Neumann U67 Reissue v.s. Vintage U67 Shootout | Microphone | Vintage King

[@Rgdonaire_07]

That violin player just killed it

[@WizardsMachine]

Sounds fab. Maybe a teensy bit less low end than the vintage... but truly, it could be partly performance related. I wish individual phrases of the music (for all instruments) could have been repeated for both mics, AB style. As a potential consumer, for my money that's the way to really compare the mics.

[@mannixmusicmixingmastering8652]

I think the newest u67 sounds awesome. I also think that if you compared 3 original u67s you would hear as much or more difference in sound as a few people are complaining about between a new one and a vintage mic.

[@yoyoyo6313]

Thanks, would be vary curious to hear these with the same tube. I wonder how much of the difference is actually attributed to that.

[@charlesondrovcik3310]

So, first off; she shreds. Secondly, the vintage 67 has more warmth in the midrange I find.

[@dannon2010]

I can’t put my finger on it....but the vintage just sounds like it SHOULD. Doesn’t sound like there’s a mic even there. Mic placement was kinda messed up for the acoustic guitar particularly. An inch can make a difference.

[@musicgeekmatt5010]

I actually own the reissue. I was lucky enough to get one of the first ones released. I recently sold my vintage Neumann M269C (a variant of the U67) because the I liked the reissue more. A friend brought his vintage U67 to my studio. The differences were basically undetectable in my space. In this video the differences are much greater because of the performance variations and the fact that they added EQ and compression. To my ears as some one who owns and uses the microphone, the differences, if any, are so small that the variations from mic to mic in the vintage market will be equally as great if not greater. Excellent work Neumann! Thanks for bringing back this excellent mic properly!

[@jasperboogaard4160]

That vintage u67 overhead sounded amazing, add a kick mic and it's enough for the whole kit. I really wanted to hear no differences but the vintage is slightly better to my ears, but on some sources the difference was almost non existent.

[@zmusic3882]

I'm a male singer and I'm planning to buy an U67. Although I was very happy to find this video, at the end it didn't help me at all. It would've been great if the male singer instead of making noises had actually sung something. (Like the female singer did)

[@phuzbrain]

The Vintage 67 is richer sounding with more lower end. The new 67 is more mid-range and louder, but still sounds good.

[@LanceisLawson]

I had an original 67, best mic ever.

[@EandVEntertainment]

For me the top ends on both of these were very similar. It is the low end that is a bit more extended on the vintage mic. Most of the people I've spoken with who have both a Vintage U67 and now the reissue have said that changing the tubes with a NOS tube will often bring them even closer and that low end extension shows up.

[@JulianDavidMusic]

Where's the low end on the drum kit with the 67 reissue?

[@jeff49605]

i agree ! the original sounds much more "alive" and full, must be the tube they used. Tube do this effect i noticed

[@Achase4u]

I found the meat of the snare to disappear on the reissue on the drums. The low lows seemed ok but this low mid and the bite/forward sound of the vintage was a bit missing. Not too surprised, they are very close but things simply aren't made the same any more.

[@NateJDrums]

The new mic has the same problem a lot new mic's have. Super clean, but lacking the warmth and presence of the vintage mics. However, you would be fine with either.

[@lucianoluggren]

Julian David Hello, maybe the vintage one it's modded and don't have the broadcast filter.

[@californiasurfpunkmetal6207]

Put a good old tube in the reissue and it would be killer. I am in love with her voice by the way....

[@Only1Science]

The drums had a nice rich fat sound with the vintage 67. It thinned out with the reissue.

[@southport65]

I'm relatively new to the world of mics/recording and was certain I wouldn't be able to hear the difference, but the vintage one definitely has more presence/clarity in the top end, which I personally really like. The reissue sounded slightly dull in comparison. What do I do now? :/

[@drewsleyy3836]

You guys really know what we want! 🙏🏻

[@MariJu1ce]

The original on the overheads was a huuuge difference

[@MrDeverda]

I will like to try it out see if it makes any difference on the singing part

[@DannyTheIrishSwede]

Going by this, probably not enough of a difference to matter to me. However I would have wanted the singers to be singing the same vocal phrasing for testing each mic, so I'll probably wait for more tests.

