Neumann TLM102 vs TLM103 Comparison (Versus Series)

[@vesislavaofficial]

Clear winner in my ears was 103. I'm surprised to see so many people disagree in the comment section though. Very interesting!

[@NuclearDeathWalk]

Everyone hears different and has different listening environments. Myself, I went down a YT rabbit hole and ended up here so I listened. In the studio getting set up for a session and waiting on the talent. I use both often. When a singer I haven't worked with comes in I usually have an assortment of mics setup to shoot out. 102, 103, 193, Gefell 930, u87ai, SM7b, etc and i'd say about 50% of the time the 102 gets used. and almost always gets used for backing vocals and acoustic guitars. But then I am running them through dakings, la2a, and distressors on the way in or Neve style pres (mikteK) so I am getting some color on the way in. From this test, I liked the 102 on the acoustic and even the electric guitars, the voice I could have gone either way. But the artist has a bit of sibilance which the 103 picked up a little more. Also, listen to some VO examples with the 103... the hard K sounds are more pronounced in the 103

[@zainkeaton7177]

I know I am kinda randomly asking but does anybody know a good place to watch newly released tv shows online ?

[@camilorylan138]

@Zain Keaton Flixportal xD

[@zainkeaton7177]

@Camilo Rylan thank you, I signed up and it seems like a nice service :D I really appreciate it !

[@camilorylan138]

@Zain Keaton happy to help =)

[@neve1064]

The reasons I disagree with you are: Of axis coloration of the TLM 103 is dark and loud particularly at 180 degrees front front center. Why is that bad? Because mics pick up room noise and sound. That means if your room isn’t tuned perfectly your going to get a lot of muddy bass sounds in your recording. That’s a big problem and why the TLM 102 is a better choice. Secondly: because you have to drive the microphone’s pre amp more to get more volume out of the TLM 102, you get more saturation from the transformer in the pre amp. I WANT that. I don’t want colorless. Maybe you do, but I have yet to hear a recording that sounds bad with transformer core Iron saturation like Neve pre amps have. If your recording classical, fine go for a millennia HV3B pre amp to drive the mic but honestly if your using that kind of mic pre, you’re probably using a better mic than both the TLM 102 and TLM 103. Dollar for dollar, the TLM 102 is a hell of a value and it does have that Neuman mid freq presence all Neaumans have. Lastly, the TLM 102 is just easier to listen to. I didn’t say sounds better but my chest cavity feels more relaxed when I listen to it. That’s everything to me. Loved your video by the way and thank you for making it.

[@ryanreedtv3242]

I have the 102, it's nice. But the 103 is better.

[@michaelcaplin8969]

@@ryanreedtv3242 I'm going to have to disagree. After having used a pair of 102 and a pair of 103 side by side almost exclusively for years, I'm now working with m49's and nice Gefell mics from the 60's, so I'm a bit "past" the whole 102-103 thing and feel like I can be more objective in what microphones I actually got the most usage and best recordings from. I've got to say that for voice particularly, the 102 was just better. I also liked it better for overheads, BY FAR. The only thing where I felt I got a weird sound from the 102's was baroque guitar. The 103 sounded glorious on both baroque guitar and lute, but other than that, the 102's gave me better results across the board. The 103 is too bright and thin, while the 102 is also really bright compared to what we might want a condenser mic to sound like sometimes, but less so, and less intrusive to the ears.

[@NKWTI]

@@michaelcaplin8969 I have to agree. The 102 handles the high end better and is smoother, I feel like the 103 has a harsh mid-high end that kinda rattles around in your brain when you hear it and somehow even though the 102 is bright and present, does not have that problem and does not go thin. I don't think the 103 goes thin either, it is definitely warmer sounding, but I think 102 is smoother overall.

[@marioangel3190]

@neve1064 just say you can’t afford the 103 Instead of all that it’s obvious 103 Is better it has the same body has the u87

[@onethousandtwonortheast8848]

@@marioangel3190 Others agree, 102 is better across the board. Ad hominem doesn’t bring much to the discussion, even if i couldn’t afford a 103.

[@cyanic666]

TLM 102 all the way! TLM 103 sounds great on some vocalists. TLM 102 sounds great on "most" vocalists! 102 also seems to replicate more of the authentic Neumann sound we come to love! Prices should be switched between these mics in my opinion.

[@HarvinderSingh-yy8th]

True 102 has more naumann sound texture.

