Warm Audio WA67 vs. Neumann U67 Reissue

[@Rod-Wheeler]

Thanks for dropping a Warm deuce on us. The warm sounds pretty good.

[@Podcastage2]

The deuce is inescapable.

[@somewhatfrog]

You meant pretty warm?

[@MechTechRW]

@Rod Wheeler you are a legend.

[@bitecho2652]

@@Podcastage2 can you do a review on the maono au-pm421

[@jesusflores2121]

The WA seem to be a bit more clear than the Neumann. The Neumann seems to have the a bit more coloration, or saturation, but I like that saturation. However, I don't have the money to afford either of these mics.

[@Ricksterpt]

Just got the Warm67. Love it

[@littleoakstudio4254]

You are the best mic comparison channel on KZbin! Seriously Awesome Dude!

[@aloneinthedev]

Can’t wait to see a U87AI vs Wa87 R2

[@HarvinderSingh-yy8th]

Buy U87AI. Don't confuse yourself. There is are differences between a 🐕 and an 🐘. Stay happy.

[@aloneinthedev]

@@HarvinderSingh-yy8th yes but does it worth the price difference? I'm not so sure

[@CirclesandSounds]

@@aloneinthedev It depends on you. If you can get into a commercial studio and shootout a ton of mics for your voice (or other instrument) in context with what you’ll be doing, only then will the differences stand out for the right reasons. Try to find a mic and signal chain that requires no tinkering with EQ’s and fixes during mixing - something completely mix ready on YOUR voice/instrument. Anything beside this? It’s all subtle nuance. If you drop $3.6k on a mic, you better know why you’re doing it in detail, and have a rig and room to support it. You can make a Warm sound just like a Neumann - I don’t care what people say. I’m an audio scientist, and I’ve done it with mics you wouldn’t believe - BUT it takes a LOT of work in many cases, and if you’re doing commercial work, you just don’t have time for that. SO. It depends on you, what you want, what you’re doing, and if you have time to tinker or if you need the finalized sound GOING IN. :)

[@aloneinthedev]

@@CirclesandSounds thanks for the long answer. I had the U87 AI, I really liked it on voices, but I sold it for financial reasons. In the other hand, I have the JZ vintage 11 that is fantastic for my voice, I also got the WA87 R2 and even though it needs some slight EQ, I can really feel the Neumann sound signature in it, it's very obvious for anyone used to work with Neumann microphones for over 10 years.

[@diegoconti2646]

@@HarvinderSingh-yy8th

[@OverdriveMusic]

I feel like the WA67 doesn't have much transient attack. It sounds like it floats like a cloud. Nice sound.

[@garyshirinian]

Thx for the video. WA67 low end is more pronounced while top end is the same to my ears however, for the money I would go with WA67. I already own WA47 again for the price point I love it. This might be my next. Hope SANTA is good to my this year.

[@NickG6489]

Counterpoint: Peter Claes from Masterclaes did the same thing with his WA67, compared to a VINTAGE! U67, and found the sound to be nearly identical on axis. He explains his methodology pretty well, and isn't a Warm Audio fanboy, notice his opinions of the WA251. He also really does know his history. If his is typical, I'd say that Warm's reissue is more accurate to an early U67 than Neumann's own reissue.

[@Madrrrrrrrrrrr]

The guitar mid/top range is much more fresh with that vintage u67. The warm in this video has a dead mid and muddy lows.

[@RockmannMusic]

@@Madrrrrrrrrrrr I totally agree

[@chrisbonica1775]

The neumann is so good that when talking into the warm audio, it sounds like you’re talking from behind a door

[@rylandweet7750]

Wa67 is supposed to copy the sound of a VINTAGE u67 , not the reissue, just for anyone in the comments talking about how different these 2 sound

[@phillipphillip367]

Yeah!! And unlike the vintage U67, u67 reissue has that hard / a slightly harsh upper mids like all modern Neumanns with K870/K67 capsules. Vintage u67 in good condition sounds smooth, rolled off on top end and harsh free. But reissue....i'm not impressed. High mids jump out louder than other frequencies all the time and it is not pleasant to the ears.

