Neumann U87 value question

[Matthew Seed]

Hi guys I have a Neumann U87 from 1979 and i am planning on selling it. How do you start trying to track down how much a mic like this is worth. I cant seem to find any reference or guide price etc online anywhere. i have asked Neumann but the answer wasn't that helpful really......i guess with vintage kit its a tough one to nail down.

Thanks for any help
Matthew

[MarkOne]

I guess it's whatever the market will be prepared to pay.

Right now there are 8 on ebay, they all have 'buy it now' prices, I assume they are in various conditions, several say 'excellent'

The max price is £1,836.26, the min price is £1,349.00 and the average price is £1,550.33. So that probably gives you a ball park to work in.

[James Perrett]

What is the suffix after the model number? I would guess that it is probably P48 given the age. Those older ones sound slightly darker than the newer Ai version. I'd agree that the value is anywhere between £1200 and £1800 - depending upon condition and how many people are looking for one at the time.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Those older ones sound slightly darker than the newer Ai version.

They are also noisier, have a slightly different capsule design, and a more complicated polar-pattern switching arrangement.

The early ones (before the A suffix) operated with a lower-than-normal bias voltage on the capsule because it was taken directly from the phantom supply.

The later ones (post 1986 with the A suffix) had a DC-DC converter in place of the battery compartment, and they operated with a full 60V bias voltage as well as a switchable +/-60V bias for the rear capsule. This made them around 3dB quieter, but with a slightly greater current demand. The polar-pattern switching electronics were simplified, though, and the original K67 capsule from the U67 mic as reinstated.

As with all things vintage, the value is what you can persuade someone to pay for it. £2k would be pretty high. £1k would be a bargain....

H

[Matthew Seed]

Hi Guys, thank you for your help.The Mic is according to Neumann from 1979 and james the model number on the mic just says U87, nothing else. Does that help know ether it is a P48 or not ? It still has the compartment for a battery inside too.

Thank you.

[Hugh Robjohns]

All U87s are Phantom 48V powered -- it was one of Neumann's first mics to take phantom power (which Neumann invented BTW), along with other mics in the FET80 series (like the KM84 and KM86). The original U87 design had an internal battery compartment that took two 22.5 V batteries if phantom power wasn't available, but that was replaced in 1986 as I explained previously.

At the same time as the U87, Neumann also released the U77 which looked identical but used the U67 capsule and ran on 12V Tonader (also known as A-B) powering. It had a DC-DC converter that developed +/-60V to bias the capsule and so was quieter than the U87.

[Matthew Seed]

Thanks Hugh, that is some very good information there. One quick question, speaking generally how would this one i have differ from a brand new U87AI would you say. James mentioned the old ones are a little darker ?

Thank you.

[Hugh Robjohns]

More dents and scratches, slightly noisier (3 or 4dB) & slightly darker, but fundamentally very very similar sounding.

H

[Sam Inglis]

One reason some prefer the older one is because it will tolerate slightly higher SPLs than the Ai (which is an issue when recording guitar amps for instance). In fact I'd say an old U87 in good condition would probably fetch more than an Ai version in today's vintage-obsessed market. I've seen them go from around £1000 for working but battered examples up to £1500 or more for good ones with the original box and accessories.

[Hugh Robjohns]

One reason some prefer the older one is because it will tolerate slightly higher SPLs than the Ai (which is an issue when recording guitar amps for instance).

This is true, although the actual situation is a little more complex.

The U87's max SPL rating is 132dB, while the U87A is 127dB. So 5dB lower but still pretty high.

However, an equally significant and relevant difference is that the U87's sensitivity is a lot lower than the U87A. Whereas the original U87 had a sensitivity of 5-8mV/Pa (the range is because the sensitivity varies with polar pattern), the (post 1986) U87A's revised impedance conversion circuitry brought that up to 20-28mV/Pa. In other words, the newer U87A model was a good 10-12dB hotter than the older original U87.

Consequently, with really loud sources you have the double advantage when using an original U87 (compared to the U87A) of a 5dB greater internal headroom margin within the mic itself, but also a 12dB lower output level that wouldn't overload preamps that themselves lacked headroom. (The latter being a surprisingly common problem in a lot of consoles designed in the 70s and 80s!)

H

[Zukan]

Hugh, I am writing a book. I think I know sh1t. I read your posts and realise I would have made a good KFC employee because I actually know dik when compared to you.

[Hugh Robjohns]

To be fair, this stuff is only in my head because I happen to have reviewed the Peluso P87 recently and had to do a load of background research on the original Neumann U87 that inspired its design.

Ask me again in a year and that specific knowledge will mostly have floated away again... C'est la vie!

H

[James Perrett]

james the model number on the mic just says U87, nothing else. Does that help know ether it is a P48 or not ? It still has the compartment for a battery inside too.

I mentioned the P48 because, from memory, that's the only additional marking on the mic. As Hugh says, they all take phantom power but only the older ones have the battery compartment.

[Sam Inglis]

Whereas the original U87 had a sensitivity of 5-8mV/Pa (the range is because the sensitivity varies with polar pattern), the (post 1986) U87A's revised impedance conversion circuitry brought that up to 20-28mV/Pa. In other words, the newer U87A model was a good 10-12dB hotter than the older original U87.

