That was excellent. Very informative and the acoustic phase is something I never knew about.

I liked the SM7 and the U67 best.

Ive done much research on AKG mics over the years, have had the opportunity to use C12's, C12A's, various models I of 414's, and as side note, I think it's worth mentioning that the AKG C12A mic used in the video is not the same mic as the C12.
While both mics have similarities - the main one being that they both use the famous CK12 Brass Capsule - there are differences in the circuitry that does make a substantial difference in sound...
The C12, originally released in 1953, was a remote powered mic, using a 6072 glass triode tube in a plate pickup; it also used a T14 XFO, and was housed in a long polished metal cylindrical body.
The C12A was introduced in 1963, and offered the same CK12 capsule with the same multi pattern choices as the C12 ...but it was more similar in appearance to what would eventually become the 414, which had a much smaller body; the original 6072 was far too large to fit into the body of the C12A... and because of this, it used a miniturized steel-cased Nuvistor tube; which was designed by RCA. The origins of the Nuvistor tube are said to be in the technology of the time; RCA recognized that transistor technology was gaining ground in '63, and using this Nuvistor tube would allow manufacturers to still advertise the various products as being tube based - and technically they were tubes, but their design and size were not even close to being same as the previously-used 6072's. The C12A also used a completely different XFO and had other internal circuitry than the C12. Many people who had used or heard the C12 - and who then bought the C12A -ended up being "underwhelmed" by the CK12A's lack of warmth and definition in the lows, as well as missing the gorgeous mid range that the C12 had inherently. It also lacked the same gain as the C12.
That's not to say that the C12A was a bad mic, because it wasn't...but it didn't have the same sonic magic as the C12.
While C12A's are still used quite a bit by people who have them, a big part of their popularity is that they are being purchased for the CK12 Brass capsule, because it can be used in reconditioning other famous mics that used that same capsule.... Telefunken ELAM's, older AKG 414's up through the EB Series, etc. The C12A is a perfectly useable condenser mic, and fine for many apps, much like the 414 is... But if you're thinking about getting one and anticipating the same sound of the C12, you'll probably be disappointed. ;)
FWIW

DonnyThompson, post: 453158, member: 46114 wrote: Ive done much research on AKG mics over the years, have had the opportunity to use C12's, C12A's, various models I of 414's, and as side note, I think it's worth mentioning that the AKG C12A mic used in the video is not the same mic as the C12.
While both mics have similarities - the main one being that they both use the famous CK12 Brass Capsule - there are differences in the circuitry that does make a substantial difference in sound...
The C12, originally released in 1953, was a remote powered mic, using a 6072 glass triode tube in a plate pickup; it also used a T14 XFO, and was housed in a long polished metal cylindrical body.
The C12A was introduced in 1963, and offered the same CK12 capsule with the same multi pattern choices as the C12 ...but it was more similar in appearance to what would eventually become the 414, which had a much smaller body; the original 6072 was far too large to fit into the body of the C12A... and because of this, it used a miniturized steel-cased Nuvistor tube; which was designed by RCA. The origins of the Nuvistor tube are said to be in the technology of the time; RCA recognized that transistor technology was gaining ground in '63, and using this Nuvistor tube would allow manufacturers to still advertise the various products as being tube based - and technically they were tubes, but their design and size were not even close to being same as the previously-used 6072's. The C12A also used a completely different XFO and had other internal circuitry than the C12. Many people who had used or heard the C12 - and who then bought the C12A -ended up being "underwhelmed" by the CK12A's lack of warmth and definition in the lows, as well as missing the gorgeous mid range that the C12 had inherently. It also lacked the same gain as the C12.
That's not to say that the C12A was a bad mic, because it wasn't...but it didn't have the same sonic magic as the C12.
While C12A's are still used quite a bit by people who have them, a big part of their popularity is that they are being purchased for the CK12 Brass capsule, because it can be used in reconditioning other famous mics that used that same capsule.... Telefunken ELAM's, older AKG 414's up through the EB Series, etc. The C12A is a perfectly useable condenser mic, and fine for many apps, much like the 414 is... But if you're thinking about getting one and anticipating the same sound of the C12, you'll probably be disappointed. ;)
FWIW

Great info there man. It’s funny that rarely does an “update” occur in gear that’s a perceived improvement to the end user. Sometimes it’s manufacturers cheapening something for cost/profit, other times it’s an actual technical improvement which looses the “magic”.

