Thank you Mr. Klaus. Your information is enough for me at the moment. I really like how this mic sounds(big, lush, meaty..). I don't want to remove grill and look at the capsule, because there is still original Neumann stamp over one of the screws. It seems it was never opened and looks it is in all original, factory condition. So, again, thank you for your answer.

I sold my U87ai after direct comparisons to the Miktek C7. It killed it over all. We had a 74 model U87i there as well and it hung with the vintage one no problem. I sold the U87ai i had and never looked back. IMHO the new(er) U87ai mics sre not that impressive for there cost. My .002 cents

Depends how well it is sung and all that. Even an sm57 can have a vocal sounding outstanding. I say that like it's incredible, but I suppose it's not. Point being, a lot of mics will sound good when good things are sung into them. The old story. Never changes...I'd rather be recording Frank Sinatra singing into a $100 mic than some nut who murders a vocal into a million dollar 47 thing. etc etc

To answer your question...an sm57 or a Sterling st170 or a CADm177

AT 4050 works great for me instead of the U87. I have both and usually prefer the 4050. Both are good general purpose Mics.

Well, this is an old thread but seems to have some recent activity. I have a U87ai and a Sanken CU-44X MK II and almost every time I do a shootout the clients prefer the Sanken. It's an incredible mic. It's definitely not as versatile as the U87ai as it doesn't have any switches to change the pickup pattern, or reduce the input, but for vocals, I don't think it's needed. As with any great microphone, you better put a good singer in front of it, or it will expose their flaws, but the off-axis pickup is incredible. This allows less experience singers who don't know how to work a mic to still sound great.
I'd say it's a little fuller than the 87ai and because of the dual capsule design the highs are just smooth and not shrill. Just my opinion though. (and that of most artist that have done the shootout with it)

Come on. There has to be a limit here. Many of you are suggesting that after paying $3600 for a Neumann U87 microphone, that it should be sent off for a $2000 mod?
Waste your money on whatever you want, I suppose. If you don’t like the sound of a U87ai choose a different microphone. The Neumann U87 is the flagship mic from the world’s premiere microphone manufacturer. Every condenser or capacitor microphone made today is based on their designs. It has been used on more stellar recordings than any other mic except for maybe an SM57. And I dare say, the vast majority of these U87s have not been modified.

Everybody wants to mod. Most of the gear I have, when you look into it, especially around here, is garbage and needs modding. I can't take a trick with the stuff I buy. Oh you bought the Shure sm81...wait...you got the new version??? Bad move chump...they SUCK.

Having said that, there is one mod I'd go for...the mod that makes the attack on the LA 610mkii compressor faster.

If you really want a U87, I would strongly urge you to save that bit longer and just get one. You'll spend all your time tracking with anything else wondering if it might simply be better with an 87. Once you've owned one, you can decide first hand how close something else gets to it and if any compromises are worth it for the savings.

If you then decide to sell the 87, provided you've looked after it, you can more or less get what you paid originally. Think of it as a rental that you are getting a great deal on.

In terms of sonics, its rare for a clone to really nail the thing its cloning entirely - you will get a flavour perhaps, but its in the details that one is a Neumann 87 and one is a clone. That doesn't make the clone bad or anything, but the areas clones struggle with are what I might describe as the 'romantic' quality of the sound. The real Neumann will evoke performances you recognise from favourite records/singers etc, thats a fun vibe to worth with.

Cheaper 87 types, such as Warms 87, will do a decent impression, but there is a reason why one is £2.5K and the other less than £1K, and its not pure marketing, but years of refinement, experience and manufacturing expertise.

I have a U87 and it sounds fantastic - even if the mic is wrong for the vocalist...what do I mean? Well, it has all the quintisential qualities we want in a microphone - air, presence, clarity, extended high and can make any voice larger than life.
In my experience - it is sometimes this exact quality that can make a vocal difficult to listen to or sit right in a mix.
At such times, a less detailed condensor, or even a dynamic microphone can be preferable, but you will notice the change in quality - and you will wonder if the 87 is still the better choice regardless of it matching the audio source.

Many people dislike the U87 - I understand why to an extent, but equally to discount it or suggest its over rated is to be taken with a big pinch of salt. The U87 is as popular as it is for a reason - it is a fine microphone and somewhat epitomises 'that commercial' sound, we love.

I find if it suffers at all, it is that it can be a bit vanilla - it has the mid forward thing, but can sometimes be unexciting. Its not like the U47 or the U67 which can draw something out of the voice, or else manage the high frequencies in such a way that it pulls focus on the performance.

