think she's great? Amazing?.. Then you are also tone deaf. Sorry. For real..I know it's not nice..but are we here to subjectively listen to audio?? FWIW I'm nst hater, I'm planning in buying an entire studio B CR from Stam..perhaps studio C. Btw I wanna hear the helios!
A is the original vintage U67, but it sounds like an old mic......B is STAM replicating that sound, C is the reissue Neumann and is a new mic, and most probably when the original was made (mic a) it would sound more like mic C with the extra punch. What's really important all mics here in this test are great, I hope one day STAM renames there range of microphones as they are awesome and should not be seen as clone mics but outstanding pieces of hand made quality that has been made with passion the same as Neumann. I get it for marketing reasons they use the Neumann numbers....but some day they should walk out from the shadows of that company :) For the record for this track and this style of singer A and B would be the right pick, however C would be better than A and B on different tracks and artist........but with modern DAW and plug-ins we all know we could make up for it in post.
I liked A the best. Nice and warm in a good way, yet clear. B was very good and very similar but something about the mids just didn’t sit right. C was very good and most similar to A, but a little more clarity in the highs, bordering on harsh.
All these microphones sounds great. In my opinion, B sounds like reissue to me, because of clearer top-ends and air. On A, I hear kind of dignity produced by aged over years. C sounds like somewhere between A and B. So my conclusion is: A: Vintage B: Reissue C: Stam
1:172:293:41 are the parts I found uniquely more resonant than others. The first two mics remind me of my Vintage U48, but all 3 sounded great. Depending on the record, all 3 have their uses. C is my favorite for how it reacts to particular resonant frequencies and stays open and natural sounding, without sounding as "vintage". Thanks, Stam! This is a great demonstration of how good your microphone stacks up against microphones more than 4x the price! Sheesh!
100million % i knew the sa67 was mic b, it’s sounds amazing and close to the u67 but it doesn’t have the magic in the low mids that the u67has. Although they got the high end pretty damn close! Good job Stam team you got 75% close to the original sound. I hope you can update the mic to get the magic of the lower mids spot on Cheers
Stam did a great job I think...I know there are subtle intricacies that separate the mics, but i was listening with something else at the forefront of what i was doing and they all sounded very much within the same family...nothing popped out to me as being completely obvious as far as differences...Now i will sit with the cans on and close my eyes and see what comes of that. Good job manufacturing this mic
Blind listen-through: I liked A & B and thought C was not of the same character. A & B were sooo damn close to my ears in this signal chain. Cool stuff. This is on the list.
it sounds like there's a standing wave or some kind of resonance in the headbasket on the stam but not in either of the neumanns. the electronics sound perfect. has this been fixed?
So A is the vintage, B is the stam and C is the re-issue? Wow i was totally wrong. I guessed A was the stam. I thought it was too bright to be vintage! Hah. Maybe I don’t know anything about u67. I liked C the most but thought B and C were really close. I would definitely consider the Stam after this shootout.
I have no idea which one is which, and I like to think I have a pretty discerning ear. All three mics sound incredible. That's really a testament to how incredible Stam Audio is. I don't own any of their mics yet but I'm definitely getting this and an SA-800.
Love B, dimensional, full, warm but clear. C close second, little less rich and a bit harder. Found A thinner and harsher (relatively speaking) - still nice and maybe the best for pop for cutting through.
That vintage one sounds like it has had the common modification of that era where it's been made brighter after production. It's a travesty that this has happened to so many vintage units. I actually prefer B and C because I believe they've tried to be more faithful to the original circuit. Just a little smoother and creamier across the frequency response. Also felt the most tube saturation happening on B which is what most modern producers want from a tube mic, so that's pretty great! Congrats Stam!
I don't know, the stam does sound good soloed but in the mix I preferred the others. I'd be leery of going by a video that was made by the manufacturer. Seemed like the stam might have been a touch louder too. I think I prefer the oomph and smokiness of the original on this one
Amazing, Joshua. B is my favourite. Smooth high and a lovely low end that beats the others for me! Eg Half way through ‘easy’ at just before 2.01. That’s using my iPhone 7 speaker. Mad way to listen perhaps, but it picked it up! I was expecting to find out it was the vintage u67...
