SM-57 vs SM-58. Which one?

[juvenal.floyd]

Well, I'm just getting started on recording... I've just bought a Tascam Porta-02 and a Line 6 POD...

I still need to buy a mic... I'm going to record acoustic guitars, vocals and probably a tenor sax...

So, and notice that I'm in a low budget, which mic should I buy?

I've heard good things about both the sm-57 and sm-58, but, according to my needs, which one should be the best buy?

Thanks in advance,
Pedro

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

They're both the same capsule, so it doesn't really matter.......

 

[Track Rat]

Same capsule with a slightly different frequency response due to the pop filter on the 58. My personal preference overall is the 57.

 

[juststartingout]

You may want to consider buying an inexpensive preamp as well. The reason I say this is with my 57 and 58, I did not have enough gain with just my DAW ( AW16G) when recording my acoustic straight with a mic. If you are going to record off the pickup or record off an amp from the acoustic, then you would not need it.

I know you don't have the budget for it, but I picked up a Presonus tube preamp. I found I had pleanty of gain after that. There were preamps for less than $100 that were offered to me at the shop I go to as well. They would certainly do the job.

 

[chessparov]

Neither! Get an EV 535a omni dynamic instead for around $50 used.

Seriously, I've learned recently that the 535a is another contender in the
"all around" sweepstakes.

IMHO (and noted pro engineer Scott Dorsey), you'll get better sound by
getting a Shure SM57 with its foam windscreen accessory, than using
a SM58. I've used both and the SM57/foam piece has a clearer sound
than just using the '58.

Chris

 

[JiggleDaHandle]

as a formar vocalist - i personally loved the electrovoice 1776 for a omni mike (i date myself), the sure cannons are just good work mikes, take a beatin, keep tickin' i do believe with a tube preamp the are still good for that mid analog meat with some eq, and or compression cielings/floors and pretty cheap to find as well, just about any studio i know has the 57's

 

[tdukex]

57

 

[jem]

sm57 if those are your only choices...
i recently bought a mackie 1202 to start with my own recording and i only needed 1 mic to start and i chose a sm57...

the sm57 generally picks up 10db lower than a 58 and is classified as an instrument mic.... i've done a few recodrings and it gives a real kick into the bass... not very good fro recording vocals though... i had to stand about 1 ft. away from the mic to have a better pickup. you might also want to consider this as a microphone for females with sharper voices.

 

[ALBERTPIKE]

SM 57 and SM 58 use the same capsule and are very similar. In many situations they would function exactly the same.

The 58 is designed so that the windscreen keeps the singers mouth away from the capsule to minimize proximity effect (enhanced bass response), as well as serving as a pop filter. The ball can make it less convenient for instrument miking. This mic is specifically designed for live vocals.

The capsule in the 57 sits very close to the screen. This makes it more versatile in that sometimes you want to close mic an instrument or even a vocalist for enhanced proximity effect. The frequency response on the 57 is slightly better. Shure sells a windscreen for the 57 that essentially converts it into a 58. The 57 is cheaper and more versatile, and it can serve the same function as a 58.

On the other hand, the SM 58 looks very cool!

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

the sm57 generally picks up 10db lower than a 58 and is classified as an instrument mic....

No... as I said - same capsule - same spec -- EXCEPT for the windscreen on the 58 that changes the frequency curve slightly......

 

[dark_iscariot]

i dont see why people prefer 57? i have tried neither of them out, but i know 58 costs more and is better for singing...

 

[Gidge]

i dont see why people prefer 57? i have tried neither of them out, but i know 58 costs more and is better for singing...

thats not necessarily true.....

 

[jslator]

i have tried neither of them out, but i know 58...is better for singing...

If you've tried neither, how do you know the 58 is better?

Back to the original question. As Blue Bear pointed out, they are very similar (but not identical). They can be used for many of the same things (yes, a '57 can be used for vocals, and a '58 can be used for instruments). I don't prefer one over the other, but find the '57 slightly more useful in general. It's also cheaper. So, I guess I'd say go for the '57.

 

[zer0sig]

i would get the 58 and then just pull the pop screen cover off for doing instrumental work-a lot of highs and transients show up when you do that that will be rewarding for guitar work.

 

[dafduc]

I love my 58, but it's 'cos I like the way it colors my (frikkin awful) voice. 57's are cleaner, more versatile - and you can always post-process to do your own coloring.

So, 57. Use the $20 you save to buy a hammer, since you won't have a 58.

 

[dark_iscariot]

jslator:


ive heard people saying that 58 is more developped for singing, and 57 more for recording instruments.

 

[jslator]

ive heard people saying that 58 is more developped for singing, and 57 more for recording instruments.

That's what the brochure says. In practice, I find that the opposite is true just as often.

 

[ALBERTPIKE]

Some singers benefit from the proximity effect you can get with the 57.

 

[tonejunkee]

I read that Beck did 90% of the album "Midnight Vultures" with a Shure sm58! They also had that puppy plugged into an LA2A pre-amp wich is WAAAYYYY out of my budget....very inspiring article

http://emusician.com/ar/emusic_tracking_midnite_vultures/index.htm

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Some singers benefit from the proximity effect you can get with the 57.

Which is EXACTLY the same proximity effect you get with the 58.......
same capsule, same polar specs.........