Add to it the fact that they already have the experience and the will to innovate and take their designs way further instead of settling for a winner formula.
They're was soooo much treble content missing on the acoustic. Maybe it was the distance. As i play one, thats what I look to replicate on a recording. The flatness is nice so it isn't so boomy like you miced the back of an acoustic and scooped it lol. Rather good mic for voice and roaring cabs. Tames the upper mids and let's settle in with cymbals and vocal highs
Well, the strings may not have been super fresh, the distance may have been a bit too much, and Taylor guitars may (just may) be lifeless garbage. But the mic is great for acoustic. It really is.
@@JohannesLabusch I agree with Taylor guitars. I can't stand how they sound and not sure why they are made that way.Get a Martin D45 or a Gibson J-200 or anything other that Taylor cheap guitars like Epiphone and will make that mic Shine.
Knowledge yeah, resources, not so much. They "were" not AKG, they're a newly formed corporation by former employees of AKG, which continues to exist, but under different ownership (I think it's Samsung). So these guys are the best of both worlds: Hungry newcomers who've been around the block a few times.
