There is no doubt the Flea mic body is very nice and precisely machined to vintage specs. On a similar point, Shaggy, whose shop is just a few minutes away from me, hand machines all of his bodies on meticulously maintained vintage mill and lathe equipment and holds to the highest quality levels for tolerance and finish, and in my opinion under-charges for his labor of love. He made me a delrin spacer for a U67 clone so beautifully machined, it puts the rest of the imported microphone body to shame. I always like checking in with him to see what he is tinkering with in high-end microphone land.
But, one of my primary goals is to make functionally outstanding microphones available and well within reach of "the common man". I strongly disagree with the assertion that these low-cost, imported bodies are categorically inadequate for the job of supporting a well functioning (Matador would argue "optimally functioning" within the circuits operating parameters) microphone system for the lifetime of the user and beyond. Certainly, you can spend 10x the amount to attain the highest quality construction, but the microphone body is nowhere near highly stressed component and does not need to be a precision machined instrument to work correctly in its intended application.
Tim Campbell, Eric Heiserman, Thiersch, and all of the other high end capsule manufacturers can make new capsules pretty much indefinitely. Same with cinemag, Marik, and the other transformer manufacturers. Projects like these that are able to gain good traction have to play at least a small role to stabilize and financially protect very small-scale operations like the manufacturers mentioned here. I don't understand the mindset that deploying the best available capsules in builds in this price bracket is somehow offensive or a waste of effort and resources. In fact, it is somewhat the entire point of the endeavor. . . that is to figure out a way to bring the full sonic potential of the premium capsule to light in an affordable, accessible package and allow people everywhere to experience and enjoy it.
The only item in this microphone that will run out eventually is the GE 6072A tube, and I have tried to the best of my abilities to call attention the practice of pairing NOS tubes with premium capsules only. If you want to make an argument about if a kit is "deserving" of a part, it makes more sense to base the argument on the non-renewable resource. . . the 50's - 70's era GE 6072A's.
This kit is often a "gateway" project. One that often times is an entry point for people into DIY. As such, ease of build is a consideration that is not even on the radar for a ~$3000 custom microphone. As a gateway project, success by the end user, and by that, I mean not only functional completion of the build, but an extremely positive sonic outcome emboldens the new builder to take on more technically complex builds (many of which are available on this forum).
I will leave the technical explanations of why the system works to those more qualified, but i will say that on the development side, Matador has never discounted any of my specific technical concerns about the kit's performance and specification. . . Even the ridiculous, obviously ill-informed ones. . . and in person, in studio, and on forum carefully explained/presented his evidence as well as make changes when testing identifies a deficiency or the performance of a material or part does not meet published specification in the real world.
I find it ironic that we improve one operating parameter of a kit that already has a track record of build success and sonic performance in the real world. . . introduce the use of a material that has great future potential for audio DIY applications (and incidentally HAS been tested to exceed quite a few of NASA's materials standards for deep space application), and people come out of the woodwork to go for another round of re-hashing arguments that have already been discussed ad-nauseum in this thread. But, since we have already diluted the support content of this thread this far already, I will summarize the entrenched positions of the parties involved:
- Matador after careful consideration of all of his design variables (per calculations and his real-world experience/intuition) maintains that all of the operating parameters for the C12 circuit as expressed in this kit are functioning optimally. . . meaning there is a LARGE margin built-in. In other words, "other factors" overwhelmingly intrude upon the performance envelope of the microphone system well before any layout, construction, or material limitations related to the board design and layout come into play.
- Mr. Granger and others contend that the HiZ isolation properties are inadequate. The microphone body has severe design defects precluding the delivery of sonics on par with the vintage original. The physical layout of the HiZ section is "haphazardly" laid out, and the tube is not mounted in an mechanically dampened manner generating unacceptable microphonics.
Matador is not defensive because he is lazy, selling snake oil, or doesn't want to change the layout. In fact, I feel we print more test iterations of boards before "official release" quite often. There is never hesitation to re-try or make changes. He defends based on his reasoned engineering and belief that the system is sound. . . and he puts his stake in the ground upon rubber stamping his kit design and let users judge based on results.
I'm sure Mr. Granger feels just as strongly that the traditional methods of microphone construction are vastly superior to the substandard scheme being implemented here. I have not seen or heard one of his creations, but I have no reason to doubt they are in fact outstanding pieces that perform as advertised.
Sure, I have commercial interests in this specific kit and collaboration to make it widely available. I do contend that I have always accurately and conservatively described the nature of this kit publicly and privately without any wild claims advocating the clone as an "exact replica" of the vintage AKG C12 or guaranteeing precise sonic duplication or verbiage suggesting the clone is "just like" a vintage original. This is Matador's implementation of the vintage C12 circuit. We feel it is a great one on a lot of levels and we will continue to improve and iterate based on feedback and our particular design objectives. We think it's fun to explore leveraging modern high-performance materials and processes for audio application.
The only exception to the statement above is my assertion that the yellow colored PCB is sonically superior in all applications.
