I own both the shure and the beyer, and although I dont have much tech advice, the differences I hear have come from use mainly on snare drum. The 57, although it is the "standard, is usually my second choice, unless I want that darker, slightly fatter sound. The beyer is real sweet on snare in my opinion. I've been able to get more detailed results out of it on snare. Just a better sound that's easier to work with in mixing. And always, the sm 57 rocks on guitar cab, although I really like my md 409 capsule better. :)

$ .02

s to shure betas the diff is in the magnet used the betas have a neodynium (unobtainium) magnet...

thats odd because neo is worse than ceramic, but i dont know shit about magnets in microphones, or that there even were magnets in them

The magnets are lighter making lighter moving parts and supposidly this picks up transients better. Unfortunatly, to my ears this also kills the damening and you get a little bit of "overthrow" with the mic. The pickup pattern is also super cardiod meaning it picks up a narrower path. Many believe this makes it more ideal for snare drum because it rejects bleed from more directions. However, in use I find that hihat bleed is worse than with the sm57, because if you look at a super cardiod patern, there is always a spot directly behind the mic that picks up more than a standard cardiod. I have a beta 57, sm57's and sm57's with the transformer removed. The xformerless 57 wins hands down. The Beta sounds unnatural to me, i believe due the the narrow pickup pattern and lighter moving parts. I do, however like it on the bottom of a snare drum, becase pointing the mic upwards puts the back facing the floor where not much bleed is going to come from. The fast transient response works good for that "crack" of the snare that you're trying to get from the bottom anyhow. That's really all I've liked it on so far though. I hate it on guitar amps and vocals sound thin. Hope that helps a bit.

Neil

liquidstudios wrote: thats odd because neo is worse than ceramic, but i dont know shit about magnets in microphones, or that there even were magnets in them

What do you mean "neo is worse than ceramic"? In just about every way I can think of NIB ("neo") is a technically better magnetic material. Stronger, more linear. It's only problem is stability at high temperatures.

Having said this, many guitarists, myself included, prefer the distortion of some types of ceramic magnets in their speakers. Presumably, you don't want the same distortion in a mic. A mic's job is to capture sound, not so much to create it.

In terms of the Shure Beta's, the plain old 57 is just so good and so popular, there is no way the Beta 57 stands a chance. However, the Beta 58 is a truely great unit, and appears destined for classic status.

well the 7B is a great large diaphragm dynamic microphone. i somewhat understand as that analysis makes sense, but just basic better or worse, do you think the beta series is better than the regular?

but on the contrary to that other arguement, i would say coloured mics are just as interesting, the tube or ribbon mics. but yeah a lot of the transistor based mics are very transparent, and in Neumannn's case often where the transistor version of their mics are designed to be better than the tube versions. very warm trasnsistor based mic, as opposed to an akg-c414 which is more transparent but still a great mic.

but my main question is, is the beta release just a marketing thing, or do they truly have significant differences sonically in the frequency patterns and what not?

!!

liquidstudios wrote: thats odd because neo is worse than ceramic, but i dont know shit about magnets in microphones, or that there even were magnets in them

DUH !!!alldynamics have magnets and yes you dont know shit....

amishsixstringer wrote: The magnets are lighter making lighter moving parts and supposidly this picks up transients better.

I have a beta 57, sm57's and sm57's with the transformer removed. The xformerless 57 wins hands down.

Neil

while the magnet is lighter that's not what the big deal is as the magnet doesn't move the coil does...

i dont believe there's any coupleing transformer in them...though the coil it's self obviously is a transformer (single sided inductor)

liquidstudios wrote: well the 7B is a great large diaphragm dynamic microphone. i somewhat understand

but my main question is, is the beta release just a marketing thing, or do they truly have significant differences sonically in the frequency patterns and what not?

gee.. i was going to insert something fromshueres web site about lrg dia dyn but they dont mention the diaphragm size in their lit ... probably because there's no such thing as a LDD...and no you dont understand in the least....

no it's not just a marketing thing... the primary reason to got to neo magnets was the difference in flux density which gives ahotter signal and more gain before feedback....

and appearently the flux isn't the only thing dense around here...

look man... i'm not a moderator around here but i think it's important for all concerned that before we post anything we have a reasonable certainty that the data we share is accurate... your's has been anything but... that's probably why they're marking every post you make as a warning to those that might mistake it for FACT...

and lest i be thought unhelpful towards you ...

the lithium only helps if you take it....

"while the magnet is lighter that's not what the big deal is as the magnet doesn't move the coil does..."

Well, yes and no... the neo magnet potentially yields a higher BL in the gap, and thus can allow a lighter coil to achieve the same sensitivity. Thus, more top end, better transient response, etc.

It's the smaller physical size of the magnet that allows a more even polar pattern that helps with the feedback, not the "hotness" of the mic. (After all, if the mic is hotter, you just have to turn down the pre until the vocal is at the level you want it anyway. The hotter mic is picks up more PA leakage, just as it picks up more voice.)

