> As time progresses though, and you jump over that 500 hurdle, you will re=
alise that the difference in price (luckily) brings a noticeable difference=
to your ears as well. For me personally, it was hearing the world through =
a Neumann for the first time, and then recently through a Sanken. I don=EF=
=BF=BDt know how to describe it other than that it recalibrates your ears. =
A good microphone will do that, regardless of the cost.
A reason I would suggest for this is that mic specs are only a guide to onl=
some of the mic characteristics. A spec is essentially part of the sales
system and it only gives a partial account of quality.
Characteristics not covered in mic specs include colouration, pulse
response, enharmonic distortion and off-axis responses. It is difficult to=
quote these in figures in a reliable and consistent way, but out ears detec=
Colouration, for instance, does not feature on frequency responses. It is
standard practice to smooth the frequency response, and a common way to do=
this is to use a warble tone to measure a response curve.
Hopefully what you get by adding a zero to the cost is a cleaner sound, but=
there are no standards for this, only comparisons with trained ears, and yo=
can't sell that.