[@diegoconti2646]

Remove the sponge in the tlm 102 and it will be much better than the tlm 103

[@jadmohsen8880]

dude.... I've watched this video 6 times, I've used an Apollo, Focusrite (Clarett and Scarlett Solo) AND a Tascam... Through any interface, the 102 takes the cake EVERY TIME! Its a bloody amazing mic. I promise you guys who are thinking of investing, that extra $400 is so not worth it. GET THE 102!!!!!!

[@NuclearDeathWalk]

if you get a 103, go used, they are around 700 so roughly the same price as a new 102. My 102s through my Dakings or my Miktek pres make singers smile, I seldom have to do any EQing to sit them in the mix and if I do, it takes eq (and compression) well. Of course, YMMV I am in a very well treated studio, using Daking >LA2A>distressor into RME converters so my chain really brings out what I want to hear in a vocal.

[@sirnigelcogs]

I prefer the sound of the TLM102. It sounds more flattering on voice.

[@danmagoo]

I have to agree, even though Bandrew is clearly right about the 103 having better specs. This is why the Podcastage "test it, hear it" approach is so valuable. Obviously, this is not to say the 103 exactly sounds like shit either!

[@shanesean7006]

you should use both side by side . i had 102 and loved it but it was one dimintional and better with headphone than speakers but when i switched to 103 it was 2 dimontional and good on both headphones and speakers. 102 was harsher againset its freq response but was burried in the mix but 103 stands out everytime. ( i used both of them with my La610 Pre)

[@MinisterTravis]

the 102 sounds better on his voice.

[@matthewphillips5483]

I disagree that its better on voice. I own the 103 and it gives my voice more low-end that it needs and it is super dry. The 102 is good but seems overpriced to me for its quality. Its also small so physics comes into play for this. 102 looks to be about the size of the Scarlett Condenser Mic.

[@mynamephwong5428]

I actually agree. Obviously he would choose the more expensive mic that is the next model up... But yeah I liked the 102 on his voice more.

[@edwardsulinski3827]

I actually liked the sound of the 102 on voice and the guitar. Both mics sound great, it really about how you use them. I especially like the smooth sound of the 102. Thanks for the info.

[@JoseyStranded]

The best mic comparison so far. :) I also found the 102 more flattering.

[@IliasPanteliasGR]

The most important in this case is the frequency response of the capsule, not the noise specs. In my opinion, the TLM 103 (which i own also) has a harsh 5K and too much sissle in the highs. The 102 sounds more neutral due to the less agressive 5K. I prefer the 102

[@lordha-ha4242]

Yup getting the 102,,,,thanks...great singing.

[@maxd3496]

Yeah, 102 doesn't have the higher 'vocal' frequency detail of the 103 (hello rappers, detail vocalists, picked acoustic guitarists), but for everything else it has a much more appealing, flat and warm tone.

[@ПавлоВенгерко]

@@maxd3496 For vocals at home, the room is less better prepared, which is better for vocals tlm 102 or 103? ..

[@ПавлоВенгерко]

For vocals at home, the room is less better prepared, which is better for vocals tlm 102 or 103? ..

[@IliasPanteliasGR]

@@ПавлоВенгерко it won't change a thing. Your room is more important than your microphone when there is no treatment. You need to give your budget to your room treatment first

[@DarkandTwisted]

I agree with you. The 103 sounds better on vocals for sure. It sounds more crisp and clear.

[@justheathers]

I had picked the same winner before you did the versus series based off of the individual reviews you did. In this versus you did a great job of comparing the two side by side and noting their differences. The determining factors were what I also considered important for my specific use case if I were to purchase one. And I love the creativity in the original song! Great job!

[@laveras6641]

Ya, this situation is also one where you can know intuitively by price. They're the same style of microphone but 103's $400 more so obviously it'll be slightly better. At the end of the day they both cost over half a thousand dollars.

[@G_money]

I have to say, you do a fantastic job w/ your reviews and comparisons. You hit every pertinent detail, esp. things like 'self-noise,' max SPL ratings, sensitivity. These are the usual suspects hidden in some misleading ads. Neumann has never been guilty of this of course, there simply is no need. The specs are included in the box, for your mic! I'm a decades old audio dog, and I find many coming up in the craft completely in the dark at understanding specs., even though it is taught somewhat in audio degree programs. I quite like the sound of the 102 in this video, and I think it's a fantastic price point for a Neumann, and the only way I would/will be able to own one. I'd rather have two TLM102's than one TLM103 for close to the same money, also, I think. Thanks for your hard work on these great videos. I've watched a few now. Best, GW

[@INFOXlive]

TLM 102 is a more expensive microphone for numerous reasons, regardless of price. It has hidden costs, especially if you don't already have a great studio. You must purchase a shock mount, have great room acoustics, and perform additional post-production. In comparison to TLM 103, post processing drives you insane. It is not by chance that TLM 103 is the absolute minimum need for the voice over industry. Sound engineers do not want to tamper with tracks that exhaust them.

