SM57 as live performance mic

[mattkw80]

I have noticed and heard that people are using the SM57 as a live vocal mic for both singing and speeches.

I heard the president uses the SM57 on television broadcasts, and Ozzy Osbourne regularly used one for singing.

How is it they are not getting alot of "S" and"P" plosives ?

Would the SM58 not be the better choice ?


Matt

 

[boingoman]

The pres for sure uses the wind/pop filter for the 57. Ozzy probly does too.

Many people find the 57 to be a bit less wooly sounding than the 58.

 

[mattkw80]

By wooly do you mean bassy ?

 

[boingoman]

By wooly do you mean bassy ?

Sort of. It just seems to lack a bit of clarity overall. Low end builds up as you get closer to a cardioid mic. In the 58, this tends to really affect up as far as 400hz. I usually end up cutting a lot of lows, a little bit somewhere in 200-400, and boosting a bit of highs and 2k-4k, depending on the singer and the band.

The 57 usually needs less eq to achieve similar results, I find. But the windscreen is pretty fragile, and expensive ($10)

 

[mattkw80]

Thanks for the info !

 

[mshilarious]

I would use the 58 on a close mic, rock/pop style singer, but the 57 on a classically trained/operatic singer. In the latter case, they are much better at projection, so the 57 could be 12" away and still get a strong signal, but no plosives due to distance.

 

[franksquid]

I would use the 58 on a close mic, rock/pop style singer, but the 57 on a classically trained/operatic singer. In the latter case, they are much better at projection, so the 57 could be 12" away and still get a strong signal, but no plosives due to distance.

I've found the opposite to be true in a live enviroment. Singers with some projection can cut a room with a 58. The weak singers would eat the 57 and you could actually hear them. You never seem to get enough gain from a 58 and a weak singer without getting some feedback.

 

[acorec]

I have noticed and heard that people are using the SM57 as a live vocal mic for both singing and speeches.

I heard the president uses the SM57 on television broadcasts, and Ozzy Osbourne regularly used one for singing.

How is it they are not getting alot of "S" and"P" plosives ?

Would the SM58 not be the better choice ?


Matt

The SM 58 is used for on stage vocals along with the SM57. Through a typical PA system, they will sound the same. The 58 is better at rejecting feedback.

 

[Big Kenny]

They both work great! I use a Beta 58 most of the time, but then again how would we know, we're up on stage, ask the board man.

 

[darrin_h2000]

I have noticed and heard that people are using the SM57 as a live vocal mic for both singing and speeches.

I heard the president uses the SM57 on television broadcasts, and Ozzy Osbourne regularly used one for singing.

How is it they are not getting alot of "S" and"P" plosives ?

Would the SM58 not be the better choice ?


Matt

I have a theory that lies just sound better through an SM57.

 

[mattkw80]

What is the difference in the BETA model of Shure mics?

I have asked different people and got different answers...

 

[philboyd studge]

What is the difference in the BETA model of Shure mics?

I have asked different people and got different answers...

For live vocals? More gain, more clarity, less plosives. I used 57's for over 20 years and Beta 57's for the last 10.

 

[A Reel Person]

...

I use the SM57 on everything, from instruments to vocals. I have [4] 57's and I think they're the bomb. With some mild EQ tuning, I can dial practically any sound I want out of 'em. 4- is good, but I could use more, and may get more soon.

The SM57 is my quintessential go-to mic of choice, but I'm admittedly not person who follows or worships mics. You won't find me commenting or browsing the Mic Forum, except when it concerns the SM57, specifically.

Of course, I have about a dozen other mics, of TEAC, Tascam, AKG & AT, (condensers & dynamics), but after scoring the SM57's years ago, I rarely use the other mics. Just the simplest, most basic, high quality, versatile & affordable mics is what I go for, and the SM57 is that for me,... & YMMV.

I don't play live any more, but I used to, & the SM57's are fine in stage & studio applications, alike.

Every mic has it's own personality, strengths & shortcomings, so get one & try it!


Thanx.

/DA

 

[mshilarious]

You never seem to get enough gain from a 58 and a weak singer without getting some feedback.

That's true with any microphone I won't use a 57 for a weak singer because every now and again, they sing one note real loud and next thing you know, you've got spit in your 57

 

[Funky_A]

Lemmy from Motorhead sings through as SM57!
Atleast I thought I saw him sing through it on the Motorhead concert last year November.

 

[sile2001]

Depends entirely on the singer. In our Easter service up at church, I was sing a solo song (and playing acoustic along with it), and during practice, at first they had me singing through a very decent AT wireless condenser since there wasn't a stage breakout box near me...and it sounded ok.

But then they decided to move me to a different part of the stage, with a breakout box 2 feet in front of me, and I pretty much just told them "ok, I'm switching to my Beta 57 now." The difference was night and day. Everyone in the auditorium, even those with untrained ears, came up to me and told me how the Beta really bought my voice to life compared to the AT mic.

However a lady who was also singing a solo in my same area tried my mic and it just did not work at all, so she switched to the AT and it was perfect for her. Just depends on the people.

I'm a little more picky I guess. I can really hear the difference in clarity between my Beta57 and Beta58, and for my voice I'll take the 57 any day of the week.