Best Large Diaphragm Condenser Microphone for recording vocals? Rode NT1A vs Neumann U87AI

Best Large Diaphragm Condenser Microphone for recording vocals? Rode NT1A vs Neumann U87AI
I am going to compare Rode NT1A with Neumann U87AI. U87AI costs $3,200 and a shock-mount for this mic costs $380. And NT1A package costs $229 which includes a shock mount, a pop filter, and even an XLR cable. This whole package is cheaper than a Neumann shock-mount.So $3,200 mic should be at least 10 times better than this $229 mic package.
Does it or does not. Let’s find out.
One tip to instantly IMPROVE your VOCAL RECORDING
• One tip to instantly I...
My Music
Apple Music apple.co/2KIvxWb
Amazon Music amzn.to/2Iv9kIu
Tidal bit.ly/2ZjtUT4
Spotify spoti.fi/2F4q9ce
멜론 bit.ly/2K9A9Fm
벅스 bit.ly/2KEEZde
네이버 bit.ly/2R0UzB9
지니뮤직 bit.ly/2H8SFek
Courses (Korean Only)
Vocal Recording Technique 1 bit.ly/2XBu5rM
Vocal Mixing Technique 1 bit.ly/2Dui5Rl... VIP distokid.com/vi...
Recording Gear that I use
Mic for Vocal Recording amzn.to/2ZtBrP... Controller amzn.to/2IC5LQT
Preamp for Vocal, Drums, Bass, and Guitar Recording amzn.to/2UzqOr8
Video Gear
Camera amzn.to/2TdqNbE
Lens amzn.to/2IQ0GpG
Lens Adapter amzn.to/2T7UScM
Light amzn.to/2W0k1s1
Light Dome amzn.to/2XxpmYc
Social
KZbin / hongdaniel
Facebook bit.ly/2Zu8aEE
Instagram bit.ly/2WWIrWZ
DISCLAIMER
Some of the links above are affiliate links, where I earn a small commission if you click on the link and purchase an item. You are not obligated to do so, but it does help fund these videos in hopes of bringing value to you!

[@DuroSamples]

:) Been at this for 30 years. Save your money people and get a Rode NT1. With the $$$ of a U87, you can build a whole studio setup and get acoustic panels. I have used the hyped U87 and sometimes a cheap mic did the job better. Most people buy expensive mics for show. What's important is what you can do with the talent in front of the mic; no matter what mic you have. God Bless...

[@HarvinderSingh-yy8th]

Mic matter too. NT1 is best for new studios.se 2300a is also good mic.

[@Leftown]

Would you recommend the NT1 5th Gen or 4th Gen? I currently own a focusrite solo interface and I'm working on my studio album. Which one is better for the weeknd type singing vocals ?

[@user-qt5eh9wb7g]

A U87 is on my dream mic list. My NT1A arrives tonight.....

[@SiegelBantuBear]

🤣

[@kirkbolas4985]

Considering the huge price difference and the more subtle differences between the two microphones, tweaking the Eq puts the Rode in the same ballpark as the Neumann.

[@TheRealJPhillips]

ppl who own the u87 will never admit when ANY OTHER mic sounds better or just as good. that price just HAS to be forever justified in their minds.

[@ArchapelloTV]

real talk bro lol

[@MMSMUZIK]

I have plenty of mics, including u87, and I will admit that I have mics that sounds better then the u87 sometimes, just depends on source and/or artist voice!

[@ahfimiwonawun]

You ain’t lying.

[@TrillShatner]

(u87ai owner) The nuemann u87Ai 'to me', has a much tighter recording radius (5 feet max) and is great when you aren't in a perfectly clean environment as you will pick up low frequencies with cheaper mics (some cheap mics will pick up sound further and further away the more power you supply to it) . Otherwise in an acoustically treated booth anything over 500 bucks is as good as the engineer is.

[@1touchproduction]

@@TrillShatner Thank you sir for the info

[@melodychest9020]

Actually, I have used a lot of condenser mics in my home studio and I have come to realise that the differences are subtle but if you listen carefully you will be able to pick up differences which are unmistakable. Neumann mics generally need less processing and they definitely sound more musical, well rounded and do seem to control and smooth out harshness very well, compared to cheaper mics. At this level, you are paying for something that will not let you down over hundreds of takes and consistently produce excellent musical results. To get from good sound to awesome sounding is very difficult and that is what you pay for .. all the tradition and experience that you get with a Neumann .. it is certainly not BS. Studio engineers who have put through the U87 to so many applications know that it is a really really good mic and well worth the price tag.

