Neumann TLM 103

I've been recording music for 6 years now, mostly death metal, hardcore, metal, rock on computer-based systems (Nuendo 3, Ableton Live, currently learning Samplitude) on this setup:
-RME Fireface 800 interface
-Blue mic Kiwi (X2)
-Neumann TLM-193
-FMR Audio RNP pre-amp
-Focusrite Octopre/w adat output
-Emes Kobalt 5 monitors
-Sennheiser HD650 headphones

The TLM-103 is a large diaphragm condenser mic with a cardioid pattern. I've tried it on vocals and acoustic guitar, on axis and close-mic caption. I find it a bit too bright and harsch for the price you paid. If you are looking for a neutral-sounding mic, I'd invest the same amount on a c414-XLS

I bought this mic because I heard that Neumanns were the best mics for recording vocals and because of the Neumann name, but I must say, when i tried the mic out on a few recordings, i was not that impressed. The mic has a very bright sound, just too bright for my taste. It also has a lot of natural reverb in it. I tried adjusting it to several positions running thru a pre amp and even straight to the board, but i just wasn't pleased with it at all. I ended up going back to my $200 Rode NT1 mic and the sound on it was so much sweeter.
I guess paying more money doesn't neccessarily mean better sound. At least not in this case to me.

Plan on selling mine on Ebay and trying out something else. Any suggestions on a good resonably priced mic that has a good sweet sound for vocals. Hit me up.

Pro session musician, recording engineer and own/operate a small studio. Own gear like API/focusrite pres, drawmer/focusrite/dbx 160 compressors, and mics by gefell, sennheiser, shure, Audio Technica, Neumann, AKG, CAD, Peavey, EV, and more. 40 years old, pro musician entire life, two degress in music performance, not a spring chicken here.

I feel the tlm 103 is a rather under rated mic in the pro audio supremist type of community. What astounds me is that EVERY SINGLE RECORDING STUDIO I've worked in over the past 6 or 7 years has owned at least 1 tlm 103 in the sessions I've done, and in almost every one of these sessions they pulled out a tlm 103 and used it on something vital to the mix, whether it be vocals, room, drums (toms etc), amp cab, or strings or sax. Don't let anyone fool you into thinking this is mic is looked down upon by anyone other than the few loud mouths who feel that everything made by neumann in the last 10 years is junk compared to vintage neumann microphones. This is an amazing mic, I use it on violin, sax, and lead vocals ALL the time and it's my money maker. At any price I would still take it over many other more expensive mics, I prefer it to the U87 (this isn't 1967 any more, we need low noise, clean crystal treble and still want that neumann velvety sheen right? THIS is the mic that provides that!). THis mic has a ton of character while remaining very clear and flat/smooth over it's range other than the fact that from 5khz up it's about 4db hotter than the lower part of it's range. GREAT vocal mic, GREAT sax, Good string mic, GREAT amp mic, GREAT tom mic. Goto for all of those things, although for violin sometimes I prefer to use an RCA ribbon or something similar.

At $600 used or $1300 new it's a great value, just get one (or more) and use them. Don't be influenced by poor judges of microphones who live in the past... this is THE greatest achievement and best built mic to come out at this price point until the competitors started trying to match it. The major competitor, Gefell, made the 930 to beat this tlm103. I actually own both. The gefell 930 is missing the charm, velvety magic of the tlm103. the gefell is NOT as good a vocal mic, NOT as good a sax mic, period. It's equal on toms etc, and it is smaller which is neat, but not important in most situations. For the money, get a tlm103 over a gefell 930.

-Recording for 15 years professionally
-using DAW based programs and plugins from sonar, steinberg, protools, wavelab, universal audio as well as giga, reason, motu,
recording into a motu 2408 mk II using an Avalon Vt737SP pre

It is interesting to see the comparisons in these reviews between The TLM 103 and various mics such as the U-87, at4050, etc. I would like to add what I hope is fairly balanced perspective on this mic. I love mics, and I own several, uncluding a Gefell M92, U-87, tlm 103, C414 uls, and then some good but less expensive mics such as the Rode NTK, Shure KSM32, and one of my all time favorites, the AT4033. I do mic comparisons all the time both with my own collection and other trial mics. first lets talk myths. Those who say the tlm 103 is "bright" either have something wrong with their preamps, monitors, ears, or got a bad mic. Either that or they have loaded their collection with darker sounding mics and are not used to the 103's detail. There are a lot of bright mics out there, especially the lower cost blue mics, which are simply out of control, and while this one falls in the "above average" category in high end response, I think "detailed" is a better adjective. I a/b'd the 103 with my U-87, and found three things:
1. It was a bit "brighter" than the U-87, but I think that added up to greater detail and clarity
2. It was certainly weightier in tone than the U-87, with better low mid push
3. The high mids were forward, but more pleasant than the U-87. I hate the word "honky" used to describe a mic, so I think a better word for the U-87 is "aggressive." However, I prefer the smoother mids of the tlm 103.

