SHURE SM57 same as SM58 ??

[gilwe]

I need a good mic for both guitar and vocal recording.

I must say the guitar sound in the recording is more important to me than the vocals.

As I understand, the SM58 is for vocals while the SM57 is more suitable for instruments recordings, but also that the only difference between them is the existance of the windscreen on the SM58 ...

Is this correct or is there any other difference between the two ?

Will guitar recording sound as good with the SM58 as it is when using the SM57 ? Does the vocals sound as good on the SM57 ?

Do I HAVE to have the SM57 for top quality guitar recording or can I just use the SM58 while taking the windscreen off when recording guitars ?

Or the SM57 doesn't give good results with vocals ??

Thanks in advance !!

[chessrock]

They're mostly the same. I never really liked the 58 all that much for vocals, either. It's supposed to handle ppppppppops ! ! better, but if you ask me, they're both very pippedy-poppedy mics.

In terms of what will sound better on guitar, take your pick -- they'll both sound about as good - or bad. They sound fine on guitars, but frankly, a good condenser mic will sound noticeably better on accoustic guitars about 90% if the time, and better on vocals about 50%. For electric guitar micing, the 57 will hold only a slight advantage because it has just a hair more bass rolloff to it. It also has a hair more tight of a cardiod pattern, so you'll get a hair less bleed from the room or other instruments.

But a hair is a hair is a hair.

[DarthFaders]

A good condenser mic will sound better on vocals about 50% of the time as compared to a 57? Chess....tell me that you're stoned.....

[chessrock]

Well, I am stoned . . . but that's kind of beside the point. Correction: "will sound better than a good DYNAMIC mic (in general - not necessarily the 57 specifically)." Geez. Picky, picky. Since when did you become such an old lady, Darth?

[DarthFaders]

I am an old lady, Chess! I thought you all knew that? I was just saying that a good condenser I think ALWAYS sounds better on vocals than almost any dynamic mic.

Oh yeah....here's a picture of me...

http://www.vurpar.com/images/august_...Old%20Lady.jpg

[chessrock]

Hey, you look like old mother hubbard ! ! ! ! ! And no, I don't want a bone.

. . . It depends a lot on the song and the singer's style . . . but have you ever noticed how many people complain about how their vocals don't sound "warm" enough, or that their mics are too siblant or too harsh?

Well, duh. Try a dyanmic and your problems in both cases will be solved. I've been noticing more and more with the type of music I'm tracking and the kinds of voices I'm working with that my SM7 is ideal (The sm7 is basically a more expensive version of the 57 and is taylored for vocals, by the way). I've noticed similar flattering results with an Electrovoice RE20 and some of the Senheisers.

To me, condensers are too crisp, too hyped, and too siblant in too many cases. Not all of them, but a lot of them. And on the flip side, alot of times dynamics aren't crisp or accurate enough to cut through a heavy mix. It's about 50-50, imho.

[chessparov]

The SM58 is a bit more "sensitive" to sound than a 57.
On a decent or better mic pre it won't really matter, however,
for someone working without one it can be a factor.
Also the 57 tends to hide negative features of a voice like a nasal
tone or sibilance, as the 58 is slightly hyped around 8Khz to cut
through a mix without needing to EQ it as much.
That's why a singer like Tom Petty (who has a nasal tone), used
the 57 over the 58 in his recordings and live concerts.
IMHO, the Beta 57 makes a great all round dynamic mike BTW.

Chris

P.S. Tom Petty has a good voice and I'm a fan-just trying to be
objective about which mike he prefers for his singing style.

[rushfan33]

If I'm not mistaken, the 58 has a higher frequency response than the 57...not by much though! I think the 57 is 20h-18k while the 58 is 20h-20k. No noticeable difference..... Am I write or was I struck in the head real hard when I read that somewhere years ago?

