The TLM 103, is a simply fabulous, superhigh output microphones utilizing the same front capsule as a U87. So it is singularly uni-directional. It's big, fat sounding superhigh level output, keeps your microphone gain cranked near its lowest position. Nearly line level output from this beast!

Not that you wouldn't be pleased with the down under impersonator but this is the real deal. And a nice status symbol showing that you know what to be the finest microphone to serve up.

I won't put down those other boys on the down under of things. They ain't bad they're just not Neumann's, even if they're wearing their clothes.

If you get them, you'll never let them go.
Ms. Remy Ann David

I'll drink to that, Remy! I bought mine three years ago and have never once regretted it! More and more people are doing their "homework" when looking for a studio and people seem to be impressed when I mention the TLM-103!

well, i completely agree. but not only that people will be impressed when they hear you have a Neumann (which is good of course), they will also be impressed when they _hear_ the tlm103. i love it, really, i've probably stuck it on any instrument that i've ever recorded and it always sounded great. there might be better choices occasionally, but with the tlm103 you can't go wrong, it's so versatile. my first microphone and still one of the best i own.

Rather than say x is better than y , here are my experinces with both mics.

I bought a TLM 103 when they first came out. I was setting a small studio at home and was working more and more on peoples homes and at times I needed a reliable mic for this.

Took it to work where I shoot it out against an old U87 and a fairly new M 149. The studio owner and me both agreed that we liked it better than the U87. It did not bit the M 149 but it held it own considering the price difference. Where the M 149 sounded big and 3 dimensional the TLM sounded upfront and clear.

Many studio owners have asked me to sell it to them. I like that what I record with it rarely needs eq in the mix.

Two clients of mine have the Rode K2. I have compared my TLM to the K2 at their studios. The K2 was brighter , required less gain to match the TLM , and on loud sources distorted before the TLM. In one studio we preferred the TLM and in the other the K2. The one studio where we liked the K2 better had bad acoustics (the studio sounded like a low pass filter).

So there. I hope that is useful to you.

What kind of studio are you running? If your goal is to attract and satisfy clients that puts a big push in favor of the Neumann. Also, in the long run you'll need a variety of mics to fit the voices and instruments of a lot of people, so you'll end up with both. If the basic goal is to record your own music (and your voice in particular) reputation and reviews don't mean much. A mic that sounds better on 8 out of 10 voices is the "better" mic unless you are one of the two. If you can't try them out in a store its probably worth booking tie in a studio that has both and doing a test. (Throw in a couple more competitors as well.) A side note: if you are going to work with a small collection of mics, the fact that the K2 is multipattern is a big help.

Thanks a lot for the advice, I really appreciate it. I think I will go with the Neumann, with their reputation you cant go wrong.

Is this the best Neumann to go for in this price range? I've just this second found another model on the internet called the Neumann Tlm 193, the Neumann Tlm 103 seems to be more well known from what I've heard.

I have not used the Tlm 193 , but I can tell you it came to market a few years before the Tlm 103 and has not been as commercially successful. Also is about $500 more.

oh right, Tlm 103 it is then!
Thanks again for the help!

It's these kinds of questions and answers that bother me sometimes.

First - to the original question -
It's not a stupid question. However, you simply CANNOT base your purchasing decision on what anyone here says. It would be foolish and absurd.

Second - I've owned 2 K2s and used the 103 numerous times. I never found a reason to buy the 103 because the sound that I got out of it never found a good home in a mix. Voices recorded on it sounded obtuse and out of place. Guitars recorded on it sounded overly round and non-realistic. Drums recorded on it didn't mix well with the other mics regardless of how little/much compression used.

As a stereo pair for hand percussion, they work well. That's where I'd put them if I had them.

The K2 on the other hand sounded and mixed great on vocals, percussion, guitars, overheads, ensembles.

The 103, IMO, is a status symbol mic. They're designed so that many young engineers can own a Neumann and not have to buy a $3000 variety.

Again, IMO, the 193 is a FAR superior mic on a similar platform (meaning "flat" general purpose mic). The mic has a smoother, more even sound from top to bottom, a better, more predictable pickup pattern and far better off-axis response. I've used 193s on just about every source known to man and never found one where it didn't work. Sure, some mics may have beaten it on one or more sources, but very few mics work as well as they do on as many sources. If I had to go out on a limb and suggest a mic to anyone without knowing anything about them or their studio, the 193 and the Bock u195 would be at the top of the list.