The only other thing I would say is that it is unneccesary to knock points off the 103 because of a lack of pads and roll offs. This can't be your only mic. If you need more versatility, spend extra and get a multi pattern condenser with pads and filters. I believe the simplicity of the 103's circuitry IS a feature in and of itself. A small, tight, full, sensitive and detailed mic with VERY low noise and great sound.

One final note: Some mics sound great with their own sonic character, but then, try to change the character slightly and tailor it to your song and the mic screams at you. On the other hands, the 103, and even the u-87, while not having the immediate sex appeal of some other mics on the market, are very MIXABLE mics. Roll off some high end from the 103, and it warms right up. Roll out some forward mids from the U-87, and it smooths right out. I made the mistake of being ooh's by the alluring first impression tone of a certain other mic manufacturer, only to find that the mic would not sit well in a mix, nor alow itself to be shaped sonically. Personally, I believe the 103 is a full, fat, loud, detailed mic that will get great results on many sources.

I have been recording music professionally for approx. 5 years working in a recording facility in Vancouver, BC.

I record to Nuendo 3, through an Allen & Heath board, primarily with Vintech 473 & Vintech x73i channels for crucial tracking. For compression i use primarily the classic 1176 & the extremely flexible Distressor.

As far as condenser mics go in the price range, this mic can't be beat. I have A/B'd it against several of my other favorite mics, including the AudioTechnica 4050 & the Sure KSM 32. It comes out on top every time.

After reading the negative reviews people have written regarding tone & frequency response, i have a simple explanation. USE PROPER PRE-AMPLIFICATION! This mic, especially because of its transformerless design, requires high quality preamps to truly shine. I use it with Vintech (Neve 1073) with very little (if any) EQ and it shines for both male and female vocals. The closer the source, the bigger and deeper it sounds.

This mic features so much proximity sensitivity that you must be careful...but it can be used very effectively.

Regarding this mic being too bright? Hardly....consider your placement and preamp choice. If anything, watch out for too much low-mid's and compensate with EQ or multiband compression afterwards.

I highly recommend this mic.

ive been making records for 43 yrs!!ive used and owned just about every mic known to man and the 103 is like any of them ,a tool that has a defined purpose . not all mics are 100% perfect for every occasion,with that said you must find that purpose that works for that mic.my u47[1961]sucked on joe cocker . a crappy 58 sounded better but i settled on a u87 through a tele v72 pre into a soundtrac quartz 48. from there the signal goes to iz radar 24 with nyquist converters and monitored by urei 813 time align with master lab x overs .the 103 by the way does horns and reeds well . one should not be ashamed to own one ,after all it still is a quality unit and itll kung fu most chinese mic to death any day of the week .i give it a 7 up against whats out there to day .

I've been recording since the late 50's. My current rig includes a custom built analog console and two ProTools systems (one for multitrack and one for mastering at 96K). I use Mackie HR824 monitors on sand filled stands, Yamaha NS-10s and Genelec monitors for a variety of sound sources. My mic closet includes many AKG mics including 414's, 460's, U-87, various MXL's, SM-57's & 58's, and others. I like fat rock guitar sounds, own 7 Boogie heads, several Marshalls, two full 8x12 Marshall stacks, a Twin reverb, a THD Univalve and lots of old Celestion speakers in custom cabinets. I've operated several commercial studios but these days I focus on writing and recording original material with my band which performs live 1-4 times per month.

