New lead vocal live mic needed

PG Music Home

I need to buy a new professional lead vocal mic for singing at live gigs. I am pretty confident about Sure as a brand but I have been to their website and it appears there would be 9 different mic models that would be suitable. What are the advantages / disadvantages of these different mics? Does anybody have experience with all of them? Which one would you recommend and why?

The list is as follows:

SM 48 (S)
SM 58
PG 48 (anything to do with PG Music?)
PG 58 (anything to do with PG Music?)
BETA 58A
SUPER 55
SUPER 55 (SE)
565 SD
55 SH

Any other suggestions?

As usual, many thanks in advance

Sam, don't dismiss the SM57. It's the same element found in the SM58 but in a somewhat better-looking package. Both are stage worthy and built like the proverbial brick oothoos (Canadian for outhouse).

A serious caution: Know your source. They are among the most counterfeited mics in the world. An untrained eye will never detect the fakes.

This short clip is an eye opener: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whfm6F-wK6g

See also under SM57 counterfeits.

I love this one Cad 189

I actually don't like the beta 58a. Too finicky on the pattern. My experience with it is that the singer has to maintain pretty consistent control of positioning of the mic to prevent significant swings in level. Probably designed this way but not very forgiving to those with less than excellent mic technique. Check out EV PL80a as a less expensive alternative. A new fave for me that also works well on acoustic guitar.

Hard to go wrong with the good ol 58. Won't get complaints from any sound engineer if you show up with that.

Another vote for the SM57. If you purchase one its not going to be wasted.

I have had the Sm58 against the SM57 and for me the 57 is more 'musical' it captures the partials better. I find the SM58 to quite a brittle sound. This is when using my sax, may be different when using for vocals which is its main use.

58 is more of a default mic rather than a quality mic. Its very robust and reliable but is this what you want?

Zero

BETA 58 from the Shure lineup. Latest technology, incorporates Neodymium magnet, lots of "gain before feedback" and a great choice for the male voice.

My personal fav has been the AUDIX OM-5 for the past few years. Although I own Beta 58 as well, the Audix OM-5 has won out in quite few situations. It is also Neodymium magnet technology as well.

--Mac

http://www.gearwire.com/audix-om5-shurebeta58-shootout.html

I won't recommend a mic for you Sam.The reason is that there are soooooo many and they all have their own characteristics. You must try out many mics until you find the one that suits your voice.

Quote:

http://www.gearwire.com/audix-om5-shurebeta58-shootout.html

There are so many technical problems with this 'shootout'; somewhat eluded to by the person doing the video, that I wouldn't say it's worth much to be honest.

It's certainly not a real A/B test. Gain before feedback portion was particularly unscientifically conducted.

Regardless, I screwed up on my distaste for a particular beta. It's the Beta 57C that has caused me issues: http://www.shure.com/idc/groups/public/documents/webcontent/us_pro_beta87c_specsheet.pdf

While the polar patterns look kind of normal, that's not been our experience in using it. On axis sensitivity seems way more sensitive than the 10 dB delta that is shown in low-mids from close (.4") to far (2ft). In my experience, it has been more like 10 dB with a 6" change. The mic is currently relegated to talk-back channel use in our system. If we get some channel compression on the lead vocalist's channel, then perhaps we'll put this thing back into lead vocal service.

Scott's correct, of course.

My comment?

That's not a test, that's not even a "shootout" - that's just a video.

Both mics are darn good modern mics, no question, I'd feel good about finding either one on the stand at any show.

The older SM-58 design may sound better to older ears more used to the kind of sound that the older Alnico based magnetics bring to the game. But if you are having to do anything at high volume levels, the newer Neodymium magnetics simply generate more signal for the same amount of moving air.

--Mac

First of all: the choise of a vocal microphone for a singer is an individual choise. It is, like any instrument, something of personal taste and feel. You can pick a good quality mic from a list you find on the net or reccomendation from experts. his will however not guarantee you that that mic is the ideal mic for you! You will have to testdrive some mics in your budget to be able to pick your favourit. Be sure to try both dynamic and condenser type microphones!
(for all guitarplayers: which guitar is the best?)

Having said that, here are some mics and my opinion about them:

- Shure SM58: Good quality dynamic microphone with a clear sound. Used a lot in rental situations because almost anyone can use this mic without any problem. (the PG-series are the budget versions of the Shure microphones: not the same standards as the originals.)

- Shure SM57: Dynamic microphone much like the SM58, used mainly for instruments. Although used by some as a vocal mic I would not reccomend it. Reason for this is the fact that the SM57 doesn't have a built-in popfilter to keep moist (spit) from the capsule.

- Shure Beta 58A: The professional brother of the SM58. Tends to sound a bit warmer.

