|
Post by jacobamerritt on May 30, 2019 9:42:57 GMT -6
I spoke with someone at JZ this week who said there will be a sale in July... Their sales are usually pretty awesome, so check in on their site.
Again, between the two version, I like the ‘vintage’ voicing.
Vincent: I’ve been itching to hear the JZ V67 myself. JZ has really been pushing it lately. There have been a number of demo videos hitting different channels on YouTube. Glen Fricker put it on piano and it sounded great. It really is disappointing that it’s not a multi pattern microphone. I’ve been real curious how it sounds next to a TLM67, but I haven’t been able to find any clips of anyone doing that.
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on May 30, 2019 9:44:39 GMT -6
I think both the sm7 and sm57 are good mics. You can record alot of great things with them. However its hard to use them once you've found something that outperforms them. For me, a 421, beyer m201 or m88tg easily out does both, and in just abouth every application I can think of.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 30, 2019 9:45:52 GMT -6
15 years ago I was going to buy a neve 1073 for 5k and a u47 for around 10-15k, and just use my cheap interface and make ITB stuff. Right before I made the purchase though, I got cold feet and decided to see if there were any clones that could match that sound. Luckily someone had posted a shootout of all the tube mics at that time. So I setup my blind test and rated them best to worst. I renamed all the files with a number code, mixed them up and later decoded my results. U47 was the clear winner with a low mid thing that was what I wanted, followed by 251, C-12, u67, all the classics.. sadly the clones I was really wanting, and also really expensive ones, were rated pretty low in my results. It was pretty easy to hear vintage from new. Except for one surprisingly I had rated next to the vintage mics. I was in shock, it was only $1100. Used the money I saved to get a 24 track, and then a console instead of a 1073. So for me I guess the cost/performance.. if it’s close enough to be a cousin of a great mic, and costs 90% less. What was the surprising $1100 mic in question?
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 30, 2019 10:00:59 GMT -6
SM7 is my favorite dynamic vocal mic of all time. Currently I don't own one but I should. I prefer it over M88TG, MD441, RE20, and so on. Those mics I prefer over the SM7 on other sources like bass, guitar amps, acoustic guitars. They all have their strengths but the SM7B's strength is shining on lead vocals spoken, screamed, or sung.
I skipped ahead by building and designing my own mics. It's not an easy thing to do, or a quick thing, but it's how I got where I wanted to go without having to spend $3,000 on a mic.
It makes me wonder if Signal Art and Barbaric could basically provide the same service for non DIY people. Probably so.
So I always get lost in these discussions since I don't have a normal perspective. The best $1,200 off the shelf mic I own, well the only one, is the Peluso 2247 SE. I think that mic holds up very well, and I also think it is one of the best mics in the Peluso lineup. It works on a lot of singers. My own voice sounds better on a 251 style.
If you have to spend $2,000, or $3,000 on a mic that you truly believe in, do it. It will make your life so much easier and erase a lot of these concerns forever.
Same thing with getting the right monitor setup / converters / room treatment. All your cares melt away and you can bask in the glory of music.
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on May 30, 2019 11:17:08 GMT -6
Should I list my reasons? I dunno.... Why not? 1. The price. Less than $400 for a mic who's pedigree has been proven time and time again? Even the poorest of home studios can usually scrape up enough cash for an SM7. 2. Versatility. Vocals, kick drum, great on guitar amps. I love the RE-20 too, but feel that the SM7 is a bit more versatile. By the way, I've used it to great effect on whispy, female folk vocals, so those that think the SM7 is only good for shouting into should think again. 3. Durability. It's a Shure mic--nuff said. 4. Resale value. My Miktek CV4 resale value has halved since I purchased it. That will never happen with an SM7. 5. Popularity. Singers have actually asked me for it and it's nice to be able to oblige. No one will ever ask for your modded DIY XKDFHW-67 with a Slovakian capsule. And please everyone stop with the "a great vocalist can use any mediocre mic and make it sound good" argument. The SM7 stands on its own as a versatile, great sounding mic. I tell everyone who's beginning to build a mic cabinet to put it on their short list.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on May 30, 2019 11:32:52 GMT -6
And just like Chuck Norris...
