AKG C414 B XLS vs Neumann TLM103

[MikeCzech]

OK, I'm not looking for the typical TapeOp "It depends on what you're looking for" response, I'm asking anyone who has used these mics which they personally prefer and why.

I don't have the option of trying these mics out in my studio before buying, but they will mainly be used as overheads. If they are favorable on other applications that's a bonus.

I was pretty well set on the C414's because it's proven theory, and it works well, but I know people love to see 'Neumann' on a studio gear list - and that's important too, in an entirely different way..

(Sorry, I guess this should go in the 'gear talk' section, I'm not used to this.. Oh well, too late now..)

[jca83]

well, both mics are nice workhorse mics.. i can't think of much they couldn't be used for. the 103 is brighter than the 414, but i prefer the 414..

if i were making the decision i'd figure what would go best with my pres, etc, plus with the kind of music i'm doing.

a pair of 103s would go further in say, country, where everything's super bright, but 414's rock too.


get both! i don't think you can go wrong here

[djimbe]

I find the 414 more versatile than the 103. Our 414's get used for OH, front of kit, room mics, piano, M-S rigs...whole buncha stuff. Those different patterns come in handy. Plus they have a built in pad, and a rolloff if you really feel you need them. 'Bout the only thing I like the 103 on is snare (but I think it excells there) and sometimes a guitar cab.

Yeah, Neumann...but seriously...the 103 is the only Neumann we have, and I've never felt that fact brought or kept people out of our place. A client focused on how many Neumanns you have is probably overlooking the other important parts of a good recording (good sounding rooms, house talent, customer service, well maintained gear, etc...). Just my opinion...

[joel hamilton]

414 is multi pattern, 103 is not.

I dont have any 414's, but because EVERY studio I used to work in had a pair of 414's. They are workhorses, for sure. They are not "cool" right now even though a billion recordings that people love used 414's all over the place... funny when something falls out of favor like that...

The 103 seems to work within a more picky range of sources... The 414 will sound cooler on more things.

Just my 37 cents.

[MikeCzech]

Cool, thanks guys, you just told me everything I wanted to hear. I would definately use the multiple patterns, and the HPF.. I mainly wanted to see if there were any valuable pro's that might outwiegh the 414's.. Glad to see there aren't too many, and I'm not a fan of bright mics.

[soundguy]

I think both mics sound totally different. The 414 has a real wierd midrange to it which Ive never liked. Ive never used a 414 on anything that I liked. This is a totally personal taste kind of thing. The 103 might be brighter in some respects to a 414 but wouldnt necessarily describe it as a "bright" mic. Its a well balanced neumann that definitely sounds like a neumann, it just doesnt have the wow factor tonally that other neumanns have. I dont use my 103 too too often but have never ever considered selling it either. Its a pretty cool mic. The 414 has a bunch of features on it the 103 doesnt, this may give it the appearance of it being more useful, but if you decide you dont like the sound of it at all, a multipattern mic you dont like the sound of is pretty unuseful if you asked me. Ive never been one to judge a mic based on the bells and whistles thrown on there, including pattern switching. All that said, everyone in the world has 414's and seems to find a way to use them so I think Im firmly in the minority with my opinion about that mic. Im sure if I was stuck on a desert island with only 414's and john bonham, Id like them just fine. Im pretty sure that 103's worked as overheads on soundgarden superunknown. Personally, if you are just using condensers for overheads in a traditional sense and are close micing everything and have rooom mics, it doesnt matter much what the fuck mic you stick up there, its do so little in the mix. Often, in a mic setup like that you'd be better off with small diaphragm condensers as it will pick up less of the body of the drum kit which is usually a good thing from cymbal mics.

can you order both from a place that has a return policy and keep the one you think sounds better? That might be the best plan if you can afford to lay out the initial sum of money.

the one thing about the 103 is it has an edge to it from the components used in the mic. Ive found that to be really helpful on singers that needed some definition, but thats a totally case by case type of thing.

dave

[MikeCzech]

Hmmm, another good consideration, thanks Dave..

Well, this might seem wierd, but I've been using Audix OM5's by choice as overheads and I really like them. I own a few decent LDC's and SDC's. I often use a K2 as a room mic but I've always hated it as an overhead. KSM32's have been my favorite overhead LDC's so far, but they belong to a friend. I've been using my use my MC012's on Toms, and the dynamic mics seems to contrast them nicely and mello out the cymbals without distorting the top end like my TapeOp ribbon mics.. The dynamic mics seem to balance everything out, but I'm totally lacking snare ring, this is mainly why I've decided it's time to get some real mic's as overheads..

I've even considered a pair of RE20's or SM7's, but I guess I came to the conclusion that I should do something that is proven effective for overheads..