[@DerekSamuelReese]

Anyone know what mic stands and extensions these are ? They look strong and sweet

[@pythgoreansassistant2789]

Both are to die for but gosh there's something magical about the vintage. Not fair

[@autodidacticprofessor869]

Definitely better lows with the vintage version but that can be attributed to particular components and how they age over time. If it were possible to shoot out a brand new, never taken out of box 60's model vs. this one, it would be more of a scientific comparison. Neumann obviously is remaking the circuit as it was new, not using "aged" components.

[@norwegiansniper9713]

What drums are being played, they sound fantastic??

[@dylanrice7323]

The low end seems more tamed in the reissue and the high end was a little brighter. Still sounds great though!

[@giovannipaglioli2302]

To me they sounds pretty similar but the vintage one (mabye for the age?) it seems more compress and round, it also catch more ambient, mabye the cardioid figure is much wider? The new seems to be more analytic and responsive. Same general sound but different beheviours. The vintage one looks already "mixed" and easy to include in any production.

[@charlesvoiceoverdotcom7266]

Gorgeous mics! Violin performance in Mendelssohn's concerto is absolutely breathtaking and brought tears to my eyes. I know there is no EQ or compression but I'd literally pay money to know what reverb plug-in and settings you used on this excerpt.

[@Enliamusic]

Vintage is incredible.

[@filtafacta]

Wow! The vintage was noticeably better for both guitars and the drums. No bias towards the original, would be happy for it to be the other way round. The reissue sounded darker on both guitars which was a surprise. The vintage mic sounded better balanced frequency wise.

[@absoluutrecords]

Something about all these vintage German Mic's where the definition in the low end is just impossible to duplicate. Amazing how it really adds some dimension its not night and day but to some it is, Almost like working with a subwoofer vs. without.

[@NURREDIN]

Thank you.This was helpful.I'm a baritone doing R&B and I know the vintage was the mic choice of Isaac Hayes and Barry White. Can you do a shootout between the Neumann U47 FET and the Telefunken U-47 so we can see if there's $5000 worth of difference between the two?

[@67Stu]

I'm a bass/baritone singer and I've trie some of the Telefunken mics that are made in Connecticut. They are good mics, but they don't come close to the originals. I say this because I've pushed them quite hard, and the start to have a shrill slight breakup. I would like to hear a test be tween the Wunder Audio mics and the Neumanns.

[@statlantasreality9014]

4:27 what this track?

[@katyspenzer9526]

Vintage sounded warmer, more natural, more open, full frequency top to bottom. This Vintage U67 has that magic ability to have the source sound like you are right there without the color of the mic in the way. Sick

[@1960chucks]

I hear the reissue with a little more 1k-ish. Very slight but apparently brighter in the upper mids. I would expect the differences would about the same between two vintage U67s

[@monkeyxx]

The main thing I'm hearing is a lack of low end on the Reissue compared to the original

[@dfmn8650]

Just played this for my girlfriend who knows nothing about any of this and on all examples she thought the vintage sounded better. I agree. The re-issue sounded more constricted while the vintage felt more open. It’s a shame there’s no way for companies to get the same quality guts as the originals.

[@dfmn8650]

However the reissue does sound nice but if we’re going to compare then reality is reality.

[@user-lx8ky9yf3b]

Sounds the same rich mids. Fantastic dynamics.

[@micahalston8974]

What mic pre amp was used on the violin

[@allenm]

Vintage all day, sorry

[@betacam22]

outstanding the both mics

[@jordanmoretti297]

The acoustic guitar jumped out to me from Vintage to Reissue. I sensed an upper-mid honk on the Reissue that was a tad more buttery on the vintage.

[@67Stu]

Could you possibly do a shootout between an original Neumann U67, the Neumann reissue U67, the Stam Audio SA-67, and the Wunder Audio CM67? I tried the Wunder Audio a few times at VKLA and thought it was magnificent! I've also tried an original vintage U67 and m269c in a side-by-side shootout; they were also as expected, magnificent. It would be great to hear the two Neumanns and the Wunder Audio, and the Stam, side-by-side.

[@mikelevitt7365]

Definitely a noticeably higher amount of low-mid in the vintage than in the reissue. I would definitely prefer to own the vintage example, and felt that it had a more detailed and lifelike presentation. Having said that the reissue was very good, and a worthy effort. Would be interested to know the details on the vintage example, whether it had been serviced, had the original capsule and diaphragm? I'm very happy to see this mic available.

[@SonnyMacavelli]

Different sections of music and different performances make the comparisons more difficult. The mics sound much closer than vintage U87/U87ai, a little less/tighter low end on the reissue U67.