If a SM7 falls into a pool, it doesn't get wet. The pool gets SM7'd! Chris
|
|
|
Post by brenta on May 30, 2019 11:44:22 GMT -6
I think both the sm7 and sm57 are good mics. You can record alot of great things with them. However its hard to use them once you've found something that outperforms them. For me, a 421, beyer m201 or m88tg easily out does both, and in just abouth every application I can think of. I don’t think you’re right or wrong and I wouldn’t tell someone they should prefer one mic over another. Just like I’m not going to try to convince everyone that their favorite color should be green. People saying they hate 57’s/SM7’s or that they like other mics better is their prerogative and totally understandable. But to me those are completely different statements than saying 57’s/sm7b’s are “bad mics” or “useless”, which I think just demonstrates an ignorance of recording history. I prefer Audix i5’s over a 57 on snare. I prefer a 57 over a 421 on amps because they have more bite. I don’t like 421’s on toms, I don’t like the way the cymbal bleed sounds and I think other mics capture the tom sound better. But they’re the most used tom mics of all time so obviously other people find them good there and that’s fine.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 11:58:07 GMT -6
I know some people on here think it’s a cliche, but I think the sm7 is an outstanding mic. A lot of cliches come about because they’re true. I’ll take it a step further and say that the SM7’s little brother, the SM57, is an outstanding mic as well. It gets slagged often by what I have to assume are mostly home recording novices. One of my least favorite phrases on GS is “(Mic preamp x) is so good it EVEN makes an SM57 sound good!” Well I’d argue that the 57 is one of the best mics of all time. We all know that most of our favorite electric guitar and snare recordings were done with a 57, but that’s not all. Ryan Hewitt said that for the Avett Brothers recordings he used 57’s on the acoustic guitars and SM7’s on the vocals. 57’s wouldn’t be my 1st, 2nd, or 3rd idea for acoustic guitars, but while we’re all obsessing about km84’s and Gefells (and rightfully so), Ryan Hewitt has created what are probably the most successful Americana recordings of the past decade with a pile of old Shure mics. Madonna used an SM57 for vocals on at least her first album and I think Bono uses one for all of the U2 recordings. Admittedly that has less to do with the tone of the mic and more about the fact that they prefer to sing in the control room with the music blaring out of the mains. Point is, cliche or not, 57’s and SM7’s are great mics. <chuckle>
I've used 57s as long as 57s have been made. I used to think that they were great mics. That can probably be forgiven, as I started out as a live sound guy. I continued to use them well after I'd got into recording , decades ago. For a long time I thought that the reason I could never get a lot of things to sound the way I wanted them to - that is, like the source actually sounded in the room - was me, that I was doing something wrong, and that the other problem was my acoustic environment. Then, on the advice of some people whose work I really respected, I tried using mics that were not 57s on some of the things I had not been happy with and guess what? Now all my 57s and all but one of my 56s sit in my box of mics that only gets used for live punk and metal shows where I don't want to risk my good mics. I also discovered that a lot of what I'd believed to be problems with bad room tone were actually problems with microphones - 57s and 421s - that have truly lousy off axis frequency response.
It should also be noted that a great performance by a great artist will trump lousy equipment any day of the week, so I'm not impressed by stories of name people who use them. For the most part those people are great IN SPITE OF, not because of, their 57s. And 421s.
As far as singing in the control room with blaring music is concerned, my Beyer M88 - which is a hypercardioid - will beat the pants off of any 57 or 58 ever made (including the really old ones which actually do sound better than the new ones - Sure changed the capsule to something cheaper to produce in the mod '80s.) And the M88 is a great recording mic - works on nearly anything.
There are certain cases where I might use a 57 - if I wanted a certain type of hard rock sound where it's a cliche' - But I don't do much of that anymore and in most cases a Beyer M201 or an EV RE10/11/15/16 will do a better job. As to a preamp "making a 57 sound good", I don't buy it. A preamp can't improve the sonic signature of a mic and it for damn sure can't do anything about bad off-axis response. A preamp can't differentiate between on-axis and off-axis. A preamp might be able to mask a mics bad sound to a degree to some way of thinking but it would have to be so colored tha I probably would not want to use it in most cases - and I can't see having a preamp around just to make 57s sound good - I have plenty of mics that sound good all by themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 30, 2019 11:59:12 GMT -6
chessparov your humor posts have been on point the past few days, keep up the good work it makes the forums more fun
|
|
|
Post by spindrift on May 30, 2019 12:09:27 GMT -6
My experience lies with Eppstein's here. Look at David Rawlings and Gillian Welch: they use 57s on guitars and 58s for vocals (live) and it sounds amazing. I've seen 57s used on acoustics at Capitol in some serious sessions.