[@rylandweet7750]

@@phillipphillip367 I totally agree, I’ve heard some guys say it might just be because the vintage u67 sounds the way it is cause of the capsule being so old but I don’t think that’s what it is, I think they are trying to stay up to date with new sound being more clear and crisp

[@kunalganjawalla3415]

Sure can’t agree more 🤝👍 that said even way back then ( early 60’s in the U67 revisions while it was in its early years they had a M269 which was a German radio broadcaster version which was much more clearer on the upper mids by design and a ever so slight sizzle on top without taking away too much from its original warmer & smoother rolled off top end ) specific to its need to cut thru a wee bit more in the news broadcast without the use of EQ to achieve the same ( whist there weren’t any EQ available either unlike later years )

[@charliekent-barker4903]

I've never used a real u67 before, so cannot speak to the accuracy of the WA67 (if it was indeed modeled on one particular vintage 67, then perhaps its an unanswerable question!). I do have a WA67 and find it to have a very good, versatile sound. The lows can sometimes be a bit tubby and often seem to lack tightness and definition, to the extent that I feel they're often masking the high-end. So on certain sources - like male baritone vocals - it doesn't necessarily produce quick & great results. The lows DO seem to translate more favorably when I use clean, fast preamps on it, like my Earthworks ZDT. On transformer-balanced or tube pres - if their inputs are driven even a little - sometimes the coloration / overlapping saturation [between mic & preamp) can get to be a bit too much. Its excellent on acoustic guitars, drum room mics, and for male singers with higher voices and female singers (especially with shrill overtones) it seems to do a good job at rounding off the edginess of certain sources with a flattering, euphonic kind of saturation, that becomes more apparent when its hit hard. Really great on saxophone & clarinet, pretty good on trumpet (on low brass, I've so far found the lows to get somewhat out of control, so don't prefer it). Because of the lows in it - and how, as I mentioned, they often seem to snuff out the highs - I often find myself using low-cut filters or notching out certain low & mid frequencies on many vocals. But for acoustics and drum room, simply positioning it properly with NO eq has led to very solid & natural results, IMO. Generally speaking, it seems to shine most prominently in its midrange character. It really does have a nice euphonic, flattering quality to it, that often verges on the darker end of the spectrum, unless the source is very bright to begin with. It definitely has the ability through the mic's inherent tone to make certain sources sound better than they did going in (case in point, my own voice). It has strong output and low noise, and the capsule definitely seems to have good "reach", and things like intimate vocals & acoustics still sound detailed even when you're 3'+ away from it. I find the off-axis response to be solid - in one of the well made comparison videos I watched between vintage 67 and the wa67, the off-axis response seemed to be one of the areas where the Warm did NOT accurately recreate the behavior of the 67, so yeah. In other videos I saw, the lows seem tighter and the airy highs seem to come through on the originals better than the Warm...they also seem smoother in general in the mids and highs. But - considering I got mine b-stock for $700 - accurate or not, I found it to be an insanely good deal for what seems to be a very good mic.

[@phoenixlandingstudio6594]

The Warm sounds warmer?

[@phillipphillip367]

All this time I didn't take Warm Audio seriously. But after this video I am very surprised. Listen closely, in this particular case Wa67 has softer and smoother mids and high mids. The U67 Reissue is a bit hard / harsh in this area with a "laser beam upper mids". This is madness. I am very surprised. Of course, a lot can be changed by the EQ, but what I hear now amazes me. By the way, If you want a warmer sound with more low end and if you want to get the best out of your mic - unplug the S-2 jumper inside the u67. Phase under such sizable curtailment as when S-2 is connected is affected far into the mid frequency range. Therefore its removal will straighten things out quite audibly. (Taken from Neumann u67 1963 manual: "A special circuit within the amplifier distinctly attenuated all frequencies below 30 cps, while those above 40 cps are reproduced linearly. The microphone amplifier's response may be extended to below 20 cps flat by opening the jumper "S-2" in the amplifier itself.") Thank me later. Cheers!

[@kunalganjawalla3415]

awesome , thanks for the info dude

[@phillipphillip367]

@@kunalganjawalla3415 ;)

[@diegoconti2646]

Finally an objective judgment not influenced by the name Neumann

[@badmiddens]

I totally agree!

