Beta 57, 58 - bad vox mics or worst vox mics

[mexicola]

I've been employed by a mid-size (650 cap) live venue for the greater part of a decade. We have a 52 channel FOH board, 32 channel monitor board, 4-way x-over PA. We have standard 58's that we use for vocals. It's a great sounding room and I can usually run FOH mixes with a near flat graph and only some minor channel eq, and monitor mixes with only a few 3-4dB cuts. And that's running everything smoking loud for rock and metal bands - 100 to 110 dB at FOH. Quieter indie bands can be run almost flat.

I have to laugh when touring bands come through with Beta 57's and 58's for vocals and end up hacking the graphs to bits and fighting feedback all night long. We had a very well known indie rock band last night, and their monitor engineer had the graphs hacked up so much that they looked like pics of the Swiss Alps.

I mean, I get it that at low levels the Betas sound better because they boost hi mid frequencies that give a condensor-like presence to the sound. But once you crank it up to the levels that you need with a live band on stage, you just end up cutting out all that high mid boost and end up worse off than if you just used a regular 58.

Anyone else have similar experiences with these mics on vocals?

[loujudson]

I detest beta 58s. Only use them when the singers insist, and then I try to turn them down rather than EQ the rest of the sound to bits. Wost vocal mic around!

Beta 57s though sound good on clarinets and high saxes... to me.

[waxx]

Beta 57's have a use (horns, static singers, ...) but the beta58 does not work on a stage except with in-ear monitoring.

i still rate the SM58 high for live vocals, trough the right preamp (most hi end live boards have such, and otherwise use an external) and right used it can shine on a lead singer. But it's often a bad preamp that gives it a muffed sound, just like the rapper style of holding the mic wich blocks the sound to go to the capsule.

[BostonBassist]

I do live sound for a small venue (cap. @ 200) - mostly acoustic and occasional electic blues etc type bands. I had used regular 58's regularly, but was finding they weren't really cutting through as the room is very reflective. Started using a Beta 58 on lead singers and found that helped, but indeed found it slightly too bright. Now switched to the Sennheiser E835 and it seems just right for the room. A few weeks back a guy brought in the model above - E865 - and was similar to the Beta 58... anyway, my 2 cents

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by loujudson

I detest beta 58s. Only use them when the singers insist, and then I try to turn them down rather than EQ the rest of the sound to bits. Wost vocal mic around!

Beta 57s though sound good on clarinets and high saxes... to me.

I agree that Beta 57's sound good on instruments. They're good on a dark snare, horns, and bass amps.

But vocal mics they are not!

The best use I've found for a Beta 58 is as a paper weight.

[loujudson]

Originally Posted by mexicola

The best use I've found for a Beta 58 is as a paper weight.

No, they roll off the table... and are ugly. Maybe the blue rubber band could be used to do something with...

;-)
L

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by loujudson

No, they roll off the table... and are ugly. Maybe the blue rubber band could be used to do something with...

;-)
L

LMAO!!!

[username]

Most of the time when I see people having massive feedback issues with beta 58s, it's because they don't realize that supercardiod mics have a rear lobe in their pickup pattern, and place the wedge directly behind it..

[AnthonyRochester]

is there much difference between the older beta 57 and the newer beta57A?

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by username

Most of the time when I see people having massive feedback issues with beta 58s, it's because they don't realize that supercardiod mics have a rear lobe in their pickup pattern, and place the wedge directly behind it..

I tend to run mixes with dual wedges angled inward and spaced anywhere from 6-12" apart. Accounting for the rear lobe of a supercardioid mic, this would, in my opinion, position the aim of the wedges directly inbetween the front and rear lobes. Even with the wedges positioned in this manner, the Beta's are worse to deal with than a standard 58.

[88fingerz]

Been using Beta 58's on gigs (male & female vox) since their introduction over or nearly a decade ago. Not one problem ever...awesome sound through a Mackie Onyx pre...cuts through the mix, big, bold and honest at the same time. Highly recommended!

[headwerkn]

Originally Posted by mexicola

I agree that Beta 57's sound good on instruments. They're good on a dark snare, horns, and bass amps.

But vocal mics they are not!

I have to agree... my 57A sounds thin unless I swallow it.

