most gear (mics included) that's at the "affordable" end of the scale will perform in much the same manner, real ok or just fine (take your pick).

the differences will be nuanced at best. major shifts to high quality come with a hefty price tag. look for something that has a robust build quality and if possible not built in China.

nochina

if i were going to buy just one mic for vocals, i would choose a Shure SM7a or SM7b the a version being more desirable.

Yeah, I like the SM7, but can't find any under $300, even used, so it's a little out of my price range.
Right now I am doing research on different mics, but the ones I am currently considering are
Audio-Technica AT40 series, the at4040 or 4033 for right around $200 in like new condition.
Shure Beta 87a, can get for $150 right now, otherwise new for around $200.
Right now I can get a Blue Bluebird for $200, but I think the AT4040 is a bit better.
Maybe the Rode NT1A, but I hear too many people saying the highs are too harsh so I probably won't get it.

Otherwise looking at
Audix OM7 or the likes
Sennheiser 900 series, 935, 945
Possibly Shure Beta 58a, but I hear the Beta 87a is worth the extra.

There are others, but I think they are the most recommended. But I have heard of other ones, just let me know what you recommend.

If anyone has any links or websites that list the best deals going on online for microphones and studio monitors, let me know.

Remeber this is for a studio only mic, so please make recommendations based on this purpose.
Thanks!

What was the problem with spending your original $100 on an SM58?

Knowing what's the preamp you'll use could help for better suggestions. But at that low budget, the Rode NT1 would seem like a good pick. [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.musician…"]Rode Microphones NT1-A Condenser Mic Bundle | Musician's Friend[/]="http://www.musician…"]Rode Microphones NT1-A Condenser Mic Bundle | Musician's Friend[/]

Shure makes some nice large condenser as well.

If you can find a used one, my preference would be an EV RE20.

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.ebay.com…"]EV RE20 Microphone 701001000098 | eBay[/]="http://www.ebay.com…"]EV RE20 Microphone 701001000098 | eBay[/]

2x SM58's

That 58 will give you as well as the 7 at less than one third the cost. The capsules are virtually identical. The form factor and a couple of features make the difference. When you record vocals you need to engage high pass filtering a.k.a. low-cut off. The 7 has that on a switch. The 58 doesn't, requiring you to do it in software. No big whoop there. And that presence rise always works out great.

A better sounding version of the SM58 is their Beta-58. It's got an extra octave in the high-end and a higher output level. It sounds a lot more like a condenser microphone but doesn't suffer from the same problems that condenser microphones suffer from.

For the 58, I would also recommend a nice large SHURE, foam pop filter. This is the other difference between the 7 and the 58. The capsule in the 7 is halfway down that barrel. So you can never get closer than 2 inches to that diaphragm. You can get within 1/4 inch of the diaphragm on a 58. And that's why people think they sound so different. Not lining up the capsules to be the same distance does not make that a valid comparison. The 58 is also a more convenient microphone to use. The 7 as you can see this quite a bit larger which can make it more difficult to place on certain instruments. On the other hand it might make it easier? But for $100 to be able to get a sound as good as the $300 plus SM-7 is a no-brainer.

You had mentioned the SHURE Beta 87. That's a condenser microphone. It's also quite good. It's also quite different sounding. Not what I would call as universal as the 58 of either variety. Condenser microphones are also not necessarily, on your budget, an improvement over the 58. In fact it can be just the opposite. The 58 rejects a lot of bad acoustic surroundings. Condenser microphones only help to make it all the more worse. It depends upon the environment mostly. Real sound proof treated acoustically designed studios sound nice with condenser microphones to pick up more of the room that sounds nice. When the room sounds like a bedroom, a basement, a garage, you don't necessarily want to accentuate that. Which is where the dynamic microphone comes in and saves the day.

In fact the 58 and its sibling 57, are the two most used recording microphones in the world. Nothing you can't do with either one of those. You see our President of the United States on 57's with their matching foam pop filters. They could just as easily use 58's but that silver ball is a bit distracting to look at. So they use the 57 with the foam. And even SHURE actually has a dedicated extra foam pop filter made specifically for the 58. You don't have to get that one. Anyone would do.

As a hip-hop rap guy, you see all the dudes on TV cupping the ball of that microphone in their hand. It couldn't sound worse that way. Don't do that. Put it on a stand and stay a few inches off the microphone. You should always be at least a couple of inches away from the capsule. Without that extra piece of foam on the 58, you have the potential to get too close. And then it sounds like muddy crap. But maybe that's the sound you want to go for like the rest of your colleagues and cohorts? That's what they all do. It's the way they all sound. And they all want to sound as bad as each other so they all hold the microphone the same way which is the wrong way to hold a microphone that is directional like the 58. So if you use it like an actual studio microphone you'll have much success using it. If you hold it and do what the other rappers and hip hop guys do, expect lots of mud all over your subcultures. It won't be nice. You get a better sounding low frequency response when you roll off the low frequency response so that you can hear the low frequency response without the mud.