[@joemarta8221]

Is there a difference? Yeah. But a better performance, a better room, more skill as a mixer, more or better takes, comping, etc etc all make vastly more of a difference. Unless you are a phenomenal top 1% engineer the difference between the two wont matter by the time of the final mixdown. Mostly it's people buying it out of a misguided sense that it makes them pros or validates them in some emotional sense. Take your leftover 3k and spend it on more impactful things.

[@rollowarlin8450]

lf the mic isn't required to be taken to extremes some engineers believe the room itself plays an equal role in determining the quality of the finished product. Within reason, the very lowest priced mics on the market cannot be considered worthy contenders in a shoot-out.

[@ryanfreese2031]

Definitely can hear the deference. For you’re voice the Rode NTIA sounds best.

[@FirstHomeStudio]

Wow with the Rode microphone you get so much bang for you buck...after adding compression and EQ people listing won't be able to tell the difference. Awesome test.. Might buy this microphone to add to my collection.

[@seanmiller5709]

Dude, you need more subscribers. Excellent content.

[@asen.biserov]

Истината е,че по-добрият е Neumann U87A,но всеки не може да си го позволи и затова Rode NT1 е бюджетен микроофн и върши работа,а като цена е 10 пъти по ниска от Neumann U87A! Поздрави от България и благодаря за видеото❤

[@travel-peter]

You pay 3000 for details that only Professional musicians appreciate and understands...details are small, but its this small things that makes it big...Leonardo da Vinci

[@sauronbaggins1833]

I had no idea da Vinci was in the mic business.

[@theheel302]

Was going to say that. You won this time.

[@Flash-pp3cr]

Actually, he was lol

[@Face_Reality]

@@Flash-pp3cr are you trying to say da Vinci was gay? Is the mic a penis reference?

[@schwanzkopf400]

of course you can get great sound out of a budget mic, but i have mixed vocals on mics from 50 to 1500 bucks and a tlm49 for example is SO much easier to actually fit in a mix than a at2020 or something where you have to do a ton of eqing saturation etc. to get a similar sound. the mics might now even sound all that different in a shootout, but in a mix,, the difference is there, trust me

[@ff-qf1th]

I wonder how much of a difference they would sound if you applied an EQ to both to make the frequency output of both the same, so that only the clarity is being measured?

[@Adarkjet]

I owned a U87 for eleven years. The U87 is a very accurate mic - but when it comes to my vocals I want a mic that flatters my voice. I switched to a Shure SM 7B. It simply makes my voice sound bigger.

[@GoreMelian]

Then you get the Rode NT1 It is very flat...

[@clarkewi]

I have two Rodes and I love them. Clear as.

[@derrickforeal]

I have both. The u87 is superior by far.

[@scubascatman8157]

You're dirty

[@derrickforeal]

@@scubascatman8157 nope, my neumann u67 is dirty. Love its raw thick tone.

[@raularaujostrw]

I liked your energy. You should totally upload frequently.

[@JR-lx8nn]

Well done. Good presentation and well scripted. I love this guy's upright posture! Very subtle differences between these microphones, yet demonstrated well. Excellent Engrish. :-) No, seriously, very well done and excellent narration. JR

[@Astr-w6y]

The sound actually starts from the source no matter what the mic is..a great voice could make a cheap mic sound good.

[@EXATTIC]

“To me it sounds expensive”, hahaha. Nice!

[@donghost591]

Loooooool

[@rypdx]

Sometimes having a really expensive mic won’t help. It also depends on the type of voice that you have. Some microphones aren’t as good tonally and have less capabilities to pick up certain frequencies in a certain rate. So if your voice sucks then you’re screwed.

[@craigsmuszickkworld8764]

The best thing to take from this is if you can't afford the Nueman you can buy the Rode & do great recordings and then make your money & buy the Nueman ( the Nueman TLM is good too) but you can also other mics too with the Rode. Reason for Nueman price is because it can change up to different micphone patterns, patterns that some production don't need

[@yjlconductor]

Wow! Thanks for the comparison. I have a Rode Stereo Videomic Pro Rycote for my camera and it sounds amazing! Glad to hear their large diaphragm mics can sound comparable to the Neumanns!