With these things there’s always a case of taste and bias by the end user, and perhaps a mine is better philosophy as well. But nonetheless it seems the updates are usually perceived as bad. Even mics like the Rode Nt1/2 vs NT 1/2A, there’s a lot who’ll say they’re not really close, and the “A” was sold under the reputation of the original, which was in fact an amazing value mic.

There’s things like Brent Avril stuff that have said to have been “evolved” a bit since the originals he did. With re-issues and vintage there’s always parts availability and Pantene issues so that’s a little different, from the same manufacturer updating their stuff.

I’ve used the C12-VR a couple times at the studio, and found it to be the most robust, full sounding mic I’ve ever used. If that thing sounds ‘that’ good, I wonder what I’ve been missing out on!?

Well, I've never used the VR, but have been told by a few veterans who have experience with it ( and the original C12, and the C12A,) that the VR is actually a lot closer in sound to the AKG "The Tube" model that was first released in the early 80's, and it didn't use the CK12 Brass Capsule - it used the Teflon ringed capsule that was used in 414's after 1980 and the first run of the 414 EB's. Halfway through that year's run of the EB, the CK12 brass cap was replaced by the Teflon ring version. This continued on with the C12VR, the 414EB-P48, and subsequent 414's since.
This doesn't include mods, of course. This based on factory stock releases.
:)

DonnyThompson, post: 453161, member: 46114 wrote: Well, I've never used the VR, but have been told by a few veterans who have experience with it ( and the original C12, and the C12A,) that the VR is actually a lot closer in sound to the AKG "The Tube" model that was first released in the early 80's, and it didn't use the CK12 Brass Capsule - it used the Teflon ringed capsule that was used in 414's after 1980 and the first run of the 414 EB's. Halfway through that year's run of the EB, the CK12 brass cap was replaced by the Teflon ring version. This continued on with the C12VR, the 414EB-P48, and subsequent 414's since.
This doesn't include mods, of course. This based on factory stock releases.
:)

Your really getting down to the nitty gritty on these mics D, love it.

I’ve noticed brass being desireable (and sometimes expensive) as an upgrade material on Floyd rose tremolos. They make a brass sustain block that’s only $40 or so.

I’m guessing brass’s somewhat softer (as far as metal / alloys go) nature, and it’s amazing resistance to rust makes it desirable. I can understand that on something like a guitar bridge or tremolo that is in direct contact with the strings vibrating fairly forcefully it can make a difference. On a mic capsule, is it really noticeable ? I’m not doubting it is, just wondering to what extent? I never really considered the capsule ring to contribute much (or really anything at all) to the sound, but I’m finding this interesting. I guess the forces are somewhat relative between the ring/diaphragm and a drum head and ring or guitar and string, so it seems to make sense.

I mean my house key is made of brass, so it doesn’t seem like a rare thing, any insights on why it was replaced w Teflon.? Lol they used to have Teflon rings as a premium feature on the upgraded wheel bearings on my skateboards. The claim to fame was no need to lubricate them, like the other steel ones.

Some things matter, some don’t, but something like a brass ring shouldn’t be grossly expensive to keep it in the design, and things like that should be passed on to the end user. I mean $15? $50 even? I’m really starting to understand why studios and engineers have people custom make their gear based on designs, and what boutique makers are charging so much for. It’s like all this expensive catalog/dealer based gear seems to be victims of business tactics, marketing, suits and red tape.

I’m also starting to see how sometimes engineers who might sound snobby or overly nastalgic when talking about ‘their old gear’ aren’t necessarily being that way.

I wish they would cut back on other things like fancy packaging or that stupid shockmount on the 414xls that’s absurdly delicate.

It seems a bit caveman and like even disrespectful to be taking apart a great sounding old mic like the c12a, just for the damn capsule ring. Lol that’s bordline assault.

I’m feeling less and less bad about letting my xls go to the used market, since it seems like it’s really a shadow of what a ‘real’ or ‘true’ 414 is. Your crazy smart for hanging on to your brass ring EB D! It’s wild how you literally have one of the first batch of them manufactured.

I’m personally glad I held off on the immense gear list I had 10yrs back just before joining up at triad/Normandy. Between PTHD and a bunch of other things I would have had a very ‘meh’ and expensive thing going on, with some of it obsolete. It’s threads like this that really show what’s important in the gear.