SM57 and SM58 mics

I've always thought they are very similar and they are... but there is a slight difference.

here

For some reason my voice sounds better when recorded through a SM57 then when recorded through a studio condenser microphone or ribbon mic.

Even Bono likes the sm 58 over most mics in the studio

I've had a 58 for more decades than I care to remember.....as a matter of fact.... I don't remember much of a few of them....     That 58 has been there the entire ride, from one of the first "official" bands I was ever in that played gigs on at least a regular basis.

I still have it for the rare occasions when I jam with some other musicians. I use my Rode in the studio.

You're almost always assured to get that wind screen rattle on a 57  over time. Part of it's charm , But it doesn't quite take  the ear defining top o the mic stand stage whack that a 58 can let loose...-  and still live to tell about it. Got to love the standards for the standards they set.

gustabo


I love how the article linked by Guitarhacker says "Each microphone has a frequency response".

One can only hope.... right?

Dont forget this rather interesting article:

http://www.recordingmag.c...esourceDetail/330.html

About modifiying the impedance that the microphone is working into. This is rather interesting and it would not surprise me if it was quite true and effective. It sounds like they took a hi fi approach to analysing the resultant sounds either with or without the resistor.

And it could be easily installed inside an adapter and then you would have the option of using it or not.

The impedance that any signal has to negotiate is rather important and can have quite an influence over the sound. Not just the input impedance of the circuit but also the output impedance and equivalent circuit of the signal generator.

At the moment I am playing around with some ideas for a circuit that creates the equivalent circuit of an electric guitar. It would form part of a reamping device so the output from an audio interface could be fed into this and as well as the signal dropped down to a suitable level it would also pass through the equivalent circuit for the guitar and present itself hopefully more accurately for the guitar amp that would follow. Sorry did not mean to go off topic.

THEY SOUND DIFFERENT.


HERE'S WHY:


The SM57 and SM58 microphones are based on the same cartridge design. The main difference is in the grille design. The SM58 was designed for vocal application and it uses a ball grille that acts as an effective pop filter. The SM57 was designed as an instrument microphone where a smaller grille size is preferred. In this application, pop and wind are not usually a concern.
 
The SM57 uses an integral resonator/grille assembly, where grille is actually a part of the cartridge. These two grille designs place the diaphragm of each microphone in a different acoustical environment. The distance from the top of the grille to the diaphragm is shorter on the SM57 compared to that of the SM58. This allows for a closer miking position with a more pronounced proximity effect. The different resonator/grille assembly design of the SM57 is also responsible for its slightly higher output above 5 kHz.

  Well put! Thanks. Anyone try changing the transformer?

gustabo


Back "in the day" when I was a professional monitor engineer, we occasionally used sm57's as hammers if a hammer wasn't handy.
Those are some durable mic's!

That's kewl and all, but that damn bug still makes my skin crawl!  Which plane of The Abyss did you dig that up from?

Many thanks to all for their comments and sorry for delay in acknowledging - all very helpful.

Nice Video Beag, demonstrating the toughness of the 58.

I use the Shure Beta 58 (in my portable bag) and its reassuring to know that I probably won't damage it -- LOL. 

Aside from my perenniel essing/sib problems, with the right pre settings (dampening, input level, etc.) this cardiode extra-dynamic mic has been great for motel vox recordings.

I was briefly in a band with a singer who had ambitions about being Roger Daltry - swinging the mic round by the lead, throwing it over his head and so on. Every so often (usually when drunk or showing off - which was most of the time) he'd either let a bit too much cable slip through his fingers or throw the mic into the air, go to catch it............
 
and miss.
 
BANG!
 
It's quite amazing now much punishment an SM58 will take and still function normally. And how dented the windshield can get before it falls apart. Even more amazing is how angry live sound engineers can get when an idiot singer hurls the business end of the lead vocal mic into the stage.
 
As I said, I was briefly in that band 

batsbrew


THEY SOUND DIFFERENT.


HERE'S WHY:


The SM57 and SM58 microphones are based on the same cartridge design. The main difference is in the grille design. The SM58 was designed for vocal application and it uses a ball grille that acts as an effective pop filter. The SM57 was designed as an instrument microphone where a smaller grille size is preferred. In this application, pop and wind are not usually a concern.

The SM57 uses an integral resonator/grille assembly, where grille is actually a part of the cartridge. These two grille designs place the diaphragm of each microphone in a different acoustical environment. The distance from the top of the grille to the diaphragm is shorter on the SM57 compared to that of the SM58. This allows for a closer miking position with a more pronounced proximity effect. The different resonator/grille assembly design of the SM57 is also responsible for its slightly higher output above 5 kHz.

I like this explanation best.

A perfectly good dynamic cartridge design being applied to the pure mechanics of it's intended application rather than the most likely looking plot on a graph.

They are staples, have a myriad of uses and are cheap enough for anyone to afford to have both.

And while we are at it why can''t I still get an AKG D12 for a kick drum? 

Likely because some boffin decided the plots didn't look right and 'improved' them, never mind the fact that what came out of it would pin you to the back wall with a lovely distinct tone, purely because of mechanical acoustic qualities physically built in to it!

Did I ever mention I miss the old D12's?