SM-7B users, I could use some advice on this mic

  • Thread starter Thread starter werewolf831
  • Start date Start date
DJL said:
Thanks, and maybe Harvey can help walk you through the process, if he's not too busy having fun playing with me. :)
Click to expand...
Actually, I'm enjoying watching you give out all this advice. Have you ever measured the response of an SM-7 with, and without, the integral windscreen? Is the response curve shown on the Shure SM-7 site taken with the integral windscreen removed? Have you ever directly compared the original SM-7 with the new SM-7B?

Sometimes "no answer" is better than a "wrong answer".
 
I think what Harvey is saying is that we need proof, DJL. :D Please respond ASAP with graphs. And get me a double latte, with mocha, light wip. Thanks.
 
I've been trying to get a certain sound with a tele, and the SM-7B is doing very well in a hellish mic shootout. I'm trying to make a tele sound as close as possible to a mic'd up acoustic. Of course, you can only get so close with current technology. So I'm going for hyper-clean here, cranking-nothing. The SM-7B and the Shure SM-82 are the current leaders, but a number of mics have been rejected. I'm having my best luck with an 8" speaker, rather than a 1X12 cab. I think I need a cheap gate, 'cause the little amp has an annoying hum. Oh- sorry to interrupt here, talking about mics and all. We now return you to your regularly programmed game of cat and mouse.-Richie
 
Harvey Gerst said:
Actually, I'm enjoying watching you give out all this advice. Have you ever measured the response of an SM-7 with, and without, the integral windscreen? Is the response curve shown on the Shure SM-7 site taken with the integral windscreen removed? Have you ever directly compared the original SM-7 with the new SM-7B?

Sometimes "no answer" is better than a "wrong answer".
Click to expand...

1) Nope
2) I don't know
3) No

But...
freshmattyp said:
Bottom line for me is Harvey has hard earned credibility. DJL has none. No one has any idea of what DJL has done. Not a clue. There's no web link, no posted work, no real name, nada, bupkus. DJL, you are just an opinionated asshole with no credibilty to back up anything you say. Your 3000+ posts of nonsense speak volumes about your "experience". Your lack of even basic conversational skills or the ability to form a coherent thought continue to amaze me. I have met some flaky bass players in my day, but you take the prize. Congratulations. And for God's sake, learn the difference between your and you're and their, there and they're. Repeat the 4th grade if necessary.

Oh, yeah, it's "damn" you moron. You can't even cuss right.
Click to expand...
So don't expect too much.
 
DJL said:
1) Nope
2) I don't know
3) No
Click to expand...
Then why give advice about removing the intergal windscreen "because it's worthless"? Is it a "fact", your considered opinion, or just a hunch? Do you even own a Shure SM-7 or SM-7B?

A studio owner friend of mine in New England (Rich Davidian) sent me his SM-7B to compare against the Bruce Swedien SM-7 I own, and against my Mark Linnet SM-7. So, if I were to comment about the SM-7 or 7B, at least I have some factual basis for my opinions. What's your's?

Sometimes "no answer" is better than a "wrong answer".
 
Harvey Gerst said:
Then why give advice about removing the intergal windscreen
Click to expand...
Bad puppy... I didn't tell anyone to remove the internal windscreen. By the way... what is an "intergal" windscreen?

Bad puppy.

Harvey Gerst said:
So I'm just gonna follow you around like a little puppy,
Click to expand...
 
DJL said:
Bad puppy... I didn't tell anyone to remove the internal windscreen. By the way... what is an "intergal" windscreen?

Bad puppy.
Click to expand...
VERY GOOD, DJL !!! You're starting to actually see what a misspelling looks like from our side. The correct word is: integral", just as I spelled it correctly twice in the first post. Just wanted to see if you would use it as a point of confusion in my second post, so I misspelled it the second time around.

No one accused you of telling someone to remove the "internal windscreen", which doesn't exist, BTW (unless you mean the metal birdcage surrounding the capsule, which would require a hacksaw to remove).

Now, you can go look up: "integral". Please report back with what you learn, if anything. You can ignore the math definition.

For extra points, let's see if you can figure out why I referred to it as an "integral windscreen" in the first post. Take your time. Neatness and accuracy count.
 
I'm just going to leave the "intergal" windscreen on ;-)

Thanks for the replies, can't wait to record with it again!
 
werewolf831 said:
I'm just going to leave the "intergal" windscreen on ;-)

Thanks for the replies, can't wait to record with it again!
Click to expand...
Yeah, leave the screen in place, and go enjoy it - it's one of the all time great mics. Try the switches (on the back of the mic) in the flat position at first. The neat thing is that you can really get right on top of the SM-7 and scream if you feel like it - it'll handle the volume. Too much bottom in close for your voice? Hit the mic's rolloff switch and you're ready to rock.

We use it on vocals, hi hats, snare, horns, just about anything you can think of, and it always does an excellent job. The better the pre amp, the better it sounds.
 
werewolf831, I reallly was trying to help you... I had no idea you thought I was refferring to the grill when I was talking about windscreens, I thought you meant some foam windscreens... but as you can see, I'm always under consent attack by someone, so I get side tracked. Also as you can see, Harvey basically said the same thing I did... you can get on the SM-7 without fear of trashing it, and use the best preamp you can. Anyway, it's good to see Harvey active and helping others again. Have fun werewolf831 and take care.
 
It's all good DJL, I knew what you were talking about. I threw in the "intergal" thing in my last post just as a joke.

I appreciate everyones input!

werewolf
 
Harvey, I've just tried the SM7 a couple of times now, and suspect my Beyer Soundstar MKII
sounds very similar to one.
Minus the various EQ settings of the SM7 of course.

Wouldn't the Soundstar MKII be an excellent
alternative, especially for the home studio crowd?
They typically run under $100 used.

Chris
 
chessparov said:
Harvey, I've just tried the SM7 a couple of times now, and suspect my Beyer Soundstar MKII
sounds very similar to one.
Minus the various EQ settings of the SM7 of course.

Wouldn't the Soundstar MKII be an excellent
alternative, especially for the home studio crowd?
They typically run under $100 used.

Chris
Click to expand...
Yup, I've used the Soundstar MKII many times as a primary vocal mic with great success. It's not as versatile as the SM-7, but it's great on rock vocals. It's one of those "sleeper" mics.

As a matter of fact, I just bought another Soundstar the other day, just so we'll have one available for each studio.
 
Harvey, I was the one who sold that exact Soundstar MKII to tubedude, before he sold it to you!

Thanks for the confirmation about it sounding like a SM7.
I've tried using it for ballad material, but did prefer it for
rock oriented stuff instead.

Figure between a Shure SM57 "Unidyne III", a 546, and this Beyer, the bases are pretty well covered on this sort of sound
now.

BTW, if you have a Shure 545 series hanging around the studio,
be sure to try it with the Studio Projects VTB-1.

Best match up out of those three microphones for that pre for
pop vocals IMHO, at least for me.

Chris
 
"Best match up" meaning as far as the VTB-1 itself is concerned.

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