Shure SM57 swivel head ? (why?)

[SouthSIDE Glen]

[f you open up the user manual, I think it explains why it needs to move.

I've looked in the user guide for both the microphone and for the replacement grille, and there is nothing in either of them to explain the rotating head.

G.

 

[boingoman]

Too bad Shure is out of business, it would be great if we could call or e-mail them and ask.

 

[Harvey Gerst]

It's an cheap way to fasten/hold the grill in place, without resorting to expensive threading and more expensive plastic molds.

 

[RAK]

I've looked in the user guide for both the microphone and for the replacement grille, and there is nothing in either of them to explain the rotating head.

G.

If you notice that in order to replace the grille you need to swivel it in place to match the grooves up to pop it out. Or to quote the user guide "Rotate to align double tabs with flat area beneath the grill" If, for example, the grill was permanently aligned over the recessed areas, then I suppose it could accidentally get depressed and pop off when you didn't want it to. So I took this to mean that you can swivel it to get in place to be able to remove. Then when it's not exactly lined up, it's not coming off.

I thought that was apparent from looking at the user guide, that's why I didn't explain it earlier. I apologize for that.

 

[RAK]

Too bad Shure is out of business, it would be great if we could call or e-mail them and ask.

If Shure is out of business then I've been imagining coming into work every day. Where did you hear that from? I can assure you that Shure is very much in business, and that's why I was trying to get an answer to this question.

 

[boingoman]

I can assure you that Shure is very much in business.

Well, no kidding. It was a tongue-in-cheek comment. One simple call or e-mail to Shure would probably answer the question. Seems like that option rarely occurs to people.

 

[ecktronic]

The swiveling head idea was made for forums like this to question and puzzle over what its use is.

I never really thought of it even though I noticed it.
Passes the time when your drummer turns up late for a session.

Eck

 

[RAK]

Well, no kidding. It was a tongue-in-cheek comment. One simple call or e-mail to Shure would probably answer the question. Seems like that option rarely occurs to people.

Sorry I missed the sarcasm, but that makes me feel better. I was concerned somebody thought Shure really was out of business. But I agree that people don't always think to go to the source. Good point.

And that's why I joined in, to try to give answers from the source. The description from the user guide made sense to me, but if you call Customer Support, I'm sure they'd give a direct answer.

Also, as a point of information, here is a link to Shure's Tech Library. There is a lot of good information on there, particularly the "Find an Answer" database. And in case not everyone was aware, the entire website was redesigned. Just putting the information out there.

http://www.shure.com/ProAudio/TechLibrary/index.htm

 

[boingoman]

And in case not everyone was aware, the entire website was redesigned.

Thankfully- it was wretched before. It has moved up to only slightly heinous.

As far as your answer, it describes a possible funtionality, but still doesn't explain the reason for that design decision. Harvey's answer seems a strong candidate, especially given his experience.

 

[littledog]

RAK, maybe you could suggest they include diaphragm sizes in the technical information released about Shure mics. That might stop a lot of misleading advertising by retailers such as: "the Shure SM7b is a large-diaphragm dynamic microphone..."

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

If you notice that in order to replace the grille you need to swivel it in place to match the grooves up to pop it out. Or to quote the user guide "Rotate to align double tabs with flat area beneath the grill" If, for example, the grill was permanently aligned over the recessed areas, then I suppose it could accidentally get depressed and pop off when you didn't want it to. So I took this to mean that you can swivel it to get in place to be able to remove. Then when it's not exactly lined up, it's not coming off.

I interpret it exactly the reverse; it seems to me like that is a locking mechanism designed to allow for a rotating head, not that the head roatates to accomidate the locking mechanism. Besides, even if the tabs are lined up, one still has to remove the name tags before one could depress the tabs, and even with the nametags off, it'd still take a paper clip or better to depress the tabs properly. The head's not coming off except on purpose or by blunt object .

And I'm not sure I buy the idea that it's simply a cheaper way to design a microphone head attachment. It'd seem cheaper and more straightforward to me to just thread the body and screw the head on like everyone else does than to have to design a freely-rotating head with seperate collar ring, locking mechanism and removable nametags.

Ah, who knows. It's certainly not something worth discussing much further. And I'll bet a buck that there are very few people at Shure that are anywhere near their customer service department that actually know the real answer. I'd give even money that 5 calls to Shure customer service will yield two or three different answers. (I'd really like to be proven wrong on that one ).

G.

 

[RAK]

Thankfully- it was wretched before. It has moved up to only slightly heinous.

As far as your answer, it describes a possible funtionality, but still doesn't explain the reason for that design decision. Harvey's answer seems a strong candidate, especially given his experience.