Clearly the best one is the vintage.. but the differences are so slightly... i feel more present and more boosted in high freq over 8000 at the reissue one... i must say that all of them sounded awesome and the differences are so small that i would go for the cheaper priced one... after all i loved the singer and the whole music song.. extremely awesome plays of the musicians there
C is the best for my ears. B is too bright and A is darker (which I love). But Of course decision of "which works the best" is depends on the performer and the music production. Thank you for making this video, dude. It's hard for some people to compare those expensive mics lol It is really helpful :)
Well..... Since we’re left to speculate, here are my speculations: A is SA-67, it was full and creamy, yet still edgy enough to cut thru modern mixes. B was Original 67 and C was reissued. B and C are very similar, I just think B is for Butter on that high end boy! Smooooooth! Once the track starts playing though, it becomes hard to tell the difference between all three. Honestly, I do prefer A because it does have that edge on the highs to cut thru modern mixes without absolutely any harshness making it versatile. Mic C was my least favorite because compared to the first two, it wouldn’t stand out anymore than the previous mics. Here’s the kicker, Original runs upwards of $15K, Re-Issue runs at around $8K and Stam runs about $1.2K. In the end, the only one that can tell the difference is your Wallet!
I understand how people can be drawn to a comparison of multiple mics on one performance, but I don’t care for this type of comparison. Seems to me that each mic has its’ own sweet spot in terms of distance and being sung directly into, even if they are the same model. A good vocalist will adjust his or herr position accordingly. Here, only the middle mic is being sung directly into. Who knows what mic she’s hearing in the mix. That said, I picked B.
Guys please do some quick vocal tests with your gorgeous new 76 Tube Compressor ? Video is not so important, even just audio & a photo of in out etc 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 ,,because of taxes , buying overseas is hard without hearing your tests are properly done! Most other UA-cam tests are not. Please 🙏🏻
This seemed like a great shootout at first. Without the reveal though it’s useless. A and B were very similar with A having a tiny bit more oomph. C sounded very different - not the same bite a little less defined in the mids and highs.
Wow they all sound so close, the Vintage one sounds just a touch mellower in the top mid range end of things. Joshua, do you have a link for the 3 samples so we could take a listen in our DAWS? Also will you do a drum room clip of the 3 versions anytime down the road. Very impressed and well done !
B is the weak one. By far, and that's listening on laptop speakers. Reason = audibly, least pleasing; technically, narrowest frequency range and emphasis on the wrong frequencies (at least in the case of this full-bodied vocalist singing in an alto-mezzo alto register).
@@jimpicz2798 Same old story: when a guy allows himself to criticize acontent on youtube it must surely be a troll ... no, that's not the case First of all: I’m not a singer myself and this is not meant to be the usual rivalry between colleagues. This comment of mine is intended to be only a sincere feedback from a music lover, outraged by this overacted vocal performance. If you are part of the Stam Audio team then I tell you: I am a fan of your products and your quality / price ratio, but you should better choose who you sing in your commercials: in my opinion you made a mistake in choosing this unpleasant singer. If instead you are the singer, then you must learn to accept criticism: this show-off interpretation is totally stuffed with ego, absent from any respect for the original version. When facing jazz standards at this level, you dont want to mess around, you are confronting singers (Billie Holiday, Ella Fitzgerald just to say) who could crush you under the heel of their shoes, so more humbleness would be appreciated. With this completely inappropriate interpretation there is a serious risk of embarrassing yourself
@@jimpicz2798 When is time to criticize, I'm used to doing it with the utmost sincerity and crudeness possible, straight to the point: it is the best way. I see that you are taking it personally: it seems that you are the singer of the video, very well: please try to fully understand my criticism instead of feeling hurt in your soul. I'm not questioning your singing skills, I'm questioning this too ego-driven performance. Sometimes less is more
@@attizzoso This singer has potential but she has to learn how to correctly use it.I agree it is way too much nasal.On the other hand it is kind of cool to choose between the less worst .A male voice is also needed for that kind of test.