I don't want to change my snare chain, I really like what I get out of it, but I know I could get more somewhere else, while adding more bang to the rest of the kit as well..

[Professor]

I'm gonna have to hang with dave on this one. 414s were the first pro mic I used, and I used them a lot and exclusively as a music student working as a student-employee recording tech - it was all we owned. When I changed to a different school and had access to a pair of U-87s and a pair of AT-4050s, I pretty much never looked back on the 414s. Years later, when I showed up here and purchased all the gear for the school studio I knew that I didn't much care for 414s but I also knew that I couldn't really have a pro studio without them, so I bought the anniversary edition matched pair. I also have 3x TLM-103s and a matched pair of TLM-193s, and gobs of other mics.
I do use the 414s, but not nearly as much as the 103s and 193s. As a team, those mics give me a 'bright and crystalline' sound and a 'warm, smooth & controlled' sound respectively. The 414 is more of a nasally sound with weaker lows. But that's precisely the thing - I consider all three of those mics to be "character mics". They are mics I reach for when I need "bright" "warm" or "nasally" whether it is to emphasize or subdue the natural sound of the source.
Of course, sometime over the last couple years I was able to spend some time with the 414-XLII which is a completely different mic. It is the same kind of warm yet smooth and controlled sound of the TLM-193 but with all the 'extras' of the multiple patterns and pads and such. I look at it as sort of a poor man's U-89, which is really quite a statement.
So, to sum up, I think that if you don't have a big mic locker, and you don't yet have any multi-pattern LDCs, then you really must get a pair. That's a basic starting point for any studio, and the 414 is a prime choice. I think the TLII version (now the XL-II) is a better choice than the B-ULS (now the XLS) version because the sound is so much nicer. If you already have some multi-pattern LDCs, and could use some character, then either the 414-XLS or the TLM-103 depending on the character you might desire.

-Jeremy

[MikeCzech]

Hmmm, so you think the XLII's would be a better choice, even for overheads.. Hmmm, I think I'm starting to like that idea. You'd say they're less nasal?

AKG claims this mic excells more on solo applications, I just figured it wasn't the mest choice for my purposes, but if it sounds better, by all means...

[Professor]

Less nasal, fuller bass, and smooth, controlled highs. That's typical of large diaphragm, edge-terminated capsules with transformerless electronics and what I'd expect from mics like the TLM-193, U-89, AT-4040, Rode NT2-A and others (though I've not had much experience with the latter two, but that's what I'd expect from the design). And either way, there is some advantage to having the multiple patterns because you'll be able to hit every 2-mic stereo technique in the book and have mics that will be useful as MORE than just drum overheads.

-Jeremy

[Dot]

The 414 is defintely a bright mic, it just doesn't have the high-mid presence boost the 103 has. 414's are also neutral, whereas the 103 has some color to it. I wouldn't consider the 103 nearly on the level of "workhorse" mic compared with 414's. I think any model of 414 is easily a better choice than a 103.

[MikeCzech]

Sorry to bring this thread back from the dead, but I took the majority advice, but more specifically the Professor's.

I bought a pair of C414 XLII's.

So far I'm really happy with the investment. I made the right choice. Thanks for your help, everyone.

Now I've come to this conclusion.. In the manual it shows the XLII's aren't even recommended for overheads, where the XLS's are highly recommended. I think it's a marketing consiracy to build the neccesity in peoples heads to own both mics.

[Professor]

There's quite a bit of irony in the marketing. The only difference in the design that I've really seen is that one uses a transformer and one doesn't. I've asked aKG about it and they said that the transformer isn't in the signal path and therefore doesn't effect the sound. Of course they also call the XLS the "linear" one and the XLII the 'tonally shaped' one or something like that, and I've found with the older models (ULS and TLII) that it's kinda the opposite. But it is an awkward situation since they build two identical mics except for this one design element, and yes, I think they are then torn with the dilemma of how to market it so both seem necessary. Honestly, they could probably charge $200 more per mic and just put both designs in the mic as a switchable choice and then truly have the perfect multi-function microphone. The only thing that would come close would be a briefcase full of system mics with two different preamp bodies and a handful of different capsules (and pads and roll off options) - and what would that setup cost. (I guess I should know since I have exactly that from MBHO)

Either way, I'm glad you have the new weapons in the arsenal, and I'm especially glad you like it since that was my opinion on the line. I think the obvious response to the manual is, use them as overheads and see how they sound. I can't imagine why they wouldn't be recommended for overheads - an ORTF or spaced omni pair over the drummer's head should get you an incredible overall kit sound with big, full toms and smooth cymbals. But then I seem to recall from the last time I saw that recommendation list that they have some wacky things listed anyway. You'll find some really great places to put those mics, I'm sure.

-Jeremy