regarding a general all around mic....
- Thread starter MaXiMiLLioN
- Start date
CubaseRox
Status: Producer Mode
^^ They are not the same mic, they are slightly different. 
The 57 has a more bright (harsh) sound whereas the 58 has a more smooth (warm) sound. And anyone in this thread wants to challange what I say now can go Here and read up on both mics.
And they are not housed in the same body, I am not sure if you can just place the 58 crown on top of a 57, but their bodies definitely look different.
Edit: I'll sum this up right now. let Maximillion try ouy both mics and choose the one he likes best! I am done on this thread!
The 57 has a more bright (harsh) sound whereas the 58 has a more smooth (warm) sound. And anyone in this thread wants to challange what I say now can go Here and read up on both mics.
And they are not housed in the same body, I am not sure if you can just place the 58 crown on top of a 57, but their bodies definitely look different.
Edit: I'll sum this up right now. let Maximillion try ouy both mics and choose the one he likes best! I am done on this thread!
Last edited:
CubaseRox: I don't wanna start a war here, but why don't you just go to the Shure website and do a search. Here is what is stated on the official Shure web site:
"The SM57 and SM58 microphones are based on the same design. The main difference between them is in the grille design. The SM58 was designed for vocal application and it uses a separate grille with a very effective pop filter. The SM57 was designed as an instrument microphone where smaller grille size is preferred. In this application the 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 the microphones in a different acoustical environment. First of all, the distance from the top of the grille to the diaphragm is significantly shorter on the SM57 compared to that of the SM58. This allows for closer sound pickup with even more pronounced proximity effect. Secondly, a different resonator/grille assembly design of the SM57 is responsible for its slightly higher output above 5 kHz ...
The SM57 and SM58 have the same input sensitivity ...
The SM58 and SM57 do use the same cartridge. The grill, though, does effect the frequency response to some extent. At a distance, the difference is probably not noticable. But at extremely close distances, the difference is noticeable. Due to the grill, a person's mouth can get closer to the diaphragm of an SM57, thus causing more proximity effect and increased bass when compared to the SM58 ... "
In other words: you screw the head off the SM58 and you have the SM57!
(which also explains why almost every music store has the 58 head grill in store: Many bands have a bunch of 57 and just screw on the 58 grill as a pop filter if they wanna use it for vocals on stage)
"The SM57 and SM58 microphones are based on the same design. The main difference between them is in the grille design. The SM58 was designed for vocal application and it uses a separate grille with a very effective pop filter. The SM57 was designed as an instrument microphone where smaller grille size is preferred. In this application the 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 the microphones in a different acoustical environment. First of all, the distance from the top of the grille to the diaphragm is significantly shorter on the SM57 compared to that of the SM58. This allows for closer sound pickup with even more pronounced proximity effect. Secondly, a different resonator/grille assembly design of the SM57 is responsible for its slightly higher output above 5 kHz ...
The SM57 and SM58 have the same input sensitivity ...
The SM58 and SM57 do use the same cartridge. The grill, though, does effect the frequency response to some extent. At a distance, the difference is probably not noticable. But at extremely close distances, the difference is noticeable. Due to the grill, a person's mouth can get closer to the diaphragm of an SM57, thus causing more proximity effect and increased bass when compared to the SM58 ... "
In other words: you screw the head off the SM58 and you have the SM57!
(which also explains why almost every music store has the 58 head grill in store: Many bands have a bunch of 57 and just screw on the 58 grill as a pop filter if they wanna use it for vocals on stage)
CubaseRox
Status: Producer Mode
^^ Why dont you post the link up here for me? Why should I have to go and find somthing your stating?
I showed you my proof (the above post) that both mics are slighly different, It said the 57 has a brighter sound whereas the 58 has a warmer sound. Yet you show no proof other than typing what it says and tell me to do a search on the shure website.
I think they sell them because everyone always drops the 58's and needs to replace the banged-up/dented crowns.
Look, if you post up the link from the shure website that says "Both the 58 and 57 are identical and all you have to do is put the 58 crown atop of a 57..."
Then i'll admit I am wrong!
But I know it doesnt say that, because for both products on the shure website, the description is different for each mic.
I showed you my proof (the above post) that both mics are slighly different, It said the 57 has a brighter sound whereas the 58 has a warmer sound. Yet you show no proof other than typing what it says and tell me to do a search on the shure website.
I think they sell them because everyone always drops the 58's and needs to replace the banged-up/dented crowns.
Look, if you post up the link from the shure website that says "Both the 58 and 57 are identical and all you have to do is put the 58 crown atop of a 57..."
Then i'll admit I am wrong!
But I know it doesnt say that, because for both products on the shure website, the description is different for each mic.
Last edited:
Guenon
New member
CubaseRox said:I never said you cant use the 57 for vocals, I only preferred the 58 because it was more geared for vocals by its dynamic range.
[...]
Edit: The dynamic range of a mic plays a part of how the source would sound recorded. If that werent true than any mic would be appropriate for any application.
