58s all the way. The Beta 57A is an N/Dym, which makes it hotter, but I would rather have the gain boost at the console. The betas are prone to feeback a bit more, and they can be a bit much around 2-3kHz for some vocals.

Nady = poo poo. Those are chinese mics. You can hammer a nail with a 58, send to Shure, and for a flat fee have it repaired and or replaced, no matter how bad the thing is. Can't do that with a Nady.

sheet wrote: 58s all the way. The Beta 57A is an N/Dym, which makes it hotter, but I would rather have the gain boost at the console. The betas are prone to feeback a bit more, and they can be a bit much around 2-3kHz for some vocals.

The Betas have what Shure call a "supercardioid" pattern rather than the cardioid of the equivalent SM range. Once you get the pattern into your head and lay out the stage with it in mind, you can actually use more gain before feedback than with an SM. An EQ dip of 1-2 dB in the upper-mids tames the edge on vocals.

for live work, i try to avoid the sm58 all together because its pickup pattern is so wide.

i deliberately spend an hour at the local music shop trying out different handheld dynamic vocal mics. the sm58 feedsback faster than any of the others .. om2, om5, nd767a, e835, etc..

the real thing to check for is speaking into the back of the mic... where the stage monitors would be emitting sound. so essentially i held the mic backwards and talked into the mic as off-axis as possible (simulating feedback sources).

like i said, the 58 was terrible. beta58 was nicer, but still... Shure seemed to be the worst of the 4 brands i tried. EV was the best for feedback rejection. in the end i bought 2 om5s, and one nd767a

You guys are doing something wrong if a 58 won't work for ya. The feedback rejection thing is a crock of crap. They aren't as sensitive and require more gain. There is no such thing as engineered feedback rejection.

I've actually had some bad experiences with the Shure Beta 58's. 2 to be exact that actually died in the middle of live recording, on 2 different occasions, on folk/acoustic music! I've never had any problems with SM58's. One of my favorites along with the SM 56/SM57's.

Of course, you're basically talking about PA applications and not recording applications. So many hits involve SM57/58 microphones that we all have become quite accustomed to the sonic character all of them, that we enjoy. Those other microphones are also quite good and are fine for recording. They're just not quite as popular with some of us as the SM 56/57/58's for recording and stage applications.

The difference between output level with a neodymium magnet and the other type commonly used is really not much of a factor when dealing with rock-and-roll and tight miking. You have a greater chance of feedback with microphones that produce a hotter output level by virtue of their output level.

The difference between cardioid, supercardioid and hypercardioid can be a factor when one doesn't know where to place their floor monitors to begin with. Now you know.

It's good to be informed
Ms. Remy Ann David

sheet wrote: You guys are doing something wrong if a 58 won't work for ya. The feedback rejection thing is a crock of crap. They aren't as sensitive and require more gain. There is no such thing as engineered feedback rejection.

nah, they work. they just dont work the BEST. the 58 was made back in the 40s (iirc) for the military, and they havent done too much to change it's design.

meanwhile, newer brands show up and they do their homework and make a tighter mic.

the feedback rejection thing is fact, i did the tests myself, man. whether it's because it's engineered to reject feedback, or if it's something to do with gain-before-feedback is irrelevent. the end result is what i was testing, and its the end result that counts.

dont get me wrong, i have 2 sm58s that have lasted me a long time. but i use them as a last resort on stage.

:cheers:

rockstardave wrote: [quote=sheet]You guys are doing something wrong if a 58 won't work for ya. The feedback rejection thing is a crock of crap. They aren't as sensitive and require more gain. There is no such thing as engineered feedback rejection.

nah, they work. they just dont work the BEST. the 58 was made back in the 40s (iirc) for the military, and they havent done too much to change it's design.

meanwhile, newer brands show up and they do their homework and make a tighter mic.

the feedback rejection thing is fact, i did the tests myself, man. whether it's because it's engineered to reject feedback, or if it's something to do with gain-before-feedback is irrelevent. the end result is what i was testing, and its the end result that counts.

dont get me wrong, i have 2 sm58s that have lasted me a long time. but i use them as a last resort on stage.

:cheers:

The 58 was not engineered in the 40s. It did not come out until the 60s.

The feedback rejection is all about sensitivity and polar pattern quality/consistantcy. You cannot defy the laws of physics. Yes, you are right, some have tighter control than others, but in this day and age, given the three mics as options by the OP, the 58 holds its own, and is still in use on major tours world over. Is there better? Sure. In the same 69-89 price range? Not when you consider full mic replacement service/warranty for a small flat fee.

Audix OM5, OM6, OM7 have great feedback rejection, and I prefer them to the SM58.

well we can at least all agree that the microphones in question all look like robot penises.

also, in response to the Original Poster.. of the 3 you listed, either the sm58 or the beta57 is ok. But... the Beta58a is probably about the same cost as the beta57a, and is tailored towards vocals.

so, beta58a = two thumbs up