i noticed something else. i, irresponsibly, have a lot of plates just kind of sitting on my desk or shelf that have begun to patina. the first in-house k87 test plates (top right) have begun to show the barest signs of a traditional green alpha brass patina. one of the plates from the mass production factory (bottom left) hasn't though. it's got a dusty powder-white oxide layer that is starting to speckle and cloud the reflections like you might see on aluminum:
i see this on beta brasses and some bronzes sometimes, from the high zinc or tin content. not for nothing, but it is also obvious from the luster of both plates that they are not the same material at all. this does not show up easily in photos, but they are very clearly not the same metal in person, even underneath their respective oxides.
I also have a k103 plate from an ebay storage unit that was left out a bit, it has a much more intense traditional alpha brass patina:
it is also, again difficult to show in the picture, very obvious in person that the neumann plate and mine are the same or at least broadly similar alloys of brass, even under their patinas. given that i specified 360 brass for the plates, and i know for a fact that the test plates are 360, and they match the neumann plate, i am guessing the mass production factory lied about the brass used to save money. will this affect the performance or reliability of capsules made with leftover mass produced plates during the transition to our new shop? not really, no. but it goes to show that the old supplier isn't trustworthy.