[@JimHancock]

I'm not an audiophile, I'm a photographer and filmmaker of 33 years, with a background in engineering... when I was an engineer we manufactured medical equipment, it was not unusual to make 2 versions of the same widget.... they cost exactly the same to make, but if a gadget cost 50,000 dollars, not everybody could afford it, so we removed a feature and charged 25,000 dollars... that way we didn't lost a sale, but without a doubt, people thought the 50,000 version was better.... (it wasn't) if you built a Toyota Corolla, from scratch, it would cost more then a Bentley) A microphone is not complicated... it's quite simple, they are in your phone, your computer, your car, everywhere.. and they can be made for pennies..... there isn't a microphone in the world worth $3,200.... I would argue that the Rode is a better microphone then the Neumann.... if you get a minute, do the factory tour of Rode... kzbin.info/www/bejne/e5e3l4GZo7aHp8U .... they have the most sophisticated, manufacturing equipment available to any manufacturer...every mic is identical.... then go look how Neumann's are made... kzbin.info/www/bejne/gJbHfZiIeKxgf9U ........ primitive by comparison.... and that is why they cost more, not because they are better.. just the man hours.. ... my theory the sound of a Neumann is incidental... and audiophiles have decided that is the sound of quality.... to me they sound so close as to not be worth discussing.... and when you can go in a equalize any microphone of similar design to sound like another.. The only value that the Neumann has over the Rode is it cost more, so it's a status symbol... if you aren't into status, don't buy a Neumann..... thanks for your video...

[@RicardoDeSantiagoMusic]

Great comment!

[@johnnynarcotics7299]

Come On In We're Dead totally agree, used both and the rode nt1a is super underrated

[@belluccistudioz-lite2578]

One thing is true. The parts are probably dirt cheap when compared to the price of the end product. If you know anything about mixing you'll know that you can't get 2 mics to sound exactly the same with EQ. If you know anything about how the individual parts in your audio chain affect each other then you will know that if your entire chain is high quality (expensive) it is easier to get a good result. Your audio chain starts with the source (artist singing or playing an instrument), microphone, mic cables, mic pre-amp, cable for line output, interface, computer. Couple all of that to a well treated room and you will have a really nice sounding recording. Now replace any part of that chain with a much cheaper part. It will affect the final output. Studios buy expensive gear for 2 reasons. One, they don't want to mess around with a recording for hours unnecessarily to get it to sound good. Secondly, people still fall for renowned name brands. You also find that more expensive gear just allows the recording to sit better in the mix. The audience might not be able to tell, but the engineer can and will. So different mics in different contexts will yield different results. Sometimes a cheap crappy mic is better than a more expensive classier mic. But if there are 2 mics that flatter the same source (artists vocal or instrument) in a similar fashion the choice will come down to which one will give me the best result quicker. It might be the $3000 mic or the $300 mic. No recording engineer ever chose a mic just because of its price. The scenario at hand will determine which mic you will use. On a song where they have used a $3000 mic they might also have used a $400 mic. If I could I would have 2 of these U87 mics in my mic closet along with 2 of every other mic I want, then that would be great. In conclusion, studios do buy crazy expensive gear. The only consideration is not only the status that accompanies the purchase. The main consideration is the benefit it will give and whether your clients are prepared to pay you enough to purchase this kind of gear or not. I hope that helps. PS: If there is a mic that can give you very similar results as the Neumann U87 AI then let me know. I want to try it out.

[@edu-lins]

I totally agree. Expensive gear is necessary, but after a certain level of quality the microphones simply sound >>>different

[@belluccistudioz-lite2578]

Eduardo the main thing about expensive gear purchases is what do you want? Does the mic give you that? If it gives you that you have two choices. Buy it or get something similar that is cheaper. Cheaper usually means there will be some compromises. Can you live with those compromises? If you can then great. However, if you have an established studio then can you really afford to live with those compromises? Your customers demand a quality product. Do you want to spend the time honing that vocal to perfection or do you want to capture it at a certain level and do less work to get it there? Time equals money. Spend more time on the entire mix and therefore less time on the individual parts. Charge your clients more for less time or less for more time? Most importantly if you can’t afford it but you force the issue and buy it then your business is probably not going to be around for long. And yes, it does add to your status. But if you have a good reputation then that means that you already know how to make smart decisions. I would buy this $3000 mic in a heart beat if the conditions were right. Both for the quality it provides and because I know it would immediately raise my profile and because I know there are people that are looking for this brand in a studio. That’s just the way people are 😂😂 But I will not bankrupt myself just for that status.

[@ap_phoenix]

I spent many years debating if I should buy a u87 but after just going for it Ive never regretted . I love it , it’s just amazing

[@luxvictorman]

The middle and low frequency bands of the two are almost the same, but the 87A1 is more transparent and more detailed in the high range, but the difference is minimal

[@slickhatter9812]

luxvictorman trust me the difference is huge put both on avalon or neve preamp and you will understand no amount of eq can make a microphone sound like the other but close you pay for the sound you get

[@motherbrain2000]

in measuring devices (i.e. a microscope or a seismometer, etc) and machining devices (i.e. a lathe or cnc machine) you'll see exponential growth in price with linear growth in precision: 1,000% more money for only 10% more accuracy. Oddly enough, The "accuracy" in this case (between 2 different mics) is only that one of the mics sounds 10% percent more like a Neumann U87- notice that one can't even say it sounds 10% "more precise"- just 10% percent "more like" a U87. Music Recording is a strange world: Marketing and dreams-of-stardom make us all a little nuts. The microphone is a simple device. Modern microphone designs don't differ much from the 100 year old patents). They are frankly easy and inexpensive to make. Blind tests between these mics are just noise- a flip of the coin. My artists consistently choose mics randomly: when auditioning which mic in my locker they want to use for their recording they pic the mic whose test vocal had the coolest "vocal run"- the coolest blues riff. YUP!

