GLS Audio ES-57 vs. Shure SM57 (on Guitar) Mic A/B Test - Video and WAV pics

GLS Audio ES-57 or Shure SM57 (on Guitar)?

  • GLS Audio ES-57

    Votes: 1 50.0%

  • Shure SM57

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • Total voters
    2
@gregoryg: Here is another mod for the SM57 which may also work for the GLS ES57. - Shure SM57 Impedance Modification : Recording Magazine -

It's about lowering the impedance which the mic sees by using a simple XLR barrel adapter with a resistor across pins 2 and 3.

@David Cooke: can you explain what you mean about the GLS having DC offset? As these mics are dynamic (ie passive), I don't understand what you are saying?
 
This mod looks interesting but intimidating!

PRHunt said:
@gregoryg: Here is another mod for the SM57 which may also work for the GLS ES57. - Shure SM57 Impedance Modification : Recording Magazine -

It's about lowering the impedance which the mic sees by using a simple XLR barrel adapter with a resistor across pins 2 and 3.

@David Cooke: can you explain what you mean about the GLS having DC offset? As these mics are dynamic (ie passive), I don't understand what you are saying?
Click to expand...
 
PRHunt said:
@gregoryg: Here is another mod for the SM57 which may also work for the GLS ES57. - Shure SM57 Impedance Modification : Recording Magazine -

It's about lowering the impedance which the mic sees by using a simple XLR barrel adapter with a resistor across pins 2 and 3.

@David Cooke: can you explain what you mean about the GLS having DC offset? As these mics are dynamic (ie passive), I don't understand what you are saying?
Click to expand...

Sorry I'm late actually recording a band atm when I get done I'll follow up. Honestly I don't know much about how a signal can be offset maybe I'm using the wrong termonology here but the wave form was unbalanced? Looking at his files I don't see the same problem. Maybe I got a bad set? Bad wiring idk?
 
What needs to be done is a blind test!! I can GURANTEE that most people will have no clue which is which and some will even prefer the GLS all the while thinking its a sm57.

The GLS is what it is, a cheap mic that sounds pretty good.
 
What is this the 'gregoryg/David Cooke' newbie circle jerk? :rolleyes: Where did you guys come from?
Not bothering with the video, but I've found the ES57 is brighter (frequency response curve shows just a little in the high-mid area) and hotter.
And of course position of the mic in relationship to the speaker makes a difference when recording amplified guitar.
 
Last edited:
I really don't see the point! dreib summed it up - The GLS is what it is, a cheap mic that sounds pretty good.

If you take two real SM57s, and do the test, if they are not in the same place with the same sound source, playing the same material - they will appear different. Stick it in a test chamber, play some calibrated noises and do a measurement and you have a proper result, but that's (as have been said) not real. You can buy a Shure 57, or a similar looking and sounding one, badged from a Chinese factory with whatever you like, or even have the same mic badged with a Shure label making it a counterfeit, but it really doesn't matter.

A year or two again, I tried with some friends to try to get hard data to say with certainty that Shure 57 and 58s we found were genuine or fakes. What we discovered was that genuine Shures from the 70s to today all sound a bit different, and all weigh different amounts - sometimes markedly so, as production batches changed and components internally, like transformers, changed. So a 1980 Shure SM58 sounds very similar to a brand new one, the same as this that suggests these two sound similar, but different.

Look at the people who have to get identical pairs for their stereo work, and spend ages trying to find matched pairs exactly the same. It's an unwinnable quest.
 
