Shure or Audix...

  • Thread starter Thread starter rynomig
  • Start date Start date
R

rynomig

New member
A music shop owner told me that the Audix OM2 are alot better than the Shure SM58 for vocals...do you think he was just trying to push his product or would there be any truth to this?...(they are comparable in price)
 
The Audix OM2 is on the same level as the Sm58. The Audix OM3 is better sounding then the SM58 on most sources. I really love how the OM3 sound on Female vocals the Audix OM5 is great on both male and female vox.

I'll give you a little inside info to get a good deal on the OM3s. Right now Audix is offering dealers a special buy 2 get the 3rd for free so you may be able talk him into a sweeter deal if you want 2 or 3 mics. If he want work with you PM me and I'll hook you up. :)
 
Audix guys love to push their stuff. So do Shure guys. As an engineer I prefer Shure equipment. There are many more factors to consider than just "what sounds best". Not only that, what does sound best? All of that is completely based on opinion. What I can tell you for certain is that over the years I have worked with well over 1000 acts. Of all of those their have really only been two things that at least 80% of those bands seem to have in common. First and foremost are Shure microphones. The other item I seem to see in everyone's arsenal is the good ol Ampeg bass rig. I have worked with many bands who are "endorsed" by Audix. One common thing I seem to see is the engineers reluctance to have to use them. In the end there really is nothing wrong with Audix mics. But Shure has stuck around for a reason. You may or may not agree with those reasons, but that is for each individual to decide on their own. There are a lot of great mics out there. There are even a lot of mics that do "sound better" than a Shure sm58. However, none of those mics offer the complete package (price vs. performance vs. durability vs. availability).

Every company has their own "58 killer" but as of yet, no one seems to have really succeeded. My guess is that Shure sells more 58's than all the other "58 killers" combined. There has got to be a reason for that;)
 
yeah the OM2 is pretty much equal in sound to the 58. However, it does have some cosmetic/build aspects that might tempt you to go for the OM2 such as:

-gold plated xlr connectors
-silk (instead of cheap foam) over the capsule
-slick, modern design
-hypercardioid pattern for better isolation, more gain before feedback

If you're looking for definitely-better-than-a-58 I'd go for the OM5 or the OM6.
 
fenix said:
yeah the OM2 is pretty much equal in sound to the 58. However, it does have some cosmetic/build aspects that might tempt you to go for the OM2 such as:

-gold plated xlr connectors
-silk (instead of cheap foam) over the capsule
-slick, modern design
-hypercardioid pattern for better isolation, more gain before feedback

If you're looking for definitely-better-than-a-58 I'd go for the OM5 or the OM6.
Click to expand...

The grill want dent like the the SM58 and better feedback rejection
 
I always hear about the better feedback rejection of the Audix mics. I have yet to see that. In fact, on louder stages I see exactly the opposite. I have had many guys on louder stages (especially on lud stages that aren't huge) put the Audix mics away and switch to Shures.

Once again, the Audix may actually be a better mic for you, but make that decision based on your own needs, and not all the false hype out there. If you need a different pickup pattern, there are other Shure mics out there with different patterns. The Sennheiser hand helds are also pretty decent. In fact, if I was to look for something other than a Shure mic for live vocals, the Sennheiser line is where I would start my search.
 
xstatic said:
I always hear about the better feedback rejection of the Audix mics. I have yet to see that. In fact, on louder stages I see exactly the opposite. I have had many guys on louder stages (especially on lud stages that aren't huge) put the Audix mics away and switch to Shures.
Click to expand...

Because of the hypercardioid pattern there is a tail on the back end of the audix mics. For best feedback rejeciton with a hypercardiod mic, it's best to place two monitors slightly on the sides of the mic with the horns in, similar to this setup:
 

Attachments

  • lgphoto05.webp
    lgphoto05.webp
    20.7 KB · Views: 1,882
My point was really that there is a lot of false hype. An Audix mic is not responsible for "feedback reduction". The polar pattern is more responsible. Also, on wedges where the lf driver is horizontally beside the hf driver, then people typically (about 98% of the many engineers I have worked with) prefer the horns to the outside on a pair of wedges. Many people people prefer the wedges to not be angled as well which gives the musician a wider pocket to move around in.
 
I agree with xstatic about small, loud stages - I mix at a club with a small stage that often features bands with really loud amps. It may not even really be that SM58s have better rejection than Sennheiser, Audix or EV "58 killers" but our monitors are rang out with 58s and since I mix 3, 4 or 15 bands a night (damn "tribute shows"!) There really isn't time to re-eq on the fly. In fact, I dont even line-check bands anymore - get up, tune up, play.

So if you want your monitors pushed, you probably are better off bringing in your own clean, not drooled on 58.

Ape
 
Not only that, but many engineers ring a PA (tune a PA) around vocal sounds. The PA always seems to translate better with all the other lines on stage when rung around a standard sm58 as opposed to alternative mics.
 
With regard to loud stages, any opinion as to why Audix uses a lower sensitivity/output on their premium (tailored for large venues to paraphrase them) OM-7 version?
Wayne
 
mixsit said:
With regard to loud stages, any opinion as to why Audix uses a lower sensitivity/output on their premium (tailored for large venues to paraphrase them) OM-7 version?
Wayne
Click to expand...

Yes- some mixers provide gain even with the trim all the way down, and many don't go below unity on the trim in any case. Many Mackies, for instance, provide 10db of gain with the trim all the way down.

Having a lower sensitivity lets you have more control by making your trim knobs more effective, basically. It makes it easier to dial in just enough gain.
 
If you have a nice console, the sensitivity of a mic is not as big an issue since the preamps are nicer. On a cheapy console, a hotter output will typically work better because you won't have to push the cheap preamps as hard (which often translates to less preamp garbage).

However, purposely designing a mic for a lower output due to it being "tailored for large venues" is yet again another piece of worthless hype.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top