McMurphy

Yeah, I like the SM7, but can't find any under $300, even used, so it's a little out of my price range.

that should tell you something. don't stumble over dollars trying to save pennies.

if you find a used SM7a for 300 bucks you can use it for years and then sell it for 300 bucks. a 57 /58 will cost 99 bucks and you can sell it on CL for 50 the next day. the [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.audixusa…"]Audix[/]="http://www.audixusa…"]Audix[/] OM7 or Sennheiser 900 series, 935, 945 mics are ok /good but they are oddballs. in a year or two they will be stuffed away somewhere and you will on to something new.

That 58 will give you as well as the 7 at less than one third the cost. The capsules are virtually identical.

i own plenty of 57's and 58's ..and a SM7a ... world of difference how they sound and the amount of pre amplification they require. if it's the same why do the SM7's need more pre amp?

SM7B Type Dynamic Frequency Response 50 to 20,000 Hz Polar Pattern Cardioid (unidirectional)
Output Level Open Circuit Voltage*: -59.0 dB (1.12 mV) *0 dB = 1 volt per Pascal

i've also heard / read people saying that 57's and 58's are the same too .. again i don't think so.

SM57 Cardioid Dynamic Microphone

Polarity Positive pressure on diaphragm produces positive voltage on pin 2 with respect to pin 3.

as you can see all 3 mics are rated (and perform) differently.

Don't mean to step on any toes, but this forum is the ONLY forum that keeps on saying the SM57 and SM58 are the best under $100 or $200. Yet when I do any search on any OTHER forum, most competing microphones in it's class are almost always said to be better. Yes, yes, I know the SM57 and SM58 are in pro studios and are really great, durable and versatile, but when comparing in clarity and best sound, other microphones ARE said to be better the these. Not downing the SM57 and 58, but it's funny how most forum members here are stuck on them, yet every other forum with professionals, confidently believe most of the other mics are better.
I mean come on, I am asking for the best mic I can get and I get recommended here to the SM57 and 58 most of the time, yet every other forum says otherwise. With some research it appears the Beta 57 and 58 are essentialy upgraded from the SM, yet those don't get recommended over the SM57 and 58 here.
Again, nothing against the SM57 and 58, but it seems (at least to other forums) it is not the best choice for what I am looking for in a mic at the moment.
Thanks for all the help everyone. I appreciate it, but was hoping for more un-biased answers. Haha.
Feel free to rant.

Unregistered, post: 403276 wrote: Don't mean to step on any toes, but this forum is the ONLY forum that keeps on saying the SM57 and SM58 are the best under $100 or $200. Yet when I do any search on any OTHER forum, most competing microphones in it's class are almost always said to be better. Yes, yes, I know the SM57 and SM58 are in pro studios and are really great, durable and versatile, but when comparing in clarity and best sound, other microphones ARE said to be better the these. Not downing the SM57 and 58, but it's funny how most forum members here are stuck on them, yet every other forum with professionals, confidently believe most of the other mics are better.
I mean come on, I am asking for the best mic I can get and I get recommended here to the SM57 and 58 most of the time, yet every other forum says otherwise. With some research it appears the Beta 57 and 58 are essentialy upgraded from the SM, yet those don't get recommended over the SM57 and 58 here.
Again, nothing against the SM57 and 58, but it seems (at least to other forums) it is not the best choice for what I am looking for in a mic at the moment.
Thanks for all the help everyone. I appreciate it, but was hoping for more un-biased answers. Haha.
Feel free to rant.

What are all the "OTHER forums" telling you to buy and why? Please share what you have learned so far on other forums, in as much detail as you can?

Thanks, looking forward to your reply,

So what's the big difference between the 7 A/B versus the 57/58? Well they both have output transformers. I would imagine the one in the 7 is a more capable output transformer. Why does the 7 require more gain? Probably because you can't get the diaphragm of the capsule as close to sound sources as you can a 57 or 58? Some folks have even removed the output transformers in their 57/58's and claim they sound better that way albeit a different output level. Otherwise I believe the capsules are really not much different. And does that difference between a passband of 17,000 Hz is not as good as a passband of 20,000 Hz? I think not? And even if you can? Does it really make any difference? If it made a difference, folks would not be using 57's & 58's as much as they do in the premium Studios and you would only find 7's. But you don't find that. You find mostly 57 & 58's and a few 7's. And I've never heard a 58 or 57 I didn't like in comparison to a 7. If I want to impress someone a little bit more? I might use my seven's? However I find that mostly unnecessary. 99% of the people out there are listening to music that doesn't even extend out to 15,000 Hz. Are we talking rock 'n roll or the New York Philharmonic?