[@HelamanGile]

A friend picked this up for me for recording music wow chills amazing even after youtube compression

[@-K3C-]

Vintage u67 is the best mic that ever been built. The reissue is a different league, unfortunately🙁

[@ErnestoPossiSpanishVoiceOver]

For me the vintage u67 sounds better in the medium frequency . I love the sounds in the violin! But the new u67 sounds great too!Great video!

[@gearhead2357]

wanted to say at times vintage had a fuller low mid-low end, reissue more defined presence, both sound amazing over all, well done

[@everglass]

I feel the reissue lacks some of the magic "air" that the vintage has. They would both be usable, but to my ear, there is considerably more mojo in the vintage 67. I was seriously thinking about buying one (a reissue 67) but after this, I'll pass. Thanks Vintage King!

[@JimmyDevere]

The violin performance was so good I forgot to listen to the mic shoot out!

[@NikeGunner77]

She shredded that violin

[@yonko-king-luffy3123]

this microphone is the best microphone ever.All categories

[@alejandroestrella69]

A lot of comments praise the low end on the vintage, but I doubt it will make it to a final mix.

[@Vanyatrick]

Does vintage still produce?

[@Md2802]

Very similar, as you'd expect. The most obvious difference is the original mic seemed to have more low end, but I'm more concerned about the harsher upper-mids in the reissue. You hear a similar ting comparing old U87s to current issue U87Ai's, so I wonder if it's to do with the way those k67 capsules age (or accumulate dust / grime / cigarette tar)?

[@33AndAThirdRPM]

Preferred the Vintage on the drums due to it's dip in the high frequencies and the reissue on guitar.On the male vocals I preferred the reissue but on the female vocals the vintage. On the violin I chose the vintage. Obviously the source one is recording would determine which of these two mics to reach for,... but I'd be happy to own either one ,... or both!

[@b-music9329]

Very very close. Maybe a tad little bit more low-end in the vintage - but in a comparison one generally tends to rate the first better than the one after - so one also should switch the order

[@griploc1981]

There was a certain magic in the vintage U67 that the reissue didn't have, a saturation and warmth that it put in the sound captured. The U67 reissue sounded modern and cleaner.

[@brianmclendon1647]

Rad mics both sound amazing, but I prefer the reissue for all sources in the video ..........now I have to figure out which banks to rob so I can get my hands on one.

[@2slick4u66]

in my opinion both are almost identical by the first listening. but the vintage u67 sounds a very little bit warmer as the new one, especially noticeable on the singer. i think the new one pushed her mid range a lil bit further, making me assume that the new one has more presence in the mid and high range. but i really was surprised when i heard to the drum sequence at the end and couldn't believe that the vintage reflects more heights, as the release of the snare drum seems to be little bit longer because. the vintage indeed seems to have more upper mid/ high range frequencies, which transport a clearer reflection of the release of the snare drum.

[@kikovazz]

i though the vintage has a slight more extended low end but the mid rage is there. the fact you can get a new pair is awsome as two vintage may not sound exacly the same sometimes... 🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼 i wish i can buy a pair!!!

[@keithrichards4296]

Surprised. The reissue has better/mellow highs. Wow.

[@cao77]

Wow, the reissue sounds very diffent from the original. Top end is harsh compared to the vintage, ir also lacks a bit of low end...

[@MrRichiekaye]

I've listened to many of your mic demonstrations. I would like to ask you to consider adding classical voices. That is, trained singers. Your violin excerpt was very helpful in hearing a full pallette of colors of the very. I'm not able to tell from the singers however, and while they may represent some of your potential market targets, they don't have the kind of voices that demonstrate the capabilities of this microphone as did the violinist.

[@zorroinhell5549]

The Vintage had less definition than the new 67. I would go with the new 67, if I were to purchase.

[@miniatureface]

those are two very similar mics. I liked the vintage slightly better, but both sound great. slight EQ would probably be enough to close the gap for 90-99% of listeners. Heard very slightly more highs on the reissue (especially vocal sibilance) and slightly more lows on the vintage (especially drums).

[@geraldgoodiii6993]

I wish the amazingly talented violinist played the same piece for both mics. Same comment for any other musician that did that. To me the mid on point... reissue slightly more crisp and vintage a bit more low end BUT it could be my mind imparting that opinion on me.. some psychoacoustic thing... knowing that most the time the vintage stuff has more weight. Or it could have been mic placement differential more gain stage. I’d have liked a blind test

[@8068]

On some of the sources the difference is almost non-existent. On lower frequencies the vintage seems to have the edge.

