• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Shure sm57 question.

#102
fuzzy beard said:
Just to make things a little more clear. This will be a party at a friends farm. There will be a PA there from a local band that will also be playing. This will be a 3 day party about 30 or 40 people. Bomb fires and beer. Not really a big deal.
Click to expand...
<ring ring!>

"hey, (guy from that local band who is bringing PA)!

i'm playing bass in the other band that's jamming at the thing coming up, and i got nuthin! i use a little tube amp that sounds awesome, but it has no DI out or anything; do you guys have an extra mic for the bass, and can you run my bass DI at the same time?"

they may well have it all covered, in which case you don't need to buy anything.

the technical road manager term is "advancing the show", where you find out just what the heck's going on before the s**t hits the fan.
 
#106
OK. I got around to it. As you might expect, it's going to get down to personal preferences here.

I broke out my little Mackie ProFX 8 and hooked it up to a JBL PRX 612M powered PA speaker cab. Channel EQ set flat, global graphic EQ bypassed. I put the Heil PR22 into Channel 1 and comparison mics into Channel 2.

I compared the following mics, singing my backup part to "The Sad Cafe".

Shure SM58
Shure Beta 58A
Shure Beta 87C
Shure KSM9

Right off the bat, the Heil has its own sound and doesn't sound similar to any of the others tested, even the condensers (Beta 87C and KSM9). If you look at the graphs below, that big hump at about 115 Hz on the Heil graph is very evident. The bottom is further emphasized by the steepness of the curve from 50 Hz to 100 Hz. It's a bit boomy down there. Likewise, the rise from about 3K Hz to 10K Hz is prominent. The higher component of that is pretty sibilant and, to my ear, would start to get annoying in a short time.

The flat part of the curve runs from about 300 Hz to 1,300 Hz, essentially the mid range. When I was testing the Heil, my impression was that it emphasizes the lows and highs, effectingly giving it a natural mid scoop. So you get this apparent richness down low (which may be good for miking a bass cab) and glassiness up top. If I were going to use this mic on vocals, particularly female vocals, I'd EQ some of the top off it. You'd probably want to do the same if you were miking a bass cab. In all, it's a decent-sounding mic, especially if you like the characteristics I've described. If judiciously EQ'd, I think it might do a better job than an SM57 for miking a bass cab.

As far as handling noise, it is only slightly louder than that of the Beta 58A - fairly noticeable, but not a deal-killer. The Beta 87C and KSM9 have very low handling noise.

Generally speaking, none of the Shure mics had the high frequency response of the Heil. I recognize that the Shure condenser mics (at $249 and $699 MAP) are higher-end mics, and logically "should" sound better than a $100 mic. To my ear, the Shure condensers were the best sounding of the bunch but, as I said, if you like boomy lows and glassy highs, you may feel differently.

For some voices, I might prefer the PR22 over an SM58 but, as other reviewers have noted, it's sometimes necessary to tame the high end a bit to get the harsh edge off the Heil. I'll try the Heil at practice this week on our girl singer and see how it sounds, then report back. Bottom line, I won't be sending out for more PR22s soon. They're OK, but not my flavor. The PR22 does however, expose some limitations of the SM58, which doesn't seem as lively in comparison.

My trio has been using Beta 58As, which work very well for us, but we're going to switch to Shure Super 55s, which have the same capsule and add a touch of nostalgia to our look (as if that were necessary - we're all over 55).

I'll report back with more.

BTW, what if Bob Heil had a brother Sig?


Link Removed
 
#107
Munjibunga said:
For some voices, I might prefer the PR22 over an SM58 but, as other reviewers have noted, it's sometimes necessary to tame the high end a bit to get the harsh edge off the Heil.
Click to expand...
I do roll some highs off with the Heil. I've never heard a clearer microphone, than the PR22, I didn't have feedback problems with.

For my money--in the $100 range, the Heil wins. I'd rather have highs I need to cut, than that weird, muffled 58 "honk" thing I seem to have been trained to ignore, in the past.

My comparison of the PR22 against the SM58, would be to say, after using the Heil, the SM58 sounds like you're singing through a pillow. It won't replace my Beta87a (which is the nicest vocal mic I've owned), but I'll never own another SM58. The Heil sends a voice sailing right through a mix and is clearer and cleaner than the 58 will ever be.

I have to say, through my system, I don't get any of this "boom" you speak of. Not at all. That statement doesn't really make sense to me when I look at the response charts for the mics. Is 120Hz a "boomy" frequency? I associate that area with a thickness, not a "boom" (which seems to be an adjective frequently used [sometimes with predjudice] to describe an annoying low end characteristic).

EDIT: My system is a Yamaha 24/14 board and a Crown XLS1500 Drivecore driving two Yamaha C215V cabinets.

I like your review. I think you're stuck, so far, in the "what's worked and is comfortable for me" range, though. I'm interested in reading your live use review.

If you want a great representation of the PR22 in a live situation, watch Bad Company - Hard Rock Live. Paul Rogers uses one or two though the entire set. That was one of the things that made me try one. Excerpts of the show can be found on YouTube.
 