[@TheWatchman1893]

The warm Audio does indeed sound much more warm, much less bright, and a hell of a lot smoother, I guess price and brand recognition doesn't always net you a better Mic

[@Screaming-Trees]

The thing is the original 67 didn't sound like that. Also, people buy those as general all-purpose microphones that they can use on instruments and mic up the whole band etc. It wasn't just about the vocals. And for that the Warm Audio is just unusable. It sounds like someone's EQ'd it already and boosted the lows and highs. That's not what you want in an all purpose microphone. Imagine that across 30/40 tracks. It'd be a nightmare that you couldn't EQ your way out of. The re-issue sounds pretty much like it's predecessor and that's the point here. As for bright well the re-issue isn't bright in a sense that the top is boosted or something like that. Its mid-range is prominent and that's exactly what the original was known for. For his voice, well that's another matter. Voices are very microphone specific. The 67 may not be what you want but it's also an aesthetics choice. I think WA missed the mark altogether here which is unsurprising. You can't reverse engineer the front of a capsule and only Neumann have the build process for that. You can reverse the back of a capsule but that doesn't matter. As for "better mic" like you say, well "better" in this case depends on what use-case. I wouldn't want to deal with the smiley curve EQ profile of the WA in my recordings. This might be charming on vocals but it would be unworkable in every other situation. No thanks. There is a reason why everyone tries to copy Neumann microphones but in your case it seems you just can't hear that.

[@heythere6983]

Original 67 is warmer and softer than the current reissue. You can check a Neumann comparison video online that includes basically all their mics . Search for it . It’s got all their mics lined up with 2 singers. It isn’t exactly the same as warm it’s even softer sounding but it is infact a warmer tone and not as bright

[@ramencurry6672]

The quality of the metal material of the outer body shell is probably a little better on the Neumann version but other than that, in a song mix most people won’t be able to tell the difference

[@RockmannMusic]

​@@ramencurry6672 The quality of the metal material and anything else is worlds better with the Neumann. The housing from the Warm rings like a bell and needs damping. There are other issues as well like the wrongly spec-ed power supply. . . and it looks shiny, cheap & garish. Nonetheless, I would buy the Warm for the right price . .and address the technical issues and its "ugly fcker" appearance . The mic sounds overall pleasant and has a EF86 tube in it.

[@oscarmorales-cn3hz]

@@Screaming-Trees Are you deaf? It's not boosted on highs, It's boosted on lows and that's why there is a high pass filter on it. I know this because I tried them both on different sources.

[@jgurtz]

The WA sounds great but not the same. I found it a little more saturated in the low end and lacking a bit of clarity compared to the U67 reissue.

[@ramencurry6672]

In a song mix most people even with high end audio systems won’t notice a difference of which is better

[@Hue_Nery]

Some people call that “lack of clarity” warmth. I like it.

[@alphagonzalez93]

I’m just wondering if it’s worth the $900

[@matthewchanmh]

Can i please have the Warm Audio WA87R2?

[@MartinMartin-yi9to]

One sounds band limited / uncontrolled and one sounds smooth and easy on the ear. Kinda explain mics (and their gear) from the amateur "Made in USA" company. Good for bedroom studios maybe. I cannot beleive they sell this for more than 400-500$. The other is a classic for so many reasons.

[@snippletrap]

The Neumann sounds more open and balanced. Very very nice.

[@ramencurry6672]

The Neumann is more neutral sounding in comparison. The Warm is more colored and tube like

[@keithgendler8727]

If Warm was trying to sound like your Reissue, they missed badly. I liked the money mic, but, in a dark room where it would be hard to see, I'd find a place for the Warm.

[@MusicChannel-rf5zz]

I got the WA 67 but wasn't too impressed as it was lacking in highs compared to all my other mics.I guess that's how its supposed to sound.However with some EQ it does sounds great! It also sounds so very clean (for lack of a better word)!

[@147rigo]

Gotta show off the u67 any chance you get 😂

[@Podcastage2]

Absolutely, I do need to use it as much as I can to get my money worth.

[@purpleheart69420]

@@Podcastage2 honestly I respect that lol

[@revelashan]

The u67 sounds a bit more balanced and smoother than the WA67, as it should. Overall there's a very slight difference between the two mics. It's definitely not a $6,300 difference.