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by 88fingerz

Been using Beta 58's on gigs (male & female vox) since their introduction over or nearly a decade ago. Not one problem ever...awesome sound through a Mackie Onyx pre...cuts through the mix, big, bold and honest at the same time. Highly recommended!

Yeah, but how loud are the venues that you're running sound at. If you're running through a mackie onyx, my guess is that you're under 300 capacity. At low levels and at smaller venues, they're manageable. I still don't like the way they sound though. But when you've got SPL's over 100dB on stage and the band isn't on in-ears, they're a nightmare.

Take those kind of sound levels and pair it with a quiet singer, and you've got a recipe for frustration! Because of their supercardioid pattern, there have been times where I get more drumkit and guitars coming through a Beta than vocals if the singer is quiet.

[steelyfan]

Bad sounds coming from a Beta 58 is usually due to user error. Most underated mic in history due to gear snobbery and non ellitist affordable price.(only the pricey stuff sounds good syndrome).

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by steelyfan

Bad sounds coming from a Beta 58 is usually due to user error. Most underated mic in history due to gear snobbery and non ellitist affordable price.(only the pricey stuff sounds good syndrome).

Last I checked a standard 58 costs less than a Beta 58. Which is my whole point that the less expensive standard SM58 is a better live vocal mic than the Betas - which are marketed to be upgraded, better mics. Read the OP.

[Aaron Miller]

I've been employed by a mid-size (650 cap) live venue for the greater part of a decade. We have a 52 channel FOH board, 32 channel monitor board, 4-way x-over PA. We have standard 58's that we use for vocals. It's a great sounding room and I can usually run FOH mixes with a near flat graph and only some minor channel eq, and monitor mixes with only a few 3-4dB cuts. And that's running everything smoking loud for rock and metal bands - 100 to 110 dB at FOH. Quieter indie bands can be run almost flat.

I have to laugh when touring bands come through with Beta 57's and 58's for vocals and end up hacking the graphs to bits and fighting feedback all night long. We had a very well known indie rock band last night, and their monitor engineer had the graphs hacked up so much that they looked like pics of the Swiss Alps.

I mean, I get it that at low levels the Betas sound better because they boost hi mid frequencies that give a condensor-like presence to the sound. But once you crank it up to the levels that you need with a live band on stage, you just end up cutting out all that high mid boost and end up worse off than if you just used a regular 58.

Anyone else have similar experiences with these mics on vocals?

Wait a minute. Your reasoning goes something like this: some band brings in their own monitor engineer and the graphic EQ ends up all over the place and there is lots of feedback therefore the Betas suck. I don't follow. Feedback and hacked up graphic EQs happen with regular 57s and 58s all the time. The problem is placement, the overall setup, the singer, or the guy running the mix.

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by steelyfan

Bad sounds coming from a Beta 58 is usually due to user error. Most underated mic in history due to gear snobbery and non ellitist affordable price.(only the pricey stuff sounds good syndrome).

Also, if you had read the OP, you'd know that my issue with the Betas isn't the sound - although I'm not a fan. My issue is that the high mid boost on the Betas creates feedback issues that are much worse than a standard 58 on a loud stage.

In essence, what I'm saying is that the high mid boost on the Betas is pointless because you just end up cutting all that stuff out to fight feedback. And I'm not talking about folkie 75dB singer/songwriters. I'm talking about a loud stage - biamped dual-wedge mixes with 1800 watts on the highs and 3000 watts on the lows - big venue rock and metal stage volumes.

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by Aaron Miller

Wait a minute. Your reasoning goes something like this: some band brings in their own monitor engineer and the graphic EQ ends up all over the place and there is lots of feedback therefore the Betas suck. I don't follow. Feedback and hacked up graphic EQs happen with regular 57s and 58s all the time. The problem is placement, the overall setup, the singer, or the guy running the mix.

I'm not basing it on one band. That was only one example. I've been mixing at that venue for the last six years, and everybody who brings in Betas does the same hackjob to the EQ's. Like I said, a standard 58 doesn't have those issues.

BTW, if you're hacking up graphs with regular 57's and 58's, then there's something wrong with your setup. I can typically run either of those mics smoking loud with only minimal (like 3-4db) cuts in a couple spots. An ideal PA can be run flat at loud levels and sound great. If you're hacking stuff up with standard 58's, you probably need to take a look at your setup.