Wow, just wow. This woman can SING!!! i forgot that I came here for the comparison :)
think she's great? Amazing?.. Then you are also tone deaf. Sorry. For real..I know it's not nice..but are we here to subjectively listen to audio?? FWIW I'm nst hater, I'm planning in buying an entire studio B CR from Stam..perhaps studio C. Btw I wanna hear the helios!
B watson weird ass
@@CA-es2pf what?
Loved B. All of them were very nice, B had something, a little more naturally compressed with more depth.
MIC A feels the best on the low end the other two are pretty close though, maybe a little more noise in the A mic too
Is mic a the stam? Which one is which
1:17 2:29 3:41
1:23 2:35 3:47
0:59 2:11 3:23
- Using this for my own reference, sorry for commenting.
A is the original vintage U67, but it sounds like an old mic......B is STAM replicating that sound, C is the reissue Neumann and is a new mic, and most probably when the original was made (mic a) it would sound more like mic C with the extra punch. What's really important all mics here in this test are great, I hope one day STAM renames there range of microphones as they are awesome and should not be seen as clone mics but outstanding pieces of hand made quality that has been made with passion the same as Neumann. I get it for marketing reasons they use the Neumann numbers....but some day they should walk out from the shadows of that company :) For the record for this track and this style of singer A and B would be the right pick, however C would be better than A and B on different tracks and artist........but with modern DAW and plug-ins we all know we could make up for it in post.
I liked A the best. Nice and warm in a good way, yet clear. B was very good and very similar but something about the mids just didn’t sit right. C was very good and most similar to A, but a little more clarity in the highs, bordering on harsh.
All these microphones sounds great. In my opinion, B sounds like reissue to me, because of clearer top-ends and air. On A, I hear kind of dignity produced by aged over years. C sounds like somewhere between A and B. So my conclusion is:
A: Vintage
B: Reissue
C: Stam
A is vintage NEUMANN U67
B is STAM SA67
C is modern NEUMAN U67
1:17 2:29 3:41 are the parts I found uniquely more resonant than others. The first two mics remind me of my Vintage U48, but all 3 sounded great. Depending on the record, all 3 have their uses. C is my favorite for how it reacts to particular resonant frequencies and stays open and natural sounding, without sounding as "vintage". Thanks, Stam! This is a great demonstration of how good your microphone stacks up against microphones more than 4x the price! Sheesh!
100million % i knew the sa67 was mic b, it’s sounds amazing and close to the u67 but it doesn’t have the magic in the low mids that the u67has. Although they got the high end pretty damn close! Good job Stam team you got 75% close to the original sound. I hope you can update the mic to get the magic of the lower mids spot on
Cheers
Working on it!
@@joshuastam7704 Well Done!
Well! I do not know the results and I still hold tight to the "A" mic...
Stam did a great job I think...I know there are subtle intricacies that separate the mics, but i was listening with something else at the forefront of what i was doing and they all sounded very much within the same family...nothing popped out to me as being completely obvious as far as differences...Now i will sit with the cans on and close my eyes and see what comes of that. Good job manufacturing this mic
Blind listen-through: I liked A & B and thought C was not of the same character. A & B were sooo damn close to my ears in this signal chain. Cool stuff. This is on the list.
Where is the answer published?
Kind regards,
Erik
What tube was fitted in the SA67 test mic in the vid ?? (great work great mic and great singer) BTW
Stam did a nice job! What interface and preamp did you use? Thanx!
I preferred B - which one was that? Didn't see them listed. Edit: A) Vintage U67 - B) Stam SA67 - C) Reissue U67
Mic C is my favorite. It has the best sibilance. B is my second favorite. All three sound great in general.
Awesome test, Stam Audio!
i agree
it sounds like there's a standing wave or some kind of resonance in the headbasket on the stam but not in either of the neumanns. the electronics sound perfect. has this been fixed?
super vraiment bravo j'aimerai beaucoup acheter ce micro mai je sait pas si je prend le CA67 ou le sa47 je recherche le plus proche du neumann U47
A IS THE BEST 🤩
great singer btw
I have a pref for the A. But with instruments added I'm not as sure anymore. Maybe B then. But..
awesome! B is my fav. What is the record chain?