[@jamesjohn7384]

KZbin compress the audio quality.. Bro you should provide google drive files of both recordings so that we can differentiate better.. I swear both seems to me same same...

[@TNT-km2eg]

There's absolutely no reason for him or any of comment section "artists" to buy an expensive mike , even if they had the money

[@toffeegamer6378]

True test needs to be done with 3 different types of song and someone to sing in key with better diaphragm training. The video itself as a comparison is good

[@joelouellette9074]

Good Job! Consistently clear and straight to the point. mish more videos were made like this.

[@elisantegh]

Thank you for this wonderful comparison. it very good and perfect. kindly keep it up.

[@ingra888]

I still think the Neumann has more life, great in the lows as well, but prices has always been the issue.... to me The Neumann has warmth to the sound, the Rode is ok but it lacks this warmth without processing. But note to others it’s not always the mic, you need to match the vocal tone to the person. Some people may sound they don’t suit the Neumann because their voice is higher etc. I use Neumann TLM 102 , AKG 414 and a Rare Sony ecm 979. In different situations each is as good as the other depending what you use it for.

[@anahatamelodeon]

It would have been interesting to do that test with a Røde NT2A instead of the 1A. With its smoother top end I think there'd have been less of a difference. The NT2A is multi-pattern too. It's a bit more expensive than the 1A but still nowhere near the Neumann in price!

[@nathanbishopmacdonald7168]

I don’t own a U87ai but have used it on some tracks on my album. I also own a Neumann TLM 102 and a Rode NT2A. I actually preferred the Rode to the Neumann TLM102 on some people’s voices. The Neumann is better on acoustic guitar and other acoustic instruments. The whole signal chain matters though.

[@SAGARSAHA]

Nathan Bishop MacDonald I am confused between NT1A and NT2A? Can you please suggest one? I sing mostly Indian bollywood and regional songs.

[@HarvinderSingh-yy8th]

Correct NT2a is wonderful CM. It sounds like U 87.

[@HarvinderSingh-yy8th]

@@SAGARSAHA NT2a will give you little warm sound but NT1a will give you little bright high ends. It depend upon your nature of voice. But both are magical microphones. No need of U87.

[@RenePretschner]

Thank you Daniel and best wishes from germany!

[@SuperGokuSon]

Well i say the NT1-A with the RK-47 capsule mod and OOo yess it hits a magical sweat spot!

[@beniaihogalo6327]

Amen to the song brother.

[@BriLoveMusic]

Yeeesss 🙌

[@beniaihogalo6327]

@@BriLoveMusic His Spotify music is nice too. It’s good to hear him praise God like that.

[@vaporizer1000]

U87 old microphone, today many interesting different solutions on more low money. Also some mics better for broadcast other better songs. Today not only money make biggest difference in mics.

[@slavmeister73]

The U87 has less sibilance and a rounder sound that sits beautifully in the frequency spectrum giving vocals presence, balance and warmth. The NT-1A is a very good condenser microphone for the very low price. The nuances it lacks can be adjusted in the mixing process to compensate for anything it may lack up against the U87. The difference here is not so much about what's better or what's worse, but more about how much money you are willing to invest in getting extremely serious about capturing your vocals. Those nuances that distinguished good from outstanding are small but significant, therefore there is such a big chasm in the price.

[@marinmardari]

That small difference almost dissapear when you put the vocals in the mix, and when we consider that 99% listen in airpods or random speakers, that extra quality dissapear at all. So buying a $2k+ mic is more of a perfectionism not a real necessity. I think a $500-800 mic will be enough in most scenarios.

[@yiranimal]

@@marinmardari After being EQed by a skilled audio person I'd be surprised if one lay person in a hundred could consistently pick out the more expensive mic.

[@Gerkozielman]

Honest compare and conclusion. Thanks for the video.

[@tell-dtruth5470]

At the end of the day, it is like this, I buy a better to go somewhere, and there is another cheaper scar till go somewhere. I arrived at my destination and have spare changes to buy me ice cream, lunch , dinners and much more if I arrive with the cheaper car.

