Sm7

  • Thread starter Thread starter JerryD
  • Start date Start date
Yeah, a used SM7 will probably cost you more than a new SM7B.
 
SM7, later redesignated SM7a, and SM7b are essentially the same mic. They changed the armiture which the mic hangs on, for convenience, and to decrease the risk of breaking the wire between the mic body and the connector. I don't see any practical difference. There are some insignificant electronic changes, but none of the "golden ears" people I know can hear any difference at all. For all intents and purposes, they are the same mic.-Richie
 
scrubs said:
Yeah, a used SM7 will probably cost you more than a new SM7B.
Click to expand...

mainly because it's older and vintage is all the rage these days ;)
 
SM7 vs. SM7B

>>Is there much difference between a Shure SM7 and a SM7B?<<

There´s a huge difference.
If you are interested, i can forward two MP3s to you and you will hear the difference. I´d go for the SM7, but it´s not easy to find one.
Cheers, Troyflamingo
 
Troyflamingo said:
>>Is there much difference between a Shure SM7 and a SM7B?<<

There´s a huge difference.
Click to expand...

First person I've read saying as much.

Odd, don't you think? But then, there's always someone who believes they can hear a huge difference. I wonder if it's just your two mics (one might be faulty or shot or on a different rolloff setting)? Cuz I've used them all before and have found them to be completely interchangeable. I mean, other than the fact that I don't swap mics from one take to another if I'll be splicing the takes together, that would just be silly dangerous. But it's more a precaution than anything else.

How do they sound different to you? is one less full, or one brighter, or some such thing? a level difference maybe? really curious about that.

Don
 
Well, I will grant that mics can change over time as they age, due to collection of dust, smoke, corrosion, etc. Exposure to very high SPL's can also alter a diaphragm's performance. What the hell? If you want your SM7b to sound *exactly* like an SM7a, put it in front of Linda Rondstadt, light up a Cohiba, and wait 15 years.-Richie
 
i understand that components can also age in a favorable way in the beginning-- the "burn in" of components that takes a few days of cumulative use and/or power being run through them, but likely that would be pretty early in the mic's operational existence.
i remember reading in the context of the dbx 160x/xt/a/ad discussions that any time there is any change in production technique (as with the x to the xt changing from hand stuffed pcb's to machine stuffed pcb's, though with the same circuit design), that the relevant laws require a change in the name of the product to reflect that revision. i wonder if that's similar to what happened with the sm7/sm7b.
 
kojdogg said:
i remember reading in the context of the dbx 160x/xt/a/ad discussions that any time there is any change in production technique (as with the x to the xt changing from hand stuffed pcb's to machine stuffed pcb's, though with the same circuit design), that the relevant laws require a change in the name of the product to reflect that revision.
Click to expand...

Say what? I've never heard that before. It doesn't seem likely given that there are tons of examples where that doesn't happen. If it is true, I'd be interested to see the actual rules.

edit- at least at the public/marketing level there seems to be no laws concerning changing designations.
 
Richard Monroe said:
Well, I will grant that mics can change over time as they age, due to collection of dust, smoke, corrosion, etc. Exposure to very high SPL's can also alter a diaphragm's performance. What the hell? If you want your SM7b to sound *exactly* like an SM7a, put it in front of Linda Rondstadt, light up a Cohiba, and wait 15 years.-Richie
Click to expand...

heh heh heh.... loved those vintage sm7a mics :)

Cheers,
Don
 
boingoman said:
Say what? I've never heard that before. It doesn't seem likely given that there are tons of examples where that doesn't happen. If it is true, I'd be interested to see the actual rules.

edit- at least at the public/marketing level there seems to be no laws concerning changing designations.
Click to expand...
i don't know that for sure, but this is the post by a dbx employee regarding that series on another mb that gave me that idea:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/high...nce-between-dbx-160-160xt-160a.html#post21390
as far as the actual rule (i.e. law), i have no idea-- you'd have to search it yourself. :)
 
kojdogg said:
i don't know that for sure, but this is the post by a dbx employee regarding that series on another mb that gave me that idea:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/high...nce-between-dbx-160-160xt-160a.html#post21390
as far as the actual rule (i.e. law), i have no idea-- you'd have to search it yourself. :)
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'll take Tom's word. Seems like some makers just decide to include revisions in the product name. Fender has been making the Twin for over 50 years and marketing it as such, no matter the actual model #, and Ford has done the same with the Mustang, so at least as far as the public goes, it must be optional.

Thanks again for finding that, a lot of info like that gets passed along as fact when in fact it's hearsay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top