In fairness, I've seen little of this on any site, including this one and gearslutz.
I'm completely interested in fairness, and I think I was winding up for my screed, so it wasn't the best framing. Mea culpa, bill5.
A common bit of sage advice is that Michael Jackson used the SM7 on the Thriller album, or Bono uses a Beta 58, or Frank Sinatra preferred a U47 for some recordings, Taylor Swift likes the Advantone CV-12.
This unnecessarily clouds the waters for someone new to microphones, and suggests a bunch of random microphones at widely different price points to someone not familiar with what these mics are. Or were, in some cases.
I humbly suggest that what happens even more often is there is an aura of mystique and nostalgia that is pumped into old hen's-teeth mics that are the price of a new car. This fetishizing of unobtainable stuff is constantly reinforced by bashing the "re-issue," the modern "equivalent," or some poor thing that has been given the same name and differs from the originals because of design, or more often, by time's effects on those originals.
Examples include C12 variants, the U87 Ai, C414, KM184, and so many others.
The first "great" mic I got was the TLM 103, and then I heard other ones. Not so great. Eek.
The TLM 49. There, that's the sound. Do I use it a lot now? Not so much. Long-form reading.
MD 441. I love the Swiss Army possibilities. Nice mic.
Horses for courses. There is so much to confuse someone who just gets to watch videos with lower-bitrate audio, and hear long-held opinions that don't consider anything made currently on par with what once was. Also, the market is flooded with mass market and boutique offerings that make the head spin.
Lots of marketing is done by putting a face on a piece of gear. Always the case. Whose oats? The guy with the hat and the long locks.
Greg