Otherwise just take a SM-7, apart and a 57 and compare the capsules. I mean a Neumann TLM-103 basically has the same front capsule that an 87 has but they sure don't quite sound the same because they're not. One has a transformer and one doesn't. Otherwise there's not much difference in the 103 and the 87 capsule accepted the 87 has 2 back to back. So it's still basically the same element. Isn't one just as good as the other? They both go out to 20,000 Hz. So what's the advantage of one over the other?

$200 budget already indicates you're not getting an SM-7. Not in your budget. Neither is a Sennheiser 421, Electro-Voice RE-20 in your budget, not even used. So your choice is the SM58 or the slightly slicker sounding Beta-58 for $50 more. Strangely enough, I wouldn't recommend purchasing used Beta-58's but I would SM58's. Primarily because we have recently discovered that neodymium magnets lose their magnetic bite in a much shorter period of time than alnico, ceramic and ferrite magnets. So they're great when they're new. Even stranger, I've had 2 Beta-58's fail on me in the middle of recordings. While I like the sound... I'll never purchase one again. This is the only SHURE microphone/microphones that have ever failed me. Yes there was phantom power on across the board, still though, I've never had a SM-57/58/7/5, ever fail on me including my 1940s, 55 which is still working today LOL. Sounds like crap with that original aluminum diaphragm. Quite different from the 55's day that use the 58 capsule which is what the 55 has today. And then the super 55 which I think is the Beta 58 capsule? But they still call it a 55 even though it's nothing like the 55 that was originally made. And that was the one you saw Elvis use most of the time. The awful original 55 with the aluminum diaphragm. And it sounds aluminum LOL. It doesn't sound like a thin piece of mylar which... LOL... is quite transparent, quite literally and figuratively. Only in Star Trek did they create transparent aluminum to hold whales that it wasn't used for microphones LOL.

You know everybody does what they see on TV. And if you watch TV you are bound to see plenty of people singing into 58's with their limited 17,000 Hz response sounding absolutely wonderful. And that's not good enough? And so why have people like Bono and Steve Tyler used 58's for their studio vocal microphones for their platinum albums if they were that substandard? If you're over the age of 30 you really don't have to worry about what you're missing beyond 15,000 Hz. That will not make or break your recording. But purchasing that other brand of dynamic microphone that indicates he goes out to 20,000 Hz will not necessarily be any kind of improvement whatsoever. Do I want to record cymbals with 57 or 58's? Not necessarily but sometimes I have when it suited the production. I know I've seen plenty of other guys use 57's on high hats. Sometimes I will put a 57 on really thin high hats? I'll use the AKG C-451 or, SM-81 or, KM-84/86/184 on thick trash can sounding high hats. Sometimes you want the presence. Sometimes you want the high-end.

So I'm really quite confused as to why this seems to be so amusing or such an issue? It's just a tool. That's all it is. Bandwidth limiting done the right way can be very important and beneficial. It's still high fidelity unless you make it UN-Fidelity because you were too HI? This is all about making recordings isn't it? It's not about reading specifications. I don't make recordings that are monochromatic. Otherwise we would only be using Neumann microphones, exclusively and we're not unless you are recording a Symphony Orchestra. And where I wouldn't want a condenser microphone sound, I would put out a ribbon before I would put out a 58 for instance. In that respect, I've never recorded a Symphony Orchestra or an Opera using any dynamic microphones at all. I prefer ribbons when you want that tone and condensers when you want that air.

So who in their right minds would ever want to use a passive ribbon microphone, when you know the high-end starts to roll off starting in the upper mid bands? Does go out to 20 kHz but look at how far down they are at 20 kHz. Then you'll find 20 kHz coming out of 57 & 58's where 20 kHz is of course more than 2 DB or more down at 20 kHz, just like a passive ribbon. Yet people still use ribbons don't they? They are certainly not flat out to 20 kHz. Not even close. And we use those when we want that sound where we don't care where 20 kHz is. You can't make a recording by simply reading specifications and accepting that as gospel. It's only a specification for the passband which is based upon ± 2 DB, NAB specification. So they go out to 20 kHz, they're just down more than 2 DB. But it's still there. And great recordings can still be had. I promise I won't tell anyone you're recording only goes out to 17,000 Hz. Especially when I know it goes beyond that.

So are you guys real engineers or are you magazine engineers? I find specifications both important and unimportant. I know it can deliver a professional product. It's nice to know what its limitations are however. And there really aren't any limitations. Not when you realize that the 57 & 58's are probably the most important microphones ever made. So the ownership and use of those microphones is a complete no-brainer. You can't go wrong. You can go wrong with a lot of other microphones that are better because they're not. If it's the sound you want? Great, no problem. I like the sound of 57, 58, 5, 7, 55's. Altogether sounding, they are all quite consistent in spite of their minor differences. For the small home studio the difference between some of those microphones are not worth the cost you realize what their similar consistency actually is to each other. So please tell me... who has not liked the sound of vocals on 57/58's? I really haven't heard anybody that hasn't sounded good on one of those.

