*I prefer FLAT. I use a CAD E100S, but then EQ it to the response pattern of a TLM 102 and TLM 103. I preset my EQ to the highs of the 102 and the lows of the 103. To my ears, and for my voice - it sounds perfect !!!*
In a lot of instances I’d prefer flat, but with your lovely deep voice, I feel like the 103 brings out the lovely rasp in the higher frequencies without the usual harsh sibilance that comes with other people’s voices. Could always eq the presence back into the 193 and that’s the one I’ll probably be getting!
My 193 just arrived yesterday and it is so CUTE! It looks like a little baby 87 (or 89). I was surprised how small it is. It sounds great though. I have a 414 LTD showing up today (which is a 60th Anniversary specially built 414 BXLS) and I'm excited to compare them. I have an XLII, which I love, but I think I'm liking the 193 better. The presence boost of the XLII kinda gets a bit much on my voice, but the bass response is so good. The 193 has good bass but none of the nasty presence...and it is by no means a dull sounding mic. It has its fair share of crispiness. As for comparing it to the 103...I was never much of a fan of that mic.
One of the best microphone comparisons on TH-cam. I think this is the first time I've ever seen a frequency response chart in a comparison. Kudos. TLM 193 all the way.
As a professional VO artist all I can say is that the both the tlm 102-103 are amazing options for the job. The 193 actually requires me to open an eq to compensate, and it doesn't has the "natural" boost of the diaphragm itself. Male singers on the low-mid vocal range would love the 102-103 over the 193, but high pitched voices like most female singers will sound great on the 193.
That’s a beautiful frequency response that can easily be eq’d to taste. Out of the few boutique LDC’S in my arsenal the tlm193 gets the better response from clients, sometimes even over the U87AI.
I have a Neumann 193 since 2001 and obtain what I want. I have produced brilliant sounds and also other opaque ones. Maybe a lot of people judge in terms of brightness. If the microphone shows super hi frequencies all the time, this is the best quality and I don't know, I'm not sure about that. Ultimately I have learned to appreciate the most discreet and natural sound. Thank you Lo!
I have used the TLM 193 for 16 years on percussion, acoustic guitars, sax , trumpet, sitar and and so much more and of course vocals. It’s an awesome mic!
The thing I struggle with about mic shootouts is that it depends so much on the speakers and environment it's being listened to in. On my phone or my laptop speakers I like the 103 better. On studio speakers, or headphones I like the 193. So I guess it's all about trying to anticipate where most of your target audience will be listening.
The 193 is basically the same capsule and components of Neumann's top of the line TLM170R ($3200), except in a Cardioid only pattern and less expensive body. In high end acoustic and classical recording, you will almost never see the TLM103 as the sound is harsh and unpleasant in many cases (a widely agreed upon opinion). The 193 and 170 are more common for these engineers, as they are more detailed, smoother, and neutral. Many operatic vocal recordings are done with a pair of spaced 170's for the singer, that is $6400 among a $50,000 sea of really nice mics. $1600 may seem like a lot when you are starting out in recording, but any LDC under $2000 is technically "budget friendly"
Replying to an old comment here, but Neumann has a great write-up on LDC vs. SDC on their website. To summarize, SDC are much better suited for acoustic instruments, where LDC microphones like the TLM103 are great for bring out "hype" in the singers voice. The TLM103 does exactly what it's "supposed to", and it works great on SOME voices, but it's the wrong tool for accurate representations of acoustic instruments.
Singing > 193 VO > 103. This is because most broadcasting will go through a multiband prcoessor such as an omnia or optimod at one point. That thing loves higher presence and bassier mics.
I was on the fence about the two of those. I own a 414 xls, so I thought a good compliment to it would be a 103 if I didn’t have my 414 and could choose one I would have gone with 193.
Awesome vid! The TLM 103 is my only option at my local studio so I am glad I have the opportunity to use it. I just gotta learn how to EQ and use Pro Tools and I'll be a few steps closer to a demo release.
In my experience, the TLM 103 is already almost perfectly EQ-ed right out of the box. Most pros will tell you not to EQ a 103 - it sounds amazing just as it is. The only time I would EQ it would be if you are doing reductive noise removal, where you are taking elements away - then I would EQ it back to its original state.
I can already tell that the 193 is flatter. I just got my NT1 in the mail yesterday. I wasn't that impressed. It has next to no bass, and it has a very cheap, almost tinny sound. Great for a starter mic, but once you've used better, it is kind of like going back to that crazy ex gf for one more fling in the sheets.
