The SM58...

How about this - a band buying mics makes sense to get 58's as starter mics, to set the minimum threshold. Then after they get better and have the ability to demo more mics with a great tech, they can discard the "training wheels" and get better mics.

How do you polish a 58 to make it sound great? All the EQ hacking doesn't fix the time domain issues I hear with them.

The music store mindset - sell training wheels, then more expensive training wheels, then ... My mindset - hang out with the band, hear them play, demo mics on a great system, then sell them the 1 Mic that fits best. Works great in theory!
 
Re: The SM58...

Brian jojade said:
I'll disagree with this post. If someone is looking on forums to decide which microphone to use, then an SM58 is probably one of the BEST choices. Why? Because it's the most widely used, and likely, those around them will have used them and already know how to get the most out of the mic. Are there better choices? Always. But if you're cruising through forums to get the answer, you probably aren't experienced to know which mic to choose that will be the better choice for your particular application. The SM58 being that all around good enough mic that will get the job done. Energy is better spent on determining the rest of the audio chain, which usually is a larger source of the problem than the microphone.
Click to expand...

Now see.. I disagree with this! The mic and speakers are always the "weakest" link in a proper system... As they are changing acoustic energy into electrical and then back again. I try to "get it right at the source" whenever possible. I often run on stage and move a guitar mic during a show instead of trying to "fix" the source with EQ. A huge part of mixing is creating a reference for yourself and the. Traing your ears to hear the difference and your brain to find ways to move towards it
 
Re: The SM58...

LOL.

Ok guys ....

I have yet to hear a single poster say that the SM58 is actually the best microphone in its price range, yet many are suggesting that people purchase one because it is "good enough" .... or if you happen to be a genius vocally, you are still going to sound good even if you are using a bullhorn for amplification.

Surely you can see how error-prone this line of argument is?

The SM58 absolutely feeds back easier than ND767a's .... and guys, that is important. The SM58 is a less detailed mic than ND767a's .... and again, this is important. The ND767a sounds warmer .... and this is important too. The ND767a rejects the other stage noise better .... again, this is important.

So if you can get an ND767a for about the same price as an SM58 .... and you are not providing sound for other people, why on earth would you opt for the SM58?

If others are trying to determine which microphone works best in a live setting, I would suggest that you look at other microphones and not just the SM58. Should people include the SM58 in their search? Sure, why not. I am certain that most will not end up walking out of the store with a SM58 once they listen to other microphones in its price range. It just doesn't hold up to the sound test guys.

So .... can someone tell my why it is a good idea for a band looking for microphones to purchase SM58's? I have a few:


  1. It is good for new musicians to learn how to equalize a bad microphone so they learn how to use the channel strip on a mixer
  2. It is good for new musicians to learn how to battle feedback by using either a graphic eq or notch filter in the monitors
  3. It is important for musicians to use microphones that are well known in the industry so they can impress the many sound engineers who attend their gigs

Does that about cover it? ;)
 
Re: The SM58...

Caleb Dick said:
How do you polish a 58 to make it sound great?
Click to expand...

That is kind of like the puzzle with 3 houses on one side of the street and where you try to get all 3 utilities on the other side of street to each house without crossing any lines. I spent a lot of time when I was younger trying to figure that one out too.

Just for the record I don't think anyone here has ever said a SM58 sounds "great" unless they were around 30+ or so years ago and said it then. We have all said they always "work" and we use them for certain circumstances.
 
Re: The SM58...

You don't buy a SM58 because it's "good enough", you buy it because it never stops working, and that can be just as important as how it sounds.
Whenever absolute clarity, maximum gain before feedback, stage noise rejection or whatever specific quality is important, there are probably better choices in the same price range, and I have made those choices often, and have a drawer full of dead or otherwise non-usable mikes to prove it.
1. It always works
2. It doesn't break
3. You can depend on it
4. It always sounds the same
5. You can't break it
6. It works
7. It doesn't fail
8. It's a know quantity
9. Nobody rejects it
10. It sounds good enough

That I think covers it.
Did I mention that it always works and never breaks?
 
Re: The SM58...

Per Søvik said:
You don't buy a SM58 because it's "good enough", you buy it because it never stops working, and that can be just as important as how it sounds.
Whenever absolute clarity, maximum gain before feedback, stage noise rejection or whatever specific quality is important, there are probably better choices in the same price range, and I have made those choices often, and have a drawer full of dead or otherwise non-usable mikes to prove it.
1. It always works
2. It doesn't break
3. You can depend on it
4. It always sounds the same
5. You can't break it
6. It works
7. It doesn't fail
8. It's a know quantity
9. Nobody rejects it
10. It sounds good enough

That I think covers it.
Did I mention that it always works and never breaks?
Click to expand...

+1.
I had a few stolen at a show in January. That's why I'm buying three brand new before my next big show
 
Re: The SM58...