[@diegooliveirabenjamin]

Little more bottom end on the vintage but nothing that could ever justify the ridiculous price difference between both.

[@OFR]

The original is nice, for sure, but it's very subtle. People get into small differences and claim they are totally different. It's not even something you couldn't fix with a little EQ or might be better once you mix. Pricewise - you can save a lot and get another mic or two with a reissue.

[@Anw120]

the vintage one sounded better to me, like you were there. The newer one was lacking in that 'in your head' sound imo

[@joeysherrett]

Vintageeeeee!

[@voixoffonline]

Vintage !

[@tobe2056]

Yeah some killer 4 stops on fiddle. Otherwise the orig sounded more full and robust in every example but the male vox. The reissue is a bit thinner, the mid bump is higher, has a bit less bottom, little bit extended top. Still a nice mic, but noticeably less warm-ish. Closer to an 87 really. I prefer the orig 67, but might just be familiarity bias. For $7K the reissue is overpriced tho imo. Why not just spend 10 in that case and get an orig? OR half that and get a great clone.

[@laveras6641]

I mean, without even analyzing the frequencies or the tones or dynamics of the two, I honestly like the vintage a lot better.

[@wesdaniel9286]

Vintage seemed more lively, dynamic, and responsive, but only by a little.

[@tymhir]

Low ends on reissue is practically non existent beautiful all and all

[@johnchristopherfee]

The reissue sounded better on everything except acoustic guitar and drums to me. Thats where the vintage one really shines

[@DjSoulMajestix]

FUUUUUUUCK ...... i can hear via my MACBOOK that the vintage one sounds in an crazy way ... more ROUND WARM HUGGING .. the other is kind of sharp / aggressive ... maybe if you record 50 Years music threw the sound get round !! -- i was hoping i can buy the new ones ...

[@Crashbanksbuysilver]

I couldn't tell the difference but I am an untrained ear. How much would a vintage one cost (if you can find it) vs a reissue? If its significantly more expensive the difference isn't worth it.

[@ronhood7773]

Slight, very slight removal of hash and highs, ultimately no difference. Good job.

[@novakattila]

Reissue sounds more hollow to me in the mid range.

[@askyles91]

No comparison

[@alexmagor7538]

Vintage wins. Most obvious difference is on the drums since the performance stays consistent through the mic switch. All the meat of the sound gets sucked out when it switches to the reissue

[@Leo_Vulkan]

Vintage sounds better in "solo mode", the reissue does not have the attitute in the low mids and mid highs the vintage have.

[@terrybryantmusic]

Vintage U67 won all contests for me. It was smoother and more pleasing on every source. The Reissue U67 sounded flat and dull in comparison.

[@pouriaabdipour8144]

He reissue seems to be thinner

[@ProfDrDrN0]

definitely different, especially noticable with the guitars and drums, vintage is way better... sadly

[@kazpermusic]

The vintage U67 just sounds a hair brighter in the mid range to my ears, but man they both sound so good.

[@AntonOlwage]

Vintage more warmth

[@deutscheshygiene-institut8091]

Sorry guys, so well done, so much energy put in the shootout, but it is pointless, to just let the vintage U67 run against an unmodified reissue. If you do not take the s a m e, identical tube (and, please, not the new tube you get from N.) you may consider the quality of different t u b e s - but, that's not the subject. We can really be happy to have the Neumann people to still service the old vintage Neumann mics, they do a good job, but, be conservative, don't give a carde blanche. A.G., also Berlin: no need to mention, we all know him & his team - he brought many, many vintage Neumanns back on stage. Just a little advice: if you send your U67 to Neumann/ Berlin, be careful not to replace with a new Neumann capsule. If for any reason there is some issues with the K67, let the old capsule be sent to Schleiz, then you can have very good reason to get something you can rely on. I don't wanna say the Neumann reissue has a "bad" K67 - you can easily look up this topic at gearslutz.

[@josephvm4930]

Vintage is incredible, Vintage has more detail then Reissue. Reissue is bit muddy.

[@7silverlight]

wowza, it's not even close. vintage wiped the floor...

[@kaidenmajarali7665]

The vintage won

[@rezarafati6499]

The re-issue U67 sounds better only on Violins, otherwise the Vintage U67 sounds better on both male and female vocals and the other instruments.