Hello friends. I used to use Rode NT2-A before and I found its sound too solid and superficial so I sold it.
I am going to buy a new microphone now and I am torn between AKG C414 XLS and Neumann TLM 102. Which one do you think I should buy?
Also I don't know if it is important for this comparison but my vocal style is quite high and crispy/breathy male vocal

414 XLS is more useful and has a more pleasant tone than the TLM 102 in my opinion. If your budget allows, I would strongly consider the Austrian Audio OC818.

Between those two, 414 XLS no doubt

Austrian Audio OC818 smokes both of them

don't guess. test.

buy both with a 100% return policy. do a shootout, keep the winner.

every modern variant of the 414 sounds awful on my voice. the only way i know this is because i auditioned them.

the 102 and 103 sound fine on my voice. how do i know? direct evaluation.

i also know the u67 sounds better on my voice than the m49, although they both sound fine. we can keep going with this.

you can add a third mic to the shootout such as the c100, tlm 103, or oc818 (all are in the same price range as the 414).

I would disagree with that. It definitely doesn't "smoke" the 414. They're different but equally good.

If I were shopping for a mic in that price range, and it was for vocals, I would make sure to audition the Lewitt PureTube.
Vocal mics are a very personal thing, so what works for one person may not work for another.
I found the 102 to be quite nice with de-essing. It doesn't have quite the body of the others... And that may be a good or bad thing.
The 414 is very reliable and will work on most sources adequately.
I didn't get on the with OC818. But it was a nice mic, for sure. I actually preferred the LCT640TS. But on a higher breathy vocal I could see that mic maybe not working. Hard to say.
The PureTube is a really neutral sounding vocal mic that has extremely high fidelity.

Welcome to gearspace. You're supposed to hate modern 414s and love Austrian Audio. Get on with the program

Well annoyingly it is true.

And affects the value of my old AKGs, which are quite good mics.

The OC818 is a superb mic.

I have purchased new AKG and not been impressed.

Having not actually heard OPs voice, no idea what would suit them.

I’ll “See” all these AA/AKG/Lewitt’s and “Raze” you all with a BZ 87 Multi-Pattern!


Wanna “be safe”?
Who you gonna call?
87!
LOL!
(I’ve got the Cardiod version)
Chris

I strongly disliked the XLS on my voice, but I really liked the TLM 102. I sold it because I liked my WA87 R2 just as much and like to take advantage of the null in figure 8 to reject my acoustic guitar while I sing.

I own a 414 B-ULS and I prefer it over the XLS/XLII versions, but I wouldn't kick a XLS out of bed either. If I was in the market for a do-it-all condenser and I didn't have my B-ULS, I'd definitely check out the OC818 first, though. Nothing wrong with a TLM 102 though, I just don't find it particularly exciting or versatile.

If your mic locker is limited or you don't have another condenser, then definitely get a 414/818. They are not the sexiest mic in the world, but will work on virtually any source and have a bunch of polar patterns/pad options. It's the swiss army knife of condensers.

Piggybacking on chess' suggestion for an 87, the Soundelux U195 is great too and you can find them used for maybe 700 bucks.

The 102 can have an unpleasant sharpness to the high end. Given your high, breathy voice that might not be the best choice.
The XLS would be a better choice.

But I would go with a used 414 TLII. They go for around the same price as a brand new XLS and have a nice smooth response across the board.

But testing out the mic on your voice would be the absolute best you can do because you never know what could work well until you try it.

the tlm102 in the right situation is great. now, after that being said, do expect the (used) prices of tlm 102's to increase by multiple times. good day/night!

I'd have to agree about the sharpness of the 102. I did, however, find that it wasn't all that hard to tame. The thing that bothered me more was the lack of low mids. It worked fine (actually really well) on fuller mixes, but in a stripped down vocal/acoustic scernerio (which I do a lot of) I didn't feel it was full enough. Just my opinion.
My 2 favorite vocal mics under $1500 are the Telefunken TF29 and Lewitt PureTube. I think on most male voices the are both outstanding. And if I had to choose between them I'd probably pick the Copperhead because it's more versatile with other instruments, while the PureTube is somewhat limited because you have to be up close to it.

Thank you for your precious infos. Also, do you think there is a big difference between the AKG C414 XLS and the AKG C414 XLII ?

Well 60.5 minus 62 equals minus 1.5.
(Translated the Roman Numerals for you guys )
That’s the difference. Only one and a half.

