Beesneez BU67 - new U67 clone

[jim1960]

So here's the review of the BU67 that I knew was coming. This guy only got the mic yesterday and put this together quickly. He says a more in depth review is coming at a later date.

I knew the mic was going to have a switch that would turn the mic into an M269 (which should be a bit brighter on the top end). I didn't know it would have other switches for a pad, a high pass filter, and a switch that removes the S2 broadcast filter. The switches are internal so the mic body has to be unscrewed from the top to access them. That's not convenient but it's not a deal breaker for me.

We can hear the mic in action at the 5:19 mark. I'm still very much liking what I'm hearing from this mic. For about $1525 shipped, this mic feels still feels a bargain to me and is on my short list.

[AcousticDreams]

So appreciate you posting these reviews. Especially since I am still considering another mic for my locker.

I will be anxious to hear his full review coming up. The internal options are a big extra. So far sounds nice.

The choice of color and finish on this is so very nice. It has that Neumann Elegance that we have all grown to love.

The Serrano is still up for consideration(and sound will be the ultimate decision maker), However the color, texture and overal look of the Serrano is no where's near as nice as the BU67.

I would love to admit that looks do not bias me. But as an artist, a designer of sorts...it is always nice to have aesthetically pleasing designs. it has been nearly 40 years since I have seen the hit TV show "Miami Vice". However one statement the leading character made in one episode, has permanently stuck in my mind. He said something like this. " Just this once could not the body and the mind be beautiful at the same time." In reference to all of the problematic beautiful girls he had met in the past...and in hopes of this new girl he had just met, would have both types of beauty.

I will hopefully purchase which ever microphone best suits my needs, regardless of looks. But it certainly is nice to have both.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

The choice of color and finish on this is so very nice. It has that Neumann Elegance that we have all grown to love.

The Serrano is still up for consideration(and sound will be the ultimate decision maker), However the color, texture and overal look of the Serrano is no where's near as nice as the BU67.

I would love to admit that looks do not bias me. But as an artist, a designer of sorts...it is always nice to have aesthetically pleasing designs.

I'd rather have a 67 than an 87, so the BU67 would be my first purchase but I'm still likely to pick up the Serrano 87 some point. I've disliked every 67 clone I've heard so far, including the Neumann reissue. The Beesneez isn't perfect but it's as close as I've heard anyone come. I think I can put that mic to good use.

On a different mic topic, I got an email telling me the Serrano 84s that I pre-paid for last year are now tentatively slated to get delivered in August. That deal has increasingly become better and better as extras have been added to make up for the long wait due to a delay on the metal bodies being made in Shanghai. That city has been shut down for a long time due to the virus. I'm looking forward to putting those up against my Gefell M295s.

[AcousticDreams]

I briefly owned a pair of 295's and they are stellar in the high end. That Nickle diaphragm is quite amazing.

And the KM84 should offer you a fuller low end and other pleasing characteristics. The two together? Two pairs? Might make an awesome combination of acoustic guitar. I have certainly dreamed of that. I look forward to your tests with two pairs.

[DupleMeter]

I just took a listen on my big Dynaudios, to me the BU67 had a touch of harshness that was never part of the U67 sound. It didn’t have that smoothness in the upper mids that a U67 has, and that, to me, is the defining aspect of the U67. Those ultra smooth upper mids.

Interestingly, yesterday we received a Signal Art U47 Premium at the studio that we had ordered a while back. Definitely not aU67, but it is a gorgeous U47 replica. It definitely has that forwardness you expect from a 47. Handmade with quality parts. The power supply had to be 10 lbs! Definitely worth every penny, and if you’re looking for a 47 style mic, it should be at the top of your list to check out.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

I just took a listen on my big Dynaudios, to me the BU67 had a touch of harshness that was never part of the U67 sound. It didn’t have that smoothness in the upper mids that a U67 has, and that, to me, is the defining aspect of the U67. Those ultra smooth upper mids.

Interestingly, yesterday we received a Signal Art U47 Premium at the studio that we had ordered a while back. Definitely not aU67, but it is a gorgeous U47 replica. It definitely has that forwardness you expect from a 47. Handmade with quality parts. The power supply had to be 10 lbs! Definitely worth every penny, and if you’re looking for a 47 style mic, it should be at the top of your list to check out.

I looked at Signal Arts it is however currently out of stock . How long did it take to get yours ?

Not trying to be argumentative just looking for some clarification and I'm genuinely curious,,,when you say the BU67 has a touch of harshness are you talking about the comparison in the Sound Cloud samples in the OP ? or the Post #16 video ? If the latter then I am a bit confused, how does one determine that comparative harshness, when there is no direct comparison ? And given no direct comparison could any harshness then be more in the recording more than the mic , his specific system and or voice etc ?. I am not suggesting the harshness is not in that video I am asking without direct A/B how does one know it's the in mic and not the recording ?


