heathen, it's been years since I "played the field" and tried out many different types of microphones. The Schoeps MK 41 was out there alone for several decades (its tube predecessor was the world's first small, single-diaphragm super- to hyper-cardioid condenser microphone), and I've recorded >1000 classical concerts with it, gravitating more recently to the "V" variant.
Nowadays, however, there are small, single-diaphragm super- / hypercardioids from several other serious manufacturers. I owned a pair of Neumann KM 150 for several years, and found numerous uses for them--but mostly spot miking and speech pickup, not full-range music recording. They're ~8 dB down at 50 Hz even with a 1-meter effective measuring distance. When there's no proximity effect, their bass response is even less.
I hardly follow DPA's products at all, despite their undoubtedly being a first-tier manufacturer. Their 4018A looks interesting on paper, but DPA's frequency response curves are "corrected" to a _30 cm_ (!) equivalent measuring distance, i.e. less than 1/3 what Schoeps, Neumann, AKG or Sennheiser uses. Comparing apples to apples, their low-frequency response must be quite a bit less linear and extended than what seems to be shown in their published graphs. (If you think you hear a "tch, tch!" in there, you're not wrong ...) So I haven't ever bothered to try theirs; it's like a gentle boycott, in addition to the fact that I'm happy with what I already use.
I've similarly never tried the small, single-diaphragm supercardioids from Sennheiser, Microtech Gefell or MBHO, but I would certainly take them seriously. AKG used to have one as well, but again I never tried it, and now they're gone.
AudioTechnica has a model AT4053b, but its response curves (at least the ones on line) are also corrected to 30 cm (or 12"), so the actual low-frequency response for more distant recording can't be nearly as good as what they show. Plus the polar diagrams for this model vary at different frequencies too widely for effective coincident or closely-spaced stereo "main miking" in my opinion. May I emphasize:
To the extent that the polar response of any microphone varies at different frequencies, its frequency response varies at different angles of sound incidence; those two things directly imply one another.
- For coincident or closely-spaced stereo pickup arrangements, that variation (some amount of which is inevitable) needs to be as small and as smooth as possible.
- I am attaching (below) what may be the worst-looking set of polar diagrams I've ever seen. Try to imagine what the off-axis response of this microphone would be like! Plus (a) these are obviously smoothed-out, hand-drawn curves, and (b) knowing how this type of microphone works, I don't believe that the 4 and 8 kHz curves could really be similar enough to share one trace as they do in this illustration--so a more truthful set of diagrams would be even wilder.
And that's a lot of why better microphones cost more. Unfortunately the microphone market wasn't created with personal fairness or democracy in mind. Proportionate values aren't necessarily available in all categories and price ranges. This is true particularly for directional microphones, which are much harder to design and manufacture. Again, that's why I suggested omnis for low-cost microphones.
--best regards