StudioMicZone

Probably the most disappointing mike that I've used is the Neumann TLM-103. I work with a producer on a regular basis who has one. The TLM-103 is a Neumann, so it is a quality, well-built mic. The problem is that when we have set it up for vocals with another microphone, we always decide to use the other mic. It has lost against an Audio-Technica 4050, an AKG 414EB and ULS, A RØDE Classic, and my Equitek 200 to mention a few. It always sounds thin. I would guess there is a use for it, but I haven't found it and it just sits in the box, at least when I'm around.

I have a pair of the E100(2)s as well as a pair of the original E100s. I love these mikes, they are hyper cardioid which may be advantageous for isolation. Definitely replace the batteries, Nimh work well, they supply the extra current needed to the op amp circuitry for recording high-level signals and loud transients. It's a good addition to the mike locker.

Guess I never answered the question about preference. All three of us, myself, Danielle the vocalist, and her husband Bill, the guitarist, preferred the RØDE NT-1000 which was the FET mike. My opinion might have been different if these tracks had been in a mix or if it had been a different style of music or different musicians. I think this is the downside of microphone "shootouts". They are conducted under very controlled and specific conditions and may tell you something about a microphone's characteristics, but won't be much help telling you how a specific mike will sound in a different room with different musicians and in a mix of a totally different song. Choosing the right microphone requires knowledge, experience, and sometimes auditioning mikes within the context of the specific song and mix.

We did a microphone comparison earlier this year and I just re-listened to it to refresh my memory. I wanted to compare two different microphones that differed only in the fact that one had a tube front-end and the other a FET front-end. I chose a RØDE NT-1000 and a RØDE NTK, These two mikes have the same HF-2 capsule, no transformer and the same transistor output circuit. They are physically very similar. The only real difference is that one is tube and the other is FET. I compared the microphones on acoustic guitar and female vocal. The difference was subtle, but the NTK had a bit less high-end detail than the NT-1000. I preferred the sound of the NT-1000. The subtle sound of the fingers moving along the strings was much less in the NTK, in the acoustic guitar recording. That was really the only noticeable difference on guitar. The vocalist, Danielle, has an amazingly clear and beautiful voice with no excessive sibilance. The NTK captured less of the high-frequency detail and airiness in her voice. That said, the differences were subtle, and I can see that the NTK might be preferable on certain voices. Also, recording an acapella voice or a solo guitar is different than recording voices or instruments that have to fit into a mix. So, in answer to the question, what I heard in the tube mike was softened transients and slightly rolled off high-end. I didn't notice any added harmonic richness.

I've never used one, but I had a TLM-103 for a while which I hated and could never find a use for. It is the top microphone I'd like to acquire at the moment, either by purchase or maybe rental just to do some testing and comparisons with my other microphones. There is nothing special about the electronics except maybe the transformer, but there many good transformers available in the $100. range. The capsule is really the only unique item in the microphone and I can't really believe it justifies the $3500. price.