Per Søvik said:
You don't buy a SM58 because it's "good enough", you buy it because it never stops working, and that can be just as important as how it sounds.
Whenever absolute clarity, maximum gain before feedback, stage noise rejection or whatever specific quality is important, there are probably better choices in the same price range, and I have made those choices often, and have a drawer full of dead or otherwise non-usable mikes to prove it.
1. It always works
2. It doesn't break
3. You can depend on it
4. It always sounds the same
5. You can't break it
6. It works
7. It doesn't fail
8. It's a know quantity
9. Nobody rejects it
10. It sounds good enough

That I think covers it.
Did I mention that it always works and never breaks?
Click to expand...
+100

It doesn't matter how "good" it is-if it doesn't work.

I remember somebody asking Hartley Peavey years ago-"What is the best amplifier" His response-"One that works".
 
Re: The SM58...

What used to bother me in the past about the SM58 was that I couldn't quite get the tone from it that I wanted without having to tune the PA to compensate for not having enough bands and enough parameters in the inputs, a sweeping mid just didn't do it and a four band with two parametric mids was sometimes a tad short of what I wanted, so inserting my parametric eq on the money channel and/or selecting mikes that was closer in tonality became a necessity. Now, having enough to work with in the input section to get the exact response curve, the SM58 has become a much more attractive proposition for me than it used to be, and I'm buying more of them.
It certainly will never sound like a studio condenser, but perfection is not always required or even desirable.
My favourite portrait lens is a cheap three element non-coated piece of crap, but it makes for nice portraits, not perfect warts-and-all super-defined dazzling colour look-how-sharp-my-lens-is stuff.
 
Last edited:
Funny, just last night I was mixing a regular client and I finally had enough of their bottom of the line $30 mics with no gain before feedback. They always nickel and dime me on what they pay for, so they usually supply mics for backup singers. It hit the point where me making my point about not letting them use stuff for free was going to make me look bad, so I grabbed 3 58's and switched them out. The band leader said "wow, we get the good mics".
After reading this thread I almost laughed out loud.
Bottom line is the 58 had good gain before feedback, sounded good and felt fairly familiar. They decided they need to pony up the $20 extra and rent my "real mics" each time.
 
Re: The SM58...

Kemper Watson said:
+1.
I had a few stolen at a show in January. That's why I'm buying three brand new before my next big show
Click to expand...

While I cannot argue with the 58, I much prefer the B57 as a vox mic, when you get to pick. HPF, the one requisite low mid cut, and a parametric boost at 12kHz, and its usually great for RnR.

Other advantages, it still says Shure, is durable, and looks "familiar."
 
Re: The SM58...

Dick Rees said:
How often do you get your ears cleaned?
Click to expand...

Daily, unless you're talking about the water-pressure to ear canal, never had that done.

The point is that EQ doesn't fix time domain issues. It's exactly the same as why crap speakers can't just be EQ'ed to sound like great speakers. Since Danley/L'Acoustics/Nexo/D&B/Fulcrum/etc aren't out of business, there must be something to this.

For those of us that have moved on from 'good enough' to 'best' - the SM58 has been left behind as well. For a cheap, durable, dynamic mic - the E935 works great for me, the AE6100 as well (haven't tested durability as much). If anyone squabbles over the cost difference, they have much larger problems than a few dollars - like the cost of real speakers/amps/DSP/subwoofers.

Show me someone that can make an SM58 sound like a 'real' mic (AE5400, E965, KMS105, etc) and I'll happily concede that my mixing/EQ skills are severely lacking.
 
Re: The SM58...

John Chiara said:
Now see.. I disagree with this! The mic and speakers are always the "weakest" link in a proper system... As they are changing acoustic energy into electrical and then back again. I try to "get it right at the source" whenever possible. I often run on stage and move a guitar mic during a show instead of trying to "fix" the source with EQ. A huge part of mixing is creating a reference for yourself and the. Traing your ears to hear the difference and your brain to find ways to move towards it
Click to expand...

Agreed that the mic and speakers are often the weakest link, with the 2nd weakest link being the operator of those items. With an SM58, you're dealing with a known pretty good constant. Those inexperienced will have people around them that know how to make the SM58 work. They know to turn this knob and that knob to a certain position to get the acceptable sound they want, not knowing why they turned those knobs. Now, throw in a different mic that they aren't used to, and they have to actually learn how to set the audio by ear. The better mic in an inexperienced users hands can end up sounding worse.

I consider the SM58 a starting point 'reference' mic. It's ROCK solid durable, which alone is a great feature. Not many other mics can match it in durability. When you find a replacement for your particular situation that works better, you can easily sell a used SM58 for darned near what you paid for it, so the investment isn't lost. Other mics don't enjoy the same resale value, in my experience.

As far as vocal mics, I love the sound of an AKG C535. Great mic, but definitely not something I'd recommend for someone just starting their search.
 
Re: The SM58...