McMurphy

McMurphy,

My apologizes as you couldn't have understood my last post. I have to approve each Guest post ( to avoid spammer) which I'm sorry I forgot to approve before you posted your last one, yet I commented on it. I saw it but you didn't until just now. Hope that makes more sense to what my question was pertaining to other forums. ?

I came here for some advice/help ;P
I really do appreciate helpful answers, but it seems most of the people here (nothing against them, but i) are biased or what not and are sooooooo professional, that budget gear is so laughable they ONLY recommend the industry standards like SM57 and SM58, when EVERY single other forum with pros, CAN recommend so many others OVER the SM57 and SM58. Nothing personal, just what truly seems to be going on this forum. No problem, I can sign up for other forums for help, just used this one because of no required sign up (rather not have to create accounts on every forum). Just mentioning so maybe those providing help, can improve their help? No hard feelings.
Thanks for the help everyone.

ah

well i didn't recommend a SM57 or 58 and i put up links to several places you could find mics on the cheap. i just didn't try to sell you a bag of goods by telling you you could get Ferrarri performance out of a mic that is priced like a Chevy Vega and i didn't do that because i know that's not possible. there are a myriad of reasons for this and if you want we will go into that but it's not really germane to the matter in question.

we disagree to the differences between a SM7 and a SM58 but Mac is correct when he says a 58 will be as good or better than that MXL piece of crap or any other cheeso mic. most of us around here like to recommend stuff that we know will stand the test of time and take the abuse of use and a 58 will pound nails and still function. i have seen 58's that were 30 years old that still worked up to spec.. i don't think you will be able to say that about some MXL or Behringer, Superlux, Studio Projects, Marshall 30 years from now.

the thing that is really silly about the question is all those mics are made by the same manufacturer. so really the question is moot or as i said initially, they all perform equally as well ( or poorly depending on how you look at it).

for the most part, you will not get a decent LD capacitor mic for under 200 bucks .. you might try a KEL HM1 which i quite like but is a medium diaphragm mic or another one i am very fond of is the ATM 4033 (same thing though medium diaphragm) although you will have to find them used as they are "out of print".

if you insist on a cheap Indochinese piece, your best bet is to get one used off of the CraigsList. i see tons of them there all the time ... lots of folks who have bought them only to find that a simple 57 or 58 actually sounds better because someone "at another forum" recommended them.

a lot of what Re ... i mean Mac said in the last post regarding band with limiting and mic selection is correct ... i just don't agree that a 58 sounds as good as a SM7 ...

Unregistered, post: 403293 wrote: I came here for some advice/help ;P
I really do appreciate helpful answers, but it seems most of the people here (nothing against them, but i) are biased or what not and are sooooooo professional, that budget gear is so laughable they ONLY recommend the industry standards like SM57 and SM58, when EVERY single other forum with pros, CAN recommend so many others OVER the SM57 and SM58. Nothing personal, just what truly seems to be going on this forum. No problem, I can sign up for other forums for help, just used this one because of no required sign up (rather not have to create accounts on every forum). Just mentioning so maybe those providing help, can improve their help? No hard feelings.
Thanks for the help everyone.

Asking for the best $200 vocal mic for a professional studio use application is about like asking for the best $200 chainsaw that will be used in a commercial logging operation.

You can probably find a $200 chainsaw that will do some work... and possibly a lot of it... but it's just not much of a budget to get you a tool that's going to do everything you want. But fortunately, in terms of microphones... there are a couple of choices that WILL do the job well enough to meet your budget and criteria.

Anyone who says that the 57's and 58's aren't good enough for professional work, are neither very experienced, nor very professional.

Isn't it odd that 58's are still used, and have been for decades, for live work on every major sound stage, venue and touring act? And have been used on countless albums as well.

Are there better mic's?? Sure... but if you're anonymously asking about a cheap mic solution, my guess is that you probably don't want to commit to being here, aren't experienced enough to be familiar with professional gear, or you have some reason to avoid revealing who you are... and from your portrayed reasoning... you obviously don't realize that a lot of the folks here are involved in most of the other professional forums.

If you're willing to dig a bit for information, which is doesn't appear that you're at that stage of your knowledge, you'll find a boatload of mic's out there that are fine... but most won't be in that sub $400 range unless you're looking at used... which is why you'll find that here at RO, you got the majority of us mentioned the venerable industry workhorse... as you can buy a good NEW mic in your price range.

Few people have the time to go digging through the myriad of mediocre mic's on the used market for you... and in all honesty... there just aren't that many new mic's that I'd recommend you piss yor money away on buying in the price range you mention. Mainly because in this day and age, the majority of the el' cheapo-mic du-jur's just don't have consistent quality in their manufacturing to ensure that you can pick up any of them without a risk of buying a piece of junk as much as your getting something decent.