Chris
P.S. XLII is brighter. Unlike myself.
My Voice is better on 60.5.
Ahem XLS.

You can definitely tell they're closely related. They handle transients the same. But the XLII has a presence boost that may or may not be to your liking.

I would suggest reviewing the TLM 49. It can help smooth out that "high and crispy voice".

I both love and agree with this idea. The best way to learn which is best is to try them out! Snag a TLM 49 and C414 and keep whichever fits you best.

tlm 49 is out of budget lol

The XLS is supposed to be the flat version of the 414, like the 414 BULS from the 80s, and the XLII is supposed to be the bright version, like the 414 EB version from the 70s.

I have all 4 of them. The XLS does not sound flat to me. It has a decent amount of brightness. The XLII is a bit strange from my experience because it sounds more narrow as opposed to sounding like a presence boosted XLS. It comes across as if it has less body, unlike the 414 EB which has the brightness but also a lot of body.

The XLII kinda reminds me of a U87.

Personally, I would go with the XLS.

Now, if you live near a Vintage King, you might be able to demo a Beesneez BC12A FET. It's basically the Beesneez version of the 414 from the 70s and is less than half the price of a current AKG 414. I just got a modded version of a 414 EB P48 (early 80s model) with the Beesneez capsule in it and I'm very impressed. Of all the 414s I have, it is so far the 2nd best sounding 414, behind my 414 EB from the 70s. I don't know exactly how much the components of the BC12A FET affects the sound, but I can't imagine that it would sound that much different from my modded 414 EB P48. The capsules are the same and do the majority of the heavy lifting.

I don't own one myself, but the Vanguard V13 is somewhat comparable (flattish frequency response and multi-pattern) but seems a bit more soft and flattering than modern C414s.

I had a V13 for a while. It was nice and very vanilla. Not overly hyped. I ended up choosing the Telefunken Copperhead over it. But it was a nice mic.

1. Is there a particular reason you've decided it's "between these two"?
2. Is there a particular reason you might want a multi-pattern microphone to record vocals?
3. What does the rest of your recording chain look like?
4. What sort of space are you recording in?
5. What is the uppermost limit of your budget?
6. What geographical region are you in?
7. Are you willing to buy a used microphone?
8. I know what you mean when you say the Rode NT was "superficial" (a term I would also apply to the AKG C414 XLS btw) but what do you mean by "too solid"?

No, there is no particular reason, I just found these when I researched. I am open to other microphone suggestions too. My budget is max 1000 dollars. I record at home and there is no acoustic insulation, but I am thinking of getting some insulation, maybe little booth/cabine. I will also buy a sound interface, but I prefer using most of my budget on microphone. I am not keen on buying a second-hand product. region is turkey. When I say solid, I mean it lacks depth and does not fully reflect my voice. The sound I get with the Rode NT 2 A is superficial and sounds like just a "heavy mid frequencies boost/exaggeration" to my ears. Rode eats up the nice parts of my voice and compresses it. It has no texture, its like "cheesy/fancy". By the way, my English is not very good, so sometimes I make strange descriptions lol.

if we add to comparison Tlm 103, still do you think C414 XLS better?

You're thinking about it wrong. There's no "better" between those two. There's what works best for you and your personal aesthetic.

To my ears! TLM pretty vanilla,(not in a bad way!) B-ULS the warmest, XLS less so, and XLii's of any vintage brightest (on purpose, as can be seen in AKG frequency response plots).

YMMV, but if, as you mentioned, a higher register is where your voice lives, than you may prefer the less 'bright' the better.

When considering a primary mic, multi pattern > cardioid only.... Because each pattern has its own sonic signature and can be useful in certain situations that do come up... even for a bedroom recordist. For that reason I'd take the 414XLS over TLM102 or TLM103

Introduce the multi-pattern TLM107 to the conversation and it's a different story. I'm usually grabbing that one over the XLS. And it's certainly possible to buy the TLM107 used for under 1,000.

I do have both, and the 107 gets used a lot more... feels a lot more natural on acoustic sources to me although I do like the XLS sometimes.

I don't think multpattern should always be thought of as superior in this scenario. Sometimes, the cardioid only mic just suits what you're doing better (not because it's cardioid only, but because of its sound). I think, especially with voice (if that's the primary concern), experimenting with mics until you find what you like is the best way.