- Shure Beta 87A: Good quality condenser microphone. Like with all condenser mics, this one requires the singer to have microphone technique. Another thing with condenser microphones is the fact that they need Phantom Power. Make sure your mixing desk can provide that!

- Sennheiser E 845: Good quality dynamic microphone. Comparable with the Shure SM58, but slightly warmer sounding (and much nicer design

)

- Sennheiser E 945: Professional version of the 845. Haven't tried this one myself yet.

- Sennheiser E 865: Good quality condenser microphone. I've been using this one (the wireless version) for about 8 or 9 years now. One of my favourit mics!

- Sennheiser E 965: When my 865 dies someday; this is the replacement mic for me.

- AKG D7: Dynamic vocal microphone. AKG makes some pretty good mics (I love the AKG C451 and D112) but I don't like the handling of their vocal mics. This has nothing to do with the quality, just my personal feel.

- AKG C535 eb: Condenser vocal microphone. See remarks on the D7.

- Audio Technica AE4100: Very good dynamic vocal microphone. This one has a cardioid pattern. The AE6100 has a polar pattern. I would reccomend the AE4100 opposed to the AE6100.

Audio Technica AE5400: Cardioid type condenser microphone. This one is very easy to work with, you almost only have to think your lines and this microphone will pick them up. Great microphone.

The there are brands like Rode, Neumann etc who make excellent microphones. It all boils down to personal taste and feel. Not every microphone is suitable for your voice. You will have to testdrive several of them. Take someone with you to have a listen also.

Like Don said: There are a lot of counterfeit microphones on the market. When you buy from a descent store you are almost sure to get the original product you paid for. Buying from private persons on the internet...well, let's say you won't be the first to end up with a cheap fake microphone.

The SM57 as a vocal mic (recorded dry then with EQ):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=MHBB42rbkJo

This is the sound that I personally prefer for vocals.

Notice the caveat about counterfeit/fake SM57s flooding the market and that music stores will say "It not a VOCAL microphone!" I wish I had a pfennig for every hit that was sung through an SM57. Further, it IS an excellent instrument mic. I used it on acoustic guitar for years. Just my humble opinion. Your mileage may vary.

My son recently bought an expensive AKG and, to my ear, the SM57 sounds much better, FWIW.

All of the vocals on my Motagator site were sung through a 2 quid computer "stick mic". Just sayin'.

Citaat:

The SM57 as a vocal mic (recorded dry then with EQ):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=MHBB42rbkJo

This is the sound that I personally prefer for vocals.

Notice the caveat about counterfeit/fake SM57s flooding the market and that music stores will say "It not a VOCAL microphone!" I wish I had a pfennig for every hit that was sung through an SM57. Further, it IS an excellent instrument mic. I used it on acoustic guitar for years. Just my humble opinion. Your mileage may vary.

My son recently bought an expensive AKG and, to my ear, the SM57 sounds much better, FWIW.

The only reason I do not reccomend the SM57 as a vocal microphone for regular (stage) use is the fact that it lacks a popfilter. This makes the capsule highly vaunerable to moist and therefor is more likely to break down long before it's lifetime. The SM57 is a good microphone, I own 4 of them and I use them on guitar cabinets and snare bottoms. The SM58 (same capsule) does have a popfilter and is therefor much better suited for vocals.

Excellent points, Mike. I'm only saying that it (the 57) is, and has been, a popular VOCAL mic in spite of contrary opinion. The 58 has a slightly better response curve but, having owned both, I prefer the 57. I was not aware of an increased "moisture" problem. Also, most studios use external "pop filters" anyway. I was just stating an opinion and opinions are like anal sphincters, everybody has one.

Audix Om2

There's a shoot out on YouTube. The Bose systems are paired with them in presets.

Quote:

Also, most studios use external "pop filters" anyway.

The thing is, this mic is not for the studio (where I have a Rode and a popguard) but for live use in front of an audience

I've heard yer voice on a youtube or two before, Sam.

Be sure to try to audition both the Shure Beta 58 and the Audix OM-5 mics, I think they will do you well.

The older SM-58 design would also be a good choice, warmer but lacking the punch through of the newer designs. That punch-through thang shouldn't be ignored, it translates to being able to belt longer with less fatigue, man.

--Mac

Quote:

Quote:

Also, most studios use external "pop filters" anyway.

The thing is, this mic is not for the studio (where I have a Rode and a popguard) but for live use in front of an audience

I understood that, Sam! Somehow the thread drifted to a comparison between the 58 (pop filtered) and 57 (no pop filter). Sorry to appear to have hijacked your thread. It was unintentional.

No problem, Don. Thanks, Mac

I guess Ray Charles, Leon Russell and Joe Cocker didn't get the memo about needing a pop filter to run the SM57 live onstage...

--Mac

They can/could afford a new mic every once in a while

You don't HAVE to paint a wooden house, but a few coats of paint or varnish will make the house last longer.

