URGENT HELP NEEDED WITH SM57>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

K

King Louis

New member
URGENT HELP NEEDED WITH SM57>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I am doing an investigation into the SM57 as part of my final thesis fro my final year and university and need your urgent help!!!!!!!

investigating will be looking into the Shure SM57 and why it has become such a widely used microphone in the music industry in nearly every aspect of recording and performance, whether in the studio or in live sound. And why it has achieved an almost ‘iconic’ status amongst engineers, producers and musicians in the recording industry and has become an essential part of every engineer’s kit. The fundamental question to be explored is how and why did it achieve this reputation in the recording industry.

if you can please answer as many of the following questions, which are relevant to you or your profession and state your name and profession, you may be creditted in the final work, all names are to be kept strictly confidential
if your not a professional in the industry it doesnt matter as all views are useful to me............

How why do you use the SM57 and how important popular would you consider the SM57 to be in your field of work?

Do you think its popularity ever diminished, if so why?

Would you consider the SM57 has achieved an ‘Iconic’ status within the music industry? Why?

Why do you think it has become such an essential part of standard mic PA/studio setup?

Do you think the SM57 and the beta version are similar, if so in what ways?
-
Do you think that there are any cheaper but better microphones that do or don’t live up the performance as the SM57?

all views and comments Much appreciated, and any questions you think that need adding, pleae add.

Thanks
Tom Easton
 
Haven't got a lot of time here, but I'll give you my general opinions...... for what they are worth....

The SM57 when you consider the price is reasonable sounding and very rugged. The ruggedness is probably where it has gained most of its reputation. You can drop an amp rack on those things and they still work.
And at the same time there was nothing in the past that could match it for sound quality at that price.
Basically Shure were the first to come up with it and therefore got a huge headstart on the competition. And now they are simply synonimous with stage micing in the way the Hoover is synonimous with vaccuuming ;)
It has simply become the goto instrument mic, and probably appears automatically on equipment ryders simply because (a bit like McDonalds) the artist knows what he/she is gunna get.

Are they still the best value? Possibly, possibly not. You can deffinately get mics for around that price that sound as good or better. But I'd doubt you'd still find anything that is as rugged.

The major difference in the Beta version that I can see is that it can handle higher SPL than the original, and therefore is favored on the snare drum.
 
Being a singer my perspective is that the SM57 is amazing in that with good mic placement and (usually) EQing you can ALWAYS get a good quality pop/blues/rock vocal recording out of one that's in good operating condition.

Will they be the "best" for most singers? No, but for many (like myself),
they'll compare extremely well to uber-mics:) costing thousands of dollars.

There are some rock singers like Robert Plant or Paul Rodgers who will use a SM57 in the studio (not just live) over a Neumann U47, for example.

This is assuming you have a reasonably good mic pre of course.
Meaning better than a something like a Mackie mixer, etc.

The Beta's are brighter than the classic "SM" line.
They might as well called them "X-1000's" or some such, they don't sound at all alike. Not as easy to use with as many singers as they tend to bring out sibilance.

Chris

P.S. Using the search function will get you a lot more answers in addition
BTW.
 
So far, in my vocal mic search, the '57 is what works for me as well. I don't like the beta '57 as much. It is a whole different mic, and not as clean sounding on my voice.
 
i don't know if this fits into your thesis at all, but another thing that's nice about the 57 is because it's pretty much two mics in one. It's both the 57 and the 58. The difference is really just the polar patterns. However, if you tape up the phase holes on the side of the SM57, you change it to a wider polar pattern, much like the 58. So it's more vocal friendly.
I also think another mic that is getting closer to "iconic" status, as you put it...is the Sennheiser 421. Very rugged as far as SPL levels go and is very versatile.
 
