why is SM57 useful?
peter
Why is it popular as instrument mic (some say it is good with guitar amp)?
Does it have some advantages over condenser mics which usually have flatter
response and wider spectrum?
I already have a few SM58. Is there an alternative grill I can use with the
SM58 to turn it into a SM 57?
Scott Dorsey
>The frequency response of the SM57 has a few humps and goes only to 16KHz.
>Why is it popular as instrument mic (some say it is good with guitar amp)?
>Does it have some advantages over condenser mics which usually have flatter
>response and wider spectrum?
Because of the way it sounds.
>I already have a few SM58. Is there an alternative grill I can use with the
>SM58 to turn it into a SM 57?
You can take the foam out of the ball. That brings back much of the top
end that the SM58 removes.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Gutter Butt
I HAVE AN SM 57!!!!!!!!!! IT'S USEFUL FOR BUTT-STUFFING ON **EITHER**
END BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT DAMN SM-58 BALL IN THE
WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SPEAKING OF MY BUTT: WANNA WATCH ME POO?!?!?!?!?!?!
Julian
>The frequency response of the SM57 has a few humps and goes only to 16KHz.
>Why is it popular as instrument mic (some say it is good with guitar amp)?
>Does it have some advantages over condenser mics which usually have flatter
>response and wider spectrum?
for some things you want those humps and don't need to go over 16k?
Julian
Gutter Butt
> for some things you want those humps and don't need to go over 16k?
>
>
> Julian
WHATCHOO GONNA DO WITH ALL THAT JUNK INSIDE YOUR TRUNK?!?!?!
ALL I KNOW IS THAT I'M GONNA USE MY HUMPS TO POO **EVERYWHERE**
SPLOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSH
LOL LOL LOL EW GROSS
TOWEL PLZ
Chris Whealy
Because its a great work horse mic. You can throw it in front of
virtually anything and it will give you a sound good enough to get the
job done. It will also handle high SPL's which is why you see it used
so much on snare drums.
True, its not the highest quality mic in the world, but in terms of
quality for price, its a very good choice.
Chris W
--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---
David Morgan (MAMS)
nwrddc02.gnilink.net!cyclone2.gnilink.net!cyclone1.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!i3g2000cwc.googlegroup
s.com!not-for-mail
From: "Gutter Butt" <Gutte...@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: why is SM57 useful?
Date: 22 Oct 2006 18:59:25 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <1161568765....@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
References: <mhU_g.553$%T3.551@trndny03>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.167.169.144
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1161568769 25050 127.0.0.1 (23 Oct 2006 01:59:29 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 01:59:29 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <mhU_g.553$%T3.551@trndny03>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 Firefox/1.0.7,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
Injection-Info: i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.167.169.144;
posting-account=p1zd2g0AAADVVTKfORZ47-BltnrFCYqi
Xref: news.verizon.net rec.audio.pro:670615
X-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 21:59:28 EDT (nwrddc02.gnilink.net)
David Morgan (MAMS)
nwrddc01.gnilink.net!cyclone2.gnilink.net!cyclone1.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!k70g2000cwa.googlegrou
ps.com!not-for-mailDate: 23 Oct 2006 02:05:28 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <1161594328.4...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <mhU_g.553$%T3.551@trndny03>
<d4aoj2tdd56cq4mhs...@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.145.65.242
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 09:05:33 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <d4aoj2tdd56cq4mhs...@4ax.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 Firefox/1.0.7,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
posting-account=p1zd2g0AAADVVTKfORZ47-BltnrFCYqi
Xref: news.verizon.net rec.audio.pro:670648
X-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 05:05:17 EDT (nwrddc01.gnilink.net)
Mike Rivers
peter wrote:
> The frequency response of the SM57 has a few humps and goes only to 16KHz.
> Why is it popular as instrument mic (some say it is good with guitar amp)?
Because the humps in the frequency response seem to be well matched to
the instruments that it works well on. There's practically nothing
above 5 kHz coming out of a guitar amplifier so extended high frequency
response doesn't really matter for this application.
> Does it have some advantages over condenser mics which usually have flatter
> response and wider spectrum?
