avatar

petehanlon3

Tin Man

Posts: 44 Member Since: 04/02/2012

Lead

Jan 5 17 11:50 PM

Tags : :

In an ongoing quest I'm wondering if anyone could give a guess on the resale value of a vintage mic with an original capsule verses a re-skinned capsule. In this case it's not a capsule that can be replaced by original manufacturer i.e. It's a Sony. 

 
Quote    Reply   
avatar

soapfoot

Ruby Baby

Posts: 7,399 Member Since:04/02/2011

#1 [url]

Jan 6 17 8:03 AM

wait, the microphone is a Sony and the original Sony capsule has been re-skinned? Or the microphone is of some other make and has a Sony aftermarket capsule?

Actually, in either case, the answer is probably the same-- the value of the mic is market value minus the market value of a functioning, correct original capsule. If it's re-skinned you might find some unfortunate soul(s) who are naive to the fact that, in most cases, re-diaphragmmed condenser capsules are light-years below factory original work in sound and performance, and thus might be willing to convince themselves to pay a little bit more. But generally, a re-skinned capsule will "work" but be far below par.

brad allen williams

Quote    Reply   
avatar

scullyfan

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,612 Member Since:27/07/2011

#2 [url]

Jan 6 17 8:32 AM

Actually, that's a very good question: If you have a Sony C37a with a bad capsule, what would the value of an unobtainable capsule be? I believe the replacement capsule is available for the newer C38B, C48, C800 and C800G, but I'm not sure about the C37. Are any of those similar enough to use in a C37? Getting ahold of anyone at Sony who knows anything about vintage mics is rather difficult. Hopefully one of this forum's resident experts can shed some light.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

spiritwalker

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,678 Member Since:14/02/2011

#3 [url]

Jan 6 17 11:17 AM

Would a capsule from a C-37 FET be the same?

Are the mics from this Sony period worth the time and money to get working?

I'm talking about;

C 37A
C 37 fet

OK it's cold here

Quote    Reply   
avatar

demiana

Gold Finger

Posts: 478 Member Since:18/02/2011

#4 [url]

Jan 6 17 11:34 AM

Is it universally the case that re-skins aren't very good? I've heard a lot of bad things about reskinned Neumann capsules, but I have a CK12 that Tim Campbell reskinned and it sounds good to me.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

klaus

Gold Finger

Posts: 387 Member Since:19/02/2012

#5 [url]

Jan 6 17 9:43 PM

soapfoot wrote:
If it's re-skinned you might find some unfortunate soul(s) who are naive to the fact that, in most cases, re-diaphragmed condenser capsules are light-years below factory original work in sound and performance...
Make that: "in all cases". 
 That elusive last bit separating mediocre, even good reskins from achieving excellence seems to be insurmountable thus far by all comers.

There are several reasons for this bottle neck in quality: obsolete materials (certain PVC formulas), manufacturing secrets to block reverse-engineering by (largely off-shore) competitors, thus avoiding losing the ultimate competitive edge companies like Neumann possess. Then there is the lack of good ears, scientific rigor, talent, intention, passion and tenacity-  all of which are required to succeed in coming up with good-sounding capsules worthy of comparison to the historic greats.

Last Edited By: klaus Jan 6 17 10:06 PM. Edited 3 times.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,145 Member Since:23/01/2011

#6 [url]

Jan 7 17 10:25 AM

demiana wrote:
Is it universally the case that re-skins aren't very good? I've heard a lot of bad things about reskinned Neumann capsules, but I have a CK12 that Tim Campbell reskinned and it sounds good to me.

 
I have been enjoying my CT12's (Tim's remake of brass CK12) for years.  Sometimes it takes me a LONG time--like years--to truly decide if I like something and it took me at least 1.5 years to have full confidence in the main mic I had built that uses that capsule.  The CT12 has delivered long term satisfaction for me.  Even though it's not 'apples to apples', to put it in some perspective, I always take that particular ELA-M250-ish mic to vocal sessions, but never even think to take one of my AKG 414-EB's (silver) with all original brass CK12's.  YMMV.  And the only true test, which I doubt will ever be done by me (or anyone else for that matter), would be also owning a good ELA-M250/251 at the same time as my mic and seeing which I would prefer in the long term.  
klaus...There are several reasons for this bottle neck in quality: obsolete materials (certain PVC formulas), manufacturing secrets to block reverse-engineering by (largely off-shore) competitors, thus avoiding losing the ultimate competitive edge companies like Neumann possess. Then there is the lack of good ears, scientific rigor, talent, intention, passion and tenacity-  all of which are required to succeed in coming up with good-sounding capsules worthy of comparison to the historic greats. 

Please note that I am not negating, or minimizing, what Klaus is saying.  

