I have a Beta 52 and a D112. Up until about a month ago the 52 was the only thing I had ( in the way of "bass" mics). After trying the 112 I found that it was easier to get a "workable"(not to be mistaken for desired tone) tone than the 52. With the 52, I have to work on it a bit more with EQ. I know what you mean about the weird sound from the 112 on kicks. I wouldn't necessarily call it crap but it does have a big dinstinction from the 52. The 52 also seems to boost more lows primarily, but the 112 seems to be a bit more full range.
In my opinion they're both great mics. It really depends on what you're putting into it. I don't mean that you must be putting "crap" through it but there are so many other things to consider. For drums you have to consider the head, the mic placement, the tuning, the player, the music and the list goes on! The same goes for any other instrument when it comes to mics.
One big difference that I've noticed is that we hear so many "big time" recordings from engineers who say they use mics like the 112, the 57s etc etc.... They sometimes go to the extreme to finally make an instrument sound good through a mic. You start hearing stories about micing cabs through long tubes or weird shit like that and it kind of makes me wonder!!
I'm not calling anyone here lazy but it seems that we don't try very many options before we cast our votes. Many of us(including myself) have no clue as to the detail major studios look at when recording major albums. I'm a drummer and when I mic up my kit it's either move the mics around or try and tune the drums to sound better. The thought of fitting my drums with a different type of head hardly ever crosses my mind unless they're old and in need of changing. Even then I'd probably get the same heads for replacements.
Wow...did I wonder off the subject or what?
Anyway... I might think about this some more and start a new post in another forum.
Thanks for watching...and good night!!