I agree with all of your definitions, Oliver, except the one for direct replacement:
direct replacement is, you state,
Quote: |
an item made by a 3rd party or original subcontractor that is identical in technical specs...
|
First, if the item came from the original sub contractor, it would probably fall in your category of "reissue" or "genuine replacement".
In cases where the (third party) manufacturer has no direct access to the original production facilities or know-how, the manufacturer will try to make his replacement identical in specs and sound.
You mention Haun capsules. I happen to be pretty familiar with his products. Haun makes very good capsules, some of the best in the world, right now, and he will make it the closest thing to an original capsule he can.
But I would not call his CK12 or K67 offerings direct replacements: he has no access to Neumann's diaphragm tensioning protocol, or where their Mylar is sourced and what exact sputtering technique was used. It remains a Neumann secret.
That kind of process (reverse engineering) will under no definition lead to a product with provably 'identical' performance (either in specs or aurally) to the real thing.
So, the dilemma is that if you define your transformers as "identical" to the original ones, it would need to be confirmed by an independent authority (which, of course does not exist in our field.)
When I compared your T14 -replacement to a real T14 in the same mic, it was the first and only replacement that was in this case indistinguishable from the real thing. But you know how impossible it is to make my subjective impression into an objective statement, as you define it.
How about if you just call these replacement transformers "the best alternative to an original transformer in existence today"?