[@EsefosseDublado]

I agree with your positions. Used both mics a lot in work(voice actor). Personally I prefer the TLM 102 frequency response, his post processed results sound more natural to my ear usually, but his lack of output signal is a pain in the ass(in comparison to TLM103) and higher self noise DEMANDS an external preamp (in my case at least) to get the best from the mic.

[@trialbytravel7148]

You have become my standard for gear reviews. Thank you for being thorough!.

[@m.e.d7609]

I own this two mics. 103 only sounds louder that's all. Get a 102 and the rest is on ur acoustic treatment

[@liljinx_]

wtf do you talking bout just go and see the frequency curve and you will see the tlm 102 ist fucking sad it has a dip in the speech frequencys and is really not optimized for vocals at all

[@Npessoa]

@@liljinx_ Jesus bro... chill out. It's someone's opinion, and it's contrary to yours. Snowflake much?

[@liljinx_]

@@Npessoa I will not chill cus i dont want him to buy a stupid mic that will not help him in the longrun

[@Npessoa]

@@liljinx_ He owns both!! :D Also check out the inner foam mod on the 102. Reversible and clean.

[@NuclearDeathWalk]

@@liljinx_ that 1dB dip isn't going to be that big of a deal. I use both; the 102 gets far more use across more voices than the 103.

[@Blueon123]

Neumann is the best audio company

[@DanielTubul]

For mics ;) but what about monitors Audio interfaces and so? All of them are German though lol

[@YoshiFD3S]

@@DanielTubul Audient iD-14 & iD-22 FTW.

[@DanielTubul]

@@YoshiFD3S done that, got tlm 103 and id14

[@haitianprince1241]

Best comment considering i have 103😂

[@digitaltrash_]

TLM 102 have more silky and smooth tone. I like it more!

[@Freogeteknet]

I feel like the tlm103 have a lot more presence and sounds a bit cleaner as you say! But going in to this as someone that looking to get a good microphone for my small home recording studio I will probably go with the tlm102 for the price difference as they sounded pretty darn similar!

[@DarkandTwisted]

I think it also has to do with what headphones people in the comments are listening on. I have an expensive great pair of headphones, and to me the 102 sounds sort of dull and muffled. The 103 sounds FANTASTIC and super crisp.

[@TheZeroSbr]

@@huss03 Where are you getting this information? Microphones don't cause distortion unless there's something physically wrong with the unit or you clip or peak it. The two mics in question have different sounds because they have different capsules with different frequency responses. That doesn't mean one inherently causes more distortion than the other; that's not how it works. The TLM 103 is a brighter mic, but that doesn't mean a more distorted sound. Going by that logic, the best mic (one with zero or closest to zero distortion possible) would have a perfectly flat frequency response, and if you know anything about audio then you should know how terrible such a microphone would sound, and thereby how faulty that logic is. Microphones can't introduce distortion any more than a guitar can. Distortion is introduced by the pre-amp/interface and the A/D conversion. Every pre-amp, no matter how crystal clean or high end, has some level of distortion, even if it's imperceptible. Your mic picks up the analog signal, and then your interface processes that signal and converts it into the digital signal you see in your DAW. That digital signal will of course never be 100% accurate, but it's inaccurate to say that it's the microphone that's introducing distortion. Sure, some microphones sound better than others, but the differences come from the sound of the capsule (tone, self-noise) as well as how they boost or attenuate different frequencies (frequency response). The only mics that introduce distortion as I understand are USB mics, and that's because they're all-in-one solutions that also have built-in pre-amps/interfaces. So no, the TLM 103 doesn't have "higher levels of harmonic distortion". It just sounds better and more crisp than the TLM 102. And really, is it any wonder? The TLM 103 is supposed to be better in every way by design, and that's why it costs ~$400 USD more.