Just some thoughts -
Jeremy

PS -
If you can, go and try some of these mics. Book some studio time (1 hour or so) with a studio that has them and see what you like.

Cucco wrote: Again, IMO, the 193 is a FAR superior mic on a similar platform (meaning "flat" general purpose mic). The mic has a smoother, more even sound from top to bottom, a better, more predictable pickup pattern and far better off-axis response. I've used 193s on just about every source known to man and never found one where it didn't work. Sure, some mics may have beaten it on one or more sources, but very few mics work as well as they do on as many sources. If I had to go out on a limb and suggest a mic to anyone without knowing anything about them or their studio, the 103 and the Bock u195 would be at the top of the list.

J - did you mean 103 in that last line after extolling the 193?

Oooops...my bad.

I meant the 193 and the Bock u195...
Perhaps I need a nap after lunch.

"on just about every source known to man"

:O
Including fruit-shaped hand percussion, and a combo of double bass + clarinet (at once)?

I have a TLM103 that I may sell as I don't really need it. It was part of a package purchase that I made not too long ago. Mint condition.

Hit me up if you're interested.

Codemonkey wrote: "on just about every source known to man"

:O
Including fruit-shaped hand percussion, and a combo of double bass + clarinet (at once)?

Hell yeah CM! I use it on that ensemble all the time!

Cucco wrote:
PS -
If you can, go and try some of these mics. Book some studio time (1 hour or so) with a studio that has them and see what you like.

I see a problem with that in that every space's acoustics are different. Microphone x can sound great on studio y but terrible on studio z. Recording a source you know well in this environments might help mitigate the problem , yet it will still be a guess (it always is anyway). A better option might be renting or buying from a local store with a good return or exchange policy. That way , at least you would be dealing with a lesser amount of unknowns. And there lies the problem with this types of questions. There are to many unknowns and/or variables.

JCMastering wrote: Rather than say x is better than y , here are my experinces with both mics.

I bought a TLM 103 when they first came out. I was setting a small studio at home and was working more and more on peoples homes and at times I needed a reliable mic for this.

Took it to work where I shoot it out against an old U87 and a fairly new M 149. The studio owner and me both agreed that we liked it better than the U87. It did not bit the M 149 but it held it own considering the price difference. Where the M 149 sounded big and 3 dimensional the TLM sounded upfront and clear.

Many studio owners have asked me to sell it to them. I like that what I record with it rarely needs eq in the mix.

Two clients of mine have the Rode K2. I have compared my TLM to the K2 at their studios. The K2 was brighter , required less gain to match the TLM , and on loud sources distorted before the TLM. In one studio we preferred the TLM and in the other the K2. The one studio where we liked the K2 better had bad acoustics (the studio sounded like a low pass filter).

So there. I hope that is useful to you.

Well...i think we live in diferent worlds...i use to have a TLM103...fairly a good mike, but, man...better than the U87?????? never in this life...now i have an U87 and i think is just other league...presence, midrange, power...not hi fi sounding like those new mikes, but for "me" is the sound...you can go on almost anything...i even prefer the K2...but, i think its matter of taste...but referring to the 87...maybe isnt the best mike out there...but is a very "honest" sounding mic...

JCMastering wrote: [quote=Cucco]
PS -
If you can, go and try some of these mics. Book some studio time (1 hour or so) with a studio that has them and see what you like.

I see a problem with that in that every space's acoustics are different. Microphone x can sound great on studio y but terrible on studio z. Recording a source you know well in this environments might help mitigate the problem , yet it will still be a guess (it always is anyway). A better option might be renting or buying from a local store with a good return or exchange policy. That way , at least you would be dealing with a lesser amount of unknowns. And there lies the problem with this types of questions. There are to many unknowns and/or variables.

True - the acoustics of the space may be different, but it's very easy to discern the quality of a microphone even in a poor acoustic space. However, since most "pro" studios should have some degree of acoustic control, the effects should be minimal. Additionally, recording voice, distorted guitar and a few other instruments aren't highly dependent upon the acoustics of the studio since they're near-field capture.