Honestly want to keep hearing and watching this chick sing. B was my favorite.
B is the SA67!
I'm going sa67,47 and 87...and sa800....I'm sold on their sound
I think C is the most polished and mix ready
So A is the vintage, B is the stam and C is the re-issue? Wow i was totally wrong. I guessed A was the stam. I thought it was too bright to be vintage! Hah. Maybe I don’t know anything about u67. I liked C the most but thought B and C were really close. I would definitely consider the Stam after this shootout.
I have no idea which one is which, and I like to think I have a pretty discerning ear. All three mics sound incredible. That's really a testament to how incredible Stam Audio is. I don't own any of their mics yet but I'm definitely getting this and an SA-800.
What was the signal chain for the mics?
Which mic is which?
And is it possible to download the hi res files somewhere? :D
Love B, dimensional, full, warm but clear. C close second, little less rich and a bit harder. Found A thinner and harsher (relatively speaking) - still nice and maybe the best for pop for cutting through.
B is the Stam SA67
Can i have the answer, i linstened to all of them in my studio, some months ago, and i still dont know the official answer
You seem to be bad at scrolling up and down!
thank you, i didnt saw you put it last week.
That vintage one sounds like it has had the common modification of that era where it's been made brighter after production. It's a travesty that this has happened to so many vintage units. I actually prefer B and C because I believe they've tried to be more faithful to the original circuit. Just a little smoother and creamier across the frequency response. Also felt the most tube saturation happening on B which is what most modern producers want from a tube mic, so that's pretty great! Congrats Stam!
I don't know, the stam does sound good soloed but in the mix I preferred the others. I'd be leery of going by a video that was made by the manufacturer. Seemed like the stam might have been a touch louder too. I think I prefer the oomph and smokiness of the original on this one
Amazing, Joshua. B is my favourite. Smooth high and a lovely low end that beats the others for me! Eg Half way through ‘easy’ at just before 2.01. That’s using my iPhone 7 speaker. Mad way to listen perhaps, but it picked it up! I was expecting to find out it was the vintage u67...
Clearly the best one is the vintage.. but the differences are so slightly... i feel more present and more boosted in high freq over 8000 at the reissue one... i must say that all of them sounded awesome and the differences are so small that i would go for the cheaper priced one... after all i loved the singer and the whole music song.. extremely awesome plays of the musicians there
I liked mic A by far. Didn't like either of the other 2. Look forward to the results!
C is the best for my ears. B is too bright and A is darker (which I love). But Of course decision of "which works the best" is depends on the performer and the music production. Thank you for making this video, dude. It's hard for some people to compare those expensive mics lol It is really helpful :)
What's the point of not revealing them when there's people who are looking to purchase one of these..
Prefer B. A sounds a little 'flat'. C sounds thinnest and least "3D"
A is the vintage original Neumann U67. Go Figure!
Joshua Stam go figure indeed... so what was C?
Re issue 67
A is good. B is good + has some interesting vibe. C is very flat, didn't like it but after processing it can be better than others )
Well..... Since we’re left to speculate, here are my speculations: A is SA-67, it was full and creamy, yet still edgy enough to cut thru modern mixes. B was Original 67 and C was reissued. B and C are very similar, I just think B is for Butter on that high end boy! Smooooooth! Once the track starts playing though, it becomes hard to tell the difference between all three. Honestly, I do prefer A because it does have that edge on the highs to cut thru modern mixes without absolutely any harshness making it versatile. Mic C was my least favorite because compared to the first two, it wouldn’t stand out anymore than the previous mics. Here’s the kicker, Original runs upwards of $15K, Re-Issue runs at around $8K and Stam runs about $1.2K. In the end, the only one that can tell the difference is your Wallet!
A is the original 67!
Which is B Joshua ?? Sounds great
@@joshuastam7704 Would be interesting to know which is which of the two others.
I´d take B!
What kind of preamp is used here?
Where are the results
B sounds a bit different from the other two, I assume it would be the Stam
B was my fav.