The more I make records, the more I realize it's what in front of the mic that is the magic. We are debating nuance.....fun nuance that has a tangible sonic imprint, but it's farther down the list than the musical magic that we are responding to.
|
|
|
Post by bradd on May 30, 2019 12:10:18 GMT -6
15 years ago I was going to buy a neve 1073 for 5k and a u47 for around 10-15k, and just use my cheap interface and make ITB stuff. Right before I made the purchase though, I got cold feet and decided to see if there were any clones that could match that sound. Luckily someone had posted a shootout of all the tube mics at that time. So I setup my blind test and rated them best to worst. I renamed all the files with a number code, mixed them up and later decoded my results. U47 was the clear winner with a low mid thing that was what I wanted, followed by 251, C-12, u67, all the classics.. sadly the clones I was really wanting, and also really expensive ones, were rated pretty low in my results. It was pretty easy to hear vintage from new. Except for one surprisingly I had rated next to the vintage mics. I was in shock, it was only $1100. Used the money I saved to get a 24 track, and then a console instead of a 1073. So for me I guess the cost/performance.. if it’s close enough to be a cousin of a great mic, and costs 90% less. So out of curiosity, what did you get?
|
|
|
Post by bradd on May 30, 2019 12:15:08 GMT -6
A lot of cliches come about because they’re true. I’ll take it a step further and say that the SM7’s little brother, the SM57, is an outstanding mic as well. It gets slagged often by what I have to assume are mostly home recording novices. One of my least favorite phrases on GS is “(Mic preamp x) is so good it EVEN makes an SM57 sound good!” Well I’d argue that the 57 is one of the best mics of all time. We all know that most of our favorite electric guitar and snare recordings were done with a 57, but that’s not all. Ryan Hewitt said that for the Avett Brothers recordings he used 57’s on the acoustic guitars and SM7’s on the vocals. 57’s wouldn’t be my 1st, 2nd, or 3rd idea for acoustic guitars, but while we’re all obsessing about km84’s and Gefells (and rightfully so), Ryan Hewitt has created what are probably the most successful Americana recordings of the past decade with a pile of old Shure mics. Madonna used an SM57 for vocals on at least her first album and I think Bono uses one for all of the U2 recordings. Admittedly that has less to do with the tone of the mic and more about the fact that they prefer to sing in the control room with the music blaring out of the mains. Point is, cliche or not, 57’s and SM7’s are great mics. <chuckle>
I've used 57s as long as 57s have been made. I used to think that they were great mics. That can probably be forgiven, as I started out as a live sound guy. I continued to use them well after I'd got into recording , decades ago. For a long time I thought that the reason I could never get a lot of things to sound the way I wanted them to - that is, like the source actually sounded in the room - was me, that I was doing something wrong, and that the other problem was my acoustic environment. Then, on the advice of some people whose work I really respected, I tried using mics that were not 57s on some of the things I had not been happy with and guess what? Now all my 57s and all but one of my 56s sit in my box of mics that only gets used for live punk and metal shows where I don't want to risk my good mics. I also discovered that a lot of what I'd believed to be problems with bad room tone were actually problems with microphones - 57s and 421s - that have truly lousy off axis frequency response.
It should also be noted that a great performance by a great artist will trump lousy equipment any day of the week, so I'm not impressed by stories of name people who use them. For the most part those people are great IN SPITE OF, not because of, their 57s. And 421s.
As far as singing in the control room with blaring music is concerned, my Beyer M88 - which is a hypercardioid - will beat the pants off of any 57 or 58 ever made (including the really old ones which actually do sound better than the new ones - Sure changed the capsule to something cheaper to produce in the mod '80s.) And the M88 is a great recording mic - works on nearly anything.