[@TheZeroSbr]

@@huss03 I read that page you linked. You realize it's just an abstract, right? A single, short paragraph that doesn't go into depth at all. If you really want to educate me, either take the time to explain things yourself (which should be no problem for you if you're as smart as you claim), or at least link me to an article with full text. I'm okay with reading 50 more of those, honestly. If that's all it'll take to be able to have an "intelligent conversation" with you, then that's quite underwhelming. I'm willing to learn, and by no means do I think I'm objectively right here. "Inclusive of those will be papers which will also cover magnetic hysteresis distortion in microphone output transformers, which is one of my areas of expertise, although in the case of the TLM103 and 102, these are not specifically relevant." If they're not specifically relevant, why would you bother mentioning them? I understand that the TLM mics are transformerless, hence "TLM", so you're right; that would be irrelevant. It doesn't seem like you're focused on the debate at hand, but rather flexing your brain and ego. What I do for a living is also irrelevant. These things don't prove either of us right or wrong. All you've done so far is say I'm wrong without providing sufficient evidence that I'm wrong. Did you think I would get overwhelmed by your wall of text and link? Did you think I wouldn't notice how you didn't actually argue anything and instead tried to seem smart by using (see: hiding behind) terms like, "magnetic hysteresis distortion"? Did you think I wouldn't notice how you're simply ad-homing and using fallacies because your pride got wounded by being called out? You've said a lot of words, none of which have much meaning.

[@TheZeroSbr]

@@huss03 www.dpamicrophones.com/mic-university/the-basics-about-distortion-in-mics "Conclusion In general, there should be no distortion in your microphones. However, in reality there is some. Measures like THD and difference frequency distortion measurements do not tell the full story. However, the numbers in the specs can be regarded as an indication of how "healthy" the design is. What is perceived by the ear is rather complex because the ear produces distortion itself. Despite the numbers, the more distortion in your microphone, the muddier and more unclear the sound gets in your recording." I rest my case. Whatever noticeable distortion there is in your recording is not from your mic unless it's a terrible mic or there is something wrong with it. Your interface and other things in your chain are much bigger concerns.

[@mikeerlich9079]

@@huss03 If you wouldn't mind, what's your favorite microphone at this or a lower price point? Thanks

[@TheZeroSbr]

@@huss03 No, I rest my case on the basis that mics, if they're working properly, exhibit levels of distortion so low that a human won't notice anyways. You're more likely to get it from an interface.

[@LazyMitchell]

I'm going to buy both these mics, and maybe a few for my friends too.

[@grabekna]

Wish I was your friend lol

[@TheAlkhemy999]

Let's be friends! 😂💯

[@summerjohnson8819]

Could you buy me the 102?

[@joeydineroakafai-zell5485]

Bro I'll buy you an tlm 107 when I make my first Milly. Stay blessed bro.

[@valorous123]

Alanah Harris keep me in a loop too if any luck there cause he said friends so yeah matey!!

[@cosmos00000]

I prefer the TLM102. It's softer and warmer. then it's better on my voice.

[@ytb917]

the 103 was very good on electric guitar.

[@CedricLathan]

Bought the TLM 102 several months ago and loved it. I've used it as a spot mic for the double bass in an orchestra where everything else was area micced. I just bought the TLM 103 but haven't picked it up yet. I figured, as good as the TLM 102 was, the 103 had to be as good or better. Now I'll have both. It'll be interesting to see how I can deploy both of them at the same time. Can't wait to have that problem. Previously, my go to mic was the Studio Projects C1. I'll have to to a comparison test with these two mics when I get them all together.

[@benkleschinsky]

Wow. The TLM 102 in this video sounds way better than in your original review of the microphone. Big difference between the Focusrite preamp and Audient.

[@whovisionsCGI]

One other thing to point out. I didn't notice it in this video, but watched another video where the owner stated you need the shock mount as 102 and 103 are terrible for conducting vibration to the mic with the basic mount. He had a basic mount on a stand and everytime a heating unit came on in his flat on the floor below the vibration traveled up his mic stand straight into the tlm 103 picking up a drone noise. So that's worth thinking about depending on your surroundings.

[@matdemaz]

102 sounds better to me. It was pretty damn hard to chose. I like the flatness.

[@Podcastage]

That's why I ALMOST picked it. I watched the video back like 30 times...and almost refilmed it. I decided to stick with my conclusion and add the additional notes in the description.

[@matthewphillips5483]

If your room treatment isnt on point, the TLM 103 is much better. My room has a few moving blankets but sounds uber-Dry. The 103 just works better for me (voice acting) but I didnt notice too much difference between the two on guitar

[@matthooper5059]

Your honesty and criticism of your own opinion when testing out the gear is a big reason why I, and I'm sure the rest of us, trust you and enjoy your content. I picked up a TLM102 over a year ago, it has paid for itself. I'm fascinated by microphone tech to begin with and love recording in studios that have Neumanns. My last session I recorded fiddle for the engineer had a vintage U87 and U67 on me at the same time. Overkill, but dang. Those mics came from the studio the Oak Ridge boys owned/recorded at years ago...The owner of the studio showed me a photo of Dolly Parton recording into that same U87. Amazing stuff.