[@tonygunz21]

More low-mids in the Warm. Could sound really close to the U67 eq'ing out a tad bit in that range.

[@redscott7179]

Fun comparison!

[@cresshead]

both sound nice

[@PierLim]

The difference is there for sure , Neumann is more forward sounding . But i would say both sound nice , just different

[@MechTechRW]

@Bandrew how's that Sweetwater basket looking during this microphone sale?

[@sanzayhbarailie7278]

Please do a detail comparison between WARM AUDIO WA47 vs WA47jr vs NEUMANN U47 My fav artist uses U47 but it's so expensive And I'm thinking WA47 or WA47jr would be a good replacement

[@somewhatfrog]

I think with the sound of WA67 I would be able to consume twice as much of Podcastage compared to U67 R. 2 * ( Podcastage + Podcastage2 ) = ? ? ?

[@diegoconti2646]

I bet that blindfolded we wouldn't feel any difference unless we were influenced by the name Neumann.

[@jeremythornton433]

I have a WA47jr and I lover it! I think the Warm Audio gear is fantastic. Why spend thousands if you don't need to?

[@sandychahal1200]

Please review lewitt lct 840 . Waiting for a while 🙏

[@911elijah]

I just ordered the wa 67.

[@kennethbailey7105]

😳😳😳😳👀👀👀👀 (continuously waits for the LCT 840 review or now even possibly the Vanguard Audio Labs V13)

[@jasonwilliamson1396]

The neumann doesn't sound 6k better. But no mic sounds better than another mic if you just compare money, they just sound different. Like an artists palette. The bottom line is that the WA67 sounds very good. For the price that it's going for, you can make commercial quality sounding records out of it. BTW...you can do that with a $100 shure. So really the question is...do you want the name and sound, or the price and quality. I own Neumann Mic's and I love them. I use a WA47 over them most of the time. It just sounds better to me. I get a better mix with them. I don't have to eq as much with them.

[@diegoconti2646]

All right!!

[@ramspencer5492]

The warm audio does sounds pretty decent..... Worth the money, but almost nothing like your 67 reissue.... They both sound like tube microphones though.

[@fluphybunny930]

So a Soyuz 017 Tube next .......

[@TheRealBrendanMcCoy]

I'm listening through my Sennheiser HD380 Pros and whilst the mics don't sound the same I'm not sure I can say that U67 actually sounds better than the WA67... In fact I honestly think the U67 is a little harsher on your voice Bandrew... Sorry dude! Awesome to actually be able to hear the "Law of Diminishing Returns" with mics in action though... You're poor, poor bank balance!! You're doing us all a great service though sir, Thank you!!!

[@Screaming-Trees]

It sounds a hell of a lot better mate. I like what Warm Audio are doing but they are pretty far from a genuine article on this attempt as you can hear. Their 67 sounds like someone applied a smiley curve to it. That's just not what the original 67 sounds like and I would not want that in an "all purpose" microphone like the 67. There's not really a lot of diminishing returns here though. The Neumann simply outclasses the Warm Audio. They market the microphone as an all-rounder but there is no way you could use it as that with that big smiley curve profile on it. Where it would really fall apart is when you start mic-ing up the whole band. That's where the Neumann would give you exactly that classic sound you heard on a billion records whereas the Warm Audio, well, it wouldn't. You'd have to deal with that smiley curve problem and I don't really see a way around that. I'd say the Neumann is worth every penny for what it advertises. Maybe not on this voice in this video but it was never really about the vocals as much as it was about all purpose.

[@TheRealBrendanMcCoy]

@@Screaming-Trees Well... obviously we're coming at this from different stand points, I was focusing on how they sound on the voice, because I work solely in recording voice, and I'm never going to be recording even a single instrument with a microphone let alone a whole band. Now don't get me wrong Neumann make some unquestionably fantastic microphones for voice the TLM 103 & 107 and of course the U87. But with these two mics on Bandrew's voice, for me the Warm is the clear winner. Am I saying the Warm is a better all rounder? No I am not. At the same time, you can use a Swiss Army knife to saw a plank of wood, drive some screws and open a tin of beans, but personally If all I need to do is open a tin of beans then there are much better tin openers than a Swiss Army Knife. :)

[@Screaming-Trees]

