Shure SM57 or SM58?

Which mic should I get?

  • Shure SM57

    Votes: 3 60.0%

  • Shure SM58

    Votes: 2 40.0%
  • Total voters
    5
Seriously, I don't understand why people are undecided about purchasing equipment can't buy both, test them out and return back they don't like. It is pretty obvious that everyone would have a different opinion because of their signal chain and room acoustics and so forth. No one can 100% guarantee that their recommendation is right.

It is as same as asking what is best compression ratio for a song. You can have all the technical details right but it may sound totally different in his surroundings. Nowadays, you can get stuff online and return it with no problem.

Why don't you try both and report back?

Maybe I should say just another suggestion.
 
PS - That GLS/Shure discussion has been beaten to death on a couple threads. We're definitely not gonna cover any new ground rehashing it here.
 
I use my Shure sm 58 for everything (except DI and MIDI of course).
I even use it on my bass amp (It's a combo amp.).
I record DI to get the 'bass'/lower frequencies/essentials and the SM58 to get the overtones/nice little gain/distortion...

Basically the SM 57 and SM 58 have a very similar tone if you remove the ball that is just screwed onto it.
It is very easy to pull it off.

The big advantage of the SM 58 is that you can let it fall from a couple of meters high and only the ball will bend but the capsule will remain intact which isn't the case with the SM 57.

There is not really a big price difference so it is just a matter of choice.
Why would you even need to go as low as 40 Hz except for maybe bass cabinets and kick drums?
I have even used highpass filters up to 300 Hz high on guitars!
When you compare the frequency graphs you see that there is not a lot of difference.

When you unscrew the ball end and put it on a guitar amp you get basically the same tone like an SM 57.
I do this all the time, pulling the 'ball' off.

I even once read that back in the day Shure used the exact same capsule to make the SM 57 as the SM 58.

Don't mind the people and Shure website saying that the SM 58 is just a 'vocal microphone'.
SM 57 is considered to be a backing vocals/instrument/amp miking microphone while it has been used on lead vocals a lot back in the day, so why not use an SM 58 for everything you would use an SM 57 for?!
I heard even professional audio engineers have used SM 58's on snare drums from time to time.

http://nl.tinypic.com/r/33zfbix/8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33QPLbQi9FI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4hPnZUMBwA : 2:09 I don't know for sure but that looks a lot like an SM 57 Iggy Pop is using there.
 
Thanks for the suggestions. I decided to get the Shure SM57 and I am very satisfied with it. I've recorded some vocals and use a pop filter and some acoustic guitar and it sounds great!
 
M3TA1 said:
Thanks for the suggestions. I decided to get the Shure SM57 and I am very satisfied with it. I've recorded some vocals and use a pop filter and some acoustic guitar and it sounds great!
Click to expand...

Glad you are sorted. May we know the interface you are using?

Dave.
 
Glad to see someone finally pointed out that the only difference between the SM57 & the SM58 is the ball cover on the 58; they use identical capsules, according to the drummer from my old band who is an electrical engineer at Shure in Northbrook, Illinois just north of me (I'm in Chicago). The guys at the studio I do some work at swear up & down they've tested this theory and there's a slight dip in certain frequencies on the 58 capsule (with the ball cover removed), but my guy at Shure says they're absolutely wrong, that the capsules in the two mics are identical and that the ball cover is coated in a proprietary material that causes the sound to bounce around in the ball cover a bit and therefore changes the frequency response. Also, the ball cover does in fact have a foam coating on the inside that acts a pop filter but doesn't do as good of a job as a dedicated wind screen mounted to a mic stand and positioned in front of the capsule.

So if I were you, I'd buy the 58 and just take off the ball end when tracking guitar amps or drums; just be REALLY careful when using that technique to track drums because the capsule will be exposed and if the drummer hits it with a stick, it's done, whereas a drummer can smack a 57 quite a few times without damaging the capsule.

Hope that helps!
 
Johnny Don't! said:
Glad to see someone finally pointed out that the only difference between the SM57 & the SM58
Click to expand...

The capsules are identical but the housing is not.
I'm not talking about the ball. I mean a 58 with the ball removed is not housed identically to a 57.


So, in real life they're the same capsule and you're not likely to hear a difference but, under test circumstances, someone could tell one from the other.


Johnny Don't! said:
just be REALLY careful when using that technique to track drums because the capsule will be exposed and if the drummer hits it with a stick, it's done, whereas a drummer can smack a 57 quite a few times without damaging the capsule.
Click to expand...
True that!
 
I'm still not sure why the OP is certain he wants a Shure 57 or 58 specifically. Good as they are there may be something else that does what he expects of the mic more to his liking.
 
Steenamaroo said:
The capsules are identical but the housing is not.
I'm not talking about the ball. I mean a 58 with the ball removed is not housed identically to a 57.


So, in real life they're the same capsule and you're not likely to hear a difference but, under test circumstances, someone could tell one from the other.
Click to expand...

Ah, that's interesting: yer saying that the housings of the mics will affect how they sound, even if it's just a small difference. Never would've thought of that. Nice.
 
Johnny Don't! said:
Ah, that's interesting: yer saying that the housings of the mics will affect how they sound, even if it's just a small difference. Never would've thought of that. Nice.
Click to expand...

I haven't tested it, but I'd imagine that's the case.
When you think of some of the mic mods out there...Removing one layer of the mesh, or plastic resonator discs etc...
The make a clearly audible difference to the sound so I guess the 57/58 is no different.
 
"Ah, that's interesting: yer saying that the housings of the mics will affect how they sound, even if it's just a small difference. Never would've thought of that. Nice."

Yes, in the microphone world "size matters" and the exact shape of the housing can have a profound effect on the frequency response. The perfect mic would have zero dimensions and therefore no obstruction effect or "shadowing" of sound sources. It would also of course have zero output!

Google for "Ball & biscuit" mic to see an historical solution. The "zero size" concept is embraced in the products of Earth Works microphones.

Dave.
 
I've used both just fine but I worked in a small studio for a while and the owner there was using Sennheiser 835's for scratch tracking and then would use condenser's like KSM44 or higher for recording. But sometimes if the singer had a great take on the 835's we kept it because they sounded good. So now I use a 935 for all vocals. The 835 is about the same price as the 57/58's.
 
M3TA1 said:
Thanks for the suggestions. I decided to get the Shure SM57 and I am very satisfied with it. I've recorded some vocals and use a pop filter and some acoustic guitar and it sounds great!
Click to expand...

Great, that is what matters in the end. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top