I'm not certain you would tell any quality difference going to more than a 58 through a radio channel. You may hear a tonal difference with a different mic and radio gear, and it could be that it's tonal differences that you are looking for. Radio channels at this price bracket level out pretty rapidly, and you would have to go up to a considerably more expensive radio rig if you wanted to hear much in the way of vocal quality improvements.

Given what you've put in your post (plus your other post advertising this mic for sale), we have to assume it's for live stage use, but tell us a bit more about the context: talking, singing, male/female voice, rock band, opera, folk etc.

That's funny, I've never tried to make a recording with just a microphone. Generally, I've had to plug a microphone into some kind of recording device. You don't need to upgrade the microphone. You need to upgrade your knowledge of that microphone. It's one of the best you could possibly have. One of those incredible recording microphones that can compare to the $3000 + German-made Neumann U87. So you are crazy for wanting to sell that microphone to upgrade to some cheap crappy Chinese condenser microphone. That's not smart. If you knew that Bono, Steve Tyler & the likes of Michael Jackson recorded their platinum albums in the studio utilizing that microphone for their vocals what would you think about that? Well that's true. And that microphone was plugged into some mighty fine input preamps that made it sound like one of those expensive microphones. So if you get a better microphone and plug it into the same crappy input, it's still going to sound crappy. It's that simple. You don't need to upgrade the microphone you need to upgrade everything after the microphone. Boswell was asking what kind of sources you want to record. I don't care what kind of sources you are recording, that microphone is good for 99% of everything. In fact that's one of the most used microphones on any recording you have ever listened to. You just see folks hear things that the other folks have & think that's what you need. It's not. So what is it you are trying to accomplish? What is your goal? I'd like to upgrade my Chevrolet to a Maserati. Unfortunately, I don't have the money for the Maserati so I guess I can't drive to McDonald's and still look cool in my Chevrolet? That's the same thing you're asking about. One of the things I've always joked about is going out to purchase a beautiful Corvette with a blown engine. I specifically want one with a blown engine. You see this way, I figured, I could get the Corvette really cheap. Then I would remove the blown engine and replace it with a lovely energy-efficient, gas saving, 4 banger 2200 cc Toyota engine. Then I would still look really cool when I pulled into McDonald's for my 1 dollar double hamburger (hold the cheese please). No really, I'm serious about the Corvette that is. There must be plenty of decent Corvettes out there with blown engines? And since the engine doesn't show, nobody would be the wiser. Of course I'm not going to win any races unless it's against some 83-year-old lady in her 1973 Ford galaxy?

I want to upgrade my business from none to something.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Good point. I'm REALLY new to recording. I have been using my MacBook (Garage Band) to do the actual recording and using a Behringer mixer between the two. I guess I just need to start reading about getting a good setup. (Only been at it for about a week) I am interested in recording mostly me playing my trumpet with a little speach. Any input would be great.

Explain why you want to do this with a wireless mic system and not a wired mic. It's the wireless bit that will limit your recorded quality, even with that particular make of mixer.

Well that was one option I was thinking about. I had a wired mic several years ago and it worked great. When I bought the mixer I received a good deal on the mic so I bought a wireless one. I was considering selling the wireless and buying a wired one. I still have plenty of cables. Any suggestions?

Get a wired Shure SM58 for vocals or an SM57 if you want to get up close to guitar cabinets. You can use a 57 with a pop filter for vocals.

If you happened to be thinking of going for a second-hand mic, beware of fake 57s and 58s that are currently circulating in Europe on Ebay and elsewhere. They look the real thing, but Shure don't sound like it!

Wireless microphones can be both practical and fun. Certainly for onstage events. When in your " studio" only the premium class of wireless microphones (transmitters and receivers regardless of microphone capsules) are capable of delivering cable/wire like performance. And those start around $1500 US. Anything less than you're dealing with something on a par with a child's walkie-talkie electronics. That means it ain't studio grade quality. A wire is so much more affordable, practical with the highest sonic integrity possible. The Behringer mixer is an effective, sonically reasonable, entry level mixer. If it is one of the models with computer USB interface capabilities, all the better. Otherwise, you're plugging it into a relatively low quality built-in computer soundcard which will compromise your quality. And as indicated, for vocals & trumpet the SM58 will outshine any similarly priced, Chinese built, condenser microphones. Any cost differences one may find between a SM57 & SM58 will usually be negated as soon as you purchase some foam pop filters for the 57. And yet even with the better pop filtered 58, I still recommend an additional foam pop filter, for your applications of voice & music. And that will present a better quality of sound generally preventing virtually all pops from sounding like pops. Pops are only good when they give you money.

I have a lousy pop because he's dead.
Mx. Remy Ann David

Well I guess that solves it... I don't feel bad about trying to sell my wireless mic. I will go back to a cable. Might explain why it sounded like i was in a barrel. What do you think is a good price for the Wireless?

Don't have experience with a lot of the mics mentioned here, but I did some work on a recent project along with a friend where we multi miked Taylor acoustic and it came out pretty alright. We used a 57 close up miked to give body and a defined pick attack, then a foot or two back and a little bit higher was placed a RODE NT4 XY stereo mic. In mixdown we rolled off the high end of the 57 just to smooth it and linearize it a bit and HP'd the NT4 so it wouldn't interfere with the body on the close mic. When mixed in the correct proportions, the tone really fit the mix quite nicely.