The TLM-103 is a very bright sounding cardiod condenser mic. Before buying, go to the Neumann website and check out the characteristics. While many folks say this has the U-87 capsule they are very mistaken. While the capsule design is based on the U-87 they are very different and sound WAY DIFFERENT (hey, isn't sound what you buy a mic for). To my ears the TLM-103 was overly bright sounding. This characteristic is shown in detail by the frequency response plot on the Neumann website. I'm afraid that many folks buy this mic because of hype and price, not sound (they want a Neumann mic and this is somewhat affordable). I'm not a fan of the TLM technology (transformerless output) because I do a lot of live recording and have had transformers save the day so often. The bad reputation of transformers is undeserved and is the result of folks using cheap transformers. Good transformers are expensive, hence the high price of Jensens and old Neve components like the 1073. The TLM-103 is a good sounding mic but it does not have the classic sound of the U-87. The U-87 is not a warm mic either but it has a unique sonic fingerprint that has been impressed on countless recordings since the late 60's. The TLM-103 only has one pickup pattern while the U-87 has three. This also makes a big difference. I rarely use the omni position of the U-87 but I use the fig-8 pattern quite often on male close vocals, it's a great alternate sound, fat and clear. I regularly mic Marshall stacks (powered by Boogie heads) and the U-87 does a fantastic job, the tracks sound extremely fat without any eq. The TLM-103 requires eq on everything (in my opinion) to compensate for its inherent brightness. For someone looking for a large diaphragm condenser mic I think an AKG 414 is a much better value and is a much more neutral sounding mic than a TLM-103. The place where the TLM-103 excels most is recording live symphonic music in good acoustic spaces, here is where the treble boost of the 103 shines. I have a big powerful blues voice, the TLM-103 brings out S's too much and takes away the guts, not at all what I want. The U-87 is very bright too but it has a midrange character that doesn't take away the balls of my sound. The TLM-103 is a quality product, just be sure you try it out and know what you're buying, it's not a great rock n roll mic at all. It's a 10 in build quality and unlike cheap china mics this mic will retain a strong value in the used market. It's only a 5 as a rock mic so be sure you know what you're looking for.

I've been recording with this mic for over a year now and I'm still astounded by its warmt and ability to make mixes come alive. It has that expensive sound that you hear in high dollar recording. My studio is set up around a 16 trk half inch Fostex reel-to-reel and older Trident B series desk (no automation). Some of the other condensor mics I own are a pair of AKG 414s, MG M300s, AT4060, U89, SE, Blue Bottle, and a few MXLs. I compliment my desk pres with an outboard Amek Moxart module (with power supply) and Grace 101.

The TLM 103 might be spartan in design, but it kicks out some *serious* sound. I prefer it over the U87 (which I don't consider similar even though it shares the same capsule). The thing I like most about the TLM 103 is its warm and smooth midrange, which most mics lack including all the budget mics I've tested. If you can only afford one mic, this is the one, since it's also versatile on a number of sound sources. The silk highs are subtle and I tend to boost it in the 3-6k range, though it does show a bump in the 5k range. I'm still impressed with this mic and am looking for another one on eBay.

Hi, I've just started home recording 2months ago. My setup is:

-PowerMac G5 Quad
-Digi 002 w/ProTools 6.9LE
-Neumann TLM103 w/shock mount and pop shield
*No preamp/compressor* (using preamp on digi 002/adding post-compression)
-Cordial XLR cabels.

so far...the first takes we did with the neumann were nice and crisp with nice room verb (with no post compression or tweaking). However, the next session we did (and the ones thereafter) were marred by over mid-tones and bass. I'm not sure if this was due to poor mic technique or poor vocal takes. We tried to reduce proximity effect and different room positions but, to no effect. I'm not sure if it's the fault of the mic-or ours. Whats your expierence/opionions??
Tried the same Neumann on an Acoustic guitar and backing Vox, but again were dissapointed by the results. Does anyone attribute this to poor recording technique or just a poor setup??
I know small membrane condensers are the choice for acoustic guitar, but would there be a posibilty that the mic may have been damaged between the first takes and the latter takes of lesser quality takes using the same setup?? Smoke in room/poor mic handling (which we made sure to avoid - i.e. how sensitive are these mics??)
Thanks guys...any criticism/adivce would be much apreciated...

B-Dogg

Condenser
Vocals/Guitars/Cello
U87-Cheaper

I am the owner and head engineer of Crown City Recording, although when I bought the mics (I got 2), I was recroding at home. Our current setup is an HD2 Accell system with Neve, Focusrite and Trident pre's and JBL LSR28's for monitors. We also have BLUE, AKG, Audio Technica, Sennheiser, Shure, Royer, Manley, and Audix mics.