@@TheRealBrendanMcCoy Well fair enough. I get that. Vocals are microphone specific. I think the biggest differentiator for me is demonstrated ability. Neumann has that in spades. Probably a monopoly on that over the last 60 years. Its record speaks for itself. Three things come to mind while reading your reply. The first is Bandrew is just one voice. If you're focused solely on recording voice you might consider that the U67 is purportedly the most used/most recorded vocal microphone of all time. This record tells you that it is perhaps a better bet overall even if not on this particular voice. As you know, there isn't a microphone that will work on every single voice so you can't fault it for that. Second is, regarding this particular demo I think Bandrew said the comparison was done through the Universal Audio onboard preamp? It's good that he did that. Gives you an idea of the character of both microphones without having to factor the character of the preamp. You wouldn't do that in production however. You'd put a Neve 1073 or a DW Fearn or similar in front of the microphone and this would change both microphones. Something like a Neve would smooth out the Neumann's more midrange-y profile and Bandrew's voice would come out differently. And third I guess is where the rubber meets the road and that's in the mix. It's all fine and good hearing these samples out of context but how these will react in the mix is all that matters ultimately. We know how the Neumann will react because we heard it on countless records. The Warm Audio copy is simply too new to know. Needs a bit of time I think. The Warm example is cheap enough though that even if you made a mistake you could take it back and it wouldn't break the bank. You'd have to factor in lost fees from the session etc etc so the cost is probably higher than just the price of the microphone but the risk is still probably relatively low. If you bought the Neumann my guess is it would never go back and it would pay for itself many times over. Even just brand name recognition would ensure that much. For what it's worth I thought the Neumann sounded better even in this example. There is no smiley curve profile to the microphone. It's mid-forward slightly but well rounded. It's a tone you can work with. On this voice a different preamp would help and then in the mix I think the Neumann would ultimately deliver (it would cut through better, it would blend better etc etc). And on thousand other voices my bet is the Neumann all day every day. That is why it is king. Lastly I guess couple of things come to mind. My own experience tells me Neumann are tough to beat. Makes sense. They pioneered the concept after all and only they know the details of how to manufacture the front of their capsules (you can reverse engineer the back of a capsule but not the front and I guess this is why no clone has ever really delivered on its promise). Since about 2015 I spent just under 20 grand USD looking for a U47 copy. In the end I ended up buying a U47 from Vintage King. The real deal. Which is what I should have done from the beginning. Would have saved myself 3 years of looking and the stress of buying and selling. Again it makes sense. Microphones are the most finicky and difficult to manufacture of all the gear. The tolerances are tight and the RnD is, well, mostly in Neumann's hands. The idea that a new kid on the block can crack it in just a couple of years is highly unlikely. When Telefunken USA tried to copy the Elam 251 they went to great lengths but to no avail. It wasn't until Klaus Heyne got involved and managed to get them some insider information from key AKG people that they managed to complete their project. And even that didn't quite succeed in delivering on the promise of a vintage 251 sound. But I digress. Everybody wants to believe that you can get that expensive vintage Neumann sound on a budget. In my experience that just didn't work out that way. After a very long process of elimination I ended up with nothing and had to buy the genuine thing in the end. This has led me to believe that all these lofty promises of expensive sound on a budget are just promises. There is no follow through. I get what you mean on this point but can't help and think that perhaps it is still a little short sighted. If my livelihood depended on recording voice I think I'd want to go with something that has demonstrated ability and that's the Neumann. Just my two cents mate.

[@TheAndrewforbes88]

I'm listening on studio monitors and the WA67 just doesn't even come close to the U67, which is a bummer. It would be awesome to get something similar in the $1000 price range. I guess the TLM103 is the best option in that range for the Neumann sound. I love the Sony C100 though. That's my next purchase.