I understand how people can be drawn to a comparison of multiple mics on one performance, but I don’t care for this type of comparison. Seems to me that each mic has its’ own sweet spot in terms of distance and being sung directly into, even if they are the same model. A good vocalist will adjust his or herr position accordingly. Here, only the middle mic is being sung directly into. Who knows what mic she’s hearing in the mix. That said, I picked B.
Guys please do some quick vocal tests with your gorgeous new 76 Tube Compressor ? Video is not so important, even just audio & a photo of in out etc 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 ,,because of taxes , buying overseas is hard without hearing your tests are properly done! Most other UA-cam tests are not. Please 🙏🏻
We need another batch of these :(
done!!
What's the name of the singer? Amazing
Thanks!
A was OK
B was Beautiful
C was like a Buzzsaw!
I take one of those "buzzsaws" any day of the week
Shane Landstrom me too actually!
She sounds like Amy wine house dam them vocals are 🔥
All top class sounding (including the singer)
Mic A has to be the Neumann, possibly a newer one.
A is an old 67!
close!...but B grabs the midrange better to my ears. any will however do fine, just a matter of eqing
B is Stam !
This seemed like a great shootout at first. Without the reveal though it’s useless. A and B were very similar with A having a tiny bit more oomph. C sounded very different - not the same bite a little less defined in the mids and highs.
The reveal is on the first comment. C is the Neumann reissue
If you look for a vintage character, A >= C >> B. B is something very neutral
Wow they all sound so close, the Vintage one sounds just a touch mellower in the top mid range end of things. Joshua, do you have a link for the 3 samples so we could take a listen in our DAWS? Also will you do a drum room clip of the 3 versions anytime down the road. Very impressed and well done !
Amazing...!!!
Wow C for me
A :neumann,neutral y agudos sedosos, B Stam muy bueno mas moderno sonido!!! Excelentes los dos, ni a quien elegir.
And the reveal??? No point doing a blind test without a reveal as all three sound different
This ^
B sounds best
B 👍👍👍🙏
B And C Sound More Like Neumann 67s
A is the Neumann, B is Stam and C is the re-issue
B is the weak one. By far, and that's listening on laptop speakers. Reason = audibly, least pleasing; technically, narrowest frequency range and emphasis on the wrong frequencies (at least in the case of this full-bodied vocalist singing in an alto-mezzo alto register).
B
video stopped after a minute due to the annoying style of the singer
And the "I need attention by pissing on others who are more talented than I" award goes to A-holeoso Dissuado. Congrats, well-earned!
@@jimpicz2798 Same old story: when a guy allows himself to criticize acontent on youtube it must surely be a troll ... no, that's not the case
First of all: I’m not a singer myself and this is not meant to be the usual rivalry between colleagues. This comment of mine is intended to be only a sincere feedback from a music lover, outraged by this overacted vocal performance. If you are part of the Stam Audio team then I tell you: I am a fan of your products and your quality / price ratio, but you should better choose who you sing in your commercials: in my opinion you made a mistake in choosing this unpleasant singer.
If instead you are the singer, then you must learn to accept criticism: this show-off interpretation is totally stuffed with ego, absent from any respect for the original version. When facing jazz standards at this level, you dont want to mess around, you are confronting singers (Billie Holiday, Ella Fitzgerald just to say) who could crush you under the heel of their shoes, so more humbleness would be appreciated. With this completely inappropriate interpretation there is a serious risk of embarrassing yourself
@@attizzoso No, you could offer a criticism without being annoying yourself.
@@jimpicz2798 When is time to criticize, I'm used to doing it with the utmost sincerity and crudeness possible, straight to the point: it is the best way. I see that you are taking it personally: it seems that you are the singer of the video, very well: please try to fully understand my criticism instead of feeling hurt in your soul. I'm not questioning your singing skills, I'm questioning this too ego-driven performance.
Sometimes less is more
@@attizzoso This singer has potential but she has to learn how to correctly use it.I agree it is way too much nasal.On the other hand it is kind of cool to choose between the less worst .A male voice is also needed for that kind of test.
A