Which of these Shure mics has MORE proximity effect; SM57 or SM58?

Thanks,
Tom

------------------
Bigger is not always better

I cannot find a clear translation for "proximity" so what do you mean exactly???

I have them both. (3 of each)
I use the SM 58'S for singing and
I use the SM 57'S for amplifcation of tube amps.

Fred

By "proximity effect" I assume you mean the relative increase in the level of bass frequencies as you move the microphone closer to the mouth when singing.

And I would expect the 57 and 58 to have similar amounts because the microphone capsule is a similar distance behind the mesh shield so the distance from mouth to membrane is similar as well.

Tomcat,

In theory the microphone with the largest diaphragm should have more proximity effect. Therefore my guess would be the SM58 has higher proximity effect than the SM57. From past experience with these mics the SM58 is more prounounced in the lower frequencies than the SM57, especically if you sing right on top of the mic.

The frequency specs for these mics indicates that the 58 has greater bass response even without considering proximity.
http://www.shure.com/stellent/groups/public/@gms_gmi_web_us/documents/web_resource/site_img_us_rc_sm58_large.gif
http://www.shure.com/stellent/groups/public/@gms_gmi_web_us/documents/web_resource/site_img_us_rc_sm57_large.gif

Kind regards,
Mark


[This message has been edited by batty (edited 09-27-2006).]

[This message has been edited by batty (edited 09-27-2006).]

The 58 will give more bass boost at close range, but there are more differences between the two mics.
Each has their own unique mid peak, and it's a little different. I find that lower range voices sound better on 58s and higher ranges seem to sound better on 57s.
Not a rule, just an observation in this studio.

Interesting; I thought just about everyone knew that "proximity effect" refers to the increase in bass frequencies when someone sings really close to a mic.

I have a high baritone/low tenor voice and I LIKE having a goodly amount of proximity effect to make my voice sound a little deeper without any need to EQ anything.

Thanks for the info,
Tom

------------------
Bigger is not always better

I'm far from an expert on singing, but I want to pass something along that may be worth checking out.
For years I LOVED the bass sound produced by getting really close to the mic, along with the bass e.q. pushed up and the mids cut. Slowly I came to realize that a lot of this bass boost was totally wasted because I was boosting way below the range of the human voice. And by cutting the mids out, I was removing any shread of natural sound that was left.
What I was doing, and what I feel a lot of singers do, was introducing "mud" or an indistict boominess that made the words hard to hear and understand.
I no longer use the classic V e.q. on my voice, instead allowing it to be clear. I do use the proximity effect to add warmth to the sound, but now it no longer muffles everything.
The SM58 in particular has a built-in mid-range boost that really compliments a lot of male voices. The proximity effect enhances it. My point is just be sure it is enhancing, not muffling.
It has been my experience that many singers are like me--it took a long time to be able to tolerate the real sound of my own voice. Therefore I wanted to disguise it behind a lot of effects and e.q.
It finally sank in that it was counterproductive and that what I was hearing wasn't really the best treatment of the sound of my voice.
I now lean toward mics that have more of a level frequency response. Then when I work the e.q. a little it isn't overdone. I currently use a Senhnieser 855 most of the time. I have two of them.
I have an SM58, a SM87, a Samson Q7 (which, as Gary says, I believe is better for most voices that SM58), a couple of Samson R67s, along with a few assorted EVs and even some throw-away Behringers for guests to tear up.
In choosing a mic, it is essential to work with a few different kinds, adjust the e.q. and effects and try to record yourself. Then get some unbiased opinions about what sounds best for YOU.
Sorry for the rambling and I hope it didn't stray too far from the topic.
DonM

Don,

My wife was the one that informated me about the difference in vocal quality using various mics. (Keep in mind that the woman can hear a mouse peeing on cotton 100 if they're 100 feet away.) When I was using the SM58 and a touch of reverb she said it sounded muddy. The same held true with the SM57. However, when I switched to the Samson Q7 she said "For the first time I could understand every word you sang, and when you were talking on the mic I could understand every word you said." Tomorrow is our 44th Anniversary--gotta' trust her judgment! Hell, she kept me around for a lot of years so she must be pretty smart.

I sold both the 57 and 58 for a lot less than I paid for them, but I still have the Sennheiser 855E and Samson Q7 set up on the office (studio). On the job, I use the Crown CM-311A headset mic. It not only provides me with vocal qualities comparable to the Q7, but addditonally, it allows me the freedom to perform without worrying about where the mic is. For me it was a good choice--for others headset mics just don't do the job. It's all a matter of personal preference.

If you want to know how good or bad your vocals sound--ask your wife!

Cheers,

Gary

------------------
Travlin' Easy

Gary, you are right. My wife is my best critic, in addition to being my best friend. She pulls no punchs.
I tried to like the headphone mic, but too many years of "working" the mic has ruined me I guess.
If I need wireless, I use the Samson plug-in cordless adapter and use any mic I choose.
DonM