[@rylandweet7750]

Advanced audios version of the u67 is nice

[@kunalganjawalla3415]

Try the advanced audio like it’s been suggested and then try the ADK FET 67 or ADK ZMOD 67 ( tube ) you’ll be blown away by both the brands am sure but but you’ll also hear the diff clearly and the refinement due to the sheer comments and thereby the sound/price in the ADKMICS .. chk them out and you’ll be blown away boss 🤘 you can thank me later 🤘🤘😎

[@kunalganjawalla3415]

@@rylandweet7750 absolutely

[@kunalganjawalla3415]

@@rylandweet7750 sheer components I meant ✌️🤦

[@rylandweet7750]

@@kunalganjawalla3415 I hear lots on ADK mics but I never can find some good samples of vocals with them, I’d like to know cause I would definitely purchase them if I could hear some

[@RadicalRumin]

I like the darker warm audio quite a bit, but it has a very weird and annoying emphasis for F sounds on at least your voice. I couldn't tune it out and it's distracting to me. Definitely smoother than the u67 I think. But since it's meant to compete with the u67 it feels weird to me it doesn't actually over a sound that sounds more similar to it. And for what the WA67 does offer I think there might be better options around and or below it's price. My two cents.

[@kunalganjawalla3415]

Well said dude , there def are and I’ve found it for sure , @ADKMICS .. chk them out 🤘🤘👏 they are very close to the U67 ( M269 versions ) sound in their ZMOD , classic smoother U67 in their FET 67 ( Hamburg ) version and at a great price too ! Larry V the founder of ADKMICS is just an awesome dude ( a philanthropist 100% ) and does this for the love of it & NOT for the ( $$££€€ ) his core idea for starting this microphone company 22 years ago was so that aspiring musicians didn’t have to break their bank 🏦 while they were yearning for the classic sounds of the yesteryear microphones without having to spend that kinda JACK if you know what I mean though he is a vintage mic collector besides pianos and guitars too 😎😎 More power to ADKMICS 💪💪 PS . You won’t find these mics available with the reg bigger stores cause that’s also how Larry is able to keep his pricing down to what it is 👍✌️😎 I own many many of his mics and for many years now and I can’t wait to get my hands in more of them 🤘🤘

[@Joelfrancis]

I love this guy 😂

[@swschilke]

The WA67 sounds warm 🤣

[@TigroGumi]

The U67 is more of a sure stable sound. The WA67 could get a little more of that sound from simply gaining the same mesh cover. It sounds like it’s more brittle to begin over loaded… The sound is less controllable also. But, only a little… things you could tame with the right processors. Use some of the savings on a 500 series chain

[@BojanBojovic]

How is this legal? Reminds me of homage watches, a thin line between them and fakes.

[@nickwilson9210]

I heard someone compare the wa 67 with their vintage one and it sounded exactly the same they guy freaking out and could not believe it and he is a well known engineer if you haven’t seen that video I would send it to you if you like

[@brockmannolaf7182]

WA sounds warm & smooth. Neumann a bit "midforward" 😉

[@kunalganjawalla3415]

That’s the sound of the U67 my friend 🤗 , it’s know for its mid forward character and smoother top than its predecessor the U47/48 ( which was slightly more present on the top and bigger bottom too ) precisely why it is so popular and therefore re -issued by Neumann amongst its entire line of microphones after so many years ( though in the early 90’s it was re issued for a short time too ) am not too sure whether the Neumann re issue is modelled on the M269 version of the U67( it sure sounds that way 🤘) or just the U67 version . To me the Warm sounds a bit muffled ( not so open and clear as the U67 both the reg version and the M269 broadcast version ) it’s almost as if someone’s thrown a handkerchief on the mic ( it’s kinda holding back from sounding like what it is because of that ✌️✌️) I don’t mean to sound dis respectful or offensive at all it’s just how it’s sounds in this review when heard side by side to the U67 re issue that’s all .

[@Awrange]

Hmmm, unfortunately I'm a bit underwhelmed by the WA, too bad. You know, I'd really like to see you do a review of one of the Rode tube mics, the K2 or NTK and how they stack up against one of the more top tier mics. I have never used one of them myself but keep hearing good things about them from a friend who owns a small recording studio.

[@martonsipos781]

The Warm Audio is pretty good,but not the same. The U67 is little more hyped in the top end and I could care less...The Warm Audio is awesome and that's it!

[@ramencurry6672]

The Warm Audio is more colored sounding. In my opinion that’s a good thing.

[@ConfidenZe]

U87 vs Wa87R2

[@MidnightMiik]

There's a bit more sparkle on the top end. The Neumann is quieter too. The WA67 sounds good though. Does it sound like a U67? Not entirely. Is the U67 worth $6000 more? Maybe? I've used a vintage U67 extensively and it is hands down my favorite microphone.