Yep, the 57 *is* an icon. Part of it is self-fulfilling prophecy. It is a valid reference point, because every engineer knows what it sounds like. It is sort of chameleon like, because it takes to EQ particularly well. If you've put up a bunch of mics, and nothing is working, you put up a 57 because you know that with EQ you can produce a wide variety of tones from the track you have- later. Personally, I never use it. For any application I can imagine, I have at least one mic I'd rather use. I do keep one around, though. As I said, it's a reference point, and I keep it around just for that purpose.
As far as dynamic mics at its price point, there are several I prefer personally. That does not make them better. I prefer Sennheiser e835 and AKG D770 for vocals or percussion. But- I won't be selling my 57 any time soon.-Richie
 
King Louis said:
I am doing an investigation into the SM57 as part of my final thesis fro my final year and university and need your urgent help!!!!!!!

investigating will be looking into the Shure SM57 and why it has become such a widely used microphone in the music industry in nearly every aspect of recording and performance, whether in the studio or in live sound. And why it has achieved an almost ‘iconic’ status amongst engineers, producers and musicians in the recording industry and has become an essential part of every engineer’s kit. The fundamental question to be explored is how and why did it achieve this reputation in the recording industry.
Click to expand...
Well heck, the answer is because it's a good mic, built like a tank, it's low price tag, and it doesn't sucks eggs... plus you can buy them everywhere.

How why do you use the SM57 and how important popular would you consider the SM57 to be in your field of work?

It's a "must have" type mic.

Do you think its popularity ever diminished, if so why?

No

Would you consider the SM57 has achieved an ‘Iconic’ status within the music industry? Why?

Yes. Because... it's a good mic, built like a tank, it's low price tag, and it doesn't sucks eggs... plus you can buy them everywhere.

Why do you think it has become such an essential part of standard mic PA/studio setup?

Because... it's a good mic, built like a tank, it's low price tag, and it doesn't sucks eggs... plus you can buy them everywhere.

Do you think the SM57 and the beta version are similar, if so in what ways?

Define similar.

Do you think that there are any cheaper but better microphones that do or don’t live up the performance as the SM57?

That sounds like a trick question.

all views and comments Much appreciated, and any questions you think that need adding, pleae add.

What's the name of your university?
 
Last edited:
DJL said:
Well heck, the answer is because it's a good mic, built like a tank, it's low price tag, and it doesn't sucks eggs... plus you can buy them everywhere.
Click to expand...

Yeah! He's right! And the search feature found @ the top of the page will net you MUCH more info!
 
They became popular for two reasons, mostly: They take high SPL's really well, and they sound best when close-mic'ing. And it just so happens that in live situations, out of necessity, you often find yourself having to close-mic a lot of loud stuff.

Add in the durability factor, and you have what amounts to be a pretty ideal mic for live bands.

As far as studio use, I have not idea why it's popularity has carried over in to that realm. My guess is because most people originally got their start in live sound . . . either as an engineer or a giging musician. So they just kind of grew familiar with them. They don't sound particularly good from an aesthetic standpoint. There's nothing particularly "hi-fi" about them. In fact, they're very peaky in the upper-midrange frequencies (often in an annoying/painful way), and quite limited in their bass response.

. . . Kind of like Yamaha NS-10 monitors. But that's the subject of a whole 'nother thesis, there. :D
 
http://www.homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=138295

http://www.homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=138296

Dude....what's the deal? If you're trying to get some random, un-accreditable sources to quote in your paper from a message board it must not be that serious a research paper. Why three threads? Why lead people with the question, "Does anyone hate the sm57?" I think I smell something fishy...

What school is this for? And what kind of program? If you're trying to get credible answers, e-mail Steve Albini or some other notable people...search for interviews that ask questions about the SM57. Do some actual research. Otherwise your "final thesis" is going to be pretty weak. I'm working on my final thesis now and if I pulled that shit I'd be failed.

Hmmm....could this possibly be SPAM!?!?!?!
 
To expand .....

...... on Chessrock and and others ...

There is now just tons and tons of SM57s out there because of their proven durability factor and sound for live use. When I started playing in a band it was the "step up" for us from the really cheap Radio Shack mics that broke constantly and when I started 4-tracking it was already a semi familiar sound from using them live.

Band split and I kept one SM57 (which I still have 10 years later) and was the only "real" mic I had for 3 years.

I considered it a "real", i.e. good, mic because if everybody uses them, then it must be. I hadn't really thought about any distinction between good-for-live use and good-for-recording ..... they seemed like the same thing at the time.