It's your money... do what you want... and no hard feelings.

Don't mean to step on any toes, but this forum is the ONLY forum that keeps on saying the [="http://www.shure.com/americas/products/microphones/sm/sm57-instrument-microphone/"]SM57[/]="http://www.shure.co…"]SM57[/] and [[url=http://="http://www.shure.co…"]SM58[/]="http://www.shure.co…"]SM58[/] are the best under $100 or $200. Yet when I do any search on any OTHER forum, most competing microphones in it's class are almost always said to be better. Yes, yes, I know the SM57 and SM58 are in pro studios and are really great, durable and versatile, but when comparing in clarity and best sound, other microphones ARE said to be better the these. Not downing the SM57 and 58, but it's funny how most forum members here are stuck on them, yet every other forum with professionals, confidently believe most of the other mics are better.
I mean come on, I am asking for the best mic I can get and I get recommended here to the SM57 and 58 most of the time, yet every other forum says otherwise. With some research it appears the Beta 57 and 58 are essentialy upgraded from the SM, yet those don't get recommended over the SM57 and 58 here.
Again, nothing against the SM57 and 58, but it seems (at least to other forums) it is not the best choice for what I am looking for in a mic at the moment.
Thanks for all the help everyone. I appreciate it, but was hoping for more un-biased answers. Haha.
Feel free to rant.

Your price range isn't a pro price range. Unless you can stumble upon a used RE20 or something, ( and I did give you a link to one I found on ebay) then you're gonna have to accept that the models we gave you were the best in that price class you mentioned.

You also mentioned that you didn't want us to "talk you up" into a higher price range, "that it took you forever" to save up the $200 you have now.

Accordingly, your choices will be very limited. Not only do the 57's and 58's mentioned and suggested fit the category of best bang for the money, they are great mics, universal in application, widely used in studios worldwide. Frankly, you're better off buying one of these tried and true dynamics than you are buying a cheap Chinese condenser knock off. Yeah, okay, so those cheap knock off's may look like more expensive condenser mics, but trust me, they don't sound like them... not by a long shot.

I for one really don't know what you are expecting to get for $200/$250. There is simply no quality LD condenser I can think of that is in that price range. You've been given advice by professionals here that know what they are doing and what they are talking about. But, it's your money... do with it what you feel is best.

-d.

This is NOT the only site that raves about the 57/58. If you go to "Transom", a radio documentary production site, they've got a great mic shoot-out that found the SM57 worked better on more voices than a Neumann U87ai. Among MANY mic models, including Sennheisers, E-V's , AKG's, etc. And many other sites. Sure, there are "sleepers", and many obscure models that have their niches. But as a general vocal-performance mic...few others are as dependable and consistent in their performance.
BTW, the Audix OM-7 is a great mic - if you are a screamer in a metal band - but not for much other than that. But that's what is was designed for in the first place. Picture you standing with that mic in front of a wall of Marshall JCM900s...that's the OM-7.

Thanks for all the help everyone. I appreciate it, but was hoping for more un-biased answers. Haha.
Feel free to rant.

ok i will. thanks!

i don't think anyone here is biased for or against the shure mics .. but ....

i do think you may be on a fishing trip with an agenda to get people to recommend a particular mic .. waiting for a nibble that never happened. now you're frustrated and lashing out because you didn't get the response you were hoping for.

so tell us ... which mic were you thinking about for under $200? we all would really like to know what you're thinking of. please, enlighten us.

REMCMURPHY wrote: Why does the 7 require more gain? Probably because you can't get the diaphragm of the capsule as close to sound sources as you can a 57 or 58?

well that's not it ... i can sing a few inches off a 57/58 and i don't lose that much gain ... i think you are reaching here.

i have had the chance to exchange e mails with people at Shure regarding the restoration of an old Elvis mic i have and in passing i was able to ask about this; specifically, "is a 57 the same capsule as a 58 or a SM7?" and their answer was an emphatic "NO" ... now who's word should we take on this? the caps may look the same but if you go to order one you will find different part numbers for each ...

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.shure.co…"]SM7A[/]="http://www.shure.co…"]SM7A[/] Replacement cartridge: RPM106
SM57 Replacement cartridge: R57
SM58 Replacement cartridge: R59

and if they are the same what accounts for a freq response of 50hZ/20K for the SM7 and a 40hZ/15K for the 57 and a 50hZ/15K for the 58?

these are all different capsules ... they just look and mount the same. but they don't sound the same to me. just because the 57/58's work well in the broadcast arena, doesn't mean they are always suitable in the studio.

if you want to limit band width then ok ... but why would you want to do that? if that's what you want to do just use 8 bit recorders ..... ha ha ha ha ... lol. i crack me up sometimes. :rolleyes:

so tell us ... which mic were you thinking about for under $200? we all would really like to know what you're thinking of. please, enlighten us.

