Quote:
Originally Posted by Telefunken USA  Markus: Your debate about it's historical accuracy is not falling on deaf ears. Just think about this, we never actually say that it is a "historically accurate reproduction," nor do we say "built to exact historic specifications." Any one with a computer and a few free moments can figure that out, we are not trying to hide anything.
|
Hi Ian,
thanks for clarifying that. That´s why I felt it appropriate to discriminate between the original and the current mic in my initial anwer to Travis´ post.
I think you agree that all other currently offered mics with the “ELA M” designation are meant to be faithful reinventions of original vintage models. So when I read on your website that “Telefunken | USA is pleased to announce the availability of
the Ela M 260 microphone”, I assumed that almost everyone who reads that, automatically thinks that this mic is an similar exact reproduction of
the (vintage) ELA M 260.
So from now on we have two different mics that are both referred to as
the Telefunken ELA M 260. That means that one always has to ask if the original one is meant or not. As you have already put so much effort in convincing people that your current ELA M´s are basically identical to their historic counterparts, I thought that this may not be in your interest (therefore the suggestion with the R-F-T line).
As I try to provide as much information as I can on this subject, I´d like to add that the original ELA M 261 had a capsule with mechanical switchable patterns (which, to my current knowledge, was not an AKG design – I haven´t found any further information yet ). Whereas your current M261 capsule appears to have a fixed polar pattern and therefore shouldn´t be confused with the original one.
I´m glad that we could clarify that whole thing in such an elegant way.
All the best,