This is a great overall mic and has made it's way on every session that I've done. I've used it on vocals, amps, acoustic guitar, overheads, room mics, cello and many more and it has never dissapointed. It's not always the best mic for the source, but it is always a very good mic for the source, especially for the price. The only thing I miss is multi-pattern, which the 414 has at the same price, but typically, I'll grab this mic before a 414 if I only need cardiod.

I'm a singer songwriter in my early 20s. I've recorded over 50 of my own songs in my home recording studio and decided that it is time to suck it up and get a good mic. I set out to get something that would sound really good with my voice. I wanted something smooth and silky that would make my voice sound full and stand out in the mix. I've had problems with thin sounding mics dominating my vocals in some songs, so I also wanted to fix that. In short, I knew what I hated about my c-3000b and what I wished it sounded like (I have a mic modelor that gave me a taste of what nice mics should sound like).

Features are pretty straight foreword and is typically used for a few specific circumstances. Example: If you want to mic a kick drum, up close guitar amp, bass amp, drum overheads, this is not the mic for you... at all. But if you want a ridiculously nice vocal mic for a ridiculously good price, check it out. You can also use it on acoustic guitar, amps (from a distance because it has no pad), and drums (at a distance as well). This works well for me because I mic instruments with sm57s up close and large condensers from afar. Anyhow, I went to guitar center to see for myself if this thing was worth the money. I have to admit that reading the reviews here really threw me off. There are a lot of mixed opinions, which is why I am writing this. I hope this will clarify some issues that I felt were not covered here. I compaired it with a shure ksm32, blue dragonfly, and a neumann u87. The u87 sounded sterile, but better than the shure and blue. The blue sounded good, but thinner that the neumanns. And for the shure, it was lifeless next to these mics, though the detail was comperable. So I narrowed it down to the u87 and tml103. I went back and forth compairing the two even though I thought I knew which one I liked the first time. The sales guy was trying to get me to buy the u87, but that's because his commission would have been three times bigger. I could tell, though, he knew the 103 was sexier. We both did. It sounded more intimate, detailed, full, warm, alive, and it brought out all of the best qualities of my voice. The airiness of the highs were there, the raspiness was well defined, and lows were tight and warm at the same time, and I was very impressed. I justified getting the 103 because I don't feel a need for putting the u87's versitility to use. I just wanted a good vocal mic first, and an acoustic guitar/ambient micing second. I'm not going to tell you what to buy because you need to justify your expensive purchases in your own way, but I hope you take away a few things from reading this. This mic will put your voice in the front of a mix, it will be clear and warm, you can tweak it with a good mic pre, and it will not break (unlike my AKG C3000b, which miraculously stopped working one day). If I had $4500 I would have gotten the Manley Reference Gold, but I don't and this is the next best for my voice. I give it a ten because it is exactly what I was looking for without all of the features I would not have used that tend to hike up the price. Fantastic mic to enjoy for years to come.

I'm a recording engineer and producer with 20+ years experience. I've been fortunate to work in rooms with vintage Neumann's, so I have a good idea on how they should sound. I record mostly to 2" analog and digital harddrives.

I was considering the Soundeluxe U195, but went for the TLM 103 instead. The LDC I use the most on sessions is the TLM 170. After recording two albums projects with the TLM 103 on a variety of sound sources, I've come to respect it. It's not only versatile (gtr cabs, acoustic instruments, vocals, ambient micing), but it's much warmer sounding than the TLM 170. The bottom end is also much tighter and not as boomy. The high end is just right and retains its smoothness from 5k up. I also like the midrange quality of this mic. It really holds its own in a mix and works well on a wide-variety of vocalists. The more I use it, the more I like it. It's becoming a studio workhorse. The best thing about this mic is the bottom end, which never gets muddy. This is where many other mics fall apart, including the TLM 170 and U87.

I've also experimented with many of the budget condensor mics, some of which are good values. But frankly, the TLM 103 is sonic leagues above them. It's also well made and should hold up to rigorous studio use for many years. I'm going to look for another one.

Been involved with music since childhood (35 years) and have been recording for years starting with tascam portastudios back in the bad old days. Now I have the basic home set up with Mackie 8 bus and the usual digital recorders and protools. Yet, I have always bought only professional mics and outboard gear to take to bigger studios.