+1. I'd also like to know.

I knew most of you would get defensive =P
I have listed some of the mics other forums have recommened. And based on reviews it does seem true that these mics ARE better than the SM57 and SM58. I am just pointing out that MOST of the users on THIS forum pretty much ONLY recommend the SM57 and SM58 being the best, but clearly every other forum says otherwise. This info coming from experienced people aswell. See what I am saying?
Don't know how else to say it...
Once again I DO appreciate the help.

Unregistered, post: 403335 wrote: I knew most of you would get defensive =P
I have listed some of the mics other forums have recommened. And based on reviews it does seem true that these mics ARE better than the SM57 and SM58. I am just pointing out that MOST of the users on THIS forum pretty much ONLY recommend the SM57 and SM58 being the best, but clearly every other forum says otherwise. This info coming from experienced people aswell. See what I am saying?
Don't know how else to say it...
Once again I DO appreciate the help.

Don't know how else to say it...

you could tell us what you actually learned here and over at the "Other Forums" ? Surprise us, maybe you can be as kind and helpful back, and share some of your knowledge now? I'm guessing you are just starting out, maybe around 15 years old? Do you have any recordings that we could hear or should we just move on and say goodbye?

Some of the mics that seem to be most recommened, I have listed on the 3rd post.
Donny, that RE20 was a good deal, although I didn't see the post in time and the auction ended. But thanks. Will keep checking around for more deals.
Thanks for the help everyone.

Try the Rode M1, I have a few of those and love them. They are excellent with a quality pre as are many mics.

Maybe McBeak will return with a bit more on 58's lol. ( inside joke)

Cheers!

This really sounds like you are doing some sort of school project rather than actually learning and wanting to know the deeper aspects of microphones?
Can we ask why you are really asking these questions? No offense but you don't seem too "pro audio" minded.

regards,

Spiced Ham

me thinks it's SPAM® ("but i don't like spam"...)

maybe someone who is schilling for a distributor or manufacturer is on the web here and other places bringing up mics in a price range hoping to get some positive responses on mics in the under $250 range?

then they can claim their products got a buzz in the audio forums. it's not really a far reach to make this conclusion. i especially suspect this due to the third post the OP made. they sure seemed like they were attempting to elicit a particular response.

Maybe they found out their $250 mic ain't so special afterall?

Thanks to all the helpful answers!
I will continue doing research to find the best fit for my situation.

This message is only directed toward a certain crowd.
Haha, whatever with this forum. Bunch of narrow minded clowns (Not all, but most I have encountered).
Simply trying to explain EVERY OTHER forum DOES recommend MANY OTHER mics over a SM57 and SM58, yet most of the members on THIS forum do not agree with EVERY OTHER forum, maybe everyone else is insane?!? Ahaha.
How hard is it to grasp this? It can't be said much clearer.
And asking me silly questions in defense. Pathetic. I really should not have to enlighten you since most of you claim to be so "pro".
And I very much would like to help, but it is apparent most of these clowns can't grasp a simple thing, such as, there are better mics than the SM57 and SM58 in the same price range?
It seems more you are the ones who are "promoting" mics. Hah.
Whatever. I will be joining any other forum.
Thanks again to all who were very helpful, even if you are some of the ones this message is addressing (yes I know since you are a admin or long-time member of this forum so you will try to defend it, although I do respect more of those who stand up/admit that themselves or friends may have been wrong).
I merely am voicing there are better choices than the SM57 and 58, but it appears to a lot that, this is ludacrous?
Again, thanks all!

Unregistered, post: 403380 wrote: Thanks to all the helpful answers!
I will continue doing research to find the best fit for my situation.

This message is only directed toward a certain crowd.
Haha, whatever with this forum. Bunch of narrow minded clowns (Not all, but most I have encountered).
Simply trying to explain EVERY OTHER forum DOES recommend MANY OTHER mics over a SM57 and SM58, yet most of the members on THIS forum do not agree with EVERY OTHER forum, maybe everyone else is insane?!? Ahaha.
How hard is it to grasp this? It can't be said much clearer.
And asking me silly questions in defense. Pathetic. I really should not have to enlighten you since most of you claim to be so "pro".
And I very much would like to help, but it is apparent most of these clowns can't grasp a simple thing, such as, there are better mics than the SM57 and SM58 in the same price range?
It seems more you are the ones who are "promoting" mics. Hah.
Whatever. I will be joining any other forum.
Thanks again to all who were very helpful, even if you are some of the ones this message is addressing (yes I know since you are a admin or long-time member of this forum so you will try to defend it, although I do respect more of those who stand up/admit that themselves or friends may have been wrong).
I merely am voicing there are better choices than the SM57 and 58, but it appears to a lot that, this is ludacrous?
Again, thanks all!

