Sm7 vs SM58 shoot-out! (w/files)

[6strings]

Homestudiocorner.com has a pretty good shoot-out comparing the SM7 and SM58. (and not some lame, spoken-word thing either... REAL SINGING!)

SM7 vs SM58

He's waiting for more "votes" before posting the answers.

Quick and easy listen. Post your impressions!

[imloggedin]

If #1 isnt the SM7 im never buying it. Cause it sounds quite a bit better than #2 to me.

[Joe Gilder]

Thanks for the link, 6strings!

I'll be posting results tomorrow afternoon, so get your guesses in.

[JoeyM]

Each has something the other dosen't. I prefer the tighter lows on 2 and the tamer, more elegant siblence on 1.

Somehow I don't think either mic is a match for the voice, but the lack of a more familiar preamp is probably to blame.

If I were recording him I'd try to find out what Paul Rodgers used when he did the Muddy Waters tribute album.

[JPeters86]

I prefer #1. I think it's the SM7, sounds a bit more... full. But I could be wrong. Had a few brewskies.

[doug hazelrigg]

Maybe I'm deaf. Maybe I need to switch careers. But those two cuts sound pretty much the same to me. In a lot of these "shootouts" I find myself unable to distinguish between such cuts, even between dynamics, condensors, and ribbons. And I've been doing this for 30 years, using all sorts of gear. I guess I've just always focused on the song and not the minutiae of how it was recorded. HOWEVER: if somebody put a gun to my head, I chose #1 as superior -- it seems smoother

[6strings]

You guys GOTTA check this thread out too...

SM57 vs. SM7 listening tests - 3dB

VERY interesting data and discussion regarding the true difference between the SM7 and SM57.

thumbsup

[Gandy]

I'd say number 2 is the SM7B, 1 is the '58. Reason for this is I listened to 2 first (loaded quicker) and it sounded alright, number 1 sounded less high end and a more muffled low end, which the '58 tends to do (at least so I've experienced).

[Chucho]

Re 58,

I have never used a 7b but have had 58s for 25 years. If 2 is not 58 than I'll eat my hat, give up music and become a nun.

Sr Chucho

[awakened]

1 sounds like the sm7 to me

[Eric Greedy]

why choose? Have all three

[deeper]

Originally Posted by Chucho

I have never used a 7b but have had 58s for 25 years. If 2 is not 58 than I'll eat my hat, give up music and become a nun.

Oh man, I hope you're right, then...

[deeper]

Yeah, I'm gonna go with #1 as the SM-7. It just sounds more balanced and smooth. Number 2 seems a bit more gritty and annoys me around the 2K frequency.

[deeper]

And if I'm wrong, I'll give up my hat and eat a nun.

[Umami Uni]

Sm7 is #1 and the 58 is #2

[Audio Hombre]

he's affected the sound of the 58 by REMOVING the basket. the guy thinks that it's a just a pop filter like the 7b but doesn't realize that a lot of the 58 sound comes from the basket design. flawed test and moot.

[doug hazelrigg]

Originally Posted by Audio Hombre

he's affected the sound of the 58 by REMOVING the basket. the guy thinks that it's a just a pop filter like the 7b but doesn't realize that a lot of the 58 sound comes from the basket design. flawed test and moot.

Ha -- I just noticed this in the pic. I agree, dubious comparison

[6strings]

Originally Posted by Audio Hombre

he's affected the sound of the 58 by REMOVING the basket. the guy thinks that it's a just a pop filter like the 7b but doesn't realize that a lot of the 58 sound comes from the basket design. flawed test and moot.

Actually, that helps the test as it converts the 58 to a 57 (documented by Shure) which is essentially the same as an SM7 with the boost on. Nothing wrong with removing the grill for the test IMO. From Shure:

The SM58 and SM57 do use the same cartridge. The grill, though, does effect the frequency response to some extent. At a distance, the difference is probably not noticable. But at extremely close distances, the difference is noticeable. Due to the grill, a person's mouth can get closer to the diaphragm of an SM57, thus causing more proximity effect and increased bass when compared to the SM58.

BTW., anyone follow the link I posted above??

SM57 vs. SM7 listening tests - 3dB

[JoeyM]

Originally Posted by 6strings

BTW., anyone follow the link I posted above??

SM57 vs. SM7 listening tests - 3dB

Yeah, really cool If there wasn't a severe storm rolling in (with pea-sized hail predicted) I'd comment more. Lots of education there, and that portable radio for the test is brilliant, I love when people share ideas like that. Of course Lynn Fuston, it goes without saying...

[6strings]

Originally Posted by Joe Gilder

Thanks for the link, 6strings!

I'll be posting results tomorrow afternoon, so get your guesses in.

If you get time, it would be cool to hear a test of the same mics, but with the SM7 boost on. I'm wondering how close they would be then, considering the "boost" on the SM7 is actually a mid-cut switch.

from the link above:

"The mid filter is a series resonant network, resonant at 3.23Khz. It pulls the signal down at the resonant point, so the network is in the circuit for flat, and switched out for boost."

[doug hazelrigg]

Originally Posted by 6strings

Actually, that helps the test as it converts the 58 to a 57 (documented by Shure) which is essentially the same as an SM7 with the boost on. Nothing wrong with removing the grill for the test IMO. From Shure:

The SM58 and SM57 do use the same cartridge. The grill, though, does effect the frequency response to some extent. At a distance, the difference is probably not noticable. But at extremely close distances, the difference is noticeable. Due to the grill, a person's mouth can get closer to the diaphragm of an SM57, thus causing more proximity effect and increased bass when compared to the SM58.