Yes. It exaggerates certain frequencies that are sometimes useful (and
sometimes not - it depends on many things, including what you need from
the recorded sound), and it doesn't pick up stray lows and highs that
you'd probably want to filter out anyway.
> I already have a few SM58. Is there an alternative grill I can use with the
> SM58 to turn it into a SM 57?
Not really, but you could try it without the grill. It sounds a little
different than with it. But an SM57 isn't THAT much better on a guitar
amp than an SM58. If you got it, use it.
Arny Krueger
news:mhU_g.553$%T3.551@trndny03
> The frequency response of the SM57 has a few humps and
> goes only to 16KHz.
Certainly going to only 16 KHz (generous evaluation I'd say!) isn't a
serious problem if you are recording voice and most music. If you want a
real education, take a recording of music and brickwall filter it (some DAW
software can do this easily) at decreasing frequencies until you hear a
difference at all. Then continue down until it looses "air", then looses
"sheen", and finally loses any sense of fidelity. You might be amazed how
low those frequencies are.
> Why is it popular as instrument mic (some say it is good with guitar
> amp)?
1. Cheap
2. Durable
3. Known quantity
4. Doesn't require phantom power which may be an issue in a few relatively
rare cases.
> Does it have some
> advantages over condenser mics which usually have flatter
> response and wider spectrum?
1. Cheap
2. Durable
3. Known quantity
4. Doesn't require phantom power which may be an issue in a few relatively
rare cases.
;-)
> I already have a few SM58. Is there an alternative grill I can use with
> the SM58 to turn it into a SM 57?
Just take the SM58 ball off, if all you want to do is experiment. You'll end
up with something that is a little nicer than a SM57 because the SM57 grille
isn't perfectly acoustically transparent, either.
Gutter Butt
I DARE YOU TO REPORT ME!!!!!!!!!
BUK BUK BWAAAAAAAAAAK YOU'RE TOO CHICKEN!!!!!!!!!
CHICKEN CHICKEN CHICKEN
BUK BUK BUK BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAK BUK BUK!!!!
YOU DON'T HAVE THE GUTS TO REPORT ME!!!!!!!!
BUK BUK BUK BWAAAAAAAAAAAK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGN
I'M FILLED WITH POO (NOT THE CHICKEN KIND, THE PEOPLE KIND)
UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGN
kellykevm
In addition to what the others have said, the bass proximity effect
being so pronounced makes it useful in tight miking situations where
you want to thicken the sound without EQ. It is also more comfortable
than most condensers in extremely high SPL environments. Snare, 4X12
bottoms etc.
vdub...@earthlink.net
rt55
On Oct 23, 9:26 pm, vdubre...@earthlink.net wrote:
> I can't believe it's 12 posts long and no one has used the word hammer.
Umm...I'm afraid you might be confusing it with the EV 635A...
Scott Dorsey
<vdub...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>I can't believe it's 12 posts long and no one has used the word hammer.
No, that's what the EV 664 is for.
vdub...@earthlink.net
Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <1161656794.6...@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
> <vdub...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >I can't believe it's 12 posts long and no one has used the word hammer.
>
> No, that's what the EV 664 is for.
I didn't mean that's all it's good for. I was refering to the notion
that if you can't find a hammer you can always grab a 57. An then put
it back on the stand and use it.
Mike Rivers
vdub...@earthlink.net wrote:
> I didn't mean that's all it's good for. I was refering to the notion
> that if you can't find a hammer you can always grab a 57. An then put
> it back on the stand and use it.
Yeah, maybe as a hammer with a longer handle, but watch it - the head
flies off the handle pretty easily. <g> The SM57 is pretty rugged, but
I wouldn't treat one that way. If I couldn't find a hammer I'd ask the
drummer for help.
EV ran an ad for the 664 at one time where they showed it hammering a
nail, and it was nicknamed "The Buchannan Hammer" (for the home city of
EV at the time).
Bob Olhsson
> The frequency response of the SM57 has a few humps and goes only to 16KHz.
> Why is it popular as instrument mic
SM 57s actually have a pretty linear response an inch or two away from
the source. They are also amazingly good at ducking unwanted room
ambiance. I frequently set one up as a "listen" mike in the studio.