[@NuclearDeathWalk]

@@matthooper5059 you should hear fiddle on a great Ribbon mic in a high end room. the playback is like having the player standing in front of you.

[@houmangf]

Which is best for recording violin? In this video I liked your voice in 102 more than 103. I think it was more smooth and pleasant. But I don't know what about recording violin

[@MaxHay]

Great shootout video. Fast. Accurate A/B Comparisons. No filler, all killer. Thanks!

[@olek.v]

but is the tlm 102 for its price okay. or should i really buy the 103.

[@JoshLMusic]

The strange thing is that, I agree with the 103 in this video for most of the applications, BUT I think the 102 sounded better on Acoustic Guitar. It had a smoother, punchier sound I find. The 103 sounded great as well on Acoustic, but more boomy. Great video! :D

[@Boretoto]

TLM 102 is a little bit more articulated then 103 and less sensitive (more noise also). This is not necessary an issue due to conditions (rumble, etc. in a home studio). Regards and thank s for the excellent video!

[@JinderSongs]

102 by a mile for me. The 103 sounded scooped and a little hollow. Of course you could EQ the 103 to resemble the 102 with a little work, but you could also glue a wig on a goose and make it look like an Afghan Hound... The 102 would make a great "set and forget" mic. Personally, if I'm making a record I'll happily spend forever on EQ, but if I'm cutting a demo for another act (I write for other people), time is often of the essence to make a pitch work, and I want to get to a great tone quickly. Too much time screwdrivering and you can lose the cut. The 102 will probably be my next purchase for exactly that purpose.

[@jonnymodena]

I thought that the 103 sounded more full (better) on the guitar. More timbre and more "feeling". However, I thought the 102 sounded better on "your" voice. It was flatter, without the hump in the midrange. I would use the 103 for recording guitar, and the 102 for recording podcasts and rap vocals. Id use the 103 for recording female singing vocals in most cases. Possibly male too, not quite sure though. Both are great mics. Wish i owned both of them.

[@DNGMaestro]

Don't get why the 103 won. The 102 clearly sounded more pleasant to me. Is this just because of price and specs?

[@iraabbott7232]

awesome description - thanks. You don't see the size difference in ads. It is quite apparent in the video. I'm glad I'm adding a 103 to studio. None of us are considering the 87, haha.

[@CraigHlavka]

and what about the TLM 107. I've noticed that mic is WAY less popular. Why? It's in same price range as the 103 and have many polar pattern options.

[@naughtyboibeats9597]

Probably the best comparison ive watched on these two mics

[@MikeBroderick33]

I've liked the 102 on previous videos I'd seen and I'd expected to prefer it here. But I agree with your conclusion. It's the 103 for me. It's got better clarity and sounds smoother to my ears. Nice review.

[@diegoconti2646]

Remove the sponge in the tlm 102 and it will be much better than the tlm 103

[@YoshiFD3S]

I'd been running a Sennheiser MKH-416 with a Focusrite Scarlett Solo for a while and had to do a lot of EQ'ing to compensate for the Scarlett pre-amps not being that great. I then bought an Neumann TLM-103 and upgraded the Focusrite Scarlett Solo to a Clarett 2Pre. I found the Clarett 2Pre required less EQ'ing but required me to drive the 103 to almost 90+% gain to get a desired -12db to -6dB recorded gain level which in-turn rose my noise floor from the -60's into the -40's. I then replaced the Clarett 2Pre with an Audient iD-14...I had to dial back the EQ'ing even more because the pre-amps are just THAT good they really bring out the natural qualities of the TLM-103 which by itself requires virtually no EQ. I also only have to drive the gain on the iD-14 to maybe 70% which gives me back my -60ish dB noise floor. Adobe Audition + iZotopes RX Elements 7 'De-Noise' plug-in and I'm gold. Sorry that's a lot of info, but I felt it was related and might help some of you guys out. :D

[@Podcastage]

That setup is sexyyyy! Great selection.

[@YoshiFD3S]

@@Podcastage Thank you! At first I planned on only using the 103 for Character voice work and the 416 for pretty much everything else, but the more I use the 103...the more I love it and want to use it for every VO genre I do. lol XD Great review, though! A friend and fellow VO just upgraded to a TLM-102 and Audient iD-4 which is what brought me to your video. Great stuff, man! Happy to be a new subscriber! :D

[@jacyano]

The 103 is superior. I don’t understand how anyone could believe otherwise.