Its a great 'forever' microphone if you find it suits your voice or the person(s) you record. If it is a particularly good fit, I'm afraid your doomed to compare the perfomance of all microphones to Nuemann, or at least microphones in the £3K mark for the rest of your life!
Very few microphones will make you feel quite the same way.

I have a u87 and recently got hold of an AT4047, they are priced similarly to your AT4050. I think the AT4047 is a great budget microphone, but as much as I like its tone, I can’t imagine preferring it over the 87. The 4047 is supposed to be a U47 fet, it’s definitely evocative of that, but where a u87 always wins is the richness and depth of sound, in contrast the 4047 can get a bit harsh or sit flat in the speakers.
On Monday, we are fortunate enough to be adding the Flea 47 vintage to our locker - the AT4047 was certainly good enough that we knew that it was the right mic type for this particular vocalist but we recognised that it lacked the sauce and finesse of a more sophisticated model.

I am very curious to hear what determines your preference, I think once the Flea arrives this AT47 will become completely redundant, but not sure I want sell it, so looking for reasons.

What makes you choose the 4050 over the 87? Are you recording a particular sort of vocal that the 87 is just too pretty for? Rock vocals?

Nothing is too pretty for the U87. Karen Carpenter used a U87 and hers was one of the most beautiful voices ever recorded. Mic choice between the 4050 and the U87 for me is largely a frequency response preference and source dependent thing. Our ears are different, so often I don’t like the 1 - 3K presence range boost the U87 is famous for.

I like the 4050 on near room drums, all vocals, and guitar cabs combined with a ribbon, usually R84. I work on Crowded House - type pop rock projects and synth pop with live drums as well. I suppose It’s a “if it sounds good, it is good” Joe Meek type thing.

The 4047 I have used before as well, and I got a monster huge front of kit drum sound with that mic. The low end was massive. I certainly never found the 4047 to be harsh or flat in any way. Mic preference can be weird sometimes, and I have found should not be determined by price. For example, my current favorite drum overhead sound is a pair of KEL Audio HM-1that cost $99 each years ago. But, if you hear from the U87 something that only that Mic will give you, that’s exactly what you should use. It’s great to have so many excellent options available.

After years of using a variety of other mics, I purchased a U87Ai about a year ago. My conclusion is that it deserves its reputation. It is a wonderful mic on a variety of voices.

When it comes to the U87 and its variants, which I will identify as U87, one might choose to consult the people in the Post Production forum. You will not hear "try this other mic instead of the U87" or "the U87 is garbage" or "it doesn't work on this voice" or the words "mic shootout" - you are going to read/hear about the U87, probably from someone who works with or at Disney, or someone who mixed Morgan Freeman's Visa Commercials - point being all those cats used to be right here in gearspace offering the knowledge they've learned over decades to those asking for guidance. And their ears aren't their only golden assets, their personalities and approaches to sharing their technical brilliance shine just as brightly.

For those of you who are not familiar with Post Production, these are the people who work in television and film (for the most part), you know their work if you watch movies in a theatre, view any amount of broadcast or cable television, listen to the radio, etc. Ten years ago you could read the credits on a film or television program, then pop in here the next day and ask questions of that person directly. I do not know if it's still that way today, but I still see some of the names and faces that offered sage advice to me when I started looking for mics.

All that to say, there is no reason for anyone on gearspace to claim they did not have the opportunity to the right people before making a serious investment in an extremely high quality tool that will last their entire career if taken care of properly.

I’m rather of the mind that if you want the Neumann U87 in your recordings, only this will do and as good as certain clones or Chinese knock offs might be, or what amazing bang you can get for your buck, if you are seriously dialled into that 87 sonic thumb print nothing else will really do it. Neumann have a knack for a particular kind of finesse that others don’t seem to quite manage, just as you think the top end sounds identical - you’ll hear something about the way the mids are forward with being harsh and you will be taunted by this until the inevitable day when you simply go and buy the darned thing.

It depends on the voice of the singer. My U87ai is my favorite vocal microphone but on some voices I find a Rode NT1, Rode NT2A, AT 4040 or RE20 can be as good or better.

I do not think that there is one microphone that is best for all vocalists.

Despite its mythological status, the U87 is far from great on every voice, and when its not working it can be really unpleasant. I have regularly preferred different options for voice, far cheaper mics can be a much better alternative, but only the Neumann U87 evokes the magic of it for me.
Even if the 87 is a ‘bad’ fit, it still conjures up a familiarity that might actually make me choose it over a ‘technically superior’ fit.