BTW it's "ludicrous".

You know, sometimes you just can't teach a thing. The advice you have gotten here is from working pros who have years of hands on experience and own or have owned most of the mics you have posted about. It's obvious that YOU have zero hands on experience with this and haven't ever even plugged in the very thing you're CERTAIN sounds better because you heard it somewhere on some forum (remember this is a forum also.....jus sayin) and because the membership of those other forums all agree with a certain choice of mics, that means that they are the professionals and we aren't?? Again, the very situation you describe in other places is also going on here and you reject it because the 'other' forums don't agree, yet YOU have no idea what these 'mics' sound like in real life, touching, plugging in, listening, placing in front of a vocalist/guitarist/bassist etc....

You get what I'm saying? Can I be any clearer? You are the one asking for the advice. You are the one with ZERO personal experience with this. YOU are the one with a strict budget. YOU are the one who doesn't know what ANY of these mics sound like.

You reject the thought of a Rode mic because someone somewhere says the upper end sounds harsh. And YOU have heard this personally?

You reject the suggestion of a solid workhorse mic like a Shure SM57/58 because someone on a forum said there's a better mic, yet YOU have never heard one. Or used one.

You say nothing of your recording chain or give information on the use of the tool you're asking about but you're CERTAIN that everyone here is being "defensive" about their choice.

Here's a secret......Listen closely........No one cares what mic you buy. Not here, not on the 'other' forums....YOU are the only one who cares about this.

I won't even recommend a mic to you because you are simply a young jackass who has no clue and doesn't want one. Until you have some real world experience to back up your opinions stay the hell out of my garage. Buy a mic, try them all out in real time and shut yer yap.

Right on DD!!

OK, I'm not a "Big Time Pro"... No, I don't have any Grammy's. (Not that I give a shit about getting one anyway.) I guess running FOH and Mons for something like 1500 shows, and running a mobile rig for 17 years, and owning/running a shop for a tad over 3 years with close to 100 satisfied and repeat clients doesn't even qualify me as a rookie in this biz... who knew? I guess owning a mic locker worth close to $30k doesn't count for shit either. Hell I'm not a "pro" at all, as I suggested that young goober look at gettin' a pair of workhorse mic's that he can use for the rest of his career, for his 250 bucks... oh well... maybe someday.

Gentlemen, I guess none of us are professional afterall... Damn... I guess someone should let the IRS know that our "Occupation" is listed wrong, and should be "rookie audio engineer".

I seriously doubt he'll be back, unless young goober is a troll, or he pisses away his $250 buck on some junk mic that "the big boys" at some other forum causes him to revisit with his tail tucked between his legs... But he'd end up joining with a real handle, and prolly wouldn't admit that this was his/her thread anyway.

He just doesn't realize that if it was my money, that I recommended what I would buy if I was in his shoes (knowing what I know now, some 45 years on in this damned industry)... and that in reality, I just used a pair of SM58's on a recording session just two weeks ago, that turned out great... and the client is EXTREMELY happy with... as it was the right mic, for the right situation, and for the right voices... and that while the 58 is not my "go to" vocal mic, in my studio, in reality, it IS my go to mic when I track live bands... whether on a remote or in the studio.

I also notice that our unregistered goober doesn't have the nads to mention the other forums, nor the other mic's he/she is being so vague about. If he wants to know some really good vocal mic's that are hella good bang for the buck... go check my gear list... but NONE of these vocal mic's are in the $200 buck range... except for my 58's. (I wonder how many of the "professionals" on the other forums he's getting all this advice from, actually post as themselves or share their real information?) My guess is that these are either high signal to noise fora, or any of them that are low volume and run by a studio owner that has a coupla' friends who drop in from time to time and yammer on about their mic collection.

Bottom line is that if goober had a budget of about double his $250, there'd be SO many more GOOD to GREAT choices for "bang for buck"... As I mentioned in another post, yes, there are a few other mic's out there that can be had in the sub $250 range, but they are NOT consistent in their manufacturing quality, and you risk getting a POS as much as you are getting a good one... but he's either got "money burning a hole in his pocket" or he's a troll... so... good bye and good riddance?

It's also important to mention, I think, that our "visitor" mentioned that it took him quite a bit of time to come up with the $250 that he now wants to spend, and he was pretty up-front about us not trying to sway him into higher end models, because he wasn't looking at spending any more than that, and couldn't see that changing in the foreseeable future.

This is going to greatly narrow his choices. A total mic budget of $250 is, well, as we all know, in the grand scope of things, $250 is nothing, really... so I think it's pertinent to mention this as an indicator of his level of seriousness.