[@aZeee]

Why do i feel like the 103 has a steep peak in the mid range, when you sing it feels like a frequency is very dominant (a frequency that almost hurts my ears, maybe its my ears haha?). 3:35 when it switches you can clearly hear a weard mid phasy-sounding thing happening.

[@preciseaudioblog]

I have the TLM 102. The 103 sounds bigger, I liked it. Cheers!

[@ChickenSoupMusic]

The 103 with less bass roll off as well as the higher upper boost just introduces more noise into your recordings... If you use it on multiple sources the extra frequencies will start to boost each other and you will have to do more EQ work. I like the 102 more. You could use the 103 on a female vocalist up close to the mic to give her a fuller voice but as an all a rounder the 102 is more flexible and will keep your overall mix a little cleaner... After all you want the bass frequencies to be saved for bass / kick and digital has enough of that 10-20k range as is.

[@glencruciani]

If I didn't know the price difference in advance, and was basing my opinion solely on sound quality, I would prefer the 102. Although the 103 is more quiet, its extended highs give it too much sibilance for my taste. I also think that the sound of the acoustic with the 102 was much smoother, and pleasing to my ear. The fact that is cheaper should make it a no brainier... But you know how brains work, they can doubt their own ears because of the price difference. How could the the less expensive one sound better? This cannot be! 😀

[@trazac]

The TLM103 is just so smooth. I'll agree with others in saying that it doesn't benefit the tone of your voice as much as it would for someone else, but the clarity and smoothness are still there. For Bandrew, the difference between the TLM102 and TLM103 isn't significant enough for the price difference, the TLM102 still sounds great.

[@diegoconti2646]

Remove the sponge in the tlm 102 and it will be much better than the tlm 103

[@Kristmaz808]

103 for me

[@astralaudio101]

They are both incredible microphones for the price.. I personally prefer the fuller presence of the TLM103. It honestly has that magic Neumann is famous for.

[@marc_leblanc]

The difference was most noticeable on the acoustic guitar for me. The TLM 103 was much smoother.

[@KatelynDawn]

Thats interesting because I liked the brightness of the acoustic on the TLM 102. Its so subjective :) I might go for the TLM 102 to save $$ and put that $$ towards my room treatment as I've heard the TLM 103 also picks up ANYTHING so if you're room isn't treated really well the added sensitivity could be bad news with the 103

[@dankov8566]

The difference between the two mics on the guitar cab was like night and day. The TLM102 is the clear winner, IMO.

[@bartdumolyn1262]

And on the acoustic.

[@nikhilesh6595]

Yess!!!! The much awaited video!😊👍

[@MaxLohMusic]

The mics tend to be very similar, so I feel a much better comparison would be to have them basically touching each other and compare the same takes.

[@FharishAhmedPortfolio]

OH MY GOD!!! Two of these put together, is more expensive than both my first and second cars!

[@NuclearDeathWalk]

I don't know if I should be happy you got cars at such good prices, or concerned that you think $1500ish is a lot of money HAHA

[@FharishAhmedPortfolio]

@@NuclearDeathWalk I am sorry that I am poor.

[@easyvocalharmony5680]

Interesting, I found the 102 to sound better, particularly during the acoustic guitar and singing parts 3:05. It sounded fuller, with more bass. The 103 sounded thinner/weaker. Maybe you should have kept the gains the same after all?

[@Emillices]

Can you please do a verses it looks actually the same as a microphone between the enCORE 100 and enCORE 200

[@jdlx4912music]

I've recieved my 102 in the mail (early in fact), and I'm putting it through a test run with my voice and energy. So far, pretty darn good. Def had to turn thr preamp down... A lot. Very good clarity and presence pre processing. Def, ready to see what the 103 has to offer. If I had to make an observation from your video, i think the 102 sounds more "musical" and the 103 def sounds more "voiceover" quality. Both sound really good in your examples, but I feel like the 102 sounded more "ready" for processing. The 103 sounded very "realistic" as though you were going to read an audiobook or something like it at a very high quality. Really, just a matter of preference. If one is gonna spend 800 on a mic and one for 1000 sounds better on your voice... Then I hope 200 more dollars isn't a deal breaker. Ok, my 2 cent.

[@fnred5554]

Depends on what you use it for. 102 for podcast and 103 for music

[@hayleypardinan]

have you done some kind of tier list for microphones? that would be cool

[@VibeMusicRo]

If you still own a 102, try removing the foam inside the capsule. It'll sound like another mic, very very close to the 103. Try it 🎤

[@major6461]

when you are testing the mics, Are you recording through a Compressor? if so which one because you sound amazing by default bro. I record off of a PC Alienware m17 r3 and it doesn't sound that good from my dynamic mic which is the Aston Spirit which is running through the Apollo Twin USB, in to DAW: Pro tools 12. need please lol suggestions to get this warmth industry warmth. Not talking engineering just straight default warmth in the mic....thanks ahead

[@ayoaliciaohs9038]

Thanks for one of the best mic shootout videos I've seen. Personally like the high end on the 102 and think it will work better for my voice, but the noise/impedance level is a big factor too. Thanks!