Last Edited By: maarvold Jan 7 17 10:31 AM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

seth

Ruby Baby

Posts: 5,629 Member Since:26/01/2011

#7 [url]

Jan 7 17 11:54 AM

If you're getting ready to sell the mic and the capsule can't be adequately repaired, why not replace the capsule so the mic works well and include the original capsule for vintage sake? That way the buyer can decide for himself what's important to him and you can ask higher money because the mic is complete with the original capsule. I have some older instruments with modern parts because they work better than the originals, though I still have the original parts if I ever sell the guitar.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

klaus

Gold Finger

Posts: 387 Member Since:19/02/2012

#8 [url]

Jan 7 17 2:45 PM

Great suggestion. What I have found though, is that people who go the re-diaphragming route generally do not have the money to do both.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

bockaudio

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,537 Member Since:02/02/2011

#9 [url]

Jan 17 17 3:24 PM

Disagree entirely. Depending upon the work, re-diaphragmed capsules can be quite excellent. This excludes re-diaphragmed capsules that fail a few years later.
For km54, 56, M7, k47, k67, and CK12 capsules excellent re-diaphragm options exist today, not just because the mic would be dead otherwise.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

klaus

Gold Finger

Posts: 387 Member Since:19/02/2012

#10 [url]

Jan 17 17 8:42 PM

We can quibble about Thiersch's K54 and K56 nickel work, which is ok, in my opinion, not brilliant, but what can you do when he is the only game in nickel. At least he has some background in the material at MTG. 
Regarding CK12: I understand that Tim Campbell's are getting better every year. But I'd be curious what concrete recommendations you have for M7, K67, K47 re-diaphragming?
Nothing I have tested so far has even come close to the originals, and does not, in my opinion, deserve to be placed in valuable vintage mics with any expectation of excellence.

Last Edited By: klaus Jan 17 17 9:20 PM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

rbreen

Silverado

Posts: 103 Member Since:31/03/2013

#11 [url]

Jan 18 17 11:10 AM

This is of course just my experience, but Tim Campbell reskinned one diaghragm in a C24 of mine so I had the opportunity to have original vs his re-skinned running side-by-side in the same mic on a stereo pair; I was amazed by how good the reskin was - I'd recommend him without hesitation.  WRT K47s - I've recently been listening to a bunch of 47s, and had a Thiersch up next to a few known excellent 47s, plus a vintage 47 with a 2016 Neumann K47 in it; the Thiersch sounded like a different beast to me in the top/mid relationship, and in the quality of the top end; not bad per se, but definitely different from the Neumann originals.   What I didn't expect was that the brand new K47 was *excellent*!  Every bit as engaging as the older 47s - I was pleasantly surprised at how close it sounded to the older capsules.

Again, just my experience - YMMV.

Last Edited By: rbreen Jan 18 17 11:12 AM. Edited 1 time.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

kats

Platinum Blonde

Posts: 1,099 Member Since:22/01/2011

#13 [url]

Jan 22 17 11:02 PM

My experience with rbreen is identical. I have been VERY happy with Tim's c12 and nothing but surprised by how boring M7 copies compare to an original.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,145 Member Since:23/01/2011

#14 [url]

Jan 23 17 1:39 PM

kats wrote:
My experience with rbreen is identical. I have been VERY happy with Tim's c12 and nothing but surprised by how boring M7 copies compare to an original.

 
Given what I understand to be the continuously self-destructing nature of PVC, is it even possible to hear firsthand what a correctly-functioning original M7 sounds like?  This is not a 'wiseguy' question--I'd really like to know (especially since I have 2 Thiersch PVC M7's).  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

compasspnt

Diamond Forever

Posts: 21,218 Member Since:08/01/2011

#15 [url]

Jan 23 17 5:07 PM

It's not easy of course.

About 3-4 years ago, I had the opportunity to be in possession of a brand new (NOS) Berlin Neumann M7 that had been sealed for all those years, open it, and put it on a perfectly restored 48 body…and then to compare it to a (specially treated) new Theirsch M7 on the same body.

They were not "the same," but I loved them both. On totally blind testing (not scientific, but…) I chose them almost equally, on varying sources (voice, piano, acoustic gtr).

But that was pretty much a 'once in a lifetime' opportunity, I fear.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

maarvold

Aqua Marine

Posts: 3,145 Member Since:23/01/2011

#16 [url]

Jan 23 17 6:41 PM

compasspnt wrote:
It's not easy of course.

About 3-4 years ago, I had the opportunity to be in possession of a brand new (NOS) Berlin Neumann M7 that had been sealed for all those years, open it, and put it on a perfectly restored 48 body…and then to compare it to a (specially treated) new Theirsch M7 on the same body.

They were not "the same," but I loved them both. On totally blind testing (not scientific, but…) I chose them almost equally, on varying sources (voice, piano, acoustic gtr).

But that was pretty much a 'once in a lifetime' opportunity, I fear.

 
But I'm grateful for you being able to provide 'earwitness testimony': there's lots and lots of talk about how new stuff compares to old stuff in good-to-excellent working condition, but very few opportunities to experience it firsthand.  Are you able to spill the beans on what the special treatment was on the M7?  

Quote    Reply   
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help