[@johngulliver6151]

More clarity in mids on the u67 reissue tops, more pronounced. The wa67 sounds a little dull in comparison, but sill sounds great for the price.

[@bitecho2652]

can you do a review on the maono au-pm 421

[@HarvinderSingh-yy8th]

WA is good copiers that console their customers by producing all sorts of stuff under budget. They also don't appear to be greedy.

[@jones786]

Couldn't tell any difference between the two. Was just reading through comments and didn't even realize he was switching mics. Watched again carefully to try to hear the difference but couldn't. If you think there's a difference, I believe you. Just not going to be detectable on any equipment anyone will actually use to listen to these. Also, everyone claiming there is a difference is saying completely inconsistent, contradictory things that can't all be true lol. That is what you would expect if they were fishing for justifications.

[@crate3232]

I think there is more differences in the looks of the microphones than in the sound.

[@realgearonline8279]

Listening through Convert 2 and Amphions with Sonarworks. Am I the only one that thinks the Warm sounds better than the reissue?

[@jacksonhall3151]

I can definitely tell a difference even through my crappy laptop speakers. I much prefer the WA67

[@wtulin1970]

You totally said 'turd burgler.' Turd. Burgler. That's just what I needed to hear, and I have no idea why.

[@DMKahn]

Fellow turd burglah here... there’s a guy named Peter Claess that did a comparison with his vintage u67. They’re very close. This too was interesting

[@stanleynowak9325]

The Warm sounds better.

[@ramencurry6672]

It’s on my Christmas shopping list

[@sh1maru]

Great comparison. We only need 5 seconds to hear a disappointing difference

[@raularaujostrw]

The WA6767 doesn't sound bad at all but why they had to make it look that modern and gross I'll never know.

[@maniacblvck5639]

U67 has better details and the high end is better but for the price wa67 is a winner

[@Deriolama]

Warm Audio The WA67 has a warmer sound than the Neumann U67, the Neumann U67 is more of a modern sound...

[@petrkorinek9559]

Thank you, I've heard many comparisons now, but this is the first one I feel literally irritated with the sound of WA67. There is a weird hole on the sibilance area that it's very unpleasant after a while of listening. Neumann got it so right.

[@dspoet1]

I had this mic. Didn’t like it. Sounded cheap.

[@quiettimes4779]

The WA67 is kinda ugly, but it sounds really good compared to the U67. Thanks for the reviews.

[@bsrobinson]

Neumann sounds more natural and has more clarity?… is that my imagination? But it’s really, really subtle. I guess my ears are not as well-trained.

[@TechSecSpaceGeek]

The WA67 doesn’t have a bad sound, it is certainly “warmer”…but if they were trying to match the U67, that’s a swing and a miss. 😬

[@DystopianOwl]

They were trying to match the original vintage U67, not the reissue. And they didn't swing and miss on that. This guy even said that this shouldn't even be a comparison.

[@mbk337]

Man, I like that Warm Audio. They are similar enough to my trash ears.

[@texasbound7089]

U67 is a W

[@ramencurry6672]

Finally!

[@artysanmobile]

If I may, I'd like to point out the elephant in the room. That is, the Warm Audio is FUGLY!! Yikes, I'd be embarrassed to put this thing in the face of a great singer for hours. A pop filter 3' in diameter might help.

[@diegoconti2646]

WARM AUDIO WA-87 2R IS OBJECTIVELY BETTER THAN THE NEUMANN U87i VINTAGE. I HAVE HAD THE NEUMANN U87 VINTAGE AND THIS WARM IS BETTER. FINE.

[@xx-ip7ej]

Honestly I think we could use more of this: videos that start out as gear reviews, but which gradually devolve into you getting angry and yelling at the viewer for asking you stupid questions, getting madder and madder that we'd even think it's worth our time to watch a video comparing a chinese-made mic with a rare, 5-figure mic that we're never going to find let alone purchase, which even if we could find and afford, would most likely just go into a $300 interface in our bedroom.

[@peterpeper4837]

That was great. Wa67 not even close to u67

[@TheMrdj33]

You will hate me for this but I've just watched the comparison on my smartphone's speaker. The sound of your mics sucks.