There are certain cases where I might use a 57 - if I wanted a certain type of hard rock sound where it's a cliche' - But I don't do much of that anymore and in most cases a Beyer M201 or an EV RE10/11/15/16 will do a better job. As to a preamp "making a 57 sound good", I don't buy it. A preamp can't improve the sonic signature of a mic and it for damn sure can't do anything about bad off-axis response. A preamp can't differentiate between on-axis and off-axis. A preamp might be able to mask a mics bad sound to a degree to some way of thinking but it would have to be so colored tha I probably would not want to use it in most cases - and I can't see having a preamp around just to make 57s sound good - I have plenty of mics that sound good all by themselves. I think I'm an odd bird because I like the M88 on many things, but I swear I have yet to find a mic that is worse on my voice than it is. I'm not sure why, but I really sound like ass with that thing.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 12:25:42 GMT -6
1. The price. Less than $400 for a mic who's pedigree has been proven time and time again? Even the poorest of home studios can usually scrape up enough cash for an SM7. 2. Versatility. Vocals, kick drum, great on guitar amps. I love the RE-20 too, but feel that the SM7 is a bit more versatile. By the way, I've used it to great effect on whispy, female folk vocals, so those that think the SM7 is only good for shouting into should think again. 3. Durability. It's a Shure mic--nuff said. 4. Resale value. My Miktek CV4 resale value has halved since I purchased it. That will never happen with an SM7. 5. Popularity. Singers have actually asked me for it and it's nice to be able to oblige. No one will ever ask for your modded DIY XKDFHW-67 with a Slovakian capsule. And please everyone stop with the "a great vocalist can use any mediocre mic and make it sound good" argument. The SM7 stands on its own as a versatile, great sounding mic. I tell everyone who's beginning to build a mic cabinet to put it on their short list. 5. Well, people will ask for my U87, my C12A, my Pearlman TM-1s, my KM84, and my Heiserman H-47.
4. I can easily get twice what I paid fpr my U87 or my C12A. I can get more than I paid for my KM84, my TM-1s, my RE-20s, my Shure 300, hell, most of my mics.
3. It's a Shure mic. Other than 58s, Shure mics are less durable than their rep would have you believe.
2. To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
1. Well, the SM7 certainly is inexpensive. For that reason, and the fact that people do ask for them, I keep thinking that I really should pick one up. but the hipster fad for them has inflated the used market price to beyond what I'm willing to pay for what is essentially a modded 57 with a selected capsule. One of these days.... If there isn't a more pressing demand for my cash.
|
|
|
Post by lpedrum on May 30, 2019 12:26:08 GMT -6
A lot of cliches come about because they’re true. I’ll take it a step further and say that the SM7’s little brother, the SM57, is an outstanding mic as well. It gets slagged often by what I have to assume are mostly home recording novices. One of my least favorite phrases on GS is “(Mic preamp x) is so good it EVEN makes an SM57 sound good!” Well I’d argue that the 57 is one of the best mics of all time. We all know that most of our favorite electric guitar and snare recordings were done with a 57, but that’s not all. Ryan Hewitt said that for the Avett Brothers recordings he used 57’s on the acoustic guitars and SM7’s on the vocals. 57’s wouldn’t be my 1st, 2nd, or 3rd idea for acoustic guitars, but while we’re all obsessing about km84’s and Gefells (and rightfully so), Ryan Hewitt has created what are probably the most successful Americana recordings of the past decade with a pile of old Shure mics. Madonna used an SM57 for vocals on at least her first album and I think Bono uses one for all of the U2 recordings. Admittedly that has less to do with the tone of the mic and more about the fact that they prefer to sing in the control room with the music blaring out of the mains. Point is, cliche or not, 57’s and SM7’s are great mics. <chuckle>
I've used 57s as long as 57s have been made. I used to think that they were great mics. That can probably be forgiven, as I started out as a live sound guy. I continued to use them well after I'd got into recording , decades ago. For a long time I thought that the reason I could never get a lot of things to sound the way I wanted them to - that is, like the source actually sounded in the room - was me, that I was doing something wrong, and that the other problem was my acoustic environment. Then, on the advice of some people whose work I really respected, I tried using mics that were not 57s on some of the things I had not been happy with and guess what? Now all my 57s and all but one of my 56s sit in my box of mics that only gets used for live punk and metal shows where I don't want to risk my good mics. I also discovered that a lot of what I'd believed to be problems with bad room tone were actually problems with microphones - 57s and 421s - that have truly lousy off axis frequency response.