The way I read it, Harvey and I were saying the similiar things. At least, when I read Harvey's post, I understood it the same way. Maybe he just worded it more clearly.

 

[RAK]

I interpret it exactly the reverse; it seems to me like that is a locking mechanism designed to allow for a rotating head, not that the head roatates to accomidate the locking mechanism. Besides, even if the tabs are lined up, one still has to remove the name tags before one could depress the tabs, and even with the nametags off, it'd still take a paper clip or better to depress the tabs properly. The head's not coming off except on purpose or by blunt object .

And I'm not sure I buy the idea that it's simply a cheaper way to design a microphone head attachment. It'd seem cheaper and more straightforward to me to just thread the body and screw the head on like everyone else does than to have to design a freely-rotating head with seperate collar ring, locking mechanism and removable nametags.

Ah, who knows. It's certainly not something worth discussing much further. And I'll bet a buck that there are very few people at Shure that are anywhere near their customer service department that actually know the real answer. I'd give even money that 5 calls to Shure customer service will yield two or three different answers. (I'd really like to be proven wrong on that one ).

G.

You're definetly correct that it would take a lot of work to accidently knock the head off, I was just making a suggestion. It's true I'm over in Product Development, but I'll do my best to track down an answer, if there is one.

 

[boingoman]

The way I read it, Harvey and I were saying the similiar things.

Sort of, but Harvey touched on a possible explanation for the deeper question than it's function- why did they make it that way in the first place instead of something else?

 

[boingoman]

You're definetly correct that it would take a lot of work to accidently knock the head off, I was just making a suggestion. It's true I'm over in Product Development, but I'll do my best to track down an answer, if there is one.

PD? Really? Sweet. How about a redesign of the Beta/SM98 mount system? A short gooseneck that plugs into the preamp, and a clamp to mount the whole thing to the rim mount? Love 'em, but the goosenecks loosen up after about a year. PITA.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

You're definetly correct that it would take a lot of work to accidently knock the head off, I was just making a suggestion. It's true I'm over in Product Development, but I'll do my best to track down an answer, if there is one.

RAK, I never noticed you worked for Shure until now . Very cool.

If you're in PD, you may be in the right place. Ask the old-timers there who may have been around 30 years ago...if there are any left.

And BTW, my comments re Customer Service were a crack at customer service departments in general, not Shure's (which I have never had to deal with.)

Now to the important stuff...need any beta testers for your new stuff?

G.

 

[RAK]

RAK, maybe you could suggest they include diaphragm sizes in the technical information released about Shure mics. That might stop a lot of misleading advertising by retailers such as: "the Shure SM7b is a large-diaphragm dynamic microphone..."

Before going any further, just confirming you know the SM7b and SM57 are entirely different microphones?

 

[RAK]

RAK, I never noticed you worked for Shure until now . Very cool.

If you're in PD, you may be in the right place. Ask the old-timers there who may have been around 30 years ago...if there are any left.

And BTW, my comments re Customer Service were a crack at customer service departments in general, not Shure's (which I have never had to deal with.)

Now to the important stuff...need any beta testers for your new stuff?

G.

Yeah, I do work for Shure. I put it under my user name because I think it should be public on this board, but I don't ever want to be pushing an agenda, as I'm here as an enthusiast. Having said that I do want to be able to answer any questions that may come up.

I happen to work in the Personal Audio side of things. So if you're familiar with our E-Series earphones, that's where I'm at. Microphones are some one elses problem, haha.

And I did shoot off an e-mail to try to come up with an answer, we'll see what happens.

 

[littledog]

Before going any further, just confirming you know the SM7b and SM57 are entirely different microphones?

Sigh. Yes. Depending on your definition of "entirely".

For instance, they both use .5 inch diaphragms based on the Unidyne III.

And the SM7b is currently being advertised by many retailers as a large diaphragm microphone, which it is not. And as a result many people believe that it is.

I'm not sure I can state it much clearer than that.

I suspect that Shure tacitly allows this practice, or at least does not go out of their way to correct it. My theory is that it is to their marketing advantage to allow people to think they are getting a large diaphragm mic, so they avoid talking about diaphragm size on all their published specs. This is only a theory, and I could well be wrong. But the whole situation seems a little suspicious.

 

[bryank]

maybe its a swivel head because........

the Sm57 is know to be "bulletproof/indistructable".........most mics heads screw off normaly to take the head off for whatever reason. Maybe shure made it swivel to make it HARD to get the head off......and to keep idiots like myself from pooking around inside and damaging it!