Brian jojade said:
Agreed that the mic and speakers are often the weakest link, with the 2nd weakest link being the operator of those items. With an SM58, you're dealing with a known pretty good constant. Those inexperienced will have people around them that know how to make the SM58 work. They know to turn this knob and that knob to a certain position to get the acceptable sound they want, not knowing why they turned those knobs. Now, throw in a different mic that they aren't used to, and they have to actually learn how to set the audio by ear. The better mic in an inexperienced users hands can end up sounding worse.

I consider the SM58 a starting point 'reference' mic. It's ROCK solid durable, which alone is a great feature. Not many other mics can match it in durability. When you find a replacement for your particular situation that works better, you can easily sell a used SM58 for darned near what you paid for it, so the investment isn't lost. Other mics don't enjoy the same resale value, in my experience.

As far as vocal mics, I love the sound of an AKG C535. Great mic, but definitely not something I'd recommend for someone just starting their search.
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing at all...just consider this analogy. It's 2013 and young people are training to be auto mechanics. While a background in 30 year old cars might be of interest to them I think they would be less than well served to spend time working on cars they will never be forced to work on, instead of learning current and implemented technologies. My point is, if I am training someone to mix on a house system, teaching them how to wrangle a 58 into submission is a waste of time. Teach them from the start that different mics suit different vocals. I taught a guy how to wrangle a Senn 935... And even his inexperienced ears can tell the difference. I admit I am old but nothing aggravates me more than seeing anyone doing something by habit instead of using their ears to try stuff and take it up a notch.
 
Re: The SM58...

I will concede that the SM58 is a very durable microphone; however, we are again going down a path of argument with huge holes in it.

The fact that an SM58 is durable does not mean that an ND767a or Sennheiser e845/e945 are NOT durable.

I have had my ND767's for over a decade. I have not had a single failure despite them being dropped, plopped, spilled on, and generally mistreated.... and they are a much better microphone than the SM58.

It is shocking to me that there are so many here that defend the SM58 and even agree that it doesn't sound as good as other microphones in its price class.

Eric Lenasbunt
Funny, just last night I was mixing a regular client and I finally had enough of their bottom of the line $30 mics with no gain before feedback. They always nickel and dime me on what they pay for, so they usually supply mics for backup singers. It hit the point where me making my point about not letting them use stuff for free was going to make me look bad, so I grabbed 3 58's and switched them out. The band leader said "wow, we get the good mics".
After reading this thread I almost laughed out loud.
Bottom line is the 58 had good gain before feedback, sounded good and felt fairly familiar. They decided they need to pony up the $20 extra and rent my "real mics" each time.​
Click to expand...


Hey Eric,

I agree that the SM58 is a much better microphone than ANY $30.00 POS I have ever seen. It isn't a bad microphone, it just isn't the best.

I suspect that had you replaced the crap $30.00 microphones with EV ND767's they would have been even more floored at the difference.

This is not the only forum where I have seen this exact subject come up. It amazes me that there is such a rabid following for the SM58 without any evidence that it is a better microphone than the others in its class. It is like a cult or something ;)

So let me list out the reasons given in this thread that you should use an SM58:
  1. It is "good enough" even if there are better sounding microphones (I would rather have the best myself).
  2. Feedback rejection isn't the only reason to pick a microphone so it is alright that the SM58 feeds back before other microphones would (It is an important issue to me though)
  3. Other people will recognize it and accept it (I acknowledge that this is important for sound providers, but not bands).
  4. It has a track record of being durable (so do other microphones).


I still would like to hear from someone in this thread that is willing to actually state that the SM58 is a better sounding microphone than others in its class and that it has better feedback rejection.

Any takers?
 
Re: The SM58...

If you ND767 is such a great mic then why have I never seen them on a tech rider? If you are having feedback problems with a 58 then how about reaching for the eq and pulling out the problem frequency? Saying that a microphone is more prone to feedback then others it complete bullshit! Think about all the variables that go into a signal path to cause feedback! You have the venue, reflective walls, ambient noises, stage wash, response of the monitors/loudspeakers, response of the microphones, overall gain of the system, (gain is the actual cause of feedback). While your EV Mics may be less prone to feedback in a particular circumstance, they won't be in all situations.

With regards to what sounds better in its class.... What class are you talking about? "Handheld vocal Mics"? I have a kms105 and it sounds better on my voice, it is a handheld vocal mic, is it in the same class? Oh, and I can guarantee you that I will not let you use my kms105 for your band so YOU get the sm58s, therefore they are the best sounding mic that you'll get on my stage unless you bring a BE and an ME who is used to using your Mics, and that is only if you are the headliner that actually gets a sound check. While your at it, bring your own consoles and copper because you aren't messing with my eq curves that are perfectly rung out for my sm58s and my monitors with my monitor guy. I don't have time to reset my eqs for all the other bands that don't get a sound check.

Get it?!

That's it why the sm58 is the most popular, most accepted vocal mic of all time!
 
Top Bottom