Incidentally, the Beta 58A definitely uses a transformer. Shure doesn't specifically say if the Beta 57 does, or doesn't, have one. Personally, I'd be surprised if the B57 was transformerless, since that would allow a user to screw up with phantom power, etc.

cool down captain anarchy. ive simply been asking questions here, and what i know about magnets comes from speaker magnets. yes im aware microhpones and drivers act differently. in the case of driver magnets, the heavier - the fuller and thicker the sound. and usually the heavier magnets are alnico or ceramic. resonance frequency and the frequency response/curves don't depend on the actual magnet type or weight.

what are the type of magnets used in the 57 and 58? and does the difference in the frequency curves/ magnet type and weight in the betas yeild a better or audibly differential sonic quality to the 57's?

and so there are no magnets in condenser micrphones? what magnets do 421's and D112's or audix d6 use?

Condensers aka capacitor mics don't have magnets. There are no moving parts. Condensers are affected by sound pressure against two poralized plates (the capsule). I suppose technically they move but not in the same way that a diaphragm moves.

The Senn. 421 is not a condenser mic. It is a cardiod dynamic. The D112, dynamic. D6, dynamic. Maybe you knew this but you did not make that clear as you included these questions in the same paragraph as your question about condensers. It seemed obvious to assume that you thought these mics are condensers.

As to what magnets they use, who cares. You're looking too deep. You're fond of saying "it's in the ears" but you concern yourself too much with specs instead of what's important. How do they sound?

jesus christ.

i didn't say they were condensers. they are arguably the most other popular dynamic mics after the 57. thanks for telling me that you don't care about what magnets they use. good to know. anyone else know what kind of magnet these mics use that is possibly in comparison with the magnet characteristics of the 57? what are the magnet characteristics of the 57, 58? not to mention the 421, D112/D6?

Have you tried google? Funny thing is that even the companies don't list the magnet type. Even for a Sennheiser MD421. Apparently they don't think it's of much importance either.

i wasn't the one who brought up the "importance" of magnet type, have you ever heard of referring to thread-references? in fact, i wrote:

liquidstudios
Posted: Sat Sep 16, 2006 7:16 am Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

thats odd because neo is worse than ceramic, but i dont know shit about magnets in microphones, or that there even were magnets in them

quit this desperate attempt to prove yourself.

you may think i don't know anything but at least i am modest enough to say when i don't know a whole lot about something. but my question STILL remains: to those who brought up the dire importance of dynamic microphone magnets. tell me the magnet characterstics of the 421, 57, D112, (D6, and 58.)

Your right. I concede. I'm desperate.... :roll:

"tell me the magnet characterstics of the 421, 57, D112, (D6, and 58.)"

I'm SM98% shure that those are all Alnico designs. I'll try and check this with some mic designers next week.

I realize it is intuitive that the "sound" of an Alnico speaker might be somehow related to the "sound" of an Alnico microphone, but there is little likelihood of this. In a guitar speaker, many of the sonic effects of Alnico are due to how its magnetic field saturates, and distorts, under power conditions. In a microphone, the gap flux is not distorted by energy coming from the coil, and excursion is low, so distortion is almost always orders of magnitude less than in a speaker. What distortion a dynamic mic does have comes almost entirely from the mechanical diaphragm suspension and the transformer (if any). That's one reason why even inexpensive dynamic mics are so good for very high SPL sources, like a kick drum or close-micing a guitar cabinet. (Diaphragm size is another reason.)

if they are alnico designs, that helps to explain a little why they sound so good. neo is alright, i just don't know.

liquidstudios wrote: if they are alnico designs, that helps to explain a little why they sound so good. neo is alright, i just don't know.

Why do you think Alnico helps explain why they sound so good? I don't understand what Alnico can do in a dynamic mic that isn't identical to Neo. All you would have to do to make them EXACTLY the same is use a smaller piece of Neo in the armature, or choose a weaker form of Neo.

As I explained in a previous post, a guitar speaker is a totally different machine from a dynamic mic, and you can't apply inuitive guesses about the sound. (Sodium is toxic, and Chlorine is really toxic, so Sodium Chloride must be instantly deadly....)