As you have initially pointed out, these charts represent the frequency responses of the said microphones, showing the relative fluctuation of the signal level as a function of frequency.
The dynamic range is a different matter, usually stated as a single decibel value denoting the difference between the loudest and softest possible signal levels. Writing about it in conjunction with the frequency response graphs, also saying "if the dynamic range is way beyond the human voice it will still pick up frequencies and mesh them in with the vocals", results in a bit confusing/confused read.
Last edited:
Guenon
New member
CubaseRox said:
No problem. And yep, I agree with you there.From the SM57 manual: "Frequency response tailored for drums, guitars, and vocals."
From the SM58 manual: "Frequency response tailored for vocals, with brightened midrange and bass rolloff."
What is notable in this, logically a pop-shield grille should constitute apparent hi-frequency attenuation, but not such a bass rolloff. The inner components may very well be identical, but SM58 seems to be slightly (but clearly) adjusted for its differing task, actually making it in essence a different mic.
I'm well aware of many people swearing these microphones are identical. I have thought so before, myself. The difference is only slight - but still, it seems to be there. I don't think Shure would skew their graphs merely to establish a false difference for marketing purposes
Last edited:
CubaseRox
Status: Producer Mode
Guenon said:I don't think Shure would skew their graphs merely to establish a false difference for marketing purposes
Hahahaha!
Edit: This is making me want to go and buy or borrow a 57 just to field test it myself.
If I get my hands on a 57 (already own a 58) I will post the results up on a page. The test will be a fair run, no processing at all to both mics, same room postitioning etc.Edit Edit: I will test with the 58's crown removed!!!!!
Last edited:
Guenon
New member
Giganova said:
I used to think so, too. Now that I checked out the info on Shure's web site, I came to the conclusion there really is a slight difference that, as far as my reasoning goes, is not explainable by the use of the grill alone.
It would seem unlikely that a pop shield alone attenuates the lower frequencies that way. Still, do you think (or know) this is actually what is happening here? Along with Shure stating the frequency response is "tailored" to fall into a certain pattern different than the SM57? I'm not being sarcastic, by the way
. For one reason, this interests me because there seems to be so much lore circling around these known mic models.
Last edited:
CubaseRox
Status: Producer Mode
^^ Thats is basically what I was trying to say at first, until this whole thing blew up as a 58 vs. 57 sound war!
Why would shure put out 2 mics that are identical? I am not a lawyer but they can probably get sued for that. Esp, since the 57 is a bit cheaper.
If both mics are the same why dont they just call one an SM58i (for instruments) and just remove the grill to facilitate a closer proximity.
There are no hard feelings with anyone here! We are all entitled to our own opinions on gear. I myself dont claim to know everything.
Why would shure put out 2 mics that are identical? I am not a lawyer but they can probably get sued for that. Esp, since the 57 is a bit cheaper.
If both mics are the same why dont they just call one an SM58i (for instruments) and just remove the grill to facilitate a closer proximity.
There are no hard feelings with anyone here! We are all entitled to our own opinions on gear. I myself dont claim to know everything.
Guenon
New member
Ahh crap. Giganova, before you reply to my earlier deductions about what is going on...
I realized there's something funny about my conclusion based on the graphs. I pretty much messed up when checking those figures out, and well, I'll just paste both of the graphs here one more time for reference.
Now, I can't possibly see how I came to read them exactly the other way around, but it is clearly the SM58 that is relatively more bassy. It doesn't attenuate the low frequencies, compared to the SM57, but the high ones. In other words it performs just like one would expect when adding a pop shield grill around the head.
No wonder my first impression was "damn, there actually has to be something more going on." Of course, now things seem to me just like they seemed a little while ago. I'm not stating any final conclusions about the issue, given all the studio lore and the Shure site failing to deliver an absolute answer, but I just wanted to point out my obvious mistake. So guys, sorry, disregard what I said earlier about the attenuation of the lower frequencies and carry on
I realized there's something funny about my conclusion based on the graphs. I pretty much messed up when checking those figures out, and well, I'll just paste both of the graphs here one more time for reference.
Now, I can't possibly see how I came to read them exactly the other way around, but it is clearly the SM58 that is relatively more bassy. It doesn't attenuate the low frequencies, compared to the SM57, but the high ones. In other words it performs just like one would expect when adding a pop shield grill around the head.
No wonder my first impression was "damn, there actually has to be something more going on." Of course, now things seem to me just like they seemed a little while ago. I'm not stating any final conclusions about the issue, given all the studio lore and the Shure site failing to deliver an absolute answer, but I just wanted to point out my obvious mistake. So guys, sorry, disregard what I said earlier about the attenuation of the lower frequencies and carry on
Last edited:
I can't exlude for sure that there are differences between the 57 and 58 apart from the grill. However, a grill can make a big difference (read my earlier quote from Shure), and also the placement of the grill (e.g., how far it is from the capsule and how close you can mike).