I just want to put a different spin on this mic. Most reviews are either bitter becuase it's not a U-87 or happy becuase they finally broke down and bought a Neumann! It is not a mini 87. Remember that the electronics are TLM. This is important.

Just for context it should be remembered that the U-87 was just the transister version of the U-67. Not only that, Neumann soon came out with the U-89 to compensate for the deficiencies of the U-87! So for all these years, Neumann has had a similar but better mic that nobody ever thinks about. For whatever reason, fashion, habit, history, the U-87 is the defacto world standard. That doesn't mean it is the best or most accurate. The few people who have actually used one, usually say the U-89 is better!

Now back to the TLM 103. The diaphram is the same as the U-87 and that is the most important part of a mic's sound. But Neumann could be said to have two approaches to mic electronics. Their Fet electronic have a bit of distorion and make things sound big and fat. On the other hand, the TLM electronics(transformerless) is more clear and accurate, less colored. The TLM 103 has transformerless electronics. This is a marriage of two distinctly different Neumann sounds. Becuase every one loves the big U-87, it always gets mentioned but you could also say that the TLM 103 is a budget version of the TLM 170--one of the premere hi fi mics in ensemble recording.

I've done a lot of voice work on the U-87 and it does make things sexy! It's also very large and $3000 meaning you either can't or don't want to use it on several marginal applications.

I have been using the TLM 103 for two years now on mine and my customer's recordings. When I put on the headphones and do the direct comparison that others talk about, I get some of the same ideas--nasality, not a U-87, etc. BUT! I am consistently struck by how big, beautiful and professional my recorded tracks sound when I'm using this mic. My monitor mixes for overdubbing sound more like mastered mixes than mastered CDs I recorded a few years ago with lesser mics! (C-451, C-414, MD421 etc.)

I look at the TLM 103 as the basic diaphram character of the U-87--presence peak, big bottom--but with the higher fidelity electronics of the TLM series which means the mic may be more universally usable on a variety of sources. Project studios need high quality and flexibility. This mic has that in spades! It's also a lot cheaper and smaller meaning you can safely use it in more places than the U-87!

Forget the "good for $200" mics and get a pair of these first. Then buy your next mics to fill in the gaps from a position of knowing what quality is!

I'VE BEEN PLAYING AND SINGING OUT ON GIGS SINCE THE MID 60'S
I HAVE RECORDED ON THE OLD 4 AND 8 TRACKS BY TEAC-TASCAM.
I RECORD DIGITALLY THESE DAYS ,I OWN NUMEROUS ROLAND HARD DISC MACHINESND ALSO USE COMPUTER BASED PROGRAMS SUCH AS PRO TOOLS.
I USE A PAIR ON EVENT 20-20BAS FOR MONITORING ALONG WITH OTHER SYSTEMS.

THIS MIC IS "OKAY", I MEAN IT HAS IT'S NICE QUALITY SUCH AS A GOOD BASS BOOST(PROXIMITY EFFECT) BUT THE MIDS ARE WAY TOO 400HZ BOXY SOUNDING. IT REQUIRES ALOT OF EQ TO CLEAN IT UP ON VOCALS. I ALSO OWN A U87.BELIEVE ME THIS MIC DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A U87. THIS IS KIND OF A NEUMANN SALES GIMMICK TO PUSH THIS MIC AND TO JUSTIFY IT'S OVERLY PRICED
PRICE TAG. IT HAS NO ROLLOFF OR ATTENUATOR. I LOVE MY AUDIO TECHNICA AT4040 WHICH HAS AN 80 HZ ROLL OF AND ATTENUATOR ,AND SOUNDS PRISTINE! I''LALSO TAKE MY RODE NTK, AND BLUE DRAGON FLY OVER THE TLM103 ON VOCALS AND ACOUSTIC INSTRUMENTS. THIS MIC SHOULD BE PRICED AROUND 300 DOLLARS BUT BECAUSE THEY STAMP THE NEUMANN NAME ON IT YOU GET IT TUCKED TO FOR $900 PLUS.

