Shure SM-57/58 Killer

[Greg Cutshaw]

The limited directional pattern of the SM-57 is great for rejecting unwanted room noise and echos. Same for the limited sensitivity. Crank the amp up a bit and other noise in the room will not be heard. The SM-57 is good enough for most studio and stage work and has proven durability.

There always room for other mics in certain applications but the Shure SM-57 mic is just not deficient in any way.

[Jack Stoner]

I have a "good assortment" of microphones in my home studio. I have SM57's, SM58, Beta 58, Sennheiser 609, one ribbon and AKG and Audia Technica Condenser mics.

I keep going back to the SM57's when I mic an amp. (My AKG C214 is my main vocal mic).

[Jack Hanson]

I've always been told that the SM-57 is for amps and the SM-58 is for vocals.

That's always been my understanding, too.

And who wants a battery in their mic? Yuck!

For live sound, I would agree. It's a drag when the 9V dies in my wireless SM58. (But as a harmonica player, it's hard to beat the freedom you attain with a wireless setup. Especially onstage, with beaucoup cables already.)

For recording, condenser mics are nice, however. A few years back I won a couple Shure PG81s off a local auction site that was selling off NOS from a defunct music store. They sound excellent on amps, drums/cymbals, acoustic instruments, etc. As good if not better than the trusty SM57. They also take an AA battery, which is really no big whoop if you remain diligent and remove it when you're finished. It's quick and easy -- the casing unscrews like a Maglite (which it resembles), and the battery simply slides in or out.

[Bob Hoffnar]

...........

There always room for other mics in certain applications but the Shure SM-57 mic is just not deficient in any way.

Exactly!

Keep in mind that A/B Ing mics can be deceiving. The practical applications Greg mentioned are real and important. I could use a royer 121 ribbon recording mic on my amp for live gigs and it would sound way better except that it would pick up everything behind it and feedback. Also volume has more to do with perception of tone than is usually covered in YouTube shoot outs..

With all that I’m sure the Nady is a useful tool and will have great value for many people. But to say it will replace the 57 seems ridiculous.

[Erv Niehaus]

I was providing the PA system for a funeral in a high school gym.
There was a harp player there to provide some music.
I had to come up with a mic for a harp!
Now this was a new experience.
I forget what mic I came up with but it was square type mic and it did a good job.
Every once in a while you luck out!
Erv

[Steven Paris]

And who wants a battery in their mic? Yuck!

"How often does the Nady SPC-25's battery need to be changed?"
From the DIY user:
"For me, every couple of months (I use mine for maybe three-four hours a week.)
For my friend who has multiple performances and practices every week, maybe 15 hours a week, the battery lasts about three weeks. Since she performs for a paying audience, she replaces the battery as a precautionary measure, before it actually fails. If you use an Energizer Ultimate Lithium AA cell, battery life will double or triple. "

[Dave Mudgett]

57/58 killer? Hardly. IMO, the fact that they will not operate on phantom power and require a battery renders them unacceptable for the vast majority of serious professional mic applications. I just can't imagine a serious live sound engineer futzing around with a $50 mic that requires a battery. Not for me either, thanks. YMMV.

There are lots of excellent but inexpensive microphones, including condensers, that run on phantom power. I bought a couple of EV PL84 condensers several years back - they are very articulate, have good handling and feedback rejection, run on phantom power, and cost $40 when they were closed out (regularly $80). Apparently out of production, but I see them around $50 used. I like them for vocal or instrument use - even acoustic guitar.

I also picked up a couple of Blue Encore 300 condensers, which are more like $200, but one of the big-boxes was selling 2 for 1, a deal I see from time to time. Very sensitive (I have to turn the trims down), very articulate, very full-range - probably not the best choice for a loud rock band, but really nice for good, accurate reproduction.

But Shure 57/58 and Betas are still gonna be standard equipment on a lot of stages. Well understood and predictable for engineers, handle high SPL, hard to kill - all things that matter in a live environment.

[George Kimery]

Just ordered one from Musicians Friend for $44.99 inc. shipping, due to a Labor Day 5% discount promotion.

I have always been an SM 57 and 58 guy. At present, I don't have either one. All I have is an EV PL 80. I am always open minded when it comes to something I haven't tried, especially when something gets rave reviews from people more knowledgeable than me. Plus, my brain is wired to experiment. I could have got a used 58 for about the same money, so just call me stupid.

[Mike Bacciarini]

I think Dave's assessment is right on the money. My sound company relied on 57/58's and B58's for years with never a failure and plenty of clarity . For their intended purposes they're hard to beat for the money. I also used Audix, Sennheiser, etc. but would never bother to save 50 bucks over a 57/58.