It has always been amazing how often it sounds better subjectively than
expensive, more accurate mikes. Unfortunately I've never been able to
completely predict when this was going to be the case so keeping an open
mind is important when using a 57.
--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com
Laurence Payne
>I didn't mean that's all it's good for. I was refering to the notion
>that if you can't find a hammer you can always grab a 57. An then put
>it back on the stand and use it.
A 58 you mean. You'll break the head off a 57.
Scott Dorsey
No, the EV 664 makes a much better hammer. It's a lot heavier. Plus,
the EV guys used to do advertisements in the 1960s with people using the
664 to hammer nails in. You'll still find people who call the 644 the
"Buchanan Hammer."
--scott
DO NOT TRY THIS WITH AN EV 666 PLEASE....
Eeyore
peter wrote:
> The frequency response of the SM57 has a few humps and goes only to 16KHz.
> Why is it popular as instrument mic (some say it is good with guitar amp)?
Maybe because guitar amps don't produce anything remotely near 16kHz ?
> Does it have some advantages over condenser mics which usually have flatter
> response and wider spectrum?
>
> I already have a few SM58. Is there an alternative grill I can use with the
> SM58 to turn it into a SM 57?
No but you can easily dig a hole to bury them in.
Graham
Romeo Rondeau
> peter wrote:
>> The frequency response of the SM57 has a few humps and goes only to
>> 16KHz.
>> Why is it popular as instrument mic
>
> SM 57s actually have a pretty linear response an inch or two away from
> the source. They are also amazingly good at ducking unwanted room
> ambiance. I frequently set one up as a "listen" mike in the studio.
>
> It has always been amazing how often it sounds better subjectively than
> expensive, more accurate mikes. Unfortunately I've never been able to
> completely predict when this was going to be the case so keeping an open
> mind is important when using a 57.
>
>
Not to mention that an sm57 sounds really good with a good preamp. Some
other mikes are not so fortunate.
Agent 86
The 635 is more of a tack hammer than a serious carpentry tool. It's
durable enough, but it doesn't have enough mass to bang a ten penny nail
into a 4x4.
Rob Reedijk
It's a shame Shure never made a screw-on cover that fit the threads
of a '58 that essentially would turn it into a '57. But I guess they
would sell fewer '57s! But this doesn't stop someone else from
doing it. For recording guys, this wouldn't be very useful as we
don't tend to use '58s. But for PA situations, this would be
very useful since they tend to use both types of mic all over the
place. In fact, the for folk festival I do every summer, we have
about 10x57s and 10x58s plus about dozen other mics---so we often are
using '58s when we run out of '57s.
Rob R.
Geoff
> --scott
>
> DO NOT TRY THIS WITH AN EV 666 PLEASE....
'cos that would be the devil's hammer ?
geoff
Willie K. Yee, MD
wrote:
>Not to mention that an sm57 sounds really good with a good preamp. Some
>other mikes are not so fortunate.
Can you name some examples?
Romeo Rondeau
The EV ND series? Cheap AKG condensers? an ATM25?
Rob Reedijk
Really? The E/V N/D 257B is quite useful for recording.
Rob
Romeo Rondeau
Argue with yourself, Rob.
Agent 86
There's no accounting for taste, but I'm also fond of the 257, as well as
the 757 and 408/468. And if the SM57 hadn't already been invented and
wasn't cheaper, the ATM25 might well qualify as the coolest cheap mic not
made by EV.
Rob Reedijk
> Argue with yourself, Rob.
What do you mean by that? I don't understand your statement.
Rob R.
Romeo Rondeau
I made a statement, plain and simple. If you're looking for an argument,
look somwhere else.
Romeo Rondeau
I would disagree on the ATM25, it basically sounds the same no matter
what you put it through, within reason of course. I didn't say the ND's
weren't good mikes, they just don't scale as well as a 57 in my opinion.
Gutter Butt
> I made a statement, plain and simple. If you're looking for an
argument,
> look somwhere else.
THAT'S THE SPIRIT!!!!!!!!! WHO THE HELL WANTS TO ARGUE ON USENET,
ANYWAY?!?!?!
