Neumann U-47 Buying advise
in [Audio Recording]
|
From: 1 on 2 Jan 2006 22:17 I'm considering the purchase of an original U-47 and I've read a number of caveats regarding vintage microphone markets such as eBay. I've seen prices in excess of $8K on eBay and I'm wondering how much a U-47 in good condition is really worth. How much more is a U-47 with a Telefunken label on it worth? The M7 capsule seems important compared to the K47 but what is the difference in price and the difference in quality? An original U-47 with all original electronics, tubes, etc. seems to be of great value in a vintage sense, but what is the trade-off in the aging of the capsule and the degradation in response? How much of a concern/importance is the Telefunken VF14 tube non-availability in choosing an all original U-47? How might that figure into pricing? How reliable are the modifications made to operate with other tubes? So is part of the answer that it all depends if you are buying it as a vintage showpiece versus a workhorse as to how much you should pay? Likewise, how can you be sure what you are buying on eBay? Are there other reputable markets for U-47's and the like, where professionals, such as yourselves, shop? Regards... Moose
From: Mike Rivers on 3 Jan 2006 07:37 1(a)2.3 wrote: > I'm considering the purchase of an original U-47 and I've read a > number of caveats regarding vintage microphone markets such as eBay. eBay isn't a vintage mircophone market, it's a place where people sell stuff. While I don't like the idea, sometimes people who know vintage microphones and regularly deal with them use eBay as their store. Know the seller, and know what you're buying. > I've seen prices in excess of $8K on eBay and I'm wondering how much a > U-47 in good condition is really worth. It's worth that to someone, obviously. Is it worth that much to you? Will it get you $8,000 more business in a couple of years? Do you have a plan for it? This is a major investment and unless you're just a rich kid or a speculator (neither of which should be allowed to take a good working microphone out of the hands of the working engineering community) you should know how you're going to make money from it. > An original U-47 with all original electronics, tubes, etc. seems to > be of great value in a vintage sense, but what is the trade-off in the > aging of the capsule and the degradation in response? They're all different. > How much of a concern/importance is the Telefunken VF14 tube > non-availability in choosing an all original U-47? It's extremely important if your tube fails, and not important at all if it doesn't. Are you a gambler? > How reliable are the modifications made to operate with other tubes? It all works, but then you don't have a vintage mic any longer and you might as well get something brand new that has the sound you want and costs 1/4 that of a risky investment. > So is part of the answer that it all depends if you are buying it as a > vintage showpiece versus a workhorse as to how much you should pay? Exactly. Why are you thinking of buying one at all? I can see no reason to pay this much money for a microphone, particularly one that you dont' know. If you've worked at a studio for years or have consistently rented the same mic time and time again because you know it well and you know what it sounds like, and that mic comes up for sale, you might consider buying it at the going price if that turns out to be a good deal for you. But just owning a U47 today isn't such a big deal unless it's an integral part of your business.
From: Scott Dorsey on 3 Jan 2006 10:50 In article <jopjr1taf3oo6b8vhqjnq9t88sie21uo2u(a)4ax.com>, <1(a)2.3> wrote: > >The M7 capsule seems important compared to the K47 but what is the >difference in price and the difference in quality? No two of the M7 capsules sound the same. If you buy, test the mike out. Some are horribly peaky, some are not. They have all aged badly over the years. Part of what some people like is the age-related failure. >How much of a concern/importance is the Telefunken VF14 tube >non-availability in choosing an all original U-47? How might that >figure into pricing? How reliable are the modifications made to >operate with other tubes? The VF14 was basically designed for table radios, and it got used in the U-47 because it was cheap on the surplus market. I don't see changing out for the EF14 being all that terrible a thing. >So is part of the answer that it all depends if you are buying it as a >vintage showpiece versus a workhorse as to how much you should pay? >Likewise, how can you be sure what you are buying on eBay? Are there >other reputable markets for U-47's and the like, where professionals, >such as yourselves, shop? Call Fletcher, tell him you want a U-47. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
From: yrplace on 3 Jan 2006 11:42 In an ideal world you would be able to compare the mic against a known great sounding one, since this is unlikely I would insist on at least a 48 hour trial period. As for the capsules, both the M-7 and KK-47's can sound great or lousy. I have an M-7 U-47 that was custom rebuilt by BLUE and I liked it so much that I decided to buy two more w/ KK-47 capsules. When I compared these to the first I realized they sounded awful, and we went through almost ten new old stock capsules before we found two that sounded good. Nothing wrong with a mic that's been converted to the EF-14. I have three w/ that tube and they are my preferred mics (I have three more w/ VF-14's) I highly reccomend BLUE's power supply for the 47 if it is still available. The original 47 supply is very unreliable and is the most common cause of tube failure. With a good stable supply like the one BLUE makes (?) a tube should last practically forever. Good luck..... Mark Linett
From: David Satz on 3 Jan 2006 12:17
Moose, there is absolutely no difference between a U 47 with a Telefunken label on it versus a U 47 with a Neumann label on it, if both microphones were made at the same time. Telefunken merely acted as distributor for a pre-existing product which they had no hand in specifying or designing. The fact that some people are willing to pay a higher price for the Telefunken "version" (again, the only difference being the label) is based on the fact that ... there are some people willing to pay a higher price for the Telefunken "version" (again, the only difference being the label). Yep, it's circular. The "vintage" microphone market is full of situations like that, in which people are basing their opinions on their perceptions of what other people's perceptions are perceived to be. The M 7 capsule was built with membranes having a PVC substrate that dried out over time whether the microphone was used or not, and this caused the tension to become irregular and the gold layer to develop hairline cracks. If you find an unmodified U 47 (or M 49) with an original M 7 capsule in it, the one thing you can be absolutely sure of is that the microphone no longer sounds as it did when it was new, especially at low frequencies. I certainly would not try to get a microphone with an M 7 capsule in it; it's a time bomb that probably has already exploded. That's why they don't make them any more. In fact one of the fundamental problems for the companies who produce copies of the U 47 is to decide which original microphone(s) to use as their model. Everyone's favorite old original U 47 sounds a little (or a lot) different from everyone else's; in that respect it can be considered a true post-modern microphone, since its essential sound is, to a great extent, in the ear of the beholder. --best regards |