Dropkick Nation he’s right rode NT1 is jus t okay for podcast definitely not good for vocals I have one and am very unimpressed with it. You always have this hoarse vocal tone even when mixed and it never sits well with the beat.
The TLM 193 is really an instrument microphone, a little brother to the TLM 170, which is considered one of the best Neumann mics made. That’s why it’s considered a bargain. You’ll see them more in classical recording than pop or rock.
you have a great personality, info and presence. but honestly, every time you launch into that "thing to do to do" patter, I click off. I have no idea why, but that kind of thing drives me batshit.
Both these mics aren't that great. TLM193 sounds a lil dull and slightly metallic. The TLM103 has that annoying throaty sound which can sound spitty and harsh. The capsule on the TLM103 had the most potential though in terms of perceived quality, as it does have a nice, warm, big and open tone; however that pre eq'd boost kills the mic imo. Flatter sounding mic all day for me, especially if you already have nice analog outboard eq ;-)
Presence or FLAT? Which do you prefer?
*I prefer FLAT. I use a CAD E100S, but then EQ it to the response pattern of a TLM 102 and TLM 103. I preset my EQ to the highs of the 102 and the lows of the 103. To my ears, and for my voice - it sounds perfect !!!*
FLAT every time because I prefer the task of equalizing in post to be easier and more tailored.
Just buy TLM 193... and... and..... I LOVE IT! :)
193 ... Love it.
In a lot of instances I’d prefer flat, but with your lovely deep voice, I feel like the 103 brings out the lovely rasp in the higher frequencies without the usual harsh sibilance that comes with other people’s voices. Could always eq the presence back into the 193 and that’s the one I’ll probably be getting!
My 193 just arrived yesterday and it is so CUTE! It looks like a little baby 87 (or 89). I was surprised how small it is. It sounds great though. I have a 414 LTD showing up today (which is a 60th Anniversary specially built 414 BXLS) and I'm excited to compare them. I have an XLII, which I love, but I think I'm liking the 193 better. The presence boost of the XLII kinda gets a bit much on my voice, but the bass response is so good. The 193 has good bass but none of the nasty presence...and it is by no means a dull sounding mic. It has its fair share of crispiness. As for comparing it to the 103...I was never much of a fan of that mic.
One of the best microphone comparisons on TH-cam. I think this is the first time I've ever seen a frequency response chart in a comparison. Kudos. TLM 193 all the way.
I think if you know what you are doing with frequency manipulation you will you with the 193
As a professional VO artist all I can say is that the both the tlm 102-103 are amazing options for the job.
The 193 actually requires me to open an eq to compensate, and it doesn't has the "natural" boost of the diaphragm itself.
Male singers on the low-mid vocal range would love the 102-103 over the 193, but high pitched voices like most female singers will sound great on the 193.
That’s a beautiful frequency response that can easily be eq’d to taste. Out of the few boutique LDC’S in my arsenal the tlm193 gets the better response from clients, sometimes even over the U87AI.
I have a Neumann 193 since 2001 and obtain what I want. I have produced brilliant sounds and also other opaque ones. Maybe a lot of people judge in terms of brightness. If the microphone shows super hi frequencies all the time, this is the best quality and I don't know, I'm not sure about that. Ultimately I have learned to appreciate the most discreet and natural sound. Thank you Lo!
I have used the TLM 193 for 16 years on percussion, acoustic guitars, sax , trumpet, sitar and and so much more and of course vocals. It’s an awesome mic!
The thing I struggle with about mic shootouts is that it depends so much on the speakers and environment it's being listened to in. On my phone or my laptop speakers I like the 103 better. On studio speakers, or headphones I like the 193. So I guess it's all about trying to anticipate where most of your target audience will be listening.
Yes TLM103 is the same capsule as the U87ai but impedance is 50 vs 200 in the U87ai
The 193 is basically the same capsule and components of Neumann's top of the line TLM170R ($3200), except in a Cardioid only pattern and less expensive body. In high end acoustic and classical recording, you will almost never see the TLM103 as the sound is harsh and unpleasant in many cases (a widely agreed upon opinion). The 193 and 170 are more common for these engineers, as they are more detailed, smoother, and neutral. Many operatic vocal recordings are done with a pair of spaced 170's for the singer, that is $6400 among a $50,000 sea of really nice mics. $1600 may seem like a lot when you are starting out in recording, but any LDC under $2000 is technically "budget friendly"
Replying to an old comment here, but Neumann has a great write-up on LDC vs. SDC on their website. To summarize, SDC are much better suited for acoustic instruments, where LDC microphones like the TLM103 are great for bring out "hype" in the singers voice. The TLM103 does exactly what it's "supposed to", and it works great on SOME voices, but it's the wrong tool for accurate representations of acoustic instruments.