Don't be a jerk mj. We obviously have two different opinions on the mic thats fine. Maybe it is my limited experience with the mic. I'm fine with being a "n00b" on the forum but I don't think thats fair to take away all of my credibility. This is "home recording" right? There is too much patronage on these low end forums and too much snobbery on the high end forums. I've had these mics for about 7 years maybe they have better qc now. Idk but I don't like them in any instance I've tried.. They have more "highs" yes but so does the mic in my iphone and it also instantly compresses things the same way. Not for me the off axis response also doesn't work for me whenever i tried it on drums. When i first got it i thought it was great but later on my opinion changed. I persobally just don't like it thats my opinion from experience now I've out grown trying to like something and make it work just because everyone on the internet says too. I'm not telling anyone to NOT buy this mic. Just nice to see someone on here that has the same observation as me. I wouldn't want anyone to buy/not buy something or change their
Opinion because of someone else thats crazy you should trust your ears. I was more or
Less venting sorry if I hurt anyones feelings. I guess this is why we have endorsement and sponsors though? So people don't always have to think for themselves. There is a lot of good knowledge on this forum but there is a lot of just repeated statements..I'll put my foot in my mouth and come correct myself after this weekend.. I'm recording another band and will try to use these mics and maybe you'll all get a chance to say I told you so. Any advice would be appreciated.
 
Ok well I'm lazy and hear goes the disclaimer. This isn't to showcase my drumming capabilities or anything else for that matter. I tried to make this as clean as possible I duct taped together the sm57 to the es57 and put them both on the snare drum. (stereo bar wouldn't let me get them close enough) There is no eq on any of the tracks and it as follow two spaced pair rode nt5's an sm7b literally just thrown into the kick drum all going into an old ART phantom mixer 2408 i believe is the model. all knobs and faders are at the same points across the board (pun intended) and the only thing i did was pan the overheads hard left and hard right and match the volume levels of the es57 and sm57. the drum is an old pearl piccolo i just ran over it with the torque key it has remo 2 ply heads can't remember the brand but they are about a month old. (reso and batter) I used 7b wood tip sticks. The overheads were placed with the 3-1 "rule". Not 100% scientific in any way but it does bring back old (bad) memories. There is no low end the transient gets lost and the off axis (bleed) is torture to me. I'm not a big fan of noise gates and I don't try to eliminate bleed I try to make my bleed work in my favor.

The first "beat" is with the sm57, overheads and kick drum. The second is the es57, overheads and kick drum. Third is just the sm57 alone. and the last one is just the es57 alone.


http://www.filedropper.com/es57vssm57

Here I'll even take it a step further. Here is a sample of each track sm57 first then the es57 the first time with a hi pass around 3khz and a low pass around 500hz. This helps me explain where I'm coming from with regards to context of the mix. The hi hat and the crash sound better IMHO on the sm57 on the hi pass and on the low pass you can REALLY hear a lot more oomph in the snare on the sm57. Now this may not seem like a huge difference now but imagine fighting phase issues when you start mixing the other mics and working with ghost notes and such.

http://www.filedropper.com/hipassat3klowpassat500hz
 
Last edited:
The purpose of the "test" was so that anyone who was curious as to what an ES-57 (often touted as a SM57 "clone") actually sounds like in conjunction with a real SM57. And then based on the recordings, which do you prefer (not which is "better"). Nothing more. Somehow that point was really lost on a few people.

Regarding the "circle jerk" comment, don't be rude. God forbid someone exhibits a similarity of opinion. And sadly, we made it just three pages before the mid-1990s "NEWB" comments start showing up. How long do you suggest folks post here before having an opinion or offering some content to the site? Should we just ask stupid questions for a couple of years and not have any thoughts on recording?

Please try to keep in mind, length of membership on a message board has no direct relation to someone's abilities or knowledge of audio recording. Posting here for years does not make you an expert. Just as not posting here for years does not make you a novice or some "dumb newb." Neg rep me all you want. I'm here to talk about recording, answer questions, ask questions if I get hung up on something, and offer some content, like an A/B test for a commonly requested microphone clone.
 
mjbphotos said:
What is this the 'gregoryg/David Cooke' newbie circle jerk? :rolleyes: Where did you guys come from?
Not bothering with the video, but I've found the ES57 is brighter (frequency response curve shows just a little in the high-mid area) and hotter.
And of course position of the mic in relationship to the speaker makes a difference when recording amplified guitar.
Click to expand...