Here is a direct comparison Vintage U67 and the BU67 with the mic's simply called #1 and #2... To me only the tinniest very very slight difference ? But nothing I would call harsh (but admittedly I have some mid range hearing loss ) Which very well could mean I am not hearing all that is there.
https://gearspace.com/board/attachme...t-number-1.mp3

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

I just took a listen on my big Dynaudios, to me the BU67 had a touch of harshness that was never part of the U67 sound. It didn’t have that smoothness in the upper mids that a U67 has, and that, to me, is the defining aspect of the U67. Those ultra smooth upper mids.

Interestingly, yesterday we received a Signal Art U47 Premium at the studio that we had ordered a while back. Definitely not aU67, but it is a gorgeous U47 replica. It definitely has that forwardness you expect from a 47. Handmade with quality parts. The power supply had to be 10 lbs! Definitely worth every penny, and if you’re looking for a 47 style mic, it should be at the top of your list to check out.

I'm not hearing anything I'd describe as harshness on the top end of the BU67. I'm not hearing quite as much sparkle as a vintage 67 (and I said so in the first post in this thread) but I do like what I'm hearing. The BU67 is also a bit lighter on the bottom end but this is as close as I've heard any clone come to a 67. All the 67 clones I've ever heard have been sonically much further afield.

As for 47s, I own a Flea 47 and it's the best 47 clone I've heard. I'd like to own something with a 67 flavor and I'd like to keep the price under $2k. I've had my ear out for such a mic for years and the BU67 is the best I've heard to date. There's clearly something about the vintage 67s that is extremely difficult to reproduce or someone would have a great 67 clone on the market. I feel reasonably sure that holding out for an exact 67 clone would have me in my grave before finding that mic.

[AcousticDreams]

Jim1960, Have you ever heard or tested the Soyuz 17?

This microphone has been touted by some as a super smooth 67 sound.

When I have spoken through both the Fet and the tube version. I thought is was indeed super smooth sounding. And at one time I was heavily considering purchasing this mic.

However greatly touted...However great it sounded when I talked through it, it just never seemed to stand out in videos and audio test recordings. I was also a bit dismayed as they had been publishing a wrong graph for that mic for many years. In actuality is has quite a heavy dip in the 2K to 10k range. Nothing like a 67. Not sure that any other microphone has such a dip like that. And is probably why I always felt like it did not stand out(with the exception of smoothness...and probably that dip is the reason for the smoothness.)

In my opinion it is not like a 67, with the exception of a smoothness quality.

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

Jim1960, Have you ever heard or tested the Soyuz 17?

This microphone has been touted by some as a super smooth 67 sound.

You mean the Soyuz 017, right? Never heard one in person but I've come across it in a shootout or two. I know the capsule was based on the K67 found in U67s but sonically it's not a U67 and I'm not sure it's even trying to be. It's never impressed me anywhere near enough to want to plop down $5K.

[DupleMeter]

Originally Posted by KevWind

I looked at Signal Arts it is however currently out of stock . How long did it take to get yours ?

Not trying to be argumentative just looking for some clarification and I'm genuinely curious,,,when you say the BU67 has a touch of harshness are you talking about the comparison in the Sound Cloud samples in the OP ? or the Post #16 video ? If the latter then I am a bit confused, how does one determine that comparative harshness, when there is no direct comparison ? And given no direct comparison could any harshness then be more in the recording more than the mic , his specific system and or voice etc ?. I am not suggesting the harshness is not in that video I am asking without direct A/B how does one know it's the in mic and not the recording ?


Here is a direct comparison Vintage U67 and the BU67 with the mic's simply called #1 and #2... To me only the tinniest very very slight difference ? But nothing I would call harsh (but admittedly I have some mid range hearing loss ) Which very well could mean I am not hearing all that is there.
https://gearspace.com/board/attachme...t-number-1.mp3

No. Comparing it to a real U67 I use. The BU67 has a slight harshness/forward thing that is not part of the real U67 sound (at least to my ears). And, it could be something else in the signal chain, it would be impossible to know. I didn’t even look to see if they outlined the signal chain used. I typically use either my Metric Halo pres or the CAPI VP28s. I know a lot of people like the Neves, I just find them a little mushy…and that just gets compounded with a tube mic.

That said, the BU67 a fine sounding mic. And I don’t know that owning a vintage u67 or u47 is a smart move these days. Tubes are getting harder & harder to get. They need regular maintenance & can be finicky because things are old. The Signal Art u47 we just got came with an extra set of tubes. That was a big deal to me.