The reason the TLM 193 is considered a value mic is that it is based on the Neumann TLM 170R, with is double the price.
The Neumann TLM-193 is ruler flat and so is perfect for so many sources from vocals to kick drum to bass guitar.
The 193 sounds to me much better it doesn't boost you voice too much just right. But wow the price is to much besides that great video.
Serioulsy, the price is out of control for my tastes
You can get a used 193 on Ebay for about a grand.
For commercials 103 . For long talk shows 193
TLM 193 + Eq preamp ;)
Singing > 193
VO > 103.
This is because most broadcasting will go through a multiband prcoessor such as an omnia or optimod at one point. That thing loves higher presence and bassier mics.
I was on the fence about the two of those. I own a 414 xls, so I thought a good compliment to it would be a 103 if I didn’t have my 414 and could choose one I would have gone with 193.
It's "value" because it's the same internals as the U89 ($3295), but cardioid only. So, saving money if you don't need the other patterns.
I like my women curvy and my microphones flat 😜
Damn straight
Can I steal that line? LOL
Of course :) It is a good one.
But you get neither...
That tlm 193 is stunning 🤩
Thank you so much!
Great video as always! It seems that 193 is a little better than 103. But the price is also out of control lol.
Awesome vid! The TLM 103 is my only option at my local studio so I am glad I have the opportunity to use it. I just gotta learn how to EQ and use Pro Tools and I'll be a few steps closer to a demo release.
Awesome man, hope for the best with the demo
In my experience, the TLM 103 is already almost perfectly EQ-ed right out of the box. Most pros will tell you not to EQ a 103 - it sounds amazing just as it is. The only time I would EQ it would be if you are doing reductive noise removal, where you are taking elements away - then I would EQ it back to its original state.
TLM 193 All day.
what are your thoughts on the neumann 107.. i cant find many comparisons
same question
I like more the sound of the TLM193. The 103 sound bassier than 193.
Excelente video. A mi gusto el tlm103.
I use 2 TLM 193 .
I need one more to complete my set. :(
The 193 sounds great :)
Mouth is mostly not centered on capsule.
which micrphone is better for spoken words?
I was curious did you ever fix your Avalon 737? Thank you.
Definitely the 103, I’m a bass lover...👍
For this kind of VO work, the 103 wins
Yeah , singing vocals is more complex to capture.
I have a question: can they use the same shock mount? Same size on the bottom?
Yes same clip as the the tlm 102,103 comes in the box and same for the shockmount
Can you compare the TLM193 and the Rode NT1 which is even flatter?
That is a goal of mine, once i get a NT1
I can already tell that the 193 is flatter. I just got my NT1 in the mail yesterday. I wasn't that impressed. It has next to no bass, and it has a very cheap, almost tinny sound. Great for a starter mic, but once you've used better, it is kind of like going back to that crazy ex gf for one more fling in the sheets.
@@D.Bunker What the fuck is wrong with this comment section?
Lo Knows, Sort Of did you get a nt1 yet?
Dropkick Nation he’s right rode NT1 is jus t okay for podcast definitely not good for vocals I have one and am very unimpressed with it. You always have this hoarse vocal tone even when mixed and it never sits well with the beat.
The 103 is basically a cardioid U87 sans the pad and roll off
No it is not. Not even close
I work with both and yes, they sound quite similar...
Incorrect
The TLM 193 is really an instrument microphone, a little brother to the TLM 170, which is considered one of the best Neumann mics made. That’s why it’s considered a bargain. You’ll see them more in classical recording than pop or rock.
I think the 193 sounds good on a nasal voice. The flat helps out a bit. What do you think?
The tlm 103 sounds nasal.
you have a great personality, info and presence. but honestly, every time you launch into that "thing to do to do" patter, I click off. I have no idea why, but that kind of thing drives me batshit.
Agree, canned.
103
Your biceps gonna explode in this video #loknowsguns
Thanks for catching it. This video was really a comparison between the 2 guns
Both these mics aren't that great. TLM193 sounds a lil dull and slightly metallic. The TLM103 has that annoying throaty sound which can sound spitty and harsh. The capsule on the TLM103 had the most potential though in terms of perceived quality, as it does have a nice, warm, big and open tone; however that pre eq'd boost kills the mic imo. Flatter sounding mic all day for me, especially if you already have nice analog outboard eq ;-)
Aren't that great? Are u high?
TLM 103
BLABLABLA MEJOR CANTAR, CNTA, CANTA