It should also be noted that a great performance by a great artist will trump lousy equipment any day of the week, so I'm not impressed by stories of name people who use them. For the most part those people are great IN SPITE OF, not because of, their 57s. And 421s.
As far as singing in the control room with blaring music is concerned, my Beyer M88 - which is a hypercardioid - will beat the pants off of any 57 or 58 ever made (including the really old ones which actually do sound better than the new ones - Sure changed the capsule to something cheaper to produce in the mod '80s.) And the M88 is a great recording mic - works on nearly anything.
There are certain cases where I might use a 57 - if I wanted a certain type of hard rock sound where it's a cliche' - But I don't do much of that anymore and in most cases a Beyer M201 or an EV RE10/11/15/16 will do a better job. As to a preamp "making a 57 sound good", I don't buy it. A preamp can't improve the sonic signature of a mic and it for damn sure can't do anything about bad off-axis response. A preamp can't differentiate between on-axis and off-axis. A preamp might be able to mask a mics bad sound to a degree to some way of thinking but it would have to be so colored tha I probably would not want to use it in most cases - and I can't see having a preamp around just to make 57s sound good - I have plenty of mics that sound good all by themselves. I'll have to revisit the Beyer M88. Does age matter? I have the M201 and I'm still looking for ways to love it. I used it on snare for a while but then modded a couple of 57s with the Crimson mods and the M201 got put away. If you have old 57s or 58s laying around I strongly suggest upgrading them with the Crimson units. It's an ultra easy mod. I use the yellow on snare and the orange for live vocals. I'm surprised that RGOers don't mention them -- HERE IS A LINK.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 12:29:52 GMT -6
<chuckle>
I've used 57s as long as 57s have been made. I used to think that they were great mics. That can probably be forgiven, as I started out as a live sound guy. I continued to use them well after I'd got into recording , decades ago. For a long time I thought that the reason I could never get a lot of things to sound the way I wanted them to - that is, like the source actually sounded in the room - was me, that I was doing something wrong, and that the other problem was my acoustic environment. Then, on the advice of some people whose work I really respected, I tried using mics that were not 57s on some of the things I had not been happy with and guess what? Now all my 57s and all but one of my 56s sit in my box of mics that only gets used for live punk and metal shows where I don't want to risk my good mics. I also discovered that a lot of what I'd believed to be problems with bad room tone were actually problems with microphones - 57s and 421s - that have truly lousy off axis frequency response.
It should also be noted that a great performance by a great artist will trump lousy equipment any day of the week, so I'm not impressed by stories of name people who use them. For the most part those people are great IN SPITE OF, not because of, their 57s. And 421s.
As far as singing in the control room with blaring music is concerned, my Beyer M88 - which is a hypercardioid - will beat the pants off of any 57 or 58 ever made (including the really old ones which actually do sound better than the new ones - Sure changed the capsule to something cheaper to produce in the mod '80s.) And the M88 is a great recording mic - works on nearly anything.
There are certain cases where I might use a 57 - if I wanted a certain type of hard rock sound where it's a cliche' - But I don't do much of that anymore and in most cases a Beyer M201 or an EV RE10/11/15/16 will do a better job. As to a preamp "making a 57 sound good", I don't buy it. A preamp can't improve the sonic signature of a mic and it for damn sure can't do anything about bad off-axis response. A preamp can't differentiate between on-axis and off-axis. A preamp might be able to mask a mics bad sound to a degree to some way of thinking but it would have to be so colored tha I probably would not want to use it in most cases - and I can't see having a preamp around just to make 57s sound good - I have plenty of mics that sound good all by themselves. I think I'm an odd bird because I like the M88 on many things, but I swear I have yet to find a mic that is worse on my voice than it is. I'm not sure why, but I really sound like ass with that thing. Well, that's odd, but some voices and some mics just don't work. The 88 does well on Bowie, Phill Collins, Pat Benetar, and lots of others.