[@richardlee4730]

Personally, large diaphragm condenser mics for vocals often add too much "room" ambiance (each mic also has its own idiosyncratic "color" which more often than not is not complimentary to a singer), at least for my taste. The best use of a large diaphragm condenser is to pick up the ambiance of a room - if you want that. Usually you want your vocals isolated from the room ambiance so the condenser is not ideal. Unless you can afford to try one microphone against another with your voice, I would suggest buying a Shure 57 or 58 (not beta), (get a good pop filter for the 57), and put money into a good (or decent) preamp (you might even invest in a booster if the preamp isn't adequate). I have tried all kinds of mics (tubes, ribbons, dynamics, am and lg diaphragm condensers) and overall, I like the 57 for my voice. It is the most accurate and has fewer idiosyncracies of its own (though it can sound a little thin on some female vocals). Once your voice is in the mix of your music, you can EQ it to bring out whatever frequency deficiencies exist between your voice and the mic. For those on a budget, I recommend the ART Pro MPA II 2-Channel Tube Mic Preamp. It's very good for the $ (about $250 used). I understand mic fetish, especially for singers, but that quest for the holy grail of mics can lead you into a rabbit hole. It's easy to imagine that as good as your voice sounds on a budget mic, it would sound really great on an expensive mic. Actually, that is probably not really true (check out who uses cheap Shure mics or even the SM7B which is really a glorified 57). Most of the mics nowadays are either cheapies that sound pretty good for the money (but still don't sound better than the 57) or are high-end stuff made for studios who can afford them and need to have lots of options to suit and impress their clients. These pros can probably hear things the rest of us mortals don't and they also have equipment that can make any mic sound good. All this said, mics are a subjective taste. What Shure should do, is rebuild the look of the 57, put it in a really glamorous chassis and re-sell it as the DeLuxe for $999.99 and put some advertising spin on it and people would be singing its praises.

[@LoserDub]

Glad people are realizing the spell big names have had over us, its like guitar pickups, its just magnets and copper coil, you can make better than factory for 30$

[@kaflik7683]

Thanks for the sharing information and experience

[@KevenDeezel]

only the neumann didn't hurt my ears, until you messed with the EQ. Behringer Truth speakers.

[@LesVegasMusic]

Good one Daniel-san! Agreed. ✌🏼❤️

[@weasle898]

NT1A is great and I love mine. U87 from ten years ago is pretty similar. I do not like the NT1A for acoustic guitar as much.

[@juantironi7239]

Gracias man excelente comparación muy bien explicado diferencias en audio existen claro pero no abismales como el precio

[@kaafideep]

Thank you so much Daniel! Much help 🌸

[@DolemiteSammich]

I like the nt1a more but that is the nice thing about audio. It is all personal preference.

[@guitargod6997]

I think you are right on the mark, Daniel. Nice comparison and interesting comments on Eq. The Neumann U87 has that roundness and dimensional character in the bass and smoothness in the higher vocal range that flatters the voice. The NT1A has less body in the low spectrum and is harsher in the highs. Nonetheless, if price matters.....

[@welcome2insanity]

Deffo more warmth and depth to the sound with the U87

[@docpat6769]

No amount of high tech can make a bad singer sound good.

[@antoineinniss5586]

hello Mr Hong. I enjoyed your presentation. I'm commenting from the Caribbean Island, of Trinidad and Tobago. Can you tell me what mixing board I am seeing in the video

[@juap]

sht... this is mind-blowing, wasn’t expecting that

[@DaveSS-xi4pn]

I was surprised that neither mic sounded sibelant! The rode nt1a is known for being sibelant . Did you do any de essing???

[@VVIPWORLDUSA]

You should mod the NT1A with the RK-47 capsule, then do another review.

[@SuperGokuSon]

HAHA i just said that it morphs the nt1-a into a whole another animal.

[@jeremylundin]

The reason I bought my Neumann 87 is because I like it.

[@user-qt5eh9wb7g]

I'd dig having a U87. If you have that kind of cash to invest, cool. I have that kind of cash, but I ain't puttin it into a mic. I have a few other ldc's that sound quite good, and they do the job quite nice. A few earlab mics are on my list too...

[@blackberryblossom]

I clearly hear the difference and I like the Neumann much better, but of course it doesn´t make a difference to me since I simply cannot afford the Neumann and unless I was a pro producer that makes a living out of recording, I wouldn't spend that much money on a single peace of gear. So the more affordable mic plus a little bit of EQ will have to do the trick.