I have to say I enjoyed reading "Not bothering with the video..." and then your following it up with exactly what is illustrated in the video ("ES-57 is brighter and hotter."). Congratulations on losing all credibility by refusing to watch the video and then simultaneously agreeing with its findings. Maybe you should have watched the video if you were trying to slam it. And of course the fact that they are two completely different microphones make a difference in how they do not sound alike.

Like I said pages ago, I understand mic position has a (negligible) impact on the test in theory. In reality, I re-did the test with the mics physically taped together and got the same results. I offered to re-do the video this way, but again, it is really beyond the scope of the discussion that the ES-57 does not sound like an SM57, despite being touted as a SM57 "clone."
 
you get what you pay for... a 29.99 dollar mock up ( not to insult anyone trying to work on a budget ) is not going to compare to the original Shure57... only comparable would be an Audix i5 and they are about the same price anyway... rule of thumb if you are going to make a change for the better you wil be upgrading not downgrading ( no offense )
 
I believe you quoted me out of context. I usually avoid selectively quoting people, with context being important and all. So it's not really accurate or fair to do that. Just feel like I need to point that out.
 
Last edited:
Real talk: Question for the group -

Why so many "regulars" so bent out of shape about this thread? Honestly. It is a pretty basic video demonstrating what two different microphones sound like. What exactly is it about someone providing an audio/video sampling of two often-compared products that you all find so offensive?
 
PS - I'm a pretty straight up guy, I even offered to re-do the test with the microphones physically duct taped together for the one guy (although I assure you it makes no audible difference that I can detect with my ears or on the wav files -- same results). So with that being said, please try to answer the real question here: why so nasty? And try not to explain it away with the science behind the "test."

I know I'm new here. I did an A/B test and posted the video thinking others, like myself, would be curious to hear one of these ES-57s in action. The responses here come off as if I went into some other "board regular's" thread, acted all disrespectful, and spouted off a bunch of bad advice to newcomers.
 
gregoryg said:
PS - I'm a pretty straight up guy, I even offered to re-do the test with the microphones physically duct taped together for the one guy (although I assure you it makes no audible difference that I can detect with my ears or on the wav files -- same results). So with that being said, please try to answer the real question here: why so nasty? And not try to explain it away with the science behind the "test."

I know I'm new here. I did an A/B test and posted the video thinking others, like myself, would be curious to hear one if these ES-57s in action. The responses here come off as if I went into some other "board regular's" thread, acted all disrespectful, and spouted off a bunch of bad advice to newcomers.
Click to expand...

Don't sweat it man. This is the internet people will troll no matter what. Your post may be helpful to anyone who googles the microphone. I hope somebody checked out my test too. I think it is VERY revealing and proves that my memory served me well. This IS in the microphone section right? It seems like this post turned into another "the microphone doesn't matter" thread.
 
gregoryg said:
I believe you quoted me out of context. I usually avoid selectively quoting people, with context being important and all. So it's not really accurate or fair to do that. Just feel like I need to point that out.
Click to expand...

No, I directly quoted you within the context of the thread itself and the post that I quoted.

The entire premise of your thread is comparing the GLS to an SM-57, which you later conclude shouldn't be done.

Period.
 
Right, based on the results of the test. Let me break it down for you.

Step 1 - The ES and the SM are often compared.

Step 2 - Conducted test, shared results. (Results being that the mics are not alike)

Step 3 - Based on the results, since the mics are really not alike, they should no longer be compared.

I hope you're trolling here (and not really confused), and if you are I know I shouldn't take the bait, but the optimist in me hopes that maybe you really are just confused and so hopefully the three-step explanation above helps.

If not, and you are trolling, what is it exactly about the ES-57 and/or the SM57 that has you so upset? Perhaps you have something insightful to add to the conversation. Otherwise, why bother taking the time to even comment?
 
Last edited:
And yes, quoting in essence just part 3 [complete with "..." in front] and neglecting parts 1 and 2, where I actually take the time to see if the mics should be compared as "identical," is taking me out of context.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top