It took close to 3 months to get the Signal Art. Quite a wait, but after hearing it, I’m convinced it was worth it (and I’m actually feeling like it should have cost about a grand more than it did, it sounds that good).

I’ve been making a short list of great current models that do what I want & getting them instead of overpaying for the vintage things.

[DupleMeter]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

In actuality is has quite a heavy dip in the 2K to 10k range. Nothing like a 67. Not sure that any other microphone has such a dip like that.

The U89 had a pronounced dip in the mids like that (which was carried forward to its TLM counterparts the TLM170 & TLM193).

[rockabilly69]

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

The U89 had a pronounced dip in the mids like that (which was carried forward to its TLM counterparts the TLM170 & TLM193).

I own a U89i which is mint, and have been using it for at least 10 years, and it's one of the most flat mics that I've heard. That's what I love about it. Take a look at Ty Fords graph to show you what I'm talking about...

https://tyfordaudiovideo.blogspot.co...nn-u-89-i.html

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by DupleMeter

I’ve been making a short list of great current models that do what I want & getting them instead of overpaying for the vintage things.

Can't wait to hear your short list! When can we expect this great publication?

I learned a long time ago, not to place ultimate decisions based on proclaimed frequency charts. There is so much more to it. What's in between the lines that as of yet, can not be documented. However be that as it may...it is certainly not a bad place to start. At least I do trust Neumann's ability to represent frequency response reasonably accurately.

I would like to try and understand What is this Mid Range Forwardness, that people talk about with the U87? Sometime they also refer to it as mid range Honk. It does appear through their charts that the U67 is indeed smoother in it's rises.

When comparing charts I do see that the U67 has an ever so gentle rise of 1.5 to 2 db starting at 5k, and tapering down around 12K.

The U87 however is flatter until about 7.5k, where it then rises much more sharply going up to 10K(with a rise of approximately 2db) before it starts to decrease. By one definition this area would more be described as above Presence domain.

I found one reference on Gearspace, of a Person who owned both the TLM67 and a Schoeps with Cardiod capsule. His proclamation was that the difference between the two mics was barely distinguishable when recording acoustic instruments. Thought that was an interesting observation.

[DupleMeter]

Originally Posted by rockabilly69

I own a U89i which is mint, and have been using it for at least 10 years, and it's one of the most flat mics that I've heard. That's what I love about it. Take a look at Ty Fords graph to show you what I'm talking about...

https://tyfordaudiovideo.blogspot.co...nn-u-89-i.html

I agree it comes across as flat, but it has pronounced dips in the plot. Which goes to show you need to trust your ears not the plots.

The dips are actually perfectly placed to reduce the “mic” from the signal. IOW, it helps the perception of the mic getting out of the way.

[DupleMeter]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

Can't wait to hear your short list! When can we expect this great publication?

I learned a long time ago, not to place ultimate decisions based on proclaimed frequency charts. There is so much more to it. What's in between the lines that as of yet, can not be documented. However be that as it may...it is certainly not a bad place to start. At least I do trust Neumann's ability to represent frequency response reasonably accurately.

I would like to try and understand What is this Mid Range Forwardness, that people talk about with the U87? Sometime they also refer to it as mid range Honk. It does appear through their charts that the U67 is indeed smoother in it's rises.

When comparing charts I do see that the U67 has an ever so gentle rise of 1.5 to 2 db starting at 5k, and tapering down around 12K.

The U87 however is flatter until about 7.5k, where it then rises much more sharply going up to 10K(with a rise of approximately 2db) before it starts to decrease. By one definition this area would more be described as above Presence domain.

I found one reference on Gearspace, of a Person who owned both the TLM67 and a Schoeps with Cardiod capsule. His proclamation was that the difference between the two mics was barely distinguishable when recording acoustic instruments. Thought that was an interesting observation.

If people are really interested, I’d be happy to share my mic picks. But, what I like might not be what other’s like. Sound is so personal.

Re: the mid forward sound. I would say the u47 is more forward than the u87. Then you have the u87i (pre-1986) and the i87Ai (later). The Ai is noticeably brighter than the original.

Keep in mind the u87 is the successor to the u67. At least that’s how Neumann saw it. But, the u67 might be one of the most honest mics you will hear & I think that got carried through the original u87i, though it lost some richness from losing the tubes. The TLM67 is just a fabulous mic. It might be the only current Neumann that I think is really worth the money.

I also would take all those plots with a grain of salt. That may be how they tested, but in use you may have a very different perception of their sound. The simple choice of a preamp could change the mic’s response significantly.

Let me see if I can demonstrate this with some audio. It’ll take me a little time to put together.