It also beats the pants off any Shure on my voice live, not that I'm anywhere close to those others.
|
|
|
Post by bradd on May 30, 2019 12:33:30 GMT -6
Agreed. The SM7 works great on me, but the brightness of the M88 just sounds off with me. I love it for other things though.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 12:40:44 GMT -6
<chuckle>
I've used 57s as long as 57s have been made. I used to think that they were great mics. That can probably be forgiven, as I started out as a live sound guy. I continued to use them well after I'd got into recording , decades ago. For a long time I thought that the reason I could never get a lot of things to sound the way I wanted them to - that is, like the source actually sounded in the room - was me, that I was doing something wrong, and that the other problem was my acoustic environment. Then, on the advice of some people whose work I really respected, I tried using mics that were not 57s on some of the things I had not been happy with and guess what? Now all my 57s and all but one of my 56s sit in my box of mics that only gets used for live punk and metal shows where I don't want to risk my good mics. I also discovered that a lot of what I'd believed to be problems with bad room tone were actually problems with microphones - 57s and 421s - that have truly lousy off axis frequency response.
It should also be noted that a great performance by a great artist will trump lousy equipment any day of the week, so I'm not impressed by stories of name people who use them. For the most part those people are great IN SPITE OF, not because of, their 57s. And 421s.
As far as singing in the control room with blaring music is concerned, my Beyer M88 - which is a hypercardioid - will beat the pants off of any 57 or 58 ever made (including the really old ones which actually do sound better than the new ones - Sure changed the capsule to something cheaper to produce in the mod '80s.) And the M88 is a great recording mic - works on nearly anything.
There are certain cases where I might use a 57 - if I wanted a certain type of hard rock sound where it's a cliche' - But I don't do much of that anymore and in most cases a Beyer M201 or an EV RE10/11/15/16 will do a better job. As to a preamp "making a 57 sound good", I don't buy it. A preamp can't improve the sonic signature of a mic and it for damn sure can't do anything about bad off-axis response. A preamp can't differentiate between on-axis and off-axis. A preamp might be able to mask a mics bad sound to a degree to some way of thinking but it would have to be so colored tha I probably would not want to use it in most cases - and I can't see having a preamp around just to make 57s sound good - I have plenty of mics that sound good all by themselves. I'll have to revisit the Beyer M88. Does age matter? I have the M201 and I'm still looking for ways to love it. I used it on snare for a while but then modded a couple of 57s with the Crimson mods and the M201 got put away. If you have old 57s or 58s laying around I strongly suggest upgrading them with the Crimson units. It's an ultra easy mod. I use the yellow on snare and the orange for live vocals. I'm surprised that RGOers don't mention them -- HERE IS A LINK. Well, the transformer is definitely a weak link in the 57. Ollie Archut used to sell a great replacement transformer at Tab Funkenwerke. I don't know if it's still available or not.
The thing is, a new trannie may help a lot but it still can't do anything about the poor aff-axis response. That may not mean much for most live applications whyere the mic is jammed right up against the source, but it's important for recording in most cases.
It's particularly important for ensemble recording where the quality of the leakage is key for the success of the mix. If you ditch all the drum mics that have poor off axis response, suddenly your drum mix gets a whole lot better and comes together a whole lot easier. Not to mention trying to record a full band live in the studio.
I do not know about qualityy differences between new and old M88s. I do know that the old ones used to come with serial numbered pen graph plots and they used to be guaranteed that any random two could make a matched pair. I also have noticed that the music vids I see of many people with M88s always seem to be older mics, but it could just be that they're older videos. I do not presently own an older one to compare.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on May 30, 2019 12:41:03 GMT -6
chessparov your humor posts have been on point the past few days, keep up the good work it makes the forums more fun Thanks so much! My "school year" afterschool Elementary classes, that I teach are winding down. Soon we will have Summer Chess camps, for the kids. Being able to kid around with kids, really does make it more fun for them. And for those Elementary school kids too! After teaching thousands of classes, that helped me transfer some comedy bits-sometimes intentionally-to local music stages. Chris P.S. Been trying to find a Recording Studio lately, that has a modded DIY XKDFHW-67. Plenty of stock ones around town, but I can only use the Slovakian capsule for my SLO jams!