#108
Take the PR22 and sing your lowest notes into it (I'm a bass/baritone). To me the bass emphasis is unnatural. I'll give you that the PR22 is brighter than an SM58, but as I said in the review, that's not necessarily what I want from some voices. It's not just the 120 Hz hump that causes the boominess - it's also the increased emphasis below 100 Hz.

Again, I'm sure some people will like it as you do, but I don't consider myself to be stuck in a comfort zone, as if there's some defect in my preferences. It's just that I don't care too much for the voicing of the PR22. It too strongly emphasizes the extreme ends of its frequency response. Some people, including me, prefer a flatter response. The SM57 graph shows a flat response from about 180 Hz to about 3.2K Hz. That's the same capsule as the SM58. Compare that to the PR22's flat section - 380 Hz to 1.2K Hz. Many mic manufacturers pride themselves on the flatness of their frequency response. Bob Heil seems to have designed this mic to be ear candy, artificially boosting certain frequencies to satisfy the same people who would push the "Loudness" button on their home stereo or crank the "Enhance" knob on their bass amps.

I'll just say this. If you want a mic with a flat frequency response, the Heil PR22 is not for you. Now, I'm not just referring to what we see on the graphs, I'm talking about the audible differences indicated by the graphs.

As I said in my initial review, it's about personal preferences. I don't think we'll be seeing the PR22 supplanting the SM58s you see A-list stars using at their concerts and TV appearances (although I did see the self-proclaimed world's best female singer, Celine Dion, use a KSM9 one time on TV).
 
#110
Craig_S said:
This is your "artificially boosted" smile curve frequency response at work:

Bad Company - Simple Man - Live At Wembley 2010 - YouTube

I never said there was a defect in your preferences. And, the SM57 and SM58 are FAR from flat. Look at that nasty bump between 5k and 6k. Unpleasant territory, there.
Click to expand...

So how is the mic EQ'd at the board? I guess we don't know, do we? I don't hear anything remarkable in the vocal anyway. As far as that "nasty bump" at 5 - 6K, interestingly, 5K is where you boost EQ to put a particular vocalist on top of a mix of others.
 
#111
Munjibunga said:
interestingly, 5K is where you boost EQ to put a particular vocalist on top of a mix of others.
Click to expand...
I guess, if you're going for that "radio voice" sort of thing it would work well. It's okay that we don't agree.

I'm no audio expert. I just know what works for my ears. I'm not a baritone. I'm a tenor. And the Heil only needs a bit of top end attenuation for my liking. The high pass on my board takes care of the low end junk that probably shouldn't be on a vocal mic in the first place.
 
#113
To the original question:

If you have no mics, there is nothing wrong with starting your collection with a Shure SM57. Used, they go for around $50 all the time.

If you do not own a direct box, you should. Forget the cheap ones, there is a difference that can be heard. I bought a used Radial JDI (mint) for $100

For a one shot deal, with a local band suppling PA support, I would just borrow whatever mic they had, and stick it in front of your Ampeg.

Concerning the "direct" vs "miked" bass signal sent to the PA: Imagine this, if you will. you show up to play at the most important gig of your life, and there is a true PRO sound company there with PA support. You insist that your great vintage amp be miked since only you know your sound. The PA guy says, "Fine, no problem" - but - he wants to set your tone / sound on stage - from the desk at the back of the room, while you are playing, so the only bass sound you are hearing is what he thinks sounds good on stage, although he can't even hear it. :):):):):):):)

The PRO level sound companies around here have no problem making my bass sound great. Always direct, too. Quite often at festivals, other pickers are curious about what guitars I am using, and do I want to sell them. Of course they might be just wanting to get the bass out of my hands so they won't have to listen my chops on fretless. :eek::eek::eek::eek:
 
#115
Craig_S said:
Where else have you ever heard that kind of clarity from a $100.00 microphone? Not from a Shure. It sounds like a condenser mic.

EDIT: Here's a clip with a Beta 87 for comparison. Again we don't know what the EQ is set at, but...

Paul Rodgers - Live in Glasgow - Full Concert HD - YouTube
Click to expand...

Sounds fine to me. Are you sure it's not an SM86? What are the other two vocal mics on stage?

Well, again, the "clarity" is the artificially boosted highs. I imagine any manufacturer could design that type of mic if they wanted to.
 
#116
Munjibunga said:
Sounds fine to me. What are the other two vocal mics on stage?

Well, again, the "clarity" is the artificially boosted highs. I imagine any manufacturer could design that type of mic if they wanted to.
Click to expand...
It sounds great. That's not the thing. The PR22 sounds great too, and it's clearer. The other two are probably Beta 58. I haven't gotten a good look at them.


EDIT AGAIN because I'm having trouble not saying something about these digs you keep throwing at the Heil: Can you please explain to me what this "artificially boosted" thing is you're talking about? The element is aluminum instead of plastic. What's "artificial"? Please enlighten me. Were the Hartke aluminum speakers artificial too?
 
#119
Craig_S said:
EDIT AGAIN because I'm having trouble not saying something about these digs you keep throwing at the Heil: Can you please explain to me what this "artificially boosted" thing is you're talking about? The element is aluminum instead of plastic. What's "artificial"? Please enlighten me. Were the Hartke aluminum speakers artificial too?
Click to expand...

You sure don't have any trouble throwing digs at the venerable SM58.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back