Shure 518SB?

O

ozzman1997

New member
Hey fellas, I've just been getting into home recording lately and this is my first visit here. I want to mic a guitar cabinet using 2 microphones (as of now, I might try more sometime down the road) into my Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 interface, and I've read that the Shure SM57 is the go-to microphone for this. I've also read that its cousin, the SM58, has basically the same internal design but with a different shell and basket. I just recently pulled an old discontinued Shure 518SB mic out of a pile of my dad's old band equipment, and it looks almost identical to the SM58. He said it went for a couple hundred bucks when he bought it back in the early-to-mid '90s. The only other one of these mics that I've seen is on eBay right now for $43.00 brand new...which doesn't make much sense, because usually Shure microphones hold their value for quite a while.

Okay, so my main question is, have any of you had experiences with this particular mic? And if so, how does it stack up against an SM57/58 for recording guitar cabs?

I also have an Electro Voice N/D 257, which is a vocal mic. I've tried it on a guitar amp, but the result is rather thin (slightly) compared to recordings made with the 518SB. With either one, a TON of post EQ'ing in Audacity is required for it to sound good. It seems as if there are thin bands of frequencies that simple aren't picked up by either one, and I don't think that is supposed to happen. I can see these frequencies in Spectrogram view and I have to manually raise them by drawing a custom EQ curve at some odd frequency like 2700 Hz.

I'm wondering if getting an SM57 or 58 would even be worth $100. It just stinks because I won't know which mics are better until I shell out $100 for one that I know can give me good results...
 
I had never heard of a 518sb, but looking at its response curve I'm not surprised that it was a little bright. It looks like it has a dip in response right around 1k, which is where a lot of your guitars tone and meat lives.

Also know that where you point a mic at the speaker will change what the mic hears. If you point the mic dead center, it will sound really bright, and as you move the mic towards the edge of the speaker, it gets darker.

So, if you were pointing a bright mic dead center on a speaker, I wouldn't be surprised if the paint doesn't start peeling off of the walls.

There is another thing that plagues people new to recording...their choice of tone. Basically, if you amp sounds like the guitars on your favorite recording, you are screwed. This is because the mic shapes the sound and the mixing and mastering process shape the sound as well. So if you start out with the finished sound coming out of the amp and you stick a mic in front of it, you've already lost the battle.
 
I think you just need to accept that the only thing that sounds like a 58, is a 58 and the same with a 57. The others don't sound bad, but they don't sound the same. You will like them better or not as much, but only you can tell. It's like the old 545 which I had in the early 70s (and it wasn't new then) then I got an SM57. Loads of people maintain now that the two things are virtually the same, and cite close engineering tolerances and design categories - but in my head, I know my brand new 57 got used for everything and the 545 retired. I have somewhere an SM48 and it's different to a 58 yet some swear they are very close. If they really were close, there wouldn't be much point in a range?
 
rob aylestone said:
I think you just need to accept that the only thing that sounds like a 58, is a 58 and the same with a 57. The others don't sound bad, but they don't sound the same. You will like them better or not as much, but only you can tell. It's like the old 545 which I had in the early 70s (and it wasn't new then) then I got an SM57. Loads of people maintain now that the two things are virtually the same, and cite close engineering tolerances and design categories - but in my head, I know my brand new 57 got used for everything and the 545 retired. I have somewhere an SM48 and it's different to a 58 yet some swear they are very close. If they really were close, there wouldn't be much point in a range?
Click to expand...

People like to say that about so many mics...especially with Shures.

I find it funny when people say that the re20 and sm7b and almost interchangeable. For me they're totally different! :eek:
 
I think much is psychology. If you buy a Fender Squire, you convince yourself it's almost as good as the 'full' Fender. People will defend everything they have bought that they like, against something nicer/better. It also works the other way. I have lots of mics in the mic box and some are cheap Chinese ones. When I can't use my AKG 451 that I've had for years because I need a stereo pair, or just two the same, I'll use the Chinese ones. They're not as good, but good enough - yet I hear people slagging them off simply because they MUST be rubbish, because they're Chinese. I read horrible things about Oktava 319s, yet the two I have had sound nice to me - and I have no idea if these are 'proper' Oktavas or something different that people seem very cross about.

I've got less concerned about makes as I have got older, and less inclined to run with the crowd. My favourite bass is a Peavey - which cost a quarter what my Fender American Standard cost - and loads of people tell me how good the Fender tone is - trouble is, I still like the Peavey.

I've always wanted an SM7, no real idea why - it just appeals to me, but apparently it's just an SM57 really? I bet!
 
I have used and owned a lot of the early shure mics, and they sound pretty good, I would use the Shure 518SB for must things a sm58 would be used on, it will sound a little different but you will get similar quality results.

Give it a try.

Alan.
 
The shure sm57 is the best for the job, I've had mine for over 10 years...still fully working, it's been to countless gigs, dropped, had beer spilt on it, and it sounds exactly the same as the day I bought it, great mic.
 
Thanks for some insight, guys. I have noticed that the 518SB lacks a lot of the lower-register OOMPH that the N/D 257 picks up, and it just doesn't sound as full. I may end up buying a 57 and some sort of cheap condenser for extra saturation.

I've actually been experimenting with amp sims lately, particularly AmpliTube, and while the results are kind of sterile and lifeless compared to a real amp, I have achieved some "decent" sounds with it. I think the cabinet simulation is its weakness, so what I have tried is bypassing the cab and running the Line Out on my audio interface into the Effects Return of a Marshall 30-watt tube power amp and a pair of custom 2x12 cabinets loaded with Vintage 30 speakers. For some reason, I can't get a sound fit for recording from the Marshall's preamp...There are those bands of missing frequencies that aren't present when AmpliTube is running through it (mic choice/placement doesn't affect this at all) and it just sounds thin and distant. It IS a lower-end solid state preamp, though...Maybe that has something to do with it.
 
Farview said:
It's a completely different animal. It has a much bigger diaphragm.
Click to expand...

Indeed! The 57/58 is just a capsule, a transformer and an XLR!
The 7b has a humbucking coil and an LC filter system. It occurs to me that all this extra circuitry must make the 7b rather sensitive to different loads. Anyone tested this out?

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