Consequently, with really loud sources you have the double advantage when using an original U87 (compared to the U87A) of a 5dB greater internal headroom margin within the mic itself, but also a 12dB lower output level that wouldn't overload preamps that themselves lacked headroom. (The latter being a surprisingly common problem in a lot of consoles designed in the 70s and 80s!)

I've read that many US studios and broadcasting facilities were originally designed around passive ribbon mics. When Neumann capacitor mics began to be imported in the Fifties, they had much hotter output than the gear was able to cope with, so the US importer offered various modifications to bring the output level down. Thus I think the KM84 could be wired for different output impedances which would give different levels. Not sure if that was also true of the U87.

I have a U77 and a (non-A) U87, and the 77 is about 15dB hotter than the 87. I believe it was also one of the first transformerless mics.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I've read that many US studios and broadcasting facilities were originally designed around passive ribbon mics.

This is true... (and not just for the US!)

When Neumann capacitor mics began to be imported in the Fifties, they had much hotter output than the gear was able to cope with, so the US importer offered various modifications to bring the output level down.

Quite possibly. That might also explain why a lot of early capacitor mics have a relatively low output level not much hotter than a moving-coil mic. (5mV/Pa rather than the more usual, today, 20mV/Pa)

Not sure if that was also true of the U87.

I don't think so. The U87 came out in 1967 and recording consoles had long since been redesigned to cope with mics other than ribbons by then! As far as I'm aware, the output level of the U87 was fixed (although it did vary slightly with pattern selection) at around 5-8mV/Pa.

I have a U77 and a (non-A) U87, and the 77 is about 15dB hotter than the 87. I believe it was also one of the first transformerless mics.

The U77 should be 15.9dB hotter, in fact, according to the specs! And yes, it lacked the output transformer because of the circuitry complications of the A-B or Tonader powering format.

And no, actually the U77 was the last T-12 mic Neumann ever made!

he earliest Neumann T12-powered mic came out in 1965 (KTM minature mic), and then there was the KM73/73/75 in 1966 (T12 powered versions of the KM83/84/85), and the KM76 in 1967 (T-12 version of the KM86). The U77 didn't come out until 1968, and there were no new models made with T-12 powering after that becuase phantom P48 took over as the ubiquitous standard.

H

[Sam Inglis]

Not sure if that was also true of the U87.

I don't think so. The U87 came out in 1967 and recording consoles had long since been redesigned to cope with mics other than ribbons by then! As far as I'm aware, the output level of the U87 was fixed (although it did vary slightly with pattern selection) at around 5-8mV/Pa.

But they *did* do it with the KM84, which came out only a year or two before the U87 -- see this post from David Satz for example. Hmmm.

[Hugh Robjohns]

But they *did* do it with the KM84...

My bad -- you are (or rather he is) quite right.

From the original U87 manual, under a heading of 'Electrical Source Impedance', it says that the output transformer secondary has dual windings. The factory standard has them wired in series for a 200 Ohms output Z, but they could be wired in parallel for 50 Ohms output Z. Naturally, the output level then also falls by 6dB. Models wired this way in the factory were marked with a red dot on the base plate beside the serial number.

There's nothing I can see in 'the book book of all things Neumann' that mentions American importers modifying their mics in this way, nor of Neumann supplying 50 Ohm models exclusively to America, but clearly some customers wanted 50 Ohm output impedances and/or 6dB lower output levels... rather than the standard Neumann production version.

H

[Matthew Seed]

Thank you for all this info guys, i'll be honest and say some of it is going over my head but i find it interesting non the less.

I have decided to sell this mic now, i have put it on SOS board. thanks guys: web page

[John Willett]

For completeness, the "i" designation means "international" and means that the mic. has an XLR connector instead of a Tuchel DIN connector.

[Bewildered]

Hi, I live in the Midlands, between Worcester and Birmingham. Tried Rode k2, SE RNR1 and AKG c414 for female vocals (latter 2 going through a DAV BG2) but apparently not good enough? Does anyone know if there's a place near me that hires Neumann U87ai? Or should I really be able to get a decent recording with the 3 mics I've already mentioned (home recording, untreated room, using SE reflexion thingy)?

[muzines]

What's the problem you are having with your vocal recording?

[Bewildered]

What's the problem you are having with your vocal recording?

According to the guy who is going to mix the song, the vocal sound is't good enough and he told me to use a different mic (had been using an AKG C414). Tried the SE RNR1 but it's not bright enough.

[ConcertinaChap]

No wonder you're bewildered. "Isn't good enough" is not much help to you, I would have thought. You need more specifics from him. How did the recording sound to you?

CC

[Bob Bickerton]

Whilst I subscribe to the view that it's a good idea to match the mic to the vocal, it nevertheless should be workable with the mics you have. It could be a room issue, or a poor performer, or maybe the person mixing isn't up to much?

What do you and the performer think of it?

Bob

[Sam Inglis]

I would be surprised if a U87 was much brighter than a C414 or a Rode K2. In fact I'd expect it to have a bit less by way of 'air' at the top end and a bit more fullness in the mid-range.

It's true that some mics suit some voices better, but I can't imagine that the difference between a 414 and a U87 would be the difference between a vocal being usable at the mix or not.