I don’t need any 58-like mics at the moment but this product is good to know about. I may yet need some again some day.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
SM57 vs SM58 for vocals....
- Thread starter cableguy
- Start date
P bass with flats!
Wait...
Wait...
I use a SM58 because when I joined the band they had a box of them, ditto the previous band I was in. When I asked the newer band why they had SM58s they said it was because that mic didn't need a lot of EQ to make a voice sound good. I never asked the first band.
I have mostly used an SM57. A soundman I worked with in the early 80s preferred these for backing vocals so I bought one. My very first mic was a Shure 585SA in 1969. I saw Deep Purple shortly after I got it. Rod Evans threw his mic down on the stage at the end of their show. I walked up to the stage and it was a 585SA.
I used a SM58 for years, but I recently got a Beta 58. Much less prone to feedback. Very happy with it.
I used Shure SM 57s and 58s for more than 40 years and preferred the 58 for vocals. Then I had a chance to try the Sennheiser e835 and thought they provided a bit more clarity in the response. I've been using the 835s for about 9 years now and still prefer them over Shure.
Koog.
Koog.
No preference. Neither is my first choice.
I've been using EV ND 757's for at least 25 years. More open in the upper mids and highs so I can hear myself better in a messy mix and a HPF to get rid of all the low-end leakage on stage.
I've been using EV ND 757's for at least 25 years. More open in the upper mids and highs so I can hear myself better in a messy mix and a HPF to get rid of all the low-end leakage on stage.
SM58 is my vote. Too many mic eating vocalist to use a 57 is my finding
I leave the 57's for the cabinets
but i use a
Shure KSM9
if I have to sing backup vocals
I leave the 57's for the cabinets
but i use a
Shure KSM9
if I have to sing backup vocals
Last edited:
The other reason to own one is that every soundman you will ever work with will know exactly what to do with it. If you're like me and prefer not to work with house mics, you'll be handing your sound tech something they won't be confused by.
My AKG mic is a world-class mic that was used by people like James Taylor and such on many tours. But I can't tell you how many times I have either tried to hand that mic to a sound engineer or let a singer use it in my rehearsal space where they look at it, cross their eyes, and tell me they don't want to have anything to do with it. OK, your choice. So I always have a 58 to offer because that's a comfort zone for everyone.
Look at the Buck Owens Show videos on YouTube. You’ll find an EV 664 front and center, covering the vocals for Buck and Don Rich. Note also that they are not crowding the mic, so no proximity effect. And this is a TV soundstage, a much more controlled environment.
Of the choices in the poll, I voted for the 58. I use a Beta 58a as my primary vocal mic. A standard 58 also works for me. I’ve used and liked EV 767’s. Studio recordings at home get large or small diaphragm condensers, or 58’s.
For knockaround jam time, I have two of the Behringer knockoffs of the 58. They sound close to the 58 to my ears. Worthwhile to a gigging bar band to have as backup and to give to the inevitable “guest singer”, who may or may not do the “drop the mic” idiocy. At $29 USD, they’re essentially disposable. And they EQ with a 58’s channel settings - pop the Behringer on the leaf singer’s mic cable when the “guest singer” comes up, then switch back afterwards.
EDIT: Now at $24 USD at Zzounds and Adorama:
Invalid Link Removed
Last edited:
You can get closer to the capsule with the 57, which may or may not produce a desired (proximity) effect, depending on what you're going for.There is also the grill array and differences in proximity effect. If you're trying to say they are the same mic that performs the same, sorry, after 40 years of experimenting with vocal mics, we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.Smart singers would be wise to audition them both and decide for themselves. They most likely will hear and feel a difference, and a 57 with a wind screen might just sound better to them. Many major label heavy hitter singers have specifically requested the 57 over the decades.
I'm talking about live sound reinforcement situations, I would never hand that mic to someone in the studio. That'd be my Audio Technica AT4050, but I would expect any studio tech to already have something of similar or better quality.Half true, although I’ve never met a sound engineer that are pretty competent with their craft ever scoff at the idea of working with condenser mics in the studio
At a high-level show where you're dealing with a sound tech who has that kind of experience, they don't scoff as often at the condenser. They do (rightfully) expect to have to deal with more feedback with a condenser, especially when they aren't familiar with the band. Most techs (also rightfully) assume that most singers have zero understanding of mic technique and feedback control. I've found this to be true myself working with a variety of singers over the years. So they like to play it safe and I don't blame them.
Last edited:
+1 My vocal coach recommends them. Same money as an SM58, vastly better mic.
Oh, don't go for the S model. S stands for switch. Never switch your mic off.
BTW, an SM58 is an SM57 with a different shape windscreen.
