[FrankHudson]

I tried to ask this in a different thread once, but it probably got lost in the shuffle. When I hear (old guy, not the greatest hearing; listen to a lot of music, but am not a pro-level recording engineer) a set of microphone tests I hear mostly different EQ profiles. I understand that there are also likely different Attack, Sustain, Decay, Release envelopes too, but I don't hear them as clearly, and outside of audiophile recordings that don't work on earbuds in the wild or inside a car, modern mastering and mixing will greatly blur that ADSR response in real world use.

In terms of the EQ curves, a good, well-educated ear would seem to me to be able to make a lot of mics sound like a lot of different mics with only the ubiquitous parametric EQ plugins. Of course you can't add treble or bass that info that isn't there, but much of what we record and spend the most time on getting "right" (acoustic guitar, voice) doesn't have that broad a necessary range that we need to capture. I believe there used to be a popular plugin which I tried out in the 20th Century called "Microphone Modeler" that I did this for you using a set of profiles, which I suspect were EQ profiles.

The ADSR envelope is a little tougher, but I suspect software can do quite a bit in that realm too, with Attack being the tough one.

This is not a knock against the idea of a hardware device that has these software functions built in. It's an explanation of why it might work quite well.

I await the more knowledgeable responses than mine. But if this doesn't or cannot work well, I'd like to hear why.