bubbagump
New member
Mmmmm, SM57 pole.
Track Rat
Just Your Average Sized Member
Would you prefer a 57 Czech?
R
robin watson
New member
What is wrong with using an SM57 on guitar cabs, toms, some voices, snare? It often shines on these sources.
C
Cerebus
New member
I'm a dynamic whore and I hate the sm-57. It sounds really cheap and useless compared to my Electro-Voices and Beyer.
P
producerkid
New member
if it's recording a good source, then its great, if its recording crap, then your getting something a little worse than crap.
let me tell you a secret....try using a BBE sonic maximizer in conjunction with a 57. you will do crazy good things. call me crazy......try it. i use the BBE plugin after tracking personally, but you could use it as an insert on a mixer. you have to use it with varying degree, but the BBE circuit compliments and enhances the 57's response in a way you just have to hear to understand.
deffinately try it on guitar cabs (57 aimed directly into cabinet, 1 inch away from center of cone), and snare drums, toms as well.
P.S. dont ever let "the book" influence you or you will never be a good engineer
let me tell you a secret....try using a BBE sonic maximizer in conjunction with a 57. you will do crazy good things. call me crazy......try it. i use the BBE plugin after tracking personally, but you could use it as an insert on a mixer. you have to use it with varying degree, but the BBE circuit compliments and enhances the 57's response in a way you just have to hear to understand.
deffinately try it on guitar cabs (57 aimed directly into cabinet, 1 inch away from center of cone), and snare drums, toms as well.
P.S. dont ever let "the book" influence you or you will never be a good engineer
Golden
New member
If Cookie Monster uses a 57 (can someone prove this), then I will return to the elite of 57 lovers for sure.
treymonfauntre
Magic Bag Of Sounds
i have a lot of fun making lofi recordings with nothing but a 57
X
XLR
______
Great mike for a gtr amp or vocal. Especially with a high end transformer input pre. Can do surprisingly well on other things I hadn't expected, like close miked nylon string guitar, but takes a lot of post processing.
K
K-dub
Well-known member
The SM57 is always in my toolkit ...
... and whenever I need to pound a nail, it's my go to device.
... and whenever I listen to it, it sounds the same as it did before I started pounding nails with it.
Just another crayon in the toolbox to color everything gray. It works perfectly well when it works perfectly well.
Kev-
... and whenever I need to pound a nail, it's my go to device.
... and whenever I listen to it, it sounds the same as it did before I started pounding nails with it.
Just another crayon in the toolbox to color everything gray. It works perfectly well when it works perfectly well.
Kev-
H
hippiesan62
New member
Don't blame the food, blame the cook!
I don't know as though I would recomend the 57 for a beginner, unless they know what they are doing with their other reinforcement gear. I can make any mic sound like crap, if I don't show any aptitude for tonal quality control, physical placement, etc.. From an engineering point of view, I guess if you know how to use the equipment to it's fullest potential, then you have a very reliable, and pretty accurate piece of equipment in a 57. If you don't know how use your gear to get the best out of them, you will think they're crap. Like anything else, you just can't please everyone, because we all have different tastes and listening preferrences. Both in the studio and on the stage, for over 30 years, my 57s have earned thier keep over and over. In settings where people you don't know will be handling them, you can't go wrong with something as indestructable as a 57. The technology is old, and there are so many newer products on the market these days, but bang for buck, I wouldn't be without a couple.
I don't know as though I would recomend the 57 for a beginner, unless they know what they are doing with their other reinforcement gear. I can make any mic sound like crap, if I don't show any aptitude for tonal quality control, physical placement, etc.. From an engineering point of view, I guess if you know how to use the equipment to it's fullest potential, then you have a very reliable, and pretty accurate piece of equipment in a 57. If you don't know how use your gear to get the best out of them, you will think they're crap. Like anything else, you just can't please everyone, because we all have different tastes and listening preferrences. Both in the studio and on the stage, for over 30 years, my 57s have earned thier keep over and over. In settings where people you don't know will be handling them, you can't go wrong with something as indestructable as a 57. The technology is old, and there are so many newer products on the market these days, but bang for buck, I wouldn't be without a couple.