All we can do is to give the advice that we feel is best, based on experience, time, personal knowledge of the gear. The bulk of that advice pointed to several dynamic models which are tried and true, which have proven themselves to be valuable for many different recording apps. We weren't telling him that the 57/58 was the finest mic ever made, we were simply informing him that for the money he had to spend, those models wouldn't disappoint... and they won't. Are they U87's? Of course not. They're also not $3000, either.

A note to the "new" users here... we're all glad to help you when we can, and to give advice based on our years of experience, both individually and collectively. We're not selling anything. No one here works for Shure.

You ask us for advice, you give us the parameters of what you want and what you have to spend. We give you the best advice we can based on your own situation. You can't get mad at us because you only have a couple hundred to spend, and expect a world-class piece of gear for that paltry sum. Don't get upset with us because the answers you received weren't what you were expecting.

A $250 budget for anything of substance or value in audio recording equipment, is a drop in the drop of an ocean of what most professionals spend.

Generally, in the end...People will only take you as seriously as you take yourself.

And finally, I'd echo the questions of my professional peers here... what other microphones were you told of on other forums that would better fit your price range than what we suggested here?

This isn't a pissing contest... many professionals here are still actively purchasing gear. If you know of any models that are better for the money you mentioned, it would be courteous of you to bring these models up here for comparison.

fwiw
-d.

well i don't feel to bad because i'm one of the only people who didn't recommend a 57 or 58 ... facepalm .

i still think this guy is trying to elicit a particular response and is upset he didn't get what he was looking for no matter how hard he prodded us... i would hesitate to point any fingers but really the available LD electrit or capacitors in this price range are limited.

he did seem to lean towards the ATMs even ones that are out of production.

any way you look at it, he didn't have the hair to say who he was.

2 57's on van halens cab were good enough for eruption. but i guess that sounds like crap? Why do singers forget that their voice dictates the mic. Most singers i've worked w/ sound worse on an 87 than other mics. Everybody around here knows i also say get the AT 3035 for a sub 100 dollar LDC. But thats just because it sucks less than the other LDC's i've tried in that range.

for someone not even considerate enough to try some mics at the store, OP, your not coming across as un-biased. If a mic sounds personally better on you than any other mic, awsome, but you asked a general question, and got a generally good answer. and good solid ones. you have a lot of nerve/ignorance trying to discredit this forum. it's filled w/ generous helpful veterans, that know more than i do about recording arts. How bout you try something before you bash it? i did a gig for a wu-tang clan member who preferred the peavey pvi backup mic i brought. If ya found something that works, great, but to try to dis-credit shure's 'sm' series, is just off the mark, and not accepted as truth by most who are involved in sound production.

Hey kids. Stumbled onto this thread through Google. Just had to sign up and say - I found your advice supremely helpful and well-argued. The OP may have thought he'd stumbled onto some Shure conspiracy - but I really appreciate all of your thoughts and comments on this subject. Very much stopped me from blowing my money on something really silly (...for now...). Just thought you should know.

I note he's now gone! Some forums have a swear word filter, and I've long thought 'best' should be in it. I often wonder if people really do believe when they first get interested in sound ( or lighting, video or photography) if buying the 'best' guarantees the 'best' result, which I think most of us feel is so wrong! I've got quite a big mic box, but on the larger events I do, I spend time working out which of the er, less good mics can be used safely on certain sources, and very often the sound from a cheap, or old mic can be really good on the right instrument. I remember once running short and sacrificing the D112 I like on the kick drum on a big band event to use on the double bass with no pickup, leaving an sm58 to do kick. Because big band doesn't need a thuddy bass, it worked fine, and sometimes I now do this even when I have the 112 spare. Every outing you learn more about what works and what doesn't.

im guessing hes wanting to hear AT2020 or something like that.

shame on you OP for being so rude to these people. they can and will provide you with years of working (not cm magazine experience)
you can tell they are all parents too, because even after you threw your tantrum they just stood there and smiled at you.

furthermore, you have undervalued the confidence these peoples information gives you to go out and DO. being armed with the right info goes a long way.

so...
go get that 2020, make sure you get right up on it. pop filters are for fools. also make sure the preamp is blazing red on the way in so its real loud too.

just re-reading this as it came up on the recent posts page .... and the one thing i noticed is the op's original request on opinions on the ATM 40 series ... and in respect to the 4033, i have a pair of them and to tell the truth i really do like them. they are great as ohs for drums or on toms and i like them for vocals and acoustic guitars too. after all they were recommended by Phill Ramone .... that says something. but 250 used is a bit steep.

He was asked several times by several members which mics he thought would be better than the ones recommended by us, as well as which mics other forums may have recommended, and he never did reply to either question.

It doesn't really matter at this point anyway, because he's bailed out. Apparently, at least to him, we were nothing more than a group of no-nothing squids who moonlight at Shure. :notworthy:

What's the old saying? Good sound is the absence of bad sound?

I've just remembered I've actually got a 2020 that I bought and never used. I must try to find it and plug it in and see what it's like.