| Pearlman TM-1 vs. TM-1 LE vs. TM-2 vs. Church? [message #339748] |
Thu, 08 May 2008 08:12  |
 |
PlugHead Messages: 129 Registered: April 2004 Location: Dundas, ON, Canada |
Active Member |
|
|
Gents,
I spoke directly with Dave Pearlman the other day, and am seriously contemplating purchasing one of his mics - just trying to differentiate between the 4 models and deciding which one to try...
First off - I could care less about all the U47 comparisons and hoopla - if the mic sounds great, and can be useful for varied applications is all I care about. I've searched every thread available on all forums re: the merits of each of his mics, so I've done a fair bit of research on this.
Background info: I recently sold my orig. U99 - it wasn't used as much as I wanted (mainly for vocal duties) - I swapped different NOS tubes to change it's palette, but still rarely suited my aesthetic (for voice). I've used a few different U67's, and know their sound fairly well. This is a sound I often prefer, esp. on male voice, and tho the U99 was marketed as a "U67" inspired design, it never sounded at all close to either of the 2 I know and love...
Of the comments I've read, the TM-2 sounds like it has the more favourable mids, which is the area I'm most interested in. I like 'authoritative' lows, but not overly bright top-end, as I already have a couple of mics that exhibit this characteristic (most often flattering). I seek thick and pronounced mids: 'reediness' has been coined by some here, and I think this descriptive is hopefully accurate for the sound I'm seeking - like a km88, but in a large diaphragm design.
For the Pearlman owners - it appears Dave can 'tune' the mics somewhat: in anyone's personal experience, can this be applied to the mid-presence, or is it relegated to hi and low freq. responses? Of the users here with experience re: Dave's mics, which one exhibits the most well-defined mids - thick, and rich, without strident top end?
Thanks to all in advance!
N. Jay Burr
PlugHead Productions
|
|
|