[Enginearing]

Originally Posted by beebay007

is there much difference between the older beta 57 and the newer beta57A?

I've used the older style live a few times and there certainly is difference to speak of. very smooth silky top end. i just wish i had a stash of them.

[steelyfan]

Originally Posted by mexicola

Also, if you had read the OP, you'd know that my issue with the Betas isn't the sound - although I'm not a fan. My issue is that the high mid boost on the Betas creates feedback issues that are much worse than a standard 58 on a loud stage.

In essence, what I'm saying is that the high mid boost on the Betas is pointless because you just end up cutting all that stuff out to fight feedback. And I'm not talking about folkie 75dB singer/songwriters. I'm talking about a loud stage - biamped dual-wedge mixes with 1800 watts on the highs and 3000 watts on the lows - big venue rock and metal stage volumes.

I got cha. I've used them on everything in the studio, always sounds really nice and smooth.Sorry they are causing problems on stage though, that sounds like a juggle, I understand the difference of applications.
Good luck

[username]

Personaly I've always found I can get a beta 58 louder in wedges than an sm58.. probably does take a bit more work, but I tend to think it's about the end results..

90% of the time if I'm doing monitors I'm using ps15s.. usual with a m7cl or ls9..

Maybe they just don't work on your stage, in your venue, with your wedges?

[xmostynx]

i can do anything you want with a sm57 and an sm58.

guitars, drums, vocals etc.


you can put a 57 on a kick drum and still get a great sounding kick...


in the live world if you see a trend... like people coming into your venue and they are hacking your graphs- you should be learning something from that....


are you metering your mixes on a C or A scale? on an A scale 110db is murderous...
your A meter should be no louder than 95dB's...

i'm not telling you how to mix or what you should do,
i'm just giving you my .02


here is a 58's spec sheet.
58


and here is a beta 58 spec sheet. beta58a


the betas are an all around 'tighter' mic...


if your cutting high end out of your channels on your console- you have a problem..


you need to cut your high end frequencies out of your main eq, sometimes down 11+dB

why?


us humans can hear high frequency content way easier than bass content.

so if you lower your hi's you can mix them on the board instead of fighting them...


see what i'm saying? i'd cut them at the board and the crossover-
a good sounding live PA - is going to sound a bit muffled when you play a cd through it...

my .02

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

i can do anything you want with a sm57 and an sm58.

guitars, drums, vocals etc.

you can put a 57 on a kick drum and still get a great sounding kick...

in the live world if you see a trend... like people coming into your venue and they are hacking your graphs- you should be learning something from that....

are you metering your mixes on a C or A scale? on an A scale 110db is murderous...
your A meter should be no louder than 95dB's...

i'm not telling you how to mix or what you should do,
i'm just giving you my .02

here is a 58's spec sheet.
58

and here is a beta 58 spec sheet. beta58a

the betas are an all around 'tighter' mic...

if your cutting high end out of your channels on your console- you have a problem..

you need to cut your high end frequencies out of your main eq, sometimes down 11+dB

why?

us humans can hear high frequency content way easier than bass content.
so if you lower your hi's you can mix them on the board instead of fighting them...


see what i'm saying? i'd cut them at the board and the crossover-
a good sounding live PA - is going to sound a bit muffled when you play a cd through it...

my .02

You're missing my point completely. I'm saying that with standard 58's on vocals I can run the system near flat and it sounds great. The overall mix sounds very full and balanced with only very minor eq cuts.

But when Beta 58's/57's are used on vocals and they're run loud on stage, then to get the same great sounding mix there needs to be a lot more eq work done, mostly on stage. AND THAT'S ONLY WITH BETA 58/57 VOCAL MICS!!! When I'm talking about graphs getting hacked up, I'm talking about monitor mixes, not FOH. I'm well aware of how to mix, thank you. And I know that humans are more sensitive to high end. That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

It's not an issue with the system I'm mixing on - and btw if you're cutting 11db of high frequencies out of your house EQ, then you need to either adjust your crossover or add more power to your subs. A good PA should not sound muffled when you play a CD - that's absolutely wrong. If you have to do that to get your PA sounding good, then your low end is underpowered. Beef up your subs and the highs will sit better.