[littledog]

Originally posted by chessrock
I've been noticing more and more with the type of music I'm tracking and the kinds of voices I'm working with that my SM7 is ideal (The sm7 is basically a more expensive version of the 57 and is taylored for vocals, by the way). I've noticed similar flattering results with an Electrovoice RE20 and some of the Senheisers.

Your ears are very perceptive Chess. The SM7 does have a lot of similarities in design and sound to the RE20 (both are large diaphragm dynamics). But it's only resemblance to the SM57, however, is that it shares the same manufacturer and three of the four letter/numbers in the name.

[MISTERQCUE]

Uhhh fella's, the SMack58 is the same as the SMack57. The diff in
frequency responses comes from the pop-filter and felt wind-screen on the 58. Unscrew the 58's metal pop-filter cover and you got yourself a 57 less the black top ring!

[MrZekeMan]

So you can buy a SM58 and unscrew the cover, or you can buy a 57 and have the advantage of having the capsule protected.

The screen on the 58 also makes it an omni, taking the screen off rectifies that as well if I understand correctly.

I kind of like the 57 on vocals. It's very very sibilant though. A pop filter is a must.

Taylor

[MrZekeMan]

Let me correct myself here. The 58 is a cardioid. I had the idea it was an omni for some reason.

Taylor

[gilwe]

Thanks all !

From what I understood so far, I should prefer the SM58,
as it gives results almost as good as the SM57 on guitars,
while the SM57 cannot really be used for vocals for as good results as the SM58 (shrinks ?)

The question is, while using the SM58 for guitar recordings,
if taking the ball off, does the lack of the internal windscreen (that the SM57 has) can result in sound not as good as that of the SM57 which contains the internal windscreen ?

[MISTERQCUE]

Originally posted by gilwe
Thanks all !

From what I understood so far, I should prefer the SM58,
as it gives results almost as good as the SM57 on guitars,
while the SM57 cannot really be used for vocals for as good results as the SM58 (shrinks ?)

The question is, while using the SM58 for guitar recordings,
if taking the ball off, does the lack of the internal windscreen (that the SM57 has) can result in sound not as good as that of the SM57 which contains the internal windscreen ?

If you look inside the pop-filter after it's screwed off the 58, you'll notice that the wind-screen is nothing more than a small piece of felt that covers the insides of the pop-filter,hence the same results mic'ing a amp with a 57 can be achieved by by using a 58 and removing the pop-filter.
Yo' Zeke-man, the 58 is a cardiod! A ECM8000 is an omni!
I luv SMack 57's and 58's!!!! World's greatest all-purpose mics!

[chessrock]

Originally posted by littledog
The SM7 does have a lot of similarities in design and sound to the RE20 (both are large diaphragm dynamics). But it's only resemblance to the SM57, however, is that it shares the same manufacturer and three of the four letter/numbers in the name.

Hmmm. I might glance again at those facts. The capsule, if I'm not mistaken, is the same as the 57. Also, the 7 isn't technically a "large-diaphragm," although it much resembles one. The only real difference between the 57 and the 7 is the casing and bass rolloff / attenuation options -- which, believe it or not, make a ton of difference. Much smoother-sounding . . . no pops or esses, etc.

[gilwe]

Thanks guys !

I must say I still quite don't know which of the SM 57 /58 to pick...

I checked their info sheets in Shure's site,
where they say that the 58 is recommended mainly for vocal purposes. This is the info as taken from that page:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Frequency response tailored for vocals, with brightened midrange and bass rolloff
Uniform cardioid pickup pattern isolates the main sound source and minimizes background noise
Pneumatic shock-mount system cuts down handling noise
Effective, built-in spherical wind and pop filter
Supplied with break-resistant stand adapter which rotates 180 degrees
Legendary Shure quality, ruggedness, and reliability
Cardioid (unidirectional) dynamic
Frequency response: 50 to 15,000 Hz

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This is while the 57 is mentioned as ideal for amplified instuments recording such as guitar / bass / saxophone / Snare /Tom.