Adding to that, many stores (such as GC and Sam Ash) won't let you purchase and return mics. Also, if you're not in NY or LA, there's not a whole lot of places from which to rent mics. Also, I have a good relationship with several retailers. I wouldn't go out on a regular basis and ask them to send me mics that I knew I was going to send back. I wouldn't keep that relationship for very long. On the other hand, I'm not above getting a $300 round trip plane ticket to go to Sweetwater or somewhere to try out a pair of $3000 mics. Of course, I don't think this is the budget we're talking about in this post.

Cheers-
J.

Is Sweetwater in Vegas or something?

Close-Indiana is HELL.

Greener wrote: Is Sweetwater in Vegas or something?

For Jeremy to get to Indiana he'd probably have to change planes at least twice. Always cheap direct flights to Vegas

moonbaby wrote: Close-Indiana is HELL.

Said the man from Jacksonville...Have any "I like Ike" buttons? Sorry, hope you make it through the season in one piece.

Cucco wrote: It's these kinds of questions and answers that bother me sometimes.

First - to the original question -
It's not a stupid question. However, you simply CANNOT base your purchasing decision on what anyone here says. It would be foolish and absurd.
.
.
.

PS -
If you can, go and try some of these mics. Book some studio time (1 hour or so) with a studio that has them and see what you like.

Best advice so far in this thread. I had a TLM103 and quickly returned it because it didn't sound as nice to me (on my voice) as my U87 did. Nobody has a voice like your's, so it's in your best interest to take the time, head out to a studio or a friend's place and try as many microphones as you can. Maybe the TLM103 will be just what you wanted. Maybe it's not, and maybe you'll go in a direction you never thought of with your final selection. That said, I can guarantee you that six months down the road, you won't be worrying about having "this mic" or "that mic", because you'll know that you already have something that works great with your voice.

elcubo wrote: [quote=JCMastering]Rather than say x is better than y , here are my experinces with both mics.

I bought a TLM 103 when they first came out. I was setting a small studio at home and was working more and more on peoples homes and at times I needed a reliable mic for this.

Took it to work where I shoot it out against an old U87 and a fairly new M 149. The studio owner and me both agreed that we liked it better than the U87. It did not bit the M 149 but it held it own considering the price difference. Where the M 149 sounded big and 3 dimensional the TLM sounded upfront and clear.

Many studio owners have asked me to sell it to them. I like that what I record with it rarely needs eq in the mix.

Two clients of mine have the Rode K2. I have compared my TLM to the K2 at their studios. The K2 was brighter , required less gain to match the TLM , and on loud sources distorted before the TLM. In one studio we preferred the TLM and in the other the K2. The one studio where we liked the K2 better had bad acoustics (the studio sounded like a low pass filter).

So there. I hope that is useful to you.

Well...i think we live in diferent worlds...i use to have a TLM103...fairly a good mike, but, man...better than the U87?????? never in this life...now i have an U87 and i think is just other league...presence, midrange, power...not hi fi sounding like those new mikes, but for "me" is the sound...you can go on almost anything...i even prefer the K2...but, i think its matter of taste...but referring to the 87...maybe isnt the best mike out there...but is a very "honest" sounding mic...

That is why I begin with that first sentence. Consider that no two 87's sound the same , add acoustics , sources , impedances , preamps , etc. and is a wonder that any of us can agree on anything. Still I have no problem saying "...not hi fi sounding like those new mikes" and "is a very "honest" sounding mic" (notice the lack of but).

Cucco wrote:
I wouldn't go out on a regular basis and ask them to send me mics that I knew I was going to send back.
J.

That would not make sense. You would go in knowing you are going to buy a mic , just not which one.

JC - I'm not sure in which city you live (since you don't list it in your profile) but even here in Washington DC, there aren't very many shops that have quality microphones where I can just go play with a handful of them. For me to get the mics I want, I need to go to Sweetwater, Atlas, or Mercenary (or VK or a few others). This means mail order.

If I want to compare the two mics in question, that's the only choice I have. So, I would order both the K2 and the 103 from perhaps Sweetwater fully expecting to send one of them back.

THAT doesn't make sense. You keep that up and you're not going to have very many friends in the business.

I've been willing to take a small loss on products to keep my positive relationship with dealers (such as selling a mic at 90% of what I paid for it rather than returning it.) You may consider this to be stupid, but I guarantee this gets repaid in kind by the retailers with which I shop.

