I think it's necessary to remember that mic manufacturers - or the sales companies which sell mics - have to sell mics to stay in business, so mics (..like everything else ..like Leica cameras, for example..) are hyped up to be 'the best there possibly is!' ..whether it's true or not.
All those mic reviews in (the UK mag) 'Sound On Sound' always said how great each mic was ..but like any mag, it needs to sell to buyers AND, of course, sell space to advertisers. And (almost) all mics are described as '20Hz - 20KHz' ..but I think only recordinghacks regularly showed, or shows, freq graphs ..which often gave the game away: how many mics really picks up any decent signal at 20Hz? ..When I saw the graphs for the M-Audio Sputnik mic I immediately hired one to find out if it really sounded as good as its - flat - graph showed ..and it sounded better, so I gradually bought 4 of them!
(They've got, er, not a 'notch' in the high mids, but a quirk which I've never read about, whereby it ..how best to describe it? It's like being in a crowded room full of the burble of conversation, and suddenly someone over there mentions a word which means something to you; your name, or an item you've been thinking of buying, or a guitar, or the name of someone you know, and somehow you're 'all ears', and your ears & brain latch onto that particular voice and conversation as your brain pops it to the front of your consciousness, and your ears and brain 'focus' onto it by selecting that delay between the sound coming to both ears, so that you can pinpoint that particular conversation ..your brain and ears become 'active' rather than just 'passive'. That's what the Sputnik does ..so you're not just passively hearing the sound which it delivers, but you're actively engaged with the music ..or at least I am. That'll be the circuitry, probably, not just the capsule.)
'Classic re-issues' are, primarily, a way of capitalising on the reputation of an old mic, and offering a NEW IMPROVED version - as it says on laundry powder. Or NEW IMPROVED ORIGINAL ..or whatever words bring in buyers. But, as a case in point, the NEW IMPROVED RE-ISSUEs of the original AKG C3000 sound NOTHING like the original ..they're just cheaper-made almost-lookalikes without the super-cardioid element which gives the INTIMACY of the original.
But hype of old original mics - like old Leicas - is specific to the period when they first appeared. They were, perhaps, the best then. The Leica M3 was a big step forward in 1954 ..but a current Leica M camera is way behind the spec of other camera makers, though people get suckered in by the reputation of the old original.
I can never hear what's so special about a 414 - or, specifically, a 414 XLII. It sounds 'featureless' to me, but maybe that's the point, or maybe that's just me. It seems to have no 'character', but perhaps those are used to give unaffected, unaltered, true, 'actual' sound of whatever they're being used with: a cello, violins, brass, snare, cymbals, voice, whatever. To me, though, their 'featureless' sound is completely unappealing - same with a TLM103 - and I thing the 414 XLII is roundly beaten by the 'upstart' sE 4400. It has a 'richer', fuller, though similar, sound, but with a little more intrinsic bass.
I want that 'character', not just true-to-life 'verity', from a mic. I want a mic which gives me what I hear in my head, and not necessarily what I hear coming directly from a voice or instrument ..that's why people use companders, and EQ, and the 'density' of tape, isn't it?
Van Gogh didn't paint realistically. He painted what he saw in his mind's eye. If you want 'realistic' try Holbein or Canaletto. If you want an artist's vision, try Turner. If you want what you want, find a mic which gives the sound that you want, no matter what others say.
