Quote:
Originally Posted by alohachris
Aloha Kev,
Howzit, my friend.
Thank you for clarifying the history & lineage of the 251 series. At this stage, my recall is not as sharp as it was & I don't trade mic's anymore.So I'd forgotten about that great mic's evolution. I owned a Soundelux Elux 251 briefly, not it's AKG-made predecessor. Sure sounded nice on my voice though..
And yes Jim1960, the Bock 251 is a nice sounding clone. That's a nice company, IMO.
But, what do you two AGF vets think about Warm mic's in general & their appropriation of the "251" or "47" model numbers in selling their mic's under $1000, Chinese-made "clone" - Ha! mic's. How do they sound compared to the originals. Any comparison at all? I was underwhelmed by their WA-47, even at that cheap price.
Whaddayathink, fellow great mic-afficionados?
I do swear by AUDITIONING MIC's & gear before you buy. Saves times, money & aggravation.
alohachris
Mahalo Kev & Jim!!!
|
I bet the Soundelux was great when I decided to look into a tube mic I had researched the 251 the 47 and 67 style offerings fairly extensively. Including the Bock.
But had only ever personally sung through a vintage U47 that was (just great) but for me too spendy ,, a Pearlman TM1 and another (escapes my memory just now ha)
My guy I have purchased most of my high end audio gear from suggested I come to his studio and audition some ADK Z Mods he had the 67 and 251 and I brought my Brauner Phantom V to compare all three . The 251 did sound slightly better on my voice ( it was close but noticeable, and enough that I was satisfied to purchase ).
I have never auditioned any Warm products so can't comment on performance.
As far as "appropriation" Personally I don't see it as an issue or any different then any other Mfg. that uses the those classic numbers in their model offerings