"such as selling a mic at 90% of what I paid for it rather than returning it"

True that, it's called a re-stocking fee and I have paid up to 15%.

This fee is to cover the cost of wages involved in dealing with you and for any loss that may be incurred because of an item not being able to be sold as brand new and having to cop a shop soiled discount.

When I worked in retail, if someone came in and seemed like a stand up guy who didn't try screw you out of your margin, you looked after that person...
When someone came in and spent 15 hours of your time so they could buy an item with about 2 points of fat... You made sure they got what they payed for.

Cucco wrote:

If I want to compare the two mics in question, that's the only choice I have. So, I would order both the K2 and the 103 from perhaps Sweetwater fully expecting to send one of them back.

THAT doesn't make sense. You keep that up and you're not going to have very many friends in the business.

While this is true, some companies (Mercenary, for example) do offer this service.

I find it hard to believe that a local Guitarget doesn't have or can't get both in stock for a person though. It's not like either mic is a tough one to find.

In case it helps, here is a nice little spot where one can at least hear the different sounds of various microphones http://transom.org/tools/recording_interviewing/200508.mic_shootout.html

It's not the same as being able to have both mics in your studio, but it's the best I can do from this side of the computer screen :wink:

Certainly - many companies offer this. However, if Fletcher were to constantly get mics back from the same customer, he'd be the first to get a little pissy about it.

As for Guitar Center, they're happy to get mics in for me - as long as I special order them. Besides, they won't take mics back either.

I still say, it's a good idea to find studios in your area and play around. They're usually quite accomodating.

Cheers-
J.

Cucco wrote: Certainly - many companies offer this. However, if Fletcher were to constantly get mics back from the same customer, he'd be the first to get a little pissy about it.

I won't deny that fact. He doesn't mess around with folks for long. I've always found, though, that a good bottle of scotch earns you some appreciation.

I still say, it's a good idea to find studios in your area and play around. They're usually quite accomodating.

Save for some vintage stuff that I wasn't able to travel to test out, I've taken this approach for each and every mic I've purchased over the past few years.

I've yet to regret a single one of those purchases.

If you can't test them in your studio, there's no better way to learn how a mic reacts than to go out and test it for yourself in a studio environment.

"f" brand names, use your ears, sorry to rant.

I have a TLM 103. It is an excellent microphone. So is the Rode NT-2. My guess is you would like one better with some voices and the other better with others. Personally, I use a Rode NT-1 to record my own voice. It is a better match for my own voice than the TLM-103 which I usually like better for female vocals.

I have a pair of 103's, and a U89.

What I find is that the 103's are great at letting the sound (color) of the preamp shine through. The mic itself is very vanilla.
So put them on a cheap preamp and they'll sound cheap. But man, they sound great with my Sebatron VMP!

Hello everyone,
just wanted to say that the TLM 103 is the mic to own period. Just as Ms. Remy says it holds its own against the best Neumann mics. I am stunned with it and whenever I record a new track its the first mic I usually use because it makes such a smooth sound when layering. Check out the song Baby blue, I used it here exclusively on everything but the drums.

http://www.myspace.com/bretnorman

jammster

I've never heard so many positive reviews on the TLM 103 as I have above. I own a TLM 103. The other "vocal" mics I use are the Soundeluxe U-95, the Gefell UM 92S and a new Neumann U87. I'd rate the 103 at the bottom for vocals anyway. Anything I have ever read about the 103 rates it as a mediocre vocal mic at best.

ceb

C E Barry wrote: I've never heard so many positive reviews on the TLM 103 as I have above. I own a TLM 103. The other "vocal" mics I use are the Soundeluxe U-95, the Gefell UM 92S and a new Neumann U87. I'd rate the 103 at the bottom for vocals anyway. Anything I have ever read about the 103 rates it as a mediocre vocal mic at best.

ceb

I'm curious as to your referral of "Anything I have ever read....." as your rating for a mic that you own and use. I can see from your mic list that it would rate down YOUR chain as the other mics you have are simply better, but why you wouldnt say how YOU feel personally about the TLM103 but instead use things you've read as a rating for it? This puzzles me.

Not an indictment at all but simply a curious inquiry.

What do YOU think of the mic?

