Let's consider something less subjective than "sonic quality." Something simple and mechanical that even I can relate to. Hmmmm... how about the shock mounts? Does it reveal anything? Don't know, but it is a study in contrasts.
Bruce Richardson in ProAudio:
Imagine an oil filter wrench, and you get the picture. However, it has a major flaw: once you've closed the clamp, the long clamp-lever tends to fall on the outer circumference of the mount. In other words, you get to twiddle with it every time you've got to move the mic.
Second, the arms that hold the rubberband-like suspension cords do a very poor job of actually keeping the rubberbands in place. Moving or jiggling the mic stand can knock the bands loose, sending the mic crashing to the floor. Not once, but twice in as many days, I saved the first test unit from floor-rash by catching it with my free hand as I moved the stand from place to place. Not good.
Paul White tries out a JOEMEEK product:
The shockmount is a snug fit, and the supplied lead is of good quality.
RECORDING MAGAZINE JUNE 1998 Review by Rick Aurricchio:
The all-metal shockmounts are well-made; they worked flawlessly and stayed put.
--------------
Edgy commentary is always quotable. "He must be on OUR side - he hates the thing."
I'm not suggesting the two 2001's Richardson used didn't have flaws; Marshall's engineer posted a comment comfirming the problems of the earliest version. It is the very model that tortured Richardson for three months and is, according to the guy, now corrected.
Rodent uses the same mount, as does Oktiva and many other brands. It's cheap, it works, and it's cheap.
What does all this say? It says I just had my Starbucks coffee and I'm feeling a little edgy myself!
Lee