Hello
As of today 18th August 2022, does anyone know if the Neumann U67 reissue capsule has been improved?
so it is not bass starved, lacking low end, ugly sounding, choked in the bass end, mid range heavy and pinched sounding ( all due to the stiff membrane ) ?

I myself personally have heard this for many many years.
Thankfully I finally found a detailed expert professional brilliant explanation.
A very interesting reading about what I've been hearing over many years from klaus heyne website below

https://germanmasterworks.com/publis...7-Reissue.html

From KLAUS HEYNE website
How do I know it’s too much diaphragm tension that causes all this trouble? Because eventually I “relaxed” the honky K67/870 installed in the Reissue, as I had done with several recent U87Ai capsules, and it ended up with full bass, frequency balance, and similar timbre as the K67 from the vintage mic.

Does anyone know?

My reissue is about 3 years old and does not have any of the sound qualities you mentioned. It sounds great.

I have a reissue (bought 2020) and a 1964, same tube, both sound in the same ballpark. Not bass starved, not sibilant, but like a u67 is suppose to sound.

Stiff membrane.

What?

I've been recording for 40+ years and I have never heard or come across the concept of a "stiff membrane" used a pejorative term describing the performance of a LDC.

I guess anything is possible!

Don’t feed the Troll. Mine are fine too.

Purchased my U67 RI in early 2021. It's perfect.

Thank you for your reply Russell,
However I have great respect for klaus heyne and I consider him to be a genius also untouchable in his field. I believe what klaus heyne has written I believe every word he says as I have experienced it myself.

I don't think people realise how valuable and innovative this man is Klaus heyne.

My personal pain is so much time was wasted with the Neumann TLM range going through the process of research, deciding, purchasing, recording, listening, then to be depressed and frustrated on every single recording. When I couldn't take any more of the dreadful sound coming from these following microphones I had to get rid of all of them. Getting rid of all Neumann TLM 102,193,103,TLM49,M149,U87Ai as they all sounded absolutely dreadful compared to what I was using for years which was the original U67, U47, M49,U87

Also getting rid of the 1998 Neumann U67 reissue

Then I started to dig deeper and look inside the Neumann TLM microphones, I was in complete shock at what I was looking at. It was at this point I understood why for so many years I was confused and extremely disappointed with the sound of these microphones the Neumann TLM range and so much time wasted testing these microphones which had no soul

Would Neumann like to comment here possibly?

does anyone know if the Neumann u67 reissue capsule has been improved?

Sneaky! If you believe the Klaus mod is an improvement, buy a u67 and pay Klaus to do the mod.

I asked Neumann representatives about this a long time ago and someone wrote me back and said they were going to officially reply about it. Haven’t ever heard anything else!

So, anyway…

BTW, the 90s run was a continuation of the original U67 production line, according to comments Martin Schneider (Neumann) made a long time back. Years ago he said that any new U67 would be a new product because it wouldn’t really be a direct continuation.

Aside from the capsule tension/resonant frequency, I would focus on replacing the tube. I would also consider the fact that the older domed plexi stands in U67 and U87 broke up reflections and changed sound in a way not present in newer Neumann, as did the foam they went to later (which decayed and destroyed the capsule, so that move did kind of suck).

I recently bought a 67RI before prices went up. It is from the end of 2021 (731XX). I was really afraid receiving one with this potential issue, but it sounds absolutely stunning. I compared it with my two TLM67 which I still love (which sadly fall into that period where Klaus mentioned the problem started) and found out that the U67 has a lot of more low end and also more detail and more so ever is absolutely not sibilant but has a very smooth high end that sounds great and can be boosted even more without hassles. Will probably not need a deesser any more for my voice.

I changed the stock tube for a TFK EF86 from around 62. which made it stunning. With stock tube it sounded really great, but lesser of everything and the TFK really opened up the lows in a way that is unrealistic 🙂

I have an U-87ai and a TLM-67 and i was happy until i read in gearslutz that i have to send it to someone else to mod it to really shine, if not my mic is honky and lacks "sex" which i dont know what really is... extra distortion? Mid scoop.
By the way neumann test everymic's frequency response, is strange they didnt find nothing.

as noted by klaus, "'within spec' is still a 4dB tolerance range from capsule to capsule (±2dB)." at the neumann of today. I encourage you to read what he has reported based on many tear downs of modern neumanns.

neumann consulted him during the design of their latest reissue, and implemented his suggestions (including ones regarding the capsule they initially sent him).

Klaus has a straightforward and repeatable method of determining resonant frequency of the capsule that makes sense.