Good point -

I used the Soundelux as my main vocal mic for years and I love it. The Gefell is much brighter to me and not something I use as often - good for some vocals I suppose - it can cut through a mix for sure. Anytime I have tried the TLM 103 I found that - compared to the others I mentioned - it just didn't cut it as a vocal mic. It doesn't have that shimmer; it seems darker as I remember. The U87 I just got and I like it a lot but if you read some forums on high end mics they talk about how newer mics like the U87 are trash compared to the vintage U87 because they aren't made with the care that used to go into them. The material that I have read on the TLM 103 as a vocal mic has tended to agree with my own findings that's all I meant.

I do appreciate the opinions of others and always ask other people about their experiences before I buy anything but I also know what I hear and I have to trust my own ears tinnitus and all. Before I bought the U87 this year, I tried the Ltd Ed AKG 414 and was majorly disappointed and took it back PDQ. It looks cheap and the sound is inferior to the other mics I own. The articles on the Klaus site (I believe that is his name) had very little good to say about the Ltd Ed 414 and I agree with that view now that I tried it out. I'm sure the 414 is a good mic but once again compared to what I have already used - not for me!

The same goes for the "lowly" Beta 58 mic and I read all the time about people saying how you can record with them and they are better than mics way more expensive - well they are good mics but as a vocal mic compared to a U87! - It has just never been my experience. A large diaphram condenser will really open things up - something the Beta 58 can't do - unless you are after that sound of course. How do I know this? - when I throw ideas down for a song I use the Beta 58 and when I record the song for real I will use the U87 or the SE U 95 so that's why I said what I said. It's real for me and I don't pretend to speak for anyone else. I have a lot to learn for sure but some things people say strike me as odd!

cb

Thats what I'm talking about.

Theres a good review folks. From someone not basing it on heresay.

I have also used a U95 Soundeluxe and it is one of the mics that really does compete with my older U87 in terms of sonic nirvana.

Yes, that is Klaus you're reffering to. Basically one of the foremost experts in the world regarding German as well as most mics ever made. Certainly THE expert on Neumann's.

Mics are funny animals. I have a real Russian made Octava MK319. Tonally it is almost exactly the same as the Neumann. Not as much output at all and theres this slight difference in dimension as well as the response around the edges of the patterns being a little less defined.....but still surprisingly great considering the price difference.....I coulda bought 20 of em for the cost o0f the Neumann.

As for the TLM103. I think its a very good mic. It does have some of that Neumann shimmer though not like the 87 or even some of the other transformerless mics in its lineage. I like both the TLM170 and the 193 more. The main reason I dont own them is because of my U87. Understand that a lot of people have never used a U87 of any age, certainly most havent seen a U95 Soundeluxe and have only the 103 as their entry into the Neumann sound. I'm sure thay are happy as clams at the sound these make as theres nothing wrong with it.....unless you know other mics and then we get the 103 for half its selling price on ebay simply because in the real world it doesnt quite measure up to a lot of other mics above them. As a poormans Neumann, however, its a damn good mic. They certainly sound better than many many of the cheap chinese capsuled things with their hyped upper end and muddy lowend responses.

Ive used both the K2 and the tlm 103 many times.

If I had to choose one mic, Id choose the tlm 103. I just trust it more.

tlm 103 is very good on acoustic guitar and hand percusion (shakers, tamborine). Vocals I prefer the at4047.

If you ever get a chance to try the Neumann KM 84 on acoustic guitar, you'd like it! The small capsule condensers like the KM84 do a great job on guitar - and once again in my experience better than the 103 (I know it sounds like I'm trashing the 103 and I'm not deliberately doing that).

I've never owned a ribbon mic - a friend of mine has a Royer 121 that he loves on guitar so it may be "better" than the KM 84 - but you can't have all the toys. Somewhere along the line you have to stop buying and use what you have because when you get good tools there's no good reason to keep buying - just keep learning with what you have. My idea anyway.

ceb

I have owned a pair of KM84's. Dont ask why I dont anymore. ......I miss them a LOT more than that particular ex-wife. :shock: :!:

when i was doing a shoot out for a nice vocal mic (and more...) i tested a 414 (can't remember the version), a 103 and a tlm 49. i quickly discovered that the 49 was a clear winner. of course it is subjective and voice dependent, but the 103 sounded a little harsh, the 414 was too ummm honest and uninspiring, and the 49 was smooth, flattering without too much color, and really brought out the best in my mediocre, mid-rangey voice.