sm57 industry standard on both cabs n snr

SM58 is a good mic, but it's strong point is vocals. SM-57 is far better for Micing amps. If you don't have one, it's definitely worth the investment. You can use the SM-57 for pretty much anything, but it's excellent for recording heavy guitar. Also, make sure to read some online articles on micing amps. Good sound has a lot to do with placement and acoustics.

Try unscrewing the ball end of the SM58. Take it off, and mic the guitar amp without the ball windscreen. It will sound very much like an SM57.

How are you placing the mic? Mic placement is everything in guitar sounds, probably more important even than mic selection. [[url=http://[/URL]="http://badmuckingfa…"]Slipperman wrote a great guide to recording guitars[/]="http://badmuckingfa…"]Slipperman wrote a great guide to recording guitars[/], check it out.

Great tip. I'll have to try that. Great article too.

I've read a lot of about guitar micing and i know how sensitive it is. thanks for the article though it looks really good, but i'm at school right now and i can't really read that here lol. but i'll check it out later. I've heard that the sm57 is the same capsule as the 58 in a different shell. Is this really true??

The e609 is better for guitar cabs and toms than the sm57. The Sm57 is better on a snare. I personally like the Audix I5 over ANY application where you could use a sm57. hope this helps a tad. Understand this is just my personal opinion, which counts a lot to me, and maybe only me.

I've heard that the sm57 is the same capsule as the 58 in a different shell. Is this really true??

Yes, they are the same. The 57 has a little "cage" around the capsule to protect it from drummers.
When you unscrew the ball from a 58, you have a 57 without the "cage"

57 has long been a standard for heavy metal guitar cabs.

Its all about the placement.

My preference is the E609. I wouldn't say either is better though.

djrr3k wrote: My preference is the E609. I wouldn't say either is better though.

I agree. Although these two mics are very comparable, I usually grab for the Senni before the 57 when talking guitar cabs. Maybe not better, but different.

If you don't own a 57, get one or four. They're true workhorses. I've seen them pound nails (literally) and work perfectly afterwards! (Not condoning driving nails with any mic, just saw it as a demonstration)

SM57

My opinion of the sm57 is that it is pretty much a piece of sh%$, I do like the beyer m201 as a mic on snare and guitar cabs price of an sm57 $79 dollars price of a beyer m201 $250 dollars I do think it is worth the extra money in this case but whatever if I had to chose between a sm57 and a 609 it would be the 609.

To say one is better than the other, especially from a distance, is ludicrious at best.Each application within a differing set of acoustic relationships will yield different results in every case. Which will work better? Only those that are present in the moment of the usage would be able to really tell. Subjective grumblings over the net are only that....subjective.

As a long time user of many types of mics for many many types of applications, I can say, through my experience, that there are VERY VERY few mics that are really 'pieces of shit'....very few. Anything that will pass audio of some form or another can be used if you're clever enough. Perhaps not the sound one might hear on an expensive recording but a sound nonetheless. What you choose to use it for is the 'art' part of this.

I keep seeing this suggestion that unscrewing the popfilter head on the SM58 will get you a 57. I'm not sure this is quite the case. While there are many similarities to these two mics, my belief is that they(Shure Co.) grade the capsules on a frequency basis and have a range that each must match to become a certain kind of mic. This would include all models with this basic capsule design. My understanding is the 58's have a bit more proximity bump than a 57. The size of the ball controls this headbump as it places the source at a definate distance from the capsule. The 57's are a bit flatter in response and therefore dont have a proximity limiting barrier. The PE series and the 545/565 mics are also from this same family and are graded accordingly.

As for the Sennheiser 609. This is a modern release of an old design, the MD409 and are only a small slice off the original block. They are quite usable and sound..'good'.Whether they are better than a 57, as I have said, depends entirely upon the application, the room, the electronics downstream and the skill level of the person placing the mic on a source.

For those who are fairly undereducated at this business, your source HAS to be good before the results can be. On a high quality source there is very little one can do to screw it up regardless of the mic used. At that point it becomes a matter of taste rather than use. ALL mics have a use. From the most brittle sounding crystal to the smoothest high-end condenser. The practical part of the ART as a recordist is to build a quality source and choose the reproducer of the source in a way that translates the Artists' vision of the work.

I include here a list of my personal favorites and what I would start a session with them being used for. Take note that I said 'start'....This can always change...