There can be tension shift with mylar, just as you may read about with PVC, but more limited. There are manufacturing processes focused on conditioning the mylar so that it minimizes tension shift in the field, and the final result of that does vary. It can get tighter after manufacture. At the same time, it saps up moisture and can break down and become looser if there are many humid/dry cycles. Either issue can occur.

So even with the 4dB tolerance that Neumann does allow, a capsule could conceivably shift even more after manufacture if the batch of “mylar” (BoPet, hostaphan, whatever) they receive, depending how well the conditioning process locked in the capsule tension.

Some people do like the results of a diaphragm being a bit tighter in that it can lead to less pop sensitivity. At the same time…it can sound wrong if the goal is the solid and potentially enormous sounding low end extension that some Neumann mic specimens can give.

Personally, I think what is most important is EVEN tension across all lugs/outer perimeter, and Neumann seems to get that very right most of the time, as evidenced by the typical lack of weird capsule distortion compared to fake k47 and k67.

There’s a lot of other potential issues with capsules, and related to capsule tension as well. One is the precise alignment of that center post height with outer edges…which presumably Neumann nails. Not all manufacturers do.

If you’re some vintage obsessed person it is worth keeping in mind that Neumann did go to computerized drilling, changing machinery that had been used in the process, moving from the original location to new facility in Wedemark, etc. There are several visible and sonic differences when it comes to what they make now and what they used to make. Tension is an issue for sure but there have been people that have deeply analyzed differences in the inner structure and perform various measurements. The corner frequency in the high frequencies of both k47 and 67 seem to have shifted a bit with differences in backplate and spacer construction over the years. That goes beyond just the issue of tension and basic resonant frequency of the capsule.

Apple computers listened to the customers and improved the keys on the MacBook pro they also implemented SD card and HDMI sockets they listened to the buyer the buyers who are giving Apple their money

Is Neumann microphones listening to the buyer the customer?
So many people have heard and complained about the sound of the Neumann U67 reissue capsule not sounding correct including the great man himself Klaus heyne. Is Neumann listening to us and improving the Neumann U67 reissue capsule or still going by what their paperwork test results look like?

It would be nice if Neumann made an official statement on this topic. According to Klaus, this problem occurs in some microphones. Neumann respects Klaus and publishes his words about the m49V on their official website, so it would be nice if they officially commented on this. Otherwise, they publish only a laudatory review from Klaus, and are silent about his constructive criticism. Even when you ask them about it via email. These are very expensive microphones, they should be held responsible for this. Oh, and yes. Unfortunately my u67 Ri has sibilance issues. Serial number 730**, made in 2021. The initials on the capsule are "KR". And I personally know people who have the same problem with U67 Ri and sibilance. There are also people here on the forum who have encountered this. I wish it were different. Neumann should pay more attention to this. These are not $150 microphones. And I sincerely happy for those guys who do not have these problems. I would like to be among them and write the same thing, especially considering the price of the microphone is $7000.

A side point that circles back…

If you take a PVC M7 and Mylar K47, what are the main differences? We have very similar backplate, different clamp method, different plastic type for membrane…

Even better, we can directly compare Thiersch redline and blueline as well. Less apples/oranges…two perfectly identical backplates.

PVC has so much self rigidity that the resulting capsule is much higher tension than equivalent mylar K47 or Thiersch redline.

Do people go “oh, yank that tight ass PVC M7 out of there”? No. Even an M7 that has tightened more as it aged and becomes even brighter, doesn’t necessarily equate to “sibilance” despite the airiness.

When you consider the effect of moving a capsule up or down inside headbasket, the audible differences between capsule stand types, I have no personal doubt that this is a cause of some of the phenomena people focus on with newer 67RI.

ALSO, the russian tubes are just substandard and don’t seem to perform 100% correctly in circuit. They don’t have the same metallurgy as the tubes these mics were originally designed around, let alone basic construction, cathode coating method, etc. They don’t necessarily sound bad to everyone or for every situation but there is frequency related phenomena and time domain phenomena that can really poke out to some ears. I hear a particular difference in the sibilant range, but really across the entire bandwidth, when removing these russian EF86. When you have a cascade of harmonics created by a sharp spike in the sibilant frequency range as the substandard constructed tube struggles, the result hits the ear in a way that screams NASTY.

All the Neumann TLM 102,193,103, U87ai, TLM49, M149 I tried over many years sounded harsh hollow lacking soul and somehow clipped also strange phase sounding lacking body lacking real good low mid and bass and very brittle they all sounded brittle in the top end.
I wasted so much time and energy it was extremely disappointing annoying and frustrating.

The TLM49 and M149 sounded only a little bit sweeter compared to the rest but still sounded like everything I said above.