[@Bcwilderness]

the 103 hasnt got the smoother top, it really needs the right pre or its too harsh

[@larrycom]

Yeah - I would say the 103 is also better in terms of upper mid-range. You get what you pay for in the end.

[@mrgeerders]

it was just odd looking at the polar pattern on those, very specific on the rear rejections, a bit lopsided to the stage right side, as well as a "Tail"? is that normal?

[@jKHAHN215PA]

I’m ok with purchasing the 102.. but do you necessarily need a shock mount for a home studio or no??

[@CanPoreotics]

Hey so I have a Neumann TLM 102 microphone and when I plug it in, turn on phantom, I get this constant clicking noise. It sounds like a digital clicking/popping noise and it even has it's own BPM. How can I fix it?

[@justinhorn2028]

Possibly you may have an earthing problem either in your hardware setup or in the room or structure you working in.

[@fjfichman]

Agree, totally. 103 sounds cleaner.

[@Thombrawley1]

I could hear the difference on my crappy laptop speaker. I have a 102 and I love it, but mm the 103 sure sounds good. Great test. Thanks!

[@BrainSlamAnimatedScience]

I really like the Neumann TLM 102 the sound is so clear 👍 Hopefully I will be able to buy one in the future 🙃

[@matthooper5059]

Did you ever get one?

[@CLaw-tb5gg]

As I've never even seen either in person I can't confirm but I have heard that if you take the foam out of the 102 (which looks very quick and easy) it sounds a lot more like the 103. Its purpose seems to be as a sort of internal popshield.

[@danmagoo]

Great choice for the vs series!!!

[@outofthinair1]

Does the 103 sound $400.00 better ? That is the question ... Like many here I liked the tone of the 102 better than the 103. Would I LOVE to have both of these mics ABSOLUTELY.... I will be purchasing the 102 next week ... Thanks for helping me make the choice

[@RetySethofficial]

for the price i go with the 102 because the difference is not much and some might prefer the 102 depending on what it will be used for.

[@mrrobot5286]

For rap vocals is better the 102 or 103? I have a high pitch voice like NF

[@paultaylor1803]

In your "Neumann Jingle", the acoustic guitar sounds considerably louder on the 102, at least to my ears. I played it back several times to be sure. Maybe your playing was slightly different?

[@larrycom]

Have you reviewed the TLM107?

[@alanreno3467]

For me the 102 sounded better at the beginning with just your voice and also on the guitar. Both sound great but for $400 less the 102 and the minute differences lead me to buying the 102. Great review as usual. Good stuff. Was on the fence but now buying the 102.

[@seanbaedke3155]

What are you using for the pop filter?

[@ThrivingInLife]

I think the 102 is great on Voice Over and instruments. 103 for Singing Both great mics. Great Review!

[@djunclegen6910]

I dont agree.... for some reason the 102 just sounds better to be in the compact body

[@terryhatziieremias]

bro there is one part in your reviews that really don't get. What is Cherry Mx blues? You say it all the time and I really cannot understand that

[@zezesilver]

Terry Hatziieremias It's the type of keys his keyboard has. Those that are tall and noisy when you type.

[@johnjackson8902]

Think I like the TLM102 better. Prefer the tone. Technically a smoother sound should be better, but I'm really not liking the tone of the 103 compared to the 102. Though I probably wouldn't buy either (if I could afford it) because I'm not impressed with how they perform at the near $1000~ price point (I know the 102 is less than $1000). I think the U87 clones out there sound much better and have similar specs.

[@Podcastage]

Yeah. I went back and forth between the 102 and 103 so much. did additional tests...and almost rerecorded the dang thing at 11:00 last night.

[@johnjackson8902]

Podcastage By the time you're spending $1000 on a microphone I feel like you'd have a good enough preamp that even the TLM102's higher self noise won't be an issue. For reference my current mic has 7 dbA of self noise and I believe around 22 mV sensitivity. So it should be pretty much silent, but when I get up to like 1:00 or 2:00 o' clock on the Behringer UMC202HD I get noise because of the noisy preamp. It's little enough that a bit of noise reduction in post helps. I could probably get away with less gain, but because Behringer doesn't share their specs I'm not confident in how much gain their interfaces supply. Obviously you're aware that other parts of the setup affect audio, but I think with an ideal setup you could take the TLM 102 and put that extra $300 into another part of the setup. You could even find some decent sounding mics of a different character or just invest in some plugins or a good DAW, dedicated preamps, or whatever.