[@FirstHomeStudio]

The U87 sounds louder just add a Neve Pre Amp on the Rode microphone and your cooking with some awesome vocals.. I use the 414 but for the price of the Rode mic you can compete with $3k microphones...If you hook it up to an Apollo Twin X & you are using Neve Pre Amps and CLB compressor you can cook up some Grammy Award Winning Vocal sounds with this $200 mic.

[@carsonyuh]

get a good pair of headphones folks, the u87 is much more clear. im not here to debate what sounds better on HIS voice but the u87 brings out more character in the voice. i dont own one, btw.

[@denchik00]

The mics are cool and all but what is that gorgeous chair? Does anybody know?

[@stryker1999]

KZbin tends to muck up the sound a little, so your comparison was probably a little clearer on your end. I think your quality electronics flattered the Rode a bit more too, making it sound more expensive. It is an amazing budget mic. However, you do get what you pay for, and Neumann mics are expensive for a lot of reasons, some which you pointed out. Really love your intro tune! God bless.

[@HongDaniel]

Thank you for your encouragement!

[@HEATHfromOZ]

Excellent review, and love the recording too. Cheers :)

[@swimin7357]

But what’s the mic preamp you’re running the mic through? Cause that makes a lot a lot of difference.

[@kyfisher3662]

U87 dose sound better but I think I'm going with the nt1

[@reekrodriqguez6552]

Ky Fisher lmao that price doesn’t justify the mic do it? 🤣

[@JoePAcalaughs]

Best for baritone/tenor male singing 90s R&B? Anyone have recommendations?

[@Yahoomediaclub]

Brilliant review Dan...can u do a review on the original NT2

[@juansoloa1529]

need more tune on the voice for the comparison! good video! thanks a lot!

[@JohnOShaughnessy]

it's a bit like comparing apples with pears; they are both fruits, they are both seasonal and they both grow on trees. The Neumann U87 is probably the best all round useful condenser mic I know of. Comparing other mics with it is only frustrating. Judge other mics on their own merit and use them as required; but as soon as you put a U87 beside one it and have good studio monitors and a "clean" desk it shows up the shortcomings. This is something you don't need to know if you don't have a U87 (what can you do about it anyway?). I really don't see the point. Many companies make perfectly reasonable mics at many different price points. Rode NT1, Audio Technica AT4033 are good examples. The Neumann TLM 193 is half the price of a U87 and is a good mic with only a cardioid pattern.

[@martinkulik9466]

too bad nobody hears any difference perhaps besides audio engineers. so since they can't taste a difference, they are both apples, one is 10x more expensive then the other, but they deliver the same result nowadays

[@JohnOShaughnessy]

@@martinkulik9466 it's practical. The Neumann is a versatile and reliable mic for in a professional studio. The sound covers all frequencies and is balanced. It has a transformer which has to be built to good specifications or there would be audible noise and distortion (this contributes to the hefty price along with the gold diaphragm). Adjustments to tone and pitch, the introduction of harmonics to make the input sound the way we want (as in a vocal) becomes the task of the engineer. In a home studio the situation is different. Most mics like this are being used for vocals, then the quirks of the cheaper mics can play in your favour. the investment in a U87 might be a wasted. You don't use it every day. I hear the difference even here on KZbin because I am listening in a different environment on more expensive studio monitors which are usually more revealing than the more affordable project studio monitors. If you don't hear the difference you can't take advantage of it either. I own both these mics and there is an audible difference. But I do know musicians producing nice work with the Rode. I find it useful too. I just would not compare the two.

[@honkytonk2010]

Your video was very helpful Thank you for sharing

[@BhushanGengane]

Amazing comparison ✌🏻

[@theexile1155]

You were predestined to be different(Romans 8:29), he who has an ear to hear, let him hear(Mark 4:9). HALLELUYAH!(PRAISE YE YAH!)

[@DaveSS-xi4pn]

Wow!!! You know your stuff !!!!! I agree 1000 percent!!!

[@ChattyCheugy]

The level of detail that the u87 picks up and the accuracy in which it does is much much better. Cheaper mics have a different eq yeah, but you can clearly hear the difference imo

[@BojanBojovic]

What is detail and accuracy? How do you show them with numbers and measures? Or it is some religious mumbo-jumbo?

[@ChattyCheugy]

@@BojanBojovic how do you show a smell or touch with numbers? You can compare recorded sounds to how they would sound live and use that to determine accuracy.

[@jesusisaliveannie3594]

Hey! I was so excited to hear your songs and understand that you're a believer! Bless you!

[@honkytonk2010]

Your awesome! Video was so helpful Thank you for sharing your

[@raphaelherzig3316]

Guys, please listen, you CANNOT compare mics from that price difference truthfully in an untreated room like this (no disrespect Daniel Hong). If you're willing to pay more than 2k on a mic, it should ONLY be after you have found a solution for absorbing treatment (around 15cm thick if you want it to be perfectly absorber the low register of voices). This would make a much bigger difference, trust me.