PhilGood
Juice box hero
I like what Steve Albini says about it on his website:
Golden
New member
geez! thanks for all the negitive rep... I'm covered in red chicklets now... 
M
mathamagician
New member
Ever recorded the bottom of a full bathtub with it?? Stick one in there and try it. But nothing compares to sticking a Neuman in.
D
DamnYankee
New member
Golden said:
I'm always reminded of Boston's debut album: with the exception of 'Let Me Take You Home Tonight' (which was recorded in L.A.), the drums on that album were recorded in a small closet in Tom Scholz's basement with only (3) SM-57s. Only 4 other albums in recording history have outsold the Boston debut album...so Tom Scholz proved you don't need AKG C-414s or Neumann KM-84s to get great overhead sounds.
Another thing: the SM-57 (which is really an SM-58) is nothing more than a PA mic but lots of ingenious people like Tom Scholz have been able to do incredible things with it.
I personally don't own one.
Last edited:
giraffe
i love negative rep
it's a good mic, i'm never sure exactly what it is people expect it to do really.
it's just a cheap dynamic.
and to whomever said (i forget now) they don't like it on vox, remember it was (like many standard mics) designed as a speech reinforcement mic.
if you haven't tried it on vox for a while, give it a whirl. it may suprise.
(then again, it may not.)
it's just a cheap dynamic.
and to whomever said (i forget now) they don't like it on vox, remember it was (like many standard mics) designed as a speech reinforcement mic.
if you haven't tried it on vox for a while, give it a whirl. it may suprise.
(then again, it may not.)
B
Beck
Guest
I wonder if like a lot of things the 57 has changed over the years. Not that people don’t have good reasons to like or dislike it, but are we even talking about the same product?
As for me and my 25+ years of recording the 57 is indispensable… and my 57s are all about that old too.
As for me and my 25+ years of recording the 57 is indispensable… and my 57s are all about that old too.
cavedog101
Well-known member
Couldn't this thread be about any other mic in the known universe and have the same set of mixed reactions??
I'm 100% behind the post about having a high-end mic pre for this mic. Variable input impedance too. At that point no one with even a modicum of ear could say a 57 doesnt sound great. Why they react this way is beyond me...its certainly not engineered to do so. But they do. Try one through a ViPre. It might be the only mic you'll use .
The other thing I will agree with is the Unidyne III mojo. Whether it be age or manufacturing materials, these sound different, maybe even better.
To compare this mic with the Sennheisers, Beyers, and other higher priced dynamics is missing the point. But like many have said, it is a tool that will shine on certain things and suck on others. It is a mic that will NEVER help a poor sounding source. It will, however, reveal the true nature of the poor source....much like the aforementioned NS10's reveal the deficiancies in the midrange of a mix.
A good tool for anyones locker.
I'm 100% behind the post about having a high-end mic pre for this mic. Variable input impedance too. At that point no one with even a modicum of ear could say a 57 doesnt sound great. Why they react this way is beyond me...its certainly not engineered to do so. But they do. Try one through a ViPre. It might be the only mic you'll use .
The other thing I will agree with is the Unidyne III mojo. Whether it be age or manufacturing materials, these sound different, maybe even better.
To compare this mic with the Sennheisers, Beyers, and other higher priced dynamics is missing the point. But like many have said, it is a tool that will shine on certain things and suck on others. It is a mic that will NEVER help a poor sounding source. It will, however, reveal the true nature of the poor source....much like the aforementioned NS10's reveal the deficiancies in the midrange of a mix.
A good tool for anyones locker.
M
Mike Baird
New member
i used a single 57 for 1 of my best recordings for a band ever. acoustic guitar, vox, bongos,...all the same mic
great mic imo
great mic imo
A
amzavareei
New member
Try ripping the cheap ass transformer out, and then it's super nice! 10 dB quieter, extended frequency range, faster. And then the devil mod. Strap a 666 (as close as you can get) ohm resistor across pins 2 and three. Or right across the capsule leads on the head. Faster still! Thanks Tape Op, and Recording magazines!
giraffe
i love negative rep
i think the sm57 sounds just like a u87.
