Quote:
Originally Posted by pegleg  You say the 251 E and the '251' are EXACTLY the same mic? Do you mean the 'F' (which we were discussing) or the 'AC'?
251 AC - $10,125 (AC701 tube)
251 E - $7495 (6072)
251 F - $4995 (6072 + ??)
This is right from the Telefunken site:
"The Ela M 251AC and Ela M 251E come complete with your choice of Telefunken AC701 or GE JAN 6072a tube, a new CK12 dual membrane capsule, custom wound Haufe transformer sourced from the original European supplier, VINTAGE style power supply, 10 meter Gotham Audio cable, locking leather bound flight case, wooden microphone box, owners manual and 5 year warranty.
The Ela M 251F microphone system comes complete with a GE JAN 6072a tube, a new TK12 dual membrane capsule, a custom wound Haufe transformer, MODERN style power supply, wooden microphone box, 10 meter Gotham Audio cable, owner manual and 1-year warranty."
EXACTLY the same? The CAPSULE isn't the same - the F uses a 'new TK12' - is that made in the same place as the 'new CK12' - or is it Chinese? Is it the capsule from the Apex/Nady mic?? The PRICE difference between the two mics is $2500.00 - do you seriously think that's $2500 worth of power supply? Come on!
As for the M-16 MKII - OK, so it's TAB-Funkenwerk electronics, but still, a supposedly 'hand-selected' Chinese capsule, same as what's in the Apex, Nady, etc, right? Is that worth the $1100 price difference there? |
Sorry about that... Yes I meant that the 251 "E" and the 251 "F" are the same mic. However, what I didn't notice is that they had changed it because for a while they were using the SAME mic. Also, straight from Telefunken about the TK-12: The only differences between the TK-12 and the new CK-12 is a plastic groove that is on the CK-12 and not the TK-12 (which is historically accurate), and some of the screws on the capsule are slightly different. Everything else is the same, and both capsules are American made. Sorry for any confusion that I might have caused.
Not to go back to a sour subject, but keep in mind that there are other factors leading to such a large price difference in the M-16 verses the Apex. First, the quantities that each company buys, the more you buy, the more you save. Second, there are various cosmetic changes to the M-16. Now, they might not be important to the sound of the microphone, but it still costs money. Everything from the new grill to the wooden box that it comes in, the powder coating of both the shockmount and the mic body all costs money. The M-16 also comes with a better cable. Does all that stuff make it worth the additional money that it costs, I dunno. But what I do know is that to most clients, if the mic looks good, it will probably sound good to, which gives them a bit of a confidence boost allowing them to perform a better take. If a client walks into the booth, and spies a mic that looks like shit, that will leave a bad first impression on them. Whereas if they walk into a booth and see a sharp looking mic badged "Telefuken," they might think "wow, that's a nice mic. I'm gonna sound great on that thing." Even if both mics sounded EXACTLY the same (which they don't), I feel that I could get a better performance out of the singer who sings into the better looking mic.
All that said, being an engineer isn't about money (well it sort of is, but that's a different discussion), it is about providing the artists with the necessary tools that he or she needs in order to deliver a compelling performance, allowing us to capture that performance in such a way that when it is reproduced, all the emotions that went into the intial performance is conveyed to the listener in an attempt to make them feel a certain way.