How did the vintage originals sound when they were born, and are they still "originals", do they still sound the same after parts have aged, and being serviced probably several times during their 60-70 years life span?This is an old canard (lovely expression), often used to counter criticism of some of the dreck out there today pretending to be "as good as the original":
Did the service from high-skilled people maybe even improve their sound over time?Yes, it may, but that's not the subject of this discussion, which is: why do any of the Big Five in 100% stock configuration and in great condition continue to blow any of their pretender copies to pieces?
If I read how you work on a microphone to bring it to its best, I think that is far more effort than what was spend into it when it was produced.The cumulative effort that went into the development and refinement of components assembled in vintage mics far exceeds any time one could possibly spend tweaking these mics.
Isn't it high time to concentrate and bundle the knowledge and skills of the few specialists left, to preserve some things that will be lost soon?The deep knowledge one could "bundle" from the inventors of excellent audio equipment or components is not that easy to come by anymore. The inventor geniuses and the craftsmen who had the proper training to manufacture tubes, transformers, capsules, etc. are either dead by now or are hanging on by a thread. THAT collaboration should have been initiated decades ago, but back then no one had the foresight, and people threw tube equipment into dumpsters.
Isn't it high time for you and some others to build real clones of the vintage gems?
Isn't it high time for you and some others to build real clones of the vintage gems?I know too much about good microphones to pretend I know enough to make them. That hubris has cost at least one cloner's investing family millions.