From the site:

Contoured frequency response for clean, instrumental reproduction and rich vocal pickup
Professional-quality reproduction for drum, percussion, and instrument amplifier miking
Uniform cardioid pickup pattern isolates the main sound source while reducing background noise
Pneumatic shock-mount system cuts down handling noise
Extremely durable under the heaviest use
Frequency response: 40 to 15,000 Hz


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I afraid that if I'll choose the 58 I will not have the best results for instument recordings which as I said is much more important to me than the vocal sound.

[Whoopysnorp]

Hell, just get the 57. Plenty of people have sung into those. If you're worried about pops, get yourself a pop filter (you'd get pops with a 58 too). I have two 57s and I couldn't live without them.

[darrin_h2000]

In defence of the 57s singing use, listen to Paul Rogers on those bad company records, Robert Plant on the live alblem.

[MISTERQCUE]

Originally posted by Whoopysnorp
Hell, just get the 57.

True!

[MrZekeMan]

Originally posted by Whoopysnorp
Hell, just get the 57. Plenty of people have sung into those...

I agree, that's what I would do. I've got one, and would buy another one before I would buy a 58.

From lurking at RAP, it seems to me the general consensus is to go with the 57. They don't seem to be too impressed with the 58.

[gilwe]

Thanks all.

Well, I first tended to go with the 58 and take the ball off when recording instruments. That was my decision after hearing the wrong information saying that the both mics were the same specifications except for the windscreen. But after looking at Shure's sites and the mics specs. I found that the SM58 is not well configured for instruments recording (Extra bass, 50Hz and up while the 57 is 40Hz...) this is while you CAN get a very good vocal sound with the SM 57.

So I'm glad I didn't get that used SM58 this morning (100$) which I could have had by now but would have not be as satified !

Thanks again !

[Axis]

So A sm 58 without the windscreen is a sm57, so does that mean a sm48 w/out the windscreen would be like a sm47, and a pg58 without the windscreen would be like a pg57?

[darrin_h2000]

Would the windscreen alone be an SM1?

[MISTERQCUE]

Originally posted by Axis
So A sm 58 without the windscreen is a sm57, so does that mean a sm48 w/out the windscreen would be like a sm47, and a pg58 without the windscreen would be like a pg57?

Yo' Axis of Evil, drugs are a terrible thing...........to waste!

Never used a SMack48, but indeed the 58 is a 57 less the pop filter. It's like buying 2 mics for the price of one. Peeps claim that
the 58 is sometimes unsuitable for amp-mic'ing but great for vocs
and there is a audio diff! Yeah sure there is a diff in audio translation; pop-filter vs none! And as far as freq response between the 2 is concerned,the diff is ONLY 10 hz! WHY!!?? Again,
the pop-filter on the 58! This is why I don't understand when people state their preference is one over the other when their both the same! I have 6-57's and 3-58's, luv 'em both,used 'em a lot and truly know thiers no diff!

[littledog]

Originally posted by chessrock


Hmmm. I might glance again at those facts. The capsule, if I'm not mistaken, is the same as the 57. Also, the 7 isn't technically a "large-diaphragm," although it much resembles one. The only real difference between the 57 and the 7 is the casing and bass rolloff / attenuation options -- which, believe it or not, make a ton of difference. Much smoother-sounding . . . no pops or esses, etc.

Thanks Chessrock for setting me straight! I've heard the SM7 referred to so many times as a large diaphragm dynamic (obviously by people who were just as ignorant as me) that i came to assume it was true.

While neither the Shure website, or the SM7 manual (downloaded PDF file) actually give the dimensions of the capsule, i did find a reference in the FAQ section which said that (paraphrasing from memory): the capsule in SM7 is based on the 57, and it remains similar but not exactly the same as the SM57.

That's enough to convince me you are right about the diaphragm size. That's the beauty of these forums - if you have any misinformation you'll soon be straightened out. Keep up the good work, Chess!