Snare.....SM57 UnidyneIII, Beyer 201, Senn MD421, Neumann KM184

Electric Guitar Cabinet.....SM57, Senn MD421, MD409, ADK A51 V,Studio Projects B3,Kel HM1,Audio Technica 25, AT63,Audix D4,D2

Electric Guitar open back combo amp....SM57, ADK A51 V,Kel HM1,Audix D4,D2

Acoustic Guitar....Sm81, AT4050,AT4033, Neumann U87, ADK SC1, AKG 451, AKG 430, Neumann KM184

These are more guidelines than anything else.They just happen to be what I personally have access to.

peace....dadogg

"I keep seeing this suggestion that unscrewing the popfilter head on the SM58 will get you a 57. I'm not sure this is quite the case. While there are many similarities to these two mics, my belief is that they(Shure Co.) grade the capsules on a frequency basis and have a range that each must match to become a certain kind of mic. This would include all models with this basic capsule design. My understanding is the 58's have a bit more proximity bump than a 57."

The shure tech guy I talked to told me they were exactly the same, rated for the exact same response, and the only difference is the windscreen.

How many 'Shure Tech guys' are there?Do all of them say this?How about reps for the company? For the last 25 years? How do you know this 'Shure Tech guy' knows whats up?

Every mic company tests the capsules for the range of frequency response they are rated at. Why wouldnt Shure? Been in business a LONNNNGGG time this Shure company...

And he could be right. I dont doubt it one bit.

Feel any better?

The fact is, if you go to the Shure site they have mic selection and help charts as well as bursts from the mics. Now I'm no EE(but I play one on TV)BUT the chart for the 57 is a bit different than the 58. Even the liturature says the sounds are different in that each is "tailored" for a different set of uses. Now, I'm fairly experienced at manufacturing process, and something tells me they dont spend a lot of time and money building entirely different sets of capsules with the EXACT SAME BUILD SPECS....I think they hire people to sit at little test benches and the capsules that exhibit certain traits in their frequency responses go in the BLUE bin for the 58's and the others go in the RED bin for the 57's. Those that dont make either of these bins become PG series mics and the ones that dont rate here get outsorced to offshore mfgrs or tossed...

Thats just my guess.

Davedog wrote: How many 'Shure Tech guys' are there?Do all of them say this?How about reps for the company? For the last 25 years? How do you know this 'Shure Tech guy' knows whats up?

Every mic company tests the capsules for the range of frequency response they are rated at. Why wouldnt Shure? Been in business a LONNNNGGG time this Shure company...

And he could be right. I dont doubt it one bit.

Feel any better?

The fact is, if you go to the Shure site they have mic selection and help charts as well as bursts from the mics. Now I'm no EE(but I play one on TV)BUT the chart for the 57 is a bit different than the 58. Even the liturature says the sounds are different in that each is "tailored" for a different set of uses. Now, I'm fairly experienced at manufacturing process, and something tells me they dont spend a lot of time and money building entirely different sets of capsules with the EXACT SAME BUILD SPECS....I think they hire people to sit at little test benches and the capsules that exhibit certain traits in their frequency responses go in the BLUE bin for the 58's and the others go in the RED bin for the 57's. Those that dont make either of these bins become PG series mics and the ones that dont rate here get outsorced to offshore mfgrs or tossed...

Thats just my guess.

that does sound good.... maybe it is the same capsules with different capacitors or resistors or something (i dunno what you would use in mics, or even exactly what they are or do)

You are probably right Davedog. I doubt if it sounds exactly the same. But it will get you in the ballpark.... if I'm recording a snare or a guitar amp or pretty much anything except vox, and all I have is a 58, I'll usually remove the windscreen. And it almost always sounds better, and it is very reminiscent of an SM57. I've never bothered with a side-by-side comparison, because if I have a 57 on hand I just use the 57.

DELETED

The cartridge on an SM58 is EXACTLY the same as an SM57... the only difference is that the windscreen that is added to a 58 cuts off a little bit of your low frequency.. I think the frequency response on a 58 is 50hz and a 57 is 40hz.. but that's the only difference. It's the exact same parts.. exact same mic. Personally, I've always had better luck with the e609. The 57 is probably built better, and will withstand more abuse, but if you are looking for a mic to solely record a guitar cab, you're probably better off with an e609, since it is designed specifically to record guitar cabs. The technique that I use is to use a 57 or a 609 right on the cab, on the edge of the best sounding speaker in the cabinet (just use your ear to find the right one) and then a good condenser mic set about 10 feet away from the cabinet. This gets you a good mix of the close mic sound of the cabinet and then captures the room sound of it with the condenser mic. I usually set the close mic's volume slightly higher in the mix than the condenser mic.. Try it out, it's always worked well for me.

Only one guy said "I5" and I feel him. I guess they just don't have the rep the others do, probably becuase they haven't been around as long. All of you guys should look into them. Go to the music store, grab one toss it around, take it apart, get a demonstration, see what you think. I think they rock, but then again I work for Audix.....just kidding I don't really work for Audix, but maybe I should...