[@jbaranowski1990]

But don;t forget about details in sound quality. You can hear that Neumann is definitely more detailed than Rode and I can hear those differences. Not mention that even with eq NT1A sounds very harsh and too bright and unnatural. But definitely there should be no more than 2-3x difference in price I would say. $3-4k for a single mic is a crime lol. Especially for freelance musician or producer.

[@Triumphinchrist1]

Great job & great song.What would I have to do to get the NT sound a little brighter like U87? I use an UAD Twin 710 Preamp.

[@BoutYoungAnnaLee]

The Neumann is better. The Rodes hi-end is harsh and nasty, good luck EQing that out without compromising your sound further. If you cant hear the difference there then what are you doing here?

[@drillgirl718]

too bad that Waves eq makes almost anything identical, if u do it with a transparent eq with no color it doesnt sound close -___-

[@gordonzrs]

My only comment is that u got great voice... Your Raw vocal is natural strong

[@kingdan6776]

Thank you for this review.

[@marvinjonathan1093]

For someone with a deep voice like me , the neumann are not a great choice. Im not saying neumann a bad mic, but the price are just not that worth it.

[@Tonsaay]

Which Audio Interface would you recommend for Neumann u87 ai?

[@joshgsanvo]

SSL 2

[@Tonsaay]

@@joshgsanvo I'm using it, thank you so much

[@YoZasuke]

I have a rather deep and smoky voice. Would you recommend the NT1 or NT1A?

[@attilakovacs5803]

There are large diaphragm condenser mics for $30, $300 and $3000 (e.g. Behringer, Rode and Neumann). Even the cheapest one of these is usable and no junk. The difference between them in terms of sound quality (or suitability for the given project) can be rather subtle, and not always in favour of the more expensive microphone. However, they are made for different target customers. A $30 mike is for the occasional hobby user, who has a limited budget and who doesn't take the project very seriously. If he likes the whole idea, he might invest in a more serious microphone later. A $300 microphone is for a serious amateur, who is willing to spend a fair price for a decent bit of kit (considering that it is just a little part of his kit), without exteme demands, brand attachment or intention to show off. A $3000 microphone is for a professional who has high demands, who is very fussy about details, who can justify the high cost with the extra return, and who wants to invest in a piece of equipment with a relatively high resale value. Place yourself in the appropriate group and buy your microphones accordingly, then you'll have no regrets.

[@flavormusic523]

Neumann was the richest sound most natural sounding mic here, the nt1-a is thin, to high frequenzy's can be good like tlm 103 has a little more high frequenzy then the voice, the whole problem many people finds with the røde nt1-a is the S- it's way to sharp on the s-es, but when in neumann is not, the sound, you can get a good sound in neumann microphones fast and eazy and a good quality eazy but when it comes to the røde it gonna be a pain in the ass when it comes to the S Sounds in your voice. If røde fixed the problem they have with the s sound and a little more frequenzy test on it i would think it would be eazyer making a better microphone. The neumann is the best microphones in the world, if you study the spec and use the microphone often and compare over a long time, try to mix different mixes on them both, the best mix sepratly to get the best mixing and mastering for the microphone with your voice, then you might know that neumann is by far much better microphones then røde.

[@adoyung258]

bro the ssss is a fucking helll

[@pedrova8058]

AKG/Telefunken enters the chat ... XD

[@vaporizer1000]

in neumann capsule is anyway better, rode give some artefacts in sound when you boosted low freequnzy

[@raffaelrudolf]

Here‘s my point: I have owned a lot of microphones from 100$ to 3000$. I ended up with the U87AI since it’s the most versatile mic and it’s pretty eq friendly. It’s hard to make it sound bad. Also, it’s very price stable. I bought mine new for 1600$. It’s an investment piece. If I want to sell it, I can, and easily make profit. But since it’s so easy to achieve pro sounding recordings out of it, it’s a keeper for me. Of course you can make a NT1-A sound great too, but it needs more heavy processing. Cheers 🤟🏼

[@HongDaniel]

Great point !! resale value !

[@RichardCampion-gh4rb]

If you got it new for $1600 that is very likely a fake U87 sorry to say.

[@franklong6269]

The NT1 A has more dynamic range, which is surprising. It also has a more controlled presence. with your higher register song I didn't notice the NT1 A being "thinner." I think that you are looking at the htz graphs a little too much. I have full stereo, high quality speakers for my computer setup and the NT1 A sounded better to me. Further, the NT1, is an upgrade to the NT1A, and it sounds better.