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 30, 2019 13:01:28 GMT -6
Talking shit about the SM57 is kind of hilarious to me. It's like talking shit about the Beatles.
What, do you think you're going to change someone's mind? At this point, really?
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 13:04:29 GMT -6
Agreed. The SM7 works great on me, but the brightness of the M88 just sounds off with me. I love it for other things though. Have you considered rolling off the treble just a touch?
I like the low end on the mic, and find the top to be much morte manageable than the Shures, as the response in the presence region is much smoother. The Shures get really ragged in the presence region (and no two are really the same, which can make monitor EQ difficult), which exacerbates problems I have with sibilance on my own voice.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 30, 2019 13:06:08 GMT -6
Talking shit about the SM57 is kind of hilarious to me. It's like talking shit about the Beatles. What, do you think you're going to change someone's mind? At this point, really? Nah. It's like talking shit about Herman's Hermits. Or maybe Screamin' Lord Such.
Change somebody's mind? Who knows? Maybe plant a seed that might eventually grow. I know that in my case it took quite a while to germinate.
I just know that in my case I have at least 4 nearly new 58s, 4 nearly new 57s, and 3 working vintage 56s that generally sit in the live mic case doing nothing. I do have one 545L Unidyne III that is my go-to harp mic.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on May 30, 2019 13:07:57 GMT -6
The M88TG is "OK" on my voice, but the RE20 was a little better, and the SM7B better still (best.)
I guess maybe it's like any other mic shootout it really depends on the specific singer.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on May 30, 2019 13:29:55 GMT -6
I'm with Bob O. regarding the M88... He has said for about 95% of singers, it'll work very well.
Up until 5 years ago, I fell into the 5% part of the group that has sibilance issues on the M88.Then Bob suggested the 441 (works great on me BTW), for bright toned/sibilant prone singers.
Like a fool though, I sold my mint M88TG, for what I paid for it-$150! Only gear sale, I regret.
BTW John E., as you probably know, any of those "Made in USA" 57/56's are worth more $$, than the "Made in Mexico" ones. Chris
|
|
|
Post by brenta on May 30, 2019 14:19:49 GMT -6
I've got two SM7B's, one SM7, and an RE20. The RE20 has more clarity and the SM7/Bs have more body. On vocals I usually prefer the SM7/Bs over the RE20. I've never bothered to shoot out the SM7 vs SM7B. Maybe someday.
Tab Funkenwork still sells the upgraded transformer for the 57 and you can buy 57's pre-modded with them from Zen Pro Audio. I've been curious about the Crimson mods but I've never heard them.
Until now the only issues I've ever seen or heard of someone having with the off-axis response of a 57 is with hi-hat bleed into a snare mic, but that's not exclusive to SM57's.
|
|
|
Post by brenta on May 30, 2019 14:24:38 GMT -6
1. The price. Less than $400 for a mic who's pedigree has been proven time and time again? Even the poorest of home studios can usually scrape up enough cash for an SM7. 2. Versatility. Vocals, kick drum, great on guitar amps. I love the RE-20 too, but feel that the SM7 is a bit more versatile. By the way, I've used it to great effect on whispy, female folk vocals, so those that think the SM7 is only good for shouting into should think again. 3. Durability. It's a Shure mic--nuff said. 4. Resale value. My Miktek CV4 resale value has halved since I purchased it. That will never happen with an SM7. 5. Popularity. Singers have actually asked me for it and it's nice to be able to oblige. No one will ever ask for your modded DIY XKDFHW-67 with a Slovakian capsule. And please everyone stop with the "a great vocalist can use any mediocre mic and make it sound good" argument. The SM7 stands on its own as a versatile, great sounding mic. I tell everyone who's beginning to build a mic cabinet to put it on their short list. 5. Well, people will ask for my U87, my C12A, my Pearlman TM-1s, my KM84, and my Heiserman H-47.
Clients ask for your Heiserman and Pearlman's by name? That's surprising to me; I didn't think they had that much name recognition, especially with the Heiserman being so new. How are you liking the Heiserman so far?
|
|