W/o going in2 2 many details-

It's difficult 2 give U any advice cuz U assume that phrases U overheard from friends and salesmen r true, w/o investigating any further.

Well, they're not.

No. The mic pre is only 1 component in a chain. Arrangement, performance, mic and mic technique precede it, and r more crucial IMO.
Sound of pb is another crucial factor. If a particular vocal track would b added 2 a different mix it would sound different.

A mic amp does not compress (only the bad 1s, or when overdriven).

Contradiction- no coloration means transparency - NOT rich fat and round. These ARE colorations.

Yes there r, they may fit the song or not. What does "better" mean anyway? Most popular vocal pres DO color the sound.

Most quality mic pres do not include these components, these r left 4 the engineer 2 choose. EQ is a common addition but that's about it.

Wrong.

The company itself is not "bad". Some AKG mics r good, some s.u.c.k.

No such animal.

List artist, arrangement, style, mics, recording medium, mixing desk and other recording / mixing gear available 4 that production please.

I'd rather piss glass than record through a green Focusrite. If U're in2 focusrite sound get the 110 or similar - @ least U'll b getting the Rupert NEVE design.

As 4 the artists U've mentioned, most of the gear used varies with the recording engineer, most gear is modified anyway.

4 example:

Humberto Gattica who recorded Michael Jackson, Celine Dion and Whitney Houston among others used a Telefunken 251E modified with a 0.9 micron diaphragm by Stephen Paul Audio .

The pre was custom built for him by by someone at Lighthouse studio.

Does this solve ur problem?

Not 2 leave U without an answer, if I were 2 buy only 2 mid-priced pres 4 a project studio I would get a Neve (1073, 1081 etc. or a good clone clone) and API 312.

But then again, I have more than just vocals in mind.

Peace,

Zooot