If there are differences in the design of the amplifier (according to Shure, the capsules are identical), they must be small, though.
So, if the 57 and 58 are almost identical, why would Shure not clearly say so? Well, first off, its a matter of economics: they develop one mic, change the head a bit, and voila: they have two products to sell! Combined with a good marketing strategy (one mic is for instruments, another for vocals), they are very effective at selling basically the same products in two different versions.
So, hey: I'm not saying that I know for sure that they are the same mics, but given that the design is almost identical, that even Shure says that they are based on the same design, the interchangable grills, and from what experienced recording engineers told me, they seem to be near-identical in my opinion.
In any case, my point was: they are both one of the finest dynamic mics ever built and it really doesn't matter which one you get
If there are differences in the design of the amplifier (according to Shure, the capsules are identical), they must be small, though.
So, if the 57 and 58 are almost identical, why would Shure not clearly say so? Well, first off, its a matter of economics: they develop one mic, change the head a bit, and voila: they have two products to sell! Combined with a good marketing strategy (one mic is for instruments, another for vocals), they are very effective at selling basically the same products in two different versions.
So, hey: I'm not saying that I know for sure that they are the same mics, but given that the design is almost identical, that even Shure says that they are based on the same design, the interchangable grills, and from what experienced recording engineers told me, they seem to be near-identical in my opinion.
In any case, my point was: they are both one of the finest dynamic mics ever built and it really doesn't matter which one you get
Jeez... I duck out for a day or so and you all get together for a mic debate party without me. Well! We'll see if I invite anyone from here to my Pampered Compression party next month!
But seriously... I had no idea this was such a debated issue! Like I said - I have both the 57 & the 58, and I quite like it that way. And, while my knowledge of mics is very limited, I would have to say that based on nothing more than my own ears I could certainly see the two having the same inner structure and relying on the difference in covers to give them their own unique sonic personalities. However (as has already been pointed out) the Shure website is most certainly not the place to confirm either side of this little argument.
In the end it's just like anything else in this crazy business. You really have to go with your gut. I have used both mics for vocal aplications, and I have used both for instruments as well (try some dual micing with them on a guitar amp!). By the same token I have a friend who (before finally installing a vocal booth and playing with condensors) swore exclusively by the SM57s for everything. Most of his recording was metal oriented though - and I could see the 57 lending its self nicely to that arena.
So let's all make nice again and agree that regardless of the means we each love music in our own right. While raging debates like this are a great way for the lesser learned folk (such as myself!) to learn (hear that noobs - read the arguments - that's where the pro's really flex their brainpans - egos are on the line!!), they're not much good for moral when they're drug out for too long. Are they?
Regards...
~T
But seriously... I had no idea this was such a debated issue! Like I said - I have both the 57 & the 58, and I quite like it that way. And, while my knowledge of mics is very limited, I would have to say that based on nothing more than my own ears I could certainly see the two having the same inner structure and relying on the difference in covers to give them their own unique sonic personalities. However (as has already been pointed out) the Shure website is most certainly not the place to confirm either side of this little argument.
In the end it's just like anything else in this crazy business. You really have to go with your gut. I have used both mics for vocal aplications, and I have used both for instruments as well (try some dual micing with them on a guitar amp!). By the same token I have a friend who (before finally installing a vocal booth and playing with condensors) swore exclusively by the SM57s for everything. Most of his recording was metal oriented though - and I could see the 57 lending its self nicely to that arena.
So let's all make nice again and agree that regardless of the means we each love music in our own right. While raging debates like this are a great way for the lesser learned folk (such as myself!) to learn (hear that noobs - read the arguments - that's where the pro's really flex their brainpans - egos are on the line!!), they're not much good for moral when they're drug out for too long. Are they?
Regards...
~T
MaXiMiLLioN
New member
I jus want the mic for back up on some "jus need a mic when people wanna throw down.." aka when we dont' wanna use our EXPENSIVE sensative recording mic which we don't yet have..thinkin about a rode nt1000 i believe as the best bet..
but say i wanted to drop something really quick, thats where th shure sm 58 comes in..
by the way after more research and reading here deciding to go wit sm 58 as we WILL never record instruments..
now the problem is i went to order it.. zsounds is out..sameday music is out.. go figure huh?
on and off switch on mic is jus for convenience purposes right? so that you can turn it off wit out it pickin up?
thank you all
one
but say i wanted to drop something really quick, thats where th shure sm 58 comes in..
by the way after more research and reading here deciding to go wit sm 58 as we WILL never record instruments..
now the problem is i went to order it.. zsounds is out..sameday music is out.. go figure huh?
on and off switch on mic is jus for convenience purposes right? so that you can turn it off wit out it pickin up?
thank you all
one
MaXiMiLLioN
New member
CubaseRox said:
nope tried them....they have them but they dont' have them available at all wit the on/off switch which from what i read i will need as this mic will primarily be used vocally...
thanks tho
one