[@jazzthing7157]

Hey, thank you for the informative and entertaining comparison! I have a question about your equipment: Which DAW controller do you use? Thx in advance!

[@Drakar.PraiseYah]

Praise Yahweh brother. Appreciate the video...

[@tommyhavoctv3350]

Was more conclusive in the u87 being better than I thought it would. Personally have one. Nice stuff, but I could use a c214

[@thane_snipes]

Personally haven't been super impressed with the C214. Consider the Aston Spirit instead. Similarly priced, but sounds better (in my opinion) and offers three polar patters.

[@VitexKenya]

Honestly, I can't hear the difference. If we have to listen and explain the difference then why is the price so loud and clear? :D

[@bce3210]

No one listening to a great song ever cared for a second what mic it was recorded on. Nt1a is just fine.

[@mariodario9033]

Because you are hearing best sounding mics selected to that particular vocalists and production coast $1-2 mln/song in best studios in the world that has bunch of best hi end microphones. You don't care, but sound engineer, who is hiring to do perfect recording, cares :)

[@bce3210]

Mario Dario thats actually not at all true. I work in the industry, and I can guarantee without a shadow of a doubt, that many cheap microphones have been on many platinum records. 8/10 times, you’re not going to be able to tell me which model mic is used on a recording just by hearing the recording post mix, master.

[@bce3210]

But yes, there are also mostly expensive mics, that as you said, are hand selected that sound incredible. Im just saying, its certainly not the end all be all and the performance, skill of whos mixing and producing and engineering aaaand the song itself are much more important in the end.

[@mariodario9033]

​@@bce3210 I also work in the industry and I know what I am saying. Even mid class studios has bunch of Neumanns or Manleys. I do some mid class recordings with good mics, I will not believe you that vocalists like Lady Gaga or Taylor Swift record their voice on cheap mics....some of them has their own sound engineer for recording his/her vocal...so c'mon, never believe that someone will take mic for $150 and hire sound engineer for $500 bucks/hour to record voice in shitty room for singel or whole album. Mic is a tool, price is not a parameter at all. But try to mix sound from U87 and cheap MXL...with cheap one it's pain in the ass and you will pay a lot of money for sound engineer to get to the point when U87 on Manley Reference needs some comp, de-essing, little bit of EQ and you are good to go.

[@bce3210]

Mario Dario you’re missing the point. Of course were not out making records on labels money with usb mics, man. Im saying that there are inexpensive mics, such as rode’s NT1-A and nt2a’s that sound great. And on a budget, you’re better off focusing on your voice and songwriting, rather than shelling out your life savings on a u87, as they sound great. Really great, in fact, if you know what you’re doing. Many, many hit songs have been recorded on these models, which is a fact, not an opinion.

[@fullvarietymusic9827]

great vídeo bro !

[@user-dp1ot7sq2j]

Oh my how n where did u learn English MR. Hong haha!! 장진누나야~ 예배사역팀에서 연습할곡 찾다가 갑자기 많이 보던 동생이 보여서 깜놀ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 멋지다! 언제또이롷게 영어까지^^!! 니삶을응원해

[@BojanBojovic]

There is a difference, but with just a little bit of EQ they sound identical. And that is what counts. The price difference is simply asinine.

[@PSORIK]

Странно, очень странно. Бывают моменты, что RODE сибилянты ловит только в путь, а тут прям ровень нойману. Видимо русская речь решает.

[@DenisUspeshny]

Ничего подобного. Ты ж не знаешь как он писал, какие значения выставлял и настройки. Сотни этих обзоров в ютьюбе а по факту - купи NT1a а потом купи U87 и покайся. Небо и земля

[@PSORIK]

@@DenisUspeshny так я и пишу, что NT1a при записи русской речи выдаёт слишком много сибилянтов. Именно в русской речи их довольно много. Нойман в этом плане значительно лучше, но повторюсь, только в русской речи. NT1a для русской речи я бы в жизни не купил - это "писклявая" скотина, требующая диессера. Более новый NT1 значительно лучше настроен по капсюлю.

[@mohamedabbas4546]

Thank you for the awesome videos, but I have a question here if I am buying one, which one would be more suitable for a classical singer? As a lyrical soprano or mezzo-soprano, I am about to buy a couple of microphones as gifts for my wife. She will use them for live performances of her students "she's an opera vocal instructor and choirmaster." any recommendations for the 100-300USD range for female opera singers live performances? PS: I am working /living near Shenzhen.

[@HarvinderSingh-yy8th]

For live stage performance as instructor or singer you should use shure SM58 dynamic mic. Condenser microphones are not meant for stage/ live performances. Condenser microphone are highly sensitive they can catch up even minor noises.