[@TheMrdj33]

Just kidding, hope you got the nonsense lol. Tbh it did sound way too different even with this crappy speaker!!!

[@urielterry]

lot of difference... u67 kills only the SA67 is at same range

[@PhilosopherThom]

Finally WA67 U67 with 2 usefull and good singers that can provide a food vocal clear clean and then nicely into the the clear track. Pity the woman had hers to low. And the drums where all shit.

[@DigitalSacalait]

The WA has more lower midrange presence (warmer... pardon the pun...). The Neumann has that upper midrange thing that's very nice. The Neumann would probably come across better in a non-eq'd mix. But do I hear a few thousand dollar difference? F' no. The folks who think they can are snobs- at best. Now will the WA last like the Neumann? We don't know that.

[@davidmarley8387]

I’m more of a Skid mark i the left overs of a terd

[@GhostOfLorelei]

On my monitors they sound the same more or less the same. But, stupid as a reason as this might be, I think the WA67 looks _really_ stupid. I'm not sure if it's $3k worth of stupid, but.........Just gotta say.

[@Podcastage2]

I heard a drastic difference in sound. I was surprised at how different they sound. However, I'm guessing they grabbed a vintage U67, not a new U67 Reissue.

[@GhostOfLorelei]

@@Podcastage2 it’s very possible I need to monkey with my setup (and also possible my hearing isn’t acute enough, a reality I’m slowly coming to terms with). I recently got some KRK 5” monitors with a matched subwoofer... room isn’t treated yet though. Like I said, I couldn’t really hear a difference, but maybe that’s why. I bet if I go back and listen on my headphones (which tend to be more detailed) I’ll hear a difference, even with my stupid ears. But, of late I’ve been trying to convince myself that if I can’t really tell the difference on an open monitor then maybe I shouldn’t be too worried. That said, perhaps I’m risking accidentally painting myself into a corner? Happy to hear feedback...

[@jacobharley7117]

@@GhostOfLorelei you need to get acoustic panels up at bare minimum on the first reflection points in your room. This includes the ceiling. Put more money into room treatment than gear, do your research on how to set your studio up properly, and you will be very surprised at how well you can hear these details.

[@kunalganjawalla3415]

@@Podcastage2 yup your absolutely correct my friend .. love how you do your thing 🤘really cool 😎 and your humour 😄👏👏🤘thanks for the keeping it so light yet precise

[@GhostOfLorelei]

@@jacobharley7117 I dunno, it must be my ears. I came back and am listening on Sennheiser 599s, not the best but… I can hear the slightest of tone difference now, and the warm audio sounds like the highs break up just a touch, but still nothing major. I’m not sure what difference I’m even looking for I guess. Still, the moral to me is: don’t hire me as your audio engineer and if I get to the point of releasing a song…I’ll get someone else to help mix/master. Clearly my ears are missing something.

[@alanshewitt]

Man, they sound nothing alike.

[@kunalganjawalla3415]

You said it bro 🤘🤝 they def sound very diff

[@elianmusic7452]

Ugh im really enjoying your videos can you only do videos and not eat or go out, thank you prayer emoji

[@tommibjork]

Worth 900€, I don't think so.

[@CarstenGoeke]

But it looks so glossy cheap... 🥴

[@bakelite-era705]

WA sounds better

[@MrLA-vp8gh]

Hahahahham broke.😭

[@byus6928]

Man that warm sure is ugly

[@JimmyBigJim]

I have to laugh. These are always the worst comparison test you can possibly do having some guy talk through a microphone. It’s like beyond laughable that anybody would take this serious. You really need to have a singer sing through the microphone sometimes belt it out other times sing softly, that’s how you really tell the difference of a mic nuances you clowns. 😂

[@jamessandwell3769]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume you didn't know that "Turd Burglar" is a derogatory slur for homosexuals...

[@Podcastage2]

Someone else pointed that out and I didn't believe them. Since when was that a derogatory slur for homosexuals? Here’s the description I had always associated it with: When you finally find an empty public restroom for a dump so massive that it requires complete solitude for the deposit....and then someone walks in.(especially at your office/work place)

[@almerinofirmino6832]

Very bad test , sing into this microphone