Neo now comes in grades from N28 to N55. Some of the lower grades overlap with the properties of Alnico 5. Here's a link, if you want to learn more about the relative properties of Alnico and NIB.

http://www.magtech.com.hk/alnico2.htm

Anyway, I'm starting to get the feeling that posting "real" info on RO is not very pointful, and that opinions and flame wars are what drives participation. So, no more from me on magnets, since I don't have any opinions on them....

i agree with you that does seem to be what people tend to do here. again i will say that i completely understand the difference between a speaker driver and microhpone magnet.

cool. you can use less neo to produce the same flux as a much larger ceramic magnet structure. neo is on the cutting edge of technology, sure. there are much better attributes towards it, especially opposed to alnico, which is the least technological of all types of magnets. i'm not completely susceptible to "Vintage" theories, and certain things that can contribute to what would constitue something that is "Vintage" or even a better, warmer sounding attribute. such as glue formulations, as me and audiogaff were talking about aged components (caps, transformers, etc.) handwiring, original to design. sure a lot of it is marketing, but a lot of it often rings true to some extent, and you just have to determine if you want your wallet to back that up, like me and cucco were talking about DAD against a mytek or as he stated even motu.

if you believe that neo is a perfect emulation to alnico then thats great. then why do the all those popular microphones continue to use alnico? it must just be because they are old right? (fast attack, responsiveness, aritculation) characteristics of neo. so i think in the end it comes down to the influence of colouration against transparency. obviously yeah there are some benefits to working with neo. but there are benefits working with alnico and ceramic as well.

i never really noticed any of the microhpones we were talking about that use alnico to be lacking in fast attack or articulation or any of that song and dance

well i appreciate the lecture because it does give me a pretty good idea of the differences between the beta releases and the other SM series.

also what kind of magnets do the beyerdynamic md201 use?

Anyway, I'm starting to get the feeling that posting "real" info on RO is not very pointful, and that opinions and flame wars are what drives participation. So, no more from me on magnets, since I don't have any opinions on them....

Please dont believe this for second. There are many many folks on here that are truly interested in this kind of information as well as the links to such. Most will NOT participate in this thread simply because of the incongruent nature of the posting and the inane questions without any admission of understanding.

As a moderator here, I can tell you without a doubt that flame wars and the kind of illogical buffoonery that your witnessing here are frowned upon by ALL moderators at this site.

Your technical knowledge and insight is greatly appreciated by all and the bent of this particular set of questions should not be a reflection of the community as a whole.

i am one to infer concepts of your statements, and who are you to determine what your peers exhibit among lack of understanding admissions. but a moderator to do so.

it takes two to tango, flame wars seem to be inherent here, this is true statement. don't seek blame. or at least try not to anyways.

" Please dont believe this for second. There are many many folks on here that are truly interested in this kind of information as well as the links to such. Most will NOT participate in this thread simply because of the incongruent nature of the posting and the inane questions without any admission of understanding."

Sorry, sir, you are correct. Thanks for the pep talk! I'll keep trying when I see threads I might be able to make a contribution to, otherwise no whining from me....

The issue of determining who on the internet has real facts or experience to share, and who only asserts opinions (benevolently or not), is turning into one of the real problematic issues of the larger on-line community.

I've never seen or used an MD-201. But, I believe it must use a magnetic monopole. Very rare.

If a mic is selling well, no need to switch it to Neo. It will be a complete redesign of the magnetic circuit, a re-tooling of the metal parts, and probably a break-even on cost. After all you work, you customers will complain irrationally, and you will have to bring back the old design anyway, having then thrown many $$$$$K down the drain. Its better to wait until a product is naturally reaching its EOL, then give it a boost with a new look and competitive new specs using neo.

More or less, that seems like Shure's current approach, but the old 57 is just soooo loved.

liquidstudios wrote: i agree with you that does seem to be what people tend to do here. again i will say that i completely understand the difference between a speaker driver and microhpone magnet.

cool. you can use less neo to produce the same flux as a much larger ceramic magnet structure. neo is on the cutting edge of technology, sure. there are much better attributes towards it, especially opposed to alnico, which is the least technological of all types of magnets. i'm not completely susceptible to "Vintage" theories, and certain things that can contribute to what would constitue something that is "Vintage" or even a better, warmer sounding attribute. such as glue formulations, as me and audiogaff were talking about aged components (caps, transformers, etc.) handwiring, original to design. sure a lot of it is marketing, but a lot of it often rings true to some extent, and you just have to determine if you want your wallet to back that up, like me and cucco were talking about DAD against a mytek or as he stated even motu.

if you believe that neo is a perfect emulation to alnico then thats great. then why do the all those popular microphones continue to use alnico? it must just be because they are old right? (fast attack, responsiveness, aritculation) characteristics of neo. so i think in the end it comes down to the influence of colouration against transparency. obviously yeah there are some benefits to working with neo. but there are benefits working with alnico and ceramic as well.

i never really noticed any of the microhpones we were talking about that use alnico to be lacking in fast attack or articulation or any of that song and dance

well i appreciate the lecture because it does give me a pretty good idea of the differences between the beta releases and the other SM series.

also what kind of magnets do the beyerdynamic md201 use?

Jesus Christ, man!!!! Stop the jackass-ed-ness!!! Come up with some clear questions, ask me them, and if I don't know it I'll bring the questions to the engineers (not audio engineers) here to answer them for you.

You'll get real information from the people that created the product.