Why should we think of "what microphones heard " as a standard


when they are incapable of hearing everything there is to hear ?
Even some Audiogon yellow badges members can possibly hear better.
inna
The OP needs to do some more research on recording tech.  The premise is false.

A recording engineer can listen to the musicians directly and then compare that to the microphone feed (mic, mic preamp, cables, console, power amp and loudspeaker).  The engineer doesn't have to speculate or theorize, they can hear if there is any difference.

inna, the Pink Floyd recordings you cite were made long before their London studio was built, and were recorded in other studios.

Where did you get the idea that microphones are the bottleneck in the recording process? Most commercial studios have a whole plethora of mics, different ones preferred for different applications. Each has a response characteristics that makes it more suitable for one instrument than another. Mica are transducers, just like loudspeakers, but in reverse. And just as do loudspeakers, they all sound a little different. Some are known to be highly neutral in timbre, others somewhat colored. Lots of recording engineers like the Shure SM57 as a snare drum mic because of it’s slight presence peak, which makes the drum "pop" more in the mix. No one thinks of that mic as a sound "standard", but there are mics that are.

As onhwy61 mentioned, Doug Sax (Sheffield Labs) tested mics (and other pieces of recording and playback gear) by doing a by-pass test. He would listen to the musician’s in his studio, then move into the control booth to compare the live sound to that coming out of his monitors (custom built horns, by the way). Doug was after maximum transparency and life-like timbre (not all engineers are), evaluating each pieces by how little it changed the sound in ways other than it’s intended purpose.

The reason John Bonham’s drums sound the way they do on Led Zeppelin’s recordings is not because of the mics used to capture their sound, but rather how those mics were employed. Bonham wanted a "big" drum sound, so he played his drums undamped (no muffling used, leading to an open, ringing sound), the opposite of Ringo and Levon Helm (The Band). Then his engineers didn’t use close-micing (putting each mic right up against the drum head), but rather put a number of mics a fair distance away from the drums, with "room" mics placed even further away. That increased the room-to-drum ratio/balance, and required Bonham to create his own balance between the different drums and cymbals---the balance couldn’t be "fixed in the mix". There is much more that can be said on the subject, as it is a large one.

The CD that Tony Minasian put out recently, Drums & Bells, which has  tremendous dynamic range, was recorded with one of his cheaper mics. 
Tony told me it cost under $50. 

It all lies with the engineer and how he records it.

All the best,
Nonoise
By the way, the Shure SM57 is also commonly used to mic snare drums on stage, so ironically any given player's snare drum often sounds very much the same on a recording as it does live.
I didn’t say that microphones were the biggest problem., but that’s the beginning of the recording chain - microphones in the room.
Yeah, I know it about Pink Floyd. Who did those recordings ? They could’ve at least cleaned the record head and used decent cables.