UGGGGGGGGGN I'M POOPING COME ON WATCH IT SLIDE OUT
UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGN FROZEN YOGURT MACHINE
UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGN
PLOP
FIZZ
I'VE GOT ALKA-SELTZER POO TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Kevin T
OK.... you win ....you finally got me to do projectile coffee expulsion
from my nose AND Piehole! :)
Kevin T
Rob Reedijk
Argument? What is this a Monty Python sketch?
You've got to be kidding.
Rob R.
Mick
no...@nowhere.com says...
I like it better than the AKG football, and better than most mics
for live work. It also works great on some floor toms.
--
---Mikhael...
Rob Reedijk
Ditto on the 408 (forgot about that one!). Quite useful on percussion.
Maybe not my first choice, but quite workable. And the swivel head thing
makes it very convenient. Too may of the great sounding dynamics
can be difficult to place in tight quarters. Why DID they stop making
the MD409?...
Rob R.
Romeo Rondeau
This parrot is dead, sir! :-)
Romeo Rondeau
I'll take the football over the ATM25 any day, although the D112 is also
a one trick pony as far as mikes are concerned. Both mikes don't have
much use other than bass guitar and kick drum an an occasional floor tom
(even then they can get quite boomy)
Rob Reedijk
"More beans!"
hank alrich
> > I already have a few SM58. Is there an alternative grill I can use with the
> > SM58 to turn it into a SM 57?
>
> No but you can easily dig a hole to bury them in.
Or you can hook 'em to a Great River and find out why some folks
appreciate beter preamps. <couldn't resist - g>
They do perform remarkably differently depending on choice of preamp.
--
ha
Laurence Payne
wrote:
How much of the improvement is due to simple difference of input
loading? This can be arranged far more cheaply than by buying a
boutique preamp.
Scott Dorsey
Some of it. But the original Great River is also quiet as hell, on top
of providing a slightly inductive load to the mike. And the distortion
characteristic is mostly due to the input transformer rather than the
electronics (which are basically a big discrete FET-input op amp), so
the limited coloration that it does have is pleasant.
The Great River MP-2 is no "boutique" preamp, it's basically equivalent
to the sort of preamp that you used to find inside a mixing console
before everyone decided to cut costs and make consoles with crap inside.
--scott
Mike Rivers
Laurence Payne wrote:
> How much of the improvement is due to simple difference of input
> loading? This can be arranged far more cheaply than by buying a
> boutique preamp.
Some, but not all. Everything that helps helps. According to Paul
Stamler, the SM57 was judged to sound best with a resistive load (if I
remember correctly) somewhere between 600 and 700 ohms. The Great River
preamp is higher than that, so maybe the GR plus a resistor could make
an SM57 sound even better than the preamp alone. Or maybe not.
Gutter Butt
I'M GLAD I WAS ABLE TO BRIGHTEN YOUR DAY!!!!!!!!! : )
I'D GIVE YOU HUGZ BUT I'M COVERED IN POO
TOWEL PLZ
Windmill Sound
doesn't matter, you are probably going to eq out the bottom end to
remove the mud anyway, and it survives being next to an amp on 11, oh,
and I like the way it sounds. I have heard of engineers putting U67s on
drums - but presumably they can afford to buy another one.
peter wrote:
> The frequency response of the SM57 has a few humps and goes only to 16KHz.
> Why is it popular as instrument mic (some say it is good with guitar amp)?
> Does it have some advantages over condenser mics which usually have flatter
> response and wider spectrum?
>
peter
news:1161950540.0...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Guitar amps have little useful info over 8-10kHz - so top end loss
> doesn't matter, you are probably going to eq out the bottom end to
> remove the mud anyway, and it survives being next to an amp on 11, oh,
> and I like the way it sounds. I have heard of engineers putting U67s on
> drums - but presumably they can afford to buy another one.
At the risk of sounding ignorant, why do people mike guitar amps?
Wouldn't it be better to take a direct feed from the guitar amp and plug it
into the mixer?
Laurence Payne
>At the risk of sounding ignorant, why do people mike guitar amps?
>Wouldn't it be better to take a direct feed from the guitar amp and plug it
>into the mixer?