They all possessed a slightly dark veiled curtain sound about them Except for the U87Ai

The U87Ai sounded good better but still you could hear the harshness in the top end the brittleness and lacking real low mid and bass

Thanks to everyone for all their helpful feedback

I guess this is a thread for people who believes strongly in Klaus Heyne statements. I wish i could hear what's the difference after he mods Mics. I didnt found anything in internet, any comparison.
I am very suspicious about someone who says that something he doesnt makes is wrong but he has the tricks to make it right. Also believe that being frustrated and depressed because a mic has some harshness is somehow exageriting the differences.
This post is big source of mis-information, in the best of the cases.
Also, please explain me what is to have "soul" i the case of a Microphone.

All this definitely calls for an extensive & up-to-date "vintage U67" vs. "U67RI" vs. "U67RI KH mod" shootout !

That things are sometimes blown out of proportion is a shortcoming of this otherwise quite informative medium.

There are plenty of U67 Reissues and U87Ai equipped with capsules that have an acceptable low end response. But there are too many capsules I have experienced that are bass starved, still. I am in communication with Neumann about this, and I am confident the issue will be resolved, sooner than later.

But to generalize if you are one of the lucky ones, then vilify the messenger if his experience is different is not helpful.

What IS helpful to the analysis is comparing many of the same before coming to an opinion and a conclusion. I am not sure whether, aside of the manufacturer, anyone has inspected and personally heard more of these capsules than I have. And that experience is what I am basing my judgement on.

I would like to say something if I may.
When I first heard and used the original old Neumann U67 I almost cried it was so beautiful, when I used and heard the Neumann U47 and the M49 I realised I could not live and record sound record music without this microphone but I could never afford it. The Neumann U47 was like I shouldn't say this but it was like listening back to a recording and the only words I can describe would be heavenly pure beauty I never thought I could fall in love with a microphone but I did.
So when Neumann released the M149 I thought wow this is fantastic then they released the 1990s reissue of the U67 and all the other Neumann TLM microphones this was majorly so disappointing sonically speaking the sound was just not there.
I felt sorry for the singers and musicians because recording their performances was painful because the body and soul in their sound was missing the depth the sweetness the beauty the realism the timbre the sound their natural performance if you listen to them in the room was not captured by these new modern Neumann TLM microphones no matter how much EQ I used this could not correct the problem because the sound was not captured from the beginning by these new modern Neumann TLM microphones. This was such a waste of time so painful when I look back at the time wasted and performances that could not be captured in its true sense.
I felt cheated I felt cheated very depressed for many many years and still do today because these microphones were not cheap they were in the hundreds and thousands of pounds the Neumann TLM range I thought I was going to experience recording with the Beauty and the high standard of sound that Neumann microphones were known for the heritage the legacy of the sound that everyone talked about that fantastic sound this was absolutely not true I felt and I still feel today very cheated.

Neumann microphones if you are listening I have a suggestion for you a good one that would bring you millions of dollars or pounds and give to people like me and others something we can own at an affordable price and make fantastic recordings. Here I go

Neumann U67 stripped down cardioid pattern only, no shock mount, no fancy case just put it in a box
Neumann M49v cardioid pattern only no shock mount, no fancy case just put it in a box

I don't need the bling I just need the sound the microphone but at a reduced affordable Price for everyone, cardioid pattern only no fancy box no shock mount no fancy this and that.

Anyway think about it it's just my thought.

Neumann microphones somehow you did this to me back in the days with the TLM range when I bought into your spill and I suffered, but do this again at the standard you are at now with the U67 reissue and M49v but cardioid only keep the same extremely high standard attention to detail manufacturing as of today 2022 but forget the shock mount forget the fancy case forget the bling. If you can bring back the U47 in the same way cardioid only at an affordable price no shock mount just put it in the box but keep the same attention to detail manufacturing standard today 2022 this would be a winner for you and for me and everyone else out there in the world that loves the original sound of the Neumann microphones

With everything you relate, it ultimately only matters what you think about a specific mic. It doesn’t really matter what anyone says about how great something is or isn’t if you find yourself having very strong independent thoughts that don’t always jive with the popular opinion.

It’s hard for people to imagine but the k89, the TLM series, etc, were all driven by problems that users complained about. The drift away from tubes was due to the industry wide problem of tube technology becoming a “horse and buggy”. Plenty of people complained about the circuits of U87, U47fet, KM84, complained about dullness, complained about transformers, etc. Plenty of problems with breath and tension happen in the field with the center terminated capsules, so it drove the innovation of the k89 used in a few TLM.

To someone aside from you, they thought these were good moves.

Some people say you’re trolling, I think you’re just passionate. It’s not worth getting overwrought about claims of others being false or true when preference is subjective. Go with your gut and keep going with it.

Apple listens to customers?

Thank you, Klaus. Is it possible Neumann fixed this problem in 2021?