Quote:

They can/could afford a new mic every once in a while

You don't HAVE to paint a wooden house, but a few coats of paint or varnish will make the house last longer.

Mike,
If you stop looking at all the cute stuff out in your audience you wouldn't drool as much on your mic. LOL

Quote:

Mike,
If you stop looking at all the cute stuff out in your audience you wouldn't drool as much on your mic. LOL

And quit singing in the sauna (steam bath). That is hard on SM57s.

Quote:

They can/could afford a new mic every once in a while

You don't HAVE to paint a wooden house, but a few coats of paint or varnish will make the house last longer.

Well, they used the '57 "back in the day" when options weren't as prolific. And they turned in strong performances that are still valid today, using that mic. That was my point.

Since that time, Ray Charles used quite a few different mics, all to good advantage. I've witnessed Ray using the ~$1000.00 or more Neumann dynamic. A fine mic, absolutely (Harry Connick Jr. uses one as well) but likely way outside the scope of affordability in this discussion, eh?

Shure sells a boot, the A81WS windshield for the SM57 that was designed by physicists to get the most out of the design, but unfortunately far too few musicians and singers take advantage of the thing. Cost of the windshield is a likely factor.

But again, I would not select the venerable '57 today, as there are better technologies available in the two (and more) Neodymium magnet designs now anyway.

--Mac

Musician's friend is having a sale on Mics.. as much as 2/3 off

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pages/all-things-vocal?src=3TP2HDF

Worked with a keyboard player for years, who's SM57 smelled like Marlboro and Johnnie Walker Black.

Later,

Quote:

Worked with a keyboard player for years, who's SM57 smelled like Marlboro and Johnnie Walker Black.

Later,

I can't remember giggin' wit' youse, my friend, mus' be gettin' old...

In High School, I was in a touring choir on Saturdays, and a touring vocal ensemble on Sundays - most of the school year. Choir was in existence starting in the late 1960's and is still running today - on about the 3rd director over that time.

We used SM 57's exclusively for everything with the exception of the crown PZM we would slap inside the local church's piano if it was in tune, we did have a live band off and on where we used the 57's as instrument mics, but we had 57's that well pre-dated my time (85-90) and my guess are still in use today - beat up by high schoolers and thrown under the bus (literally - we had GMC 4104, 4107 and what ever they are running now) buses where we had the mics in their vinyl zippered cases with clips on them, tossed into suitcases we bought at yard sales and kept in the underside cargo-holds) and they worked for years and years and years.

We used the black foam windscreens if we had them, but they would take on 'character' and we used them without them as well until we had budget to buy another grip of them. You can take out most of the plosive sensitivity with a 57 by just singing across the top instead of directly into the end. Predictable gain before feedback, legendary durability, etc.

Here's the deal, if you ever want to sell the mic, whatever you buy, there's always a long list of folks looking for 57's and 58's.

If you don't have your own sound engineer; showing up at a gig with an SM 57 or 58 will raise no eyebrows and the engineer can probably pre-dial in the gain to within 5 dB of where he/she will leave it for the rest of your gig. Show up with some lesser known mics and that's adding to the engineer's list of things to slightly worry about.

-Scott

Well stated, Scott and Mac. You covered all my bases for me. As an aside, I like the cosmetic design of the 57 much more than the 58's "ball" design. Way mo' kew! Both models can serve double-duty as a tack hammer with no ill affects.

Citaat:

Mike,
If you stop looking at all the cute stuff out in your audience you wouldn't drool as much on your mic. LOL

If I can't do that, why the heck would I want to be on a stage anyway? I mean...isn't that the only reason why they made the stage higher than floorlevel: for the nice view?

I don't do drugs, drink nothing but water on gigs: if you take the girls away; where is the rock and roll?

Quote:

Worked with a keyboard player for years, who's SM57 smelled like Marlboro and Johnnie Walker Black.

Later,

On gig nights that's how we know whose mic it is when hooking things up.
Smoke - guitar player
mint - bass
rancid raw meat - drummer

Actually, Barry and I really do mark our personal use 57's with permanent marker to keep them separate .. so we get to use 'ours'.
Weird?

Quote:

Quote:

Worked with a keyboard player for years, who's SM57 smelled like Marlboro and Johnnie Walker Black.

Later,

rancid raw meat - drummer:)

Now I am on the floor!

Great one rharv.

Yes, I do have another suggestion -- nothing against Shure since most times I'm using a 55 SH2 -- go to your local dealer and try some of the ElectroVoice N/D series.

For whatever reason (the last time I compared them to other brands, about two years ago) they seem to produce lower handling noises. EV mics are in about the same price range as Shure.

They have different characteristics so you really need to find the model that gets the best out of your voice.

Guido