BTW., anyone follow the link I posted above??

SM57 vs. SM7 listening tests - 3dB

But removing the grille doesn't reflect real world usage. If he wanted to compare a 57 with an SM7, he should've used that -- IMHO

[Newcleardaze]

Originally Posted by 6strings

Actually, that helps the test as it converts the 58 to a 57 (documented by Shure) which is essentially the same as an SM7 with the boost on. Nothing wrong with removing the grill for the test IMO. From Shure:

The SM58 and SM57 do use the same cartridge. The grill, though, does effect the frequency response to some extent. At a distance, the difference is probably not noticable. But at extremely close distances, the difference is noticeable. Due to the grill, a person's mouth can get closer to the diaphragm of an SM57, thus causing more proximity effect and increased bass when compared to the SM58.

BTW., anyone follow the link I posted above??

SM57 vs. SM7 listening tests - 3dB

Hmmm... Strange because this is the quote that I found on the Shure site: The SM7, the SM57, and the SM58 are all based on the Unidyne III capsule design. The SM7 capsule is not identical to the SM57 or SM58, but it is similar.

Here's more info on the differences between the capsules:
SM58 - The SM58 has the same capsule as the SM57, aside from mounting differences2, and the input sensitivity is the same7, but the flat grille on the SM57 allows positioning so close to a sound source that proximity effect can cause low-end boost that the SM58 cannot reproduce. Further, the grille on the SM57 causes a boost above 5kHz3.
SM7 - The SM7 capsule, like the SM57/SM58 capsule, is based on the “Unidyne III” capsule design, yet it is not identical to the SM57/SM58 capsule4. The SM7 capsule is p/n RPM106; the SM57 capsule is p/n R57.
545SD - The 545SD is physically the same size as the SM57, and uses the same Unidyne III capsule. Both are cardioid dynamics. The 545SD frequency response chart is similar, but not identical to the SM57; the 545SD would appear to have slightly more pronounced high-end response.
....and the link for this info: Shure SM57 | RecordingHacks.com

[6strings]

Originally Posted by doug hazelrigg

But removing the grille doesn't reflect real world usage. If he wanted to compare a 57 with an SM7, he should've used that -- IMHO

The spirit of the test is to compare a $350 Shure dynamic with the $99 Shure. The 57 and 58 are identical save for the screen. Nit pick if you may (and I'm sure there would've been complaining if he left the grill on, too) but I appreciate his time and effort.

Originally Posted by Newcleardaze

The SM7, the SM57, and the SM58 are all based on the Unidyne III capsule design. The SM7 capsule is not identical to the SM57 or SM58, but it is similar.

Right. VERY similar if you can account for SM7's signal level and the mid-cut circuit. Nobody here suggested they were physically identical capsules. But.....if you follow the link I posted above.... you'll learn that the frequency response (with the mid-cut circuit disengaged) is damn near identical between 90 and 8khz. (male vocal territory)

[Joe Gilder]

Originally Posted by Audio Hombre

he's affected the sound of the 58 by REMOVING the basket. the guy thinks that it's a just a pop filter like the 7b but doesn't realize that a lot of the 58 sound comes from the basket design. flawed test and moot.

I'm sure it does affect the sound, but I wanted to compare the capsules with minimal "stuff" in the way.

I don't know if this negates the test. I'm not comparing them for live use. I was more focused on how they sound in the studio. I honestly don't know, but do most engineers leave the basket on when they use the 58 on vocals in a studio session? I assumed they would remove it and use a pop filter.

Either way, I still find it interesting that while there ARE differences, it's definitely not a night and day thing, which to me is encouraging.

Thanks for the input, Audio Hombre.

[RCM - Ronan]

Its cool that this was done, but to understand the difference between mics as a vocal mic its really really important to compare them across multiple vocalists. On certain vocalists my $100 mxl sounds virtually identical to mics costing 10 or 20 times the price. On other vocalist the MXL is almost unusable and the expensive mix sounds great etc. Different vocalist will elicit very different characteristics from the same mic.

BTW, not bashing the test, just throwing in some insight.

[Schnert]

I'm not familiar with the SM7B, so I've got no idea which is which. But, in this test mic #1 sounded much better.

Very nice singin' btw

[sounden]

#1 is SM7b
#2 is SM58

I have used them both ...

//S

[mobius.media]

only used a 58, but i'd also guess 2 for that. 58 should have more bass proximity effect.

billy corgan used a 58 for some of mcis. nothing wrong with it.

[cheu78]

Whatever it is nr. 1 sounded better on this vocalist with this preamp...more full, more pathos in some ways...

my 0.02$,

Bests,

Cheu

[Joe Gilder]

Originally Posted by rcm

Its cool that this was done, but to understand the difference between mics as a vocal mic its really really important to compare them across multiple vocalists. On certain vocalists my $100 mxl sounds virtually identical to mics costing 10 or 20 times the price. On other vocalist the MXL is almost unusable and the expensive mix sounds great etc. Different vocalist will elicit very different characteristics from the same mic.

BTW, not bashing the test, just throwing in some insight.

You're absolutely right, rcm. To do a completely fair comparison requires lots of vocalists and lots of different instruments, too.