Because worse sounds better. Which is where we came in :-)
Scott Dorsey
>"Windmill Sound" <dan...@windmillsound.com> wrote in message
>news:1161950540.0...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Guitar amps have little useful info over 8-10kHz - so top end loss
>> doesn't matter, you are probably going to eq out the bottom end to
>> remove the mud anyway, and it survives being next to an amp on 11, oh,
>> and I like the way it sounds. I have heard of engineers putting U67s on
>> drums - but presumably they can afford to buy another one.
>
>At the risk of sounding ignorant, why do people mike guitar amps?
Because the guitar and the amp together make an instrument. The amp is
part of the instrument itself. Much of the sound comes from the amp.
>Wouldn't it be better to take a direct feed from the guitar amp and plug it
>into the mixer?
Then it wouldn't sound like an amplified guitar.
WillStG
Because it generally doesn't sound very good at all. And the
speakers and amps are an important part of what creates the "voice" of
an electric guitar, and unless a guitar amp has a speaker simulator of
some kind on the direct out (like a Sansamp Trademark 10 or Bronzewood
60 ) the direct out sound don't much resemble what's coming out of the
amp's speakers.
The DI outputs on a Pro Bass Amp are another story, some Bass Amps
have decent DI's built into them for convenience (although some of them
are still dreadful cheap sounding.) Typical to record bass witha mic
and a DI and then mix them. Often I haved just used the Bass's DI
though, a Bass direct has much lower frequency response than some amps
do, that kind of decision kinda depends on the style of music you are
mixing.
Will Miho
NY TV/Audio Post/Music/Live Sound Guy
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits
Gutter Butt
OK YOU KNOW THAT COOL GRITTY DISTORTION YOU GET FROM A ROCK AND ROLL
GUITAR?!?!?! MUCH OF THAT DISTORTION IS PRODUCED **ONLY** BY THE
SPEAKER ITSELF, **NOT** ANYWHERE IN THE TUBES OR DIGITAL PROCESSING!!!!
SO YEAH A DIRECT MIX WON'T GIVE YOU AS GRITTY OF A SOUND!!!!!!!!!!!
AND IT WON'T SOUND AS COOL EVEN FOR A CLEAN TONE!!!
STILL, I'M A FAN OF DIRECT GUITAR FOR SOME APPLICATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
JUST REALIZE IT WON'T SOUND LIKE A *REAL* AMP, EVEN WITH AN "AMP
SIMULATOR"!!!!!!!!!!
UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGN POOPING LIKE CRAAAAAAZZZZY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(THUD)
Eeyore
Laurence Payne wrote:
My thoughts entirely.
Graham
hank alrich
> hank alrich wrote:
>
> >> > I already have a few SM58. Is there an alternative grill I can use
> >> > with the SM58 to turn it into a SM 57?
> >>
> >> No but you can easily dig a hole to bury them in.
> >
> >Or you can hook 'em to a Great River and find out why some folks
> >appreciate beter preamps. <couldn't resist - g>
> >
> >They do perform remarkably differently depending on choice of preamp.
>
> How much of the improvement is due to simple difference of input
> loading? This can be arranged far more cheaply than by buying a
> boutique preamp.
Then you have one slightly improved microphone. OTOH, a good preamp
helps with any mic. It's down to who cares. If you don't, so what? If I
do, so what? I find working with good pres, regardless of what's in the
mic locker, helpful
--
hga
David Morgan (MAMS)
"hank alrich" <walk...@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:1hnw4n4.4mnas09jnparN%walk...@thegrid.net...
There still ain't nothin' that beats a good pre- former.
Justin Ulysses Morse
> The frequency response of the SM57 has a few humps and goes only to 16KHz.
> Why is it popular as instrument mic (some say it is good with guitar amp)?
> Does it have some advantages over condenser mics which usually have flatter
> response and wider spectrum?
The SM57 has been the 2nd-best-sounding microphone on every bass amp
I've ever made microphone comparisons with. The 1st-best has varied
(usually between an RE20 and a D12), but the SM57 is always 2nd. No
other microphone has ever been so consistently usable in any
application I've tried. The Beyer M500 is the #1 choice on a very
large selection of singing voices, but absolutely unusable on some.
ulysses
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com