[@TriWaZe]

Everybody that reviews this mic leaves the foam padding inside the 102. From what I hear removing it improves some of the clarity and closes the gap between it and the 103. Why it's there in the first place is to make the mic more suitable for pod casters and voice over work. What ends up happening is people end up using a pop filter over an already filtered mic and hence you muddy up the 102 and it has less clarity.

[@HungryForTastyFoodAndComicArt]

so, you're saying the internal circuitry and capsule of the 102 and 103 are equal?

[@TriWaZe]

@@HungryForTastyFoodAndComicArt I wouldn't say equal but closer than one may believe out of the box.

[@jimis3167]

Please! Can you make one more of the same comparison with the 102 this time being without the internal foam filter? You will make more justice to the 102 and will be particularly interesting!!

[@tobyscott6766]

Very good comparison of the two microphones.

[@Podcastage]

Thank you very much for watching and commenting Toby, I really appreciate it.

[@ajhourniforever]

Now my audio is woke!😂❤

[@phoneymalony]

The obvious one to me was the acoustic guitar test ~ the 103 sounded fabulous and cut through in such a natural way

[@kevc6115]

😂😂😂 Love the Neumann song. You should definitely push that to Neumann. Loving the reviews by the way. 1 of my favourite reviewers!

[@seanwebb605]

You know I was planning on ordering the TLM03 and saving a few hundred dollars, but I just know that as soon as I start using it I'll wish that I had spent the extra money. But I still haven't treated my space properly and it's probably a bad idea to buy any large diaphragm microphone anyway. What to do. What to do.

[@htotube]

which is the most neutral headphone for listening to the difference more minutely?

[@dylanx7624]

Can you do a comparison of the Nuemann tlm 103 and the Telefunken tf39? Those are my favorites so far but I'm not so sure. Your reviews always help me decide.

[@karenhuie6199]

Thanks for the clear comparison!

[@vaibhav3935]

Plz do any versus series of rode nt1a

[@muhammadvet]

What about tlm107??.

[@Podcastage]

I don't own the TLM107 so I am not able to do a comparison yet. But one day I may be able to afford it.

[@aaronfriedman8201]

I like the 102. The self-noise difference is because the 102 has a smaller diaphragm. However, a smaller diaphragm means a faster response time.

[@gex5541]

I wanna get a tlm 102 and work up to a u87 or even just to a tlm 103

[@NuclearDeathWalk]

Here's the cool think, when you get a 102, you might find you don't need a u87AI. I know it's not the mic I reach for...I'll have it up on a stand because it usually just works. But I'll reach for other mics most often with the 102 being used on singers and acoustic instruments probably 50% of the time and other "character" mics when I want something different.

[@BassemRashidi]

@Podcastage This is One of the best Vs videos I've seen, thank you! I need your advice because I cant find VS videos on these 2 mics. Which one would you pick between the TLM 102 and the AKG C314 for professional VO projects and vocal recording?

[@nelsonmaciel7611]

for musicians it very hard to chose between TLM 102 and the ksm32, any advice?

[@MSimky]

Would these sound okay in a scarlett solo, or do you need a better interface to benefit from these great microphones?

[@youngjb94]

I have the same question

[@AnAmericanGuitarist]

I love that guitar sound. Tell us what you are running there. What Marshall is that? Any pedals? I thought that it sounded great with both mics but I liked it better with the 102. The 103 sounds more clear, but more harsh and edgy, leaving less beef on the amp sound. I'd like to hear a mic that sits between both sounds ... about half way between how they both sound. On that amp sound I would EQ either mic slightly, adding just a little top end to the 102 and decreasing a little top end on the 103 and maybe adding some low mids.. I am really impressed with what I am hearing from both mics though.

[@happydrumstick5371]

I have a question, I was watching one of your videos, I was going comment there but the video was from 2015 so i came to a video related to that one and decided to comment here. My computer doesnt have an input, only an output. I want to record music there but i dont know what to do. I have searched youtube, amazon, and goolgle, but i cant find what i need. I find products with aux jacks but is doesnt specify if it is an input or output, i need an input. What should i do??

[@carlosqzada]

Hi, thanks for your video it’s great. A simple question please: I’m a pop and opera singer: which mic. would you recommend for my voice? (it’s very strong) TLM 102 or TLM 103 ?