During that time however I became VERY familiar with the sound of the 57 and there is a great comfort in familiarity. I dont use it nearly as much any more but still usually have at least one guitar track recorded with one as my key reference.

Do I need more low end whhuump than the 57.... try an RE20.
Need more ratty high end than the 57 .... try an NT3.
Need a a good full range with softer upper mids .... MD1b.

And probably because it is the mic which I'm most familiar .... I still LOVE the sound of a 57 on the grill of a distorted guitar amp. Its just not always the sound needed for the song.

To quote Fletcher about the 57 ...... "It's rarely ever "genius" but it never ever totally sucks. You can point one in the general direction of a sound and you'll get a pretty decent representation of that sound that can be recorded and pounded to death later."

In fact check out his comments on the SM57 at the Mercenary site for another perspective.

http://www.mercenary.com/fltaabsmandh.html

-mike
 
Oneroom.....

Hmmm....could this possibly be SPAM!?!?!?!
Click to expand...

Is it really even possible to SPAM something that is so prevalent already.
Thats like saying it's spam to say "You should have a television."..... more people have more than one television in there household than have phones!!!

I think that ketchup is the only thing found in more households than the sm57 ..... I mean TV.
:)

-mike
 
OneRoomStudios said:
http://www.homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=138295

http://www.homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=138296

Dude....what's the deal? If you're trying to get some random, un-accreditable sources to quote in your paper from a message board it must not be that serious a research paper. Why three threads? Why lead people with the question, "Does anyone hate the sm57?" I think I smell something fishy...

What school is this for? And what kind of program? If you're trying to get credible answers, e-mail Steve Albini or some other notable people...search for interviews that ask questions about the SM57. Do some actual research. Otherwise your "final thesis" is going to be pretty weak. I'm working on my final thesis now and if I pulled that shit I'd be failed.

Hmmm....could this possibly be SPAM!?!?!?!
Click to expand...

Why would anyone go to the trouble of spaming something like this.
the two threads above are an accident, somehow the board posted 2 threads, dont know how,ask admin.......

And cmon, dont i havnt been talkin to big professionals in the industry, got a few good names under the belt and loadsa damn research, and shure themselves.

And the reason im asking in the other thread if anyone hates the mic is coz i cant finad anyone that does!!!!!!!!! I need mixed views

I include views from joe public as being credible as these are ppl who use the mic, not all may be professional , but all have had experience with the mic.
thats whats important.

cheers for ur comment......
 
First off, the spam comment was a joke, guess I should have added a eye-rolling smiley or something...

As for the reseach...don't you think you should at least be getting names or something, rather than just have "some guy on the internet" as your source? If this is going to be an academic paper, depending on whether it's in APA or MLA format, you're going to need a bit of info from these people to be able to use what they say in your paper. And for the three posts - you can delete threads after you post them if you accidently double post. It's too late now, but for future reference.....
 
OneRoomStudios said:
First off, the spam comment was a joke, guess I should have added a eye-rolling smiley or something...

As for the reseach...don't you think you should at least be getting names or something, rather than just have "some guy on the internet" as your source? If this is going to be an academic paper, depending on whether it's in APA or MLA format, you're going to need a bit of info from these people to be able to use what they say in your paper. And for the three posts - you can delete threads after you post them if you accidently double post. It's too late now, but for future reference.....
Click to expand...

i think maybe he's looking for more of a general concensus.

i disliked the 57 for a while. It wasn't that i didn't like the mic though......it's just so overhyped that i didn't want to like the mic and kind of convinced myself that i didn't.

i didn't have enough mics to not use it, so i was kind of forced to experiment with it even though i didn't like it. i haven't found anything that i thought it sounded great on. but the great thing about it is it will sound good/decent/passable on anything. i don't know how valid/knowledgeable my opinion is (i've only been recording 3 or 4 years now), but i really don't think there is another 80 dollar mic that is nearly as versatile or rugged.
 
thanks people youve all been a great help

expect a link to the thesis soon, if anyone wants or has the time to read 15000 words.

cheers

Tom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top