A PA should sound perfectly balanced with a full house, which means it'll be a little high-endy when the room is empty because all those bodies soak up high frequencies.

I'm well aware that you can put a 57 on a kick and get a decent sound.

Once again, my point is that the high mid boost in beta 58/57 mics is pointless in my opinion when used as a live vocal mic, because it just ends up getting cut.

[xmostynx]

Originally Posted by mexicola

You're missing my point. I'm saying that with standard 58's I can run the system near flat and it sounds great. The overall mix sounds very full and balanced with only very minor eq cuts.

But when Beta 58's/57's are used on vocals and they're run loud on stage, then to get the same great sounding mix there needs to be a lot more eq work done, mostly on stage. AND THAT'S ONLY WITH BETA 58/57 VOCAL MICS!!! When I'm talking about graphs getting hacked up, I'm talking about monitor mixes, not FOH. I'm well aware of how to mix, thank you. And I know that humans are more sensitive to high end. That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

It's not an issue with the system I'm mixing on - and btw if you're cutting 11db of high frequencies out of your house EQ, then you need to either adjust your crossover or add more power to your subs. A good PA should not sound muffled when you play a CD - that's absolutely wrong. If you have to do that to get your PA sounding good, then your low end is underpowered. Beef up your subs and the highs will sit better.

A PA should sound perfectly balanced with a full house, which means it'll be a little high-endy when the room is empty because all those bodies soak up high frequencies.

I'm well aware that you can put a 57 on a kick and get a decent sound.

Once again, my point is that the high mid boost in beta 58/57 mics is pointless in my opinion when used as a live vocal mic, because it just ends up getting cut.

i'm sorry but if your mixes sound perfectly balanced. your mixes blow.


watch how you throw around insults, i was merely trying to lend you a hand... if i missed your point i'm sorry.

live sound is not perfectly balanced. its actually the opposite.
the high mid boost in the 58/57 is useful, since most engineers usually put 3k and 7k bells on these frequencies.


and not to push my credits around, but i've worked with bigtime engineers, and mixed some large bands.... judging by your attitude if i walked into your house, it would be a long day.

[xmostynx]

you know what you said PA instead of mix. my bad. my apologies.

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

i'm sorry but if your mixes sound perfectly balanced. your mixes blow.


watch how you throw around insults, i was merely trying to lend you a hand... if i missed your point i'm sorry.

live sound is not perfectly balanced. its actually the opposite.
the high mid boost in the 58/57 is useful, since most engineers usually put 3k and 7k bells on these frequencies.


and not to push my credits around, but i've worked with bigtime engineers, and mixed some large bands.... judging by your attitude if i walked into your house, it would be a long day.

I wasn't throwing around insults, sorry if that's how you interpreted my post. But you should take your own advice on that front.

A well-balanced PA has full lows that hit you in the chest, punchy defined mids, and smooth highs that sit on top of it all. What blows about that?

You're not the only one whose worked with big names. I've just seen lots of PA's that aren't set up properly, and many house engineers who use ridiculous shortcuts - like cutting 11dB of highs out of the house graph. I was merely stating that if you're having to do that, then there's something wrong with the PA.

I get along great with touring engineers that come through my venue if they know what they're doing.

[mexicola]

Originally Posted by xmostynx

you know what you said PA instead of mix. my bad. my apologies.

No worries! You got to do some sparring every now and then!

[xmostynx]

Originally Posted by mexicola

No worries! You got to do some sparring every now and then!

what would you do instead lower your high end on a pa?

[John Eppstein]

Beta 58s and 57 do not sound good. The sound is hyped, which is why some like them, but if you run a mic analysis chart on individual mics you'l find that the presence peak is really raggy - even worse than standard 58s and 57s, which are none too smooth to begin with. If you'll run it on several samples you'll find that the ragginess doesn't come close to matching from mic to mic, which will play hell with your monitor eq.

Standard 58s have a similar problem, but not nearly as pronounced. If you want a really good sounding vocal mic that has presence without the random ragginess, try a BeyerDynamic M69N(C) - you can use it with a 58 eq curve but can get 3-6 dB better gain before feedback. Audix also makes a nice vocal mic, I forget the number....... but the Beyer rules. M88s are even better, if you can afford 'em.....

[vernier]