WOrking at it for about 3 years now

MOTU 828MkII
Distressor
Motif Rack ES
Cubase SX
Neumann TLM-103
Yamaha S80
UAD UltraPak

An excellent MIC. I read all these reviews for cheaper mics that suppesedly sounded just as good as any of the more expensive mics and I'll never believe any of them again. I first had Oktava MK319, AKG c4000B, Rode K2, Shure KMS44 or something like that, and a Marshall MXL v69. None of them were anywhere near the quality of this mic on vocals and acoustic guitar. It just sounds so smooth and sexy and puts your vocals in a sweet spot in the mix. this coupled with my distressor and the UAD-1's LA2A, my vocals sounds professional and nice. of course singing lessons help too. Don't buy cheap crap mics!!

i have been audio recording and making music since 1995. I have been squencing for over 16 years. I record to Mackie HDR24/96 threw a mackie 8bus console. I am primarily digital and have not any other tube equipment currently in the studio other then microphones ;)my listening/monitor enviroment is with the Mackie 824 monitors. I also do critical listening threw the AKG headphones.

I am Reviewing this microphone because of all the microphones i have used this is by far the most useful, sound quality, bang for buck, powerful microphone i have ever used besides its big brother the m150. I have never used the u47 or a 87 which leaves this for those that can decern to decide. I primarily amd writting from a project studio owner whom is looking to spend thier money as best as they can and get the best sound out of thier equipment.

micrphones worked with:
Neumann TLM103
Neumann M150
akg 414ULB
akg c451b
audio technica 4043
akg d112
sen 421II
Shure 57
Shure 58
shure sm81
shure sm7

The Nueman 105 is a tube microphone with a cardioid pattern.

The microphone is extremely universal. I mainly use it on vocal but it is so very warm and expressive that i use it for ambience (room mic), amp recording, drum overheads.

The reason i got this microphone was threw a suggestion of a friend of mine.

i was considering any tube microhone at the time.

the microphone because of its tube nature does a slight tube compression at higher levels of SPL which is beautiful feature and personality to the microphone. the mic has excellent detail in sound in lower ranges and will not miss the perfect warmth of a deeper sound or voice.

I highly recommend this microphone for the project studio owner whom wants the best bang in sound and use for the buck.

I've been making music all my life and started with recording in 1994. I sing play keyboards and guitars in two bands. I started working with an analog mixing console with a fostex digital recorder some years ago. I love the 1970s sound of rock and pop (Queen, early Elton John) but my interests also spread towards electronic dance music for I love to party!

The TLM-103 is a small version of the famous U87. The quality of music recordings has become incredibly good over the last years, so it is important to have very good equipment. When I started I bought a lot of average equipment stuff like Behringer or Yamaha. The only pieces of gear I didn't sell is the the Lexicon MPX-1, my Event 20/20bas, the Midiman Delta Audiocard and - of course: The Neumann TLM-103. I don't even miss the other stuff I had because I like having good tracks at all time. So I'd rather rework single tracks five times with the Lexicon instead of using 3 cheap reverbs in parallel.

OK, back to the Mic. If you need technical data please refer to Neumanns homepage. The quality is superb, no noise, crystal clear sound (better than anything you heard on a CD!!!).

A lot of people tend to say "if you need r&b vocals, take mix xyz" for some reason. To be honest this is crap. If you can't get a solid track with a Neumann and say, a Mackie-Mixer Preamp, you should practice a little more. More important than any Mic is the room you are doing your musical performance in. Experiment with the acoustic and you will see that it has a much greater influence on your sound than a microphone.

I already said it, I personally go for quality instead of quantity. You may buy a China-mic, but in the end you will end up being frustrated and having lost a lot of money. The value of my TLM-103 has gone up in the past five years!

I've been making music for about 16 years, started off with a Radio Shack dynamic mic and Tascam 4 track. Done some commericals for radio and recording for low buget movies. I know have a small home recording studio with Echo Audio converters and Mackie HR824s for monitoring along with Sony Headphones. I'm using a Joe Meek and Avalon VT 737sp for my preamps.

The Nuemann TLM 103 is a cardioid conderser microphone with no pad and no pattern switch. I mainly use it for vocals. I was considering the Blue Dragon Fly and some lesser priced ones from Groove Tubes. I did like the Dragon Fly but wanted something more neutral sounding. The TLM 103 has an overall smooth tone and excellent proximity effect but the high end response can be a little to bright for me sometimes. There is detail in the signal (which I love) and very low self noise which are obvious once you listen to it. I have a middle range voice with some nasality and the TLM can accentuate that annoying aspect of my voice if I don't watch it. Overall it's a very good mic but not great. Worthy for the price but as always try other microphone before you choose for yourself. There is a wealth of worthy mics around this price level which could be right for you.