what are the practical differences between Shure SM58 and Shure BETA 58A vocal mics?

[pieterh]

Originally Posted by Bobby1note

The Eagles don't seem to think so,,, nor The Rolling Stones,,,, nor (enter a few thousand more bands here)

See my post earlier: they aren't horrible, they do a great job, and they still turn up on many band riders as a minimum standard. The Stones and Eagles have probably been using 58s for decades and they and their technicians are used to them and know what to expect. That doesn't mean that they wouldn't use some thing else that was better if they had to.

Case in point: Peter Gabriel is not short of a bit of cash to spend on the gear he wants and he is fairly knowledgeable about music technology wouldn't you say? He used to use the Beta 87 if I remember correctly, and for the Back to Front tour they had Audix mics.

Not to show off here but we have a pretty comprehensive mic park where I work, recently added to. I am in a position to evaluate various vocal mics on a weekly basis from the point of view of the sound engineer, and relatively often as a performer. Partly as a result of what many have said here we bought a couple of Heil PR35s to try so now our selection of vocal mics consists of Beta 58s, KMS105 & 104, dpa d:facto, Heil PR35, Sennheiser e945.

The best all rounder for what we do is the e945, it sounds great live and on recordings of live shows. The best mics for on-stand use for those who don't
eat the mic are the KMS105/105, especially when a singer can't stay on axis (it happens!). The PR35 is an excellent, warm sounding mic though for vocal use I find myself always using the inbuilt low-cut switch. The d:facto is an amazing mic, smooth and easy to eq, but it isn't cheap. The Beta 58 is a reliable workhorse, built to last (though I did have one recently where the capsule broke off from the body when it was dropped!) but I do find I have to spend just a little more time with them getting the right sound in certain situations. I don't have to do this in the same way with the Sennheiser.

Hope I didn't hijack the thread with this! To summarise, imho for more or less the same cost the e945 gets my money.

[Bobby1note]

Originally Posted by pieterh

Good point, though as I said, I actually prefer the monitor off to the side anyway. I like to have the mic at an angle too so I can sing across it rather than directly into it, partly because my vocal mic is a KMS104 and I feel it delivers its best this way.

And that,,, is another good point,,, knowing how (and when) to "work" the mic. Absolutely essential with any mic, and some more than others.

Thanks for the opinions guys! I have the loaner SM58 with me right now. I'll give it a shot this week.

[Kalani]

Similar to what jseth said earlier, in years past my gig mic was the SM58 until one day someone let me try their Beta 87A and "WOW!"! I'm not so good with the desriptions but my voice just sounded a WHOLE LOT more pleasing! I noticed that even people using it for a speech sounded so nice!

What are your thoughts on the Sennheiser e935?

[Bobby1note]

Originally Posted by J-Doug

What are your thoughts on the Sennheiser e935?

I've got an e935,,, and an e945,,, (and about 65 other mics). It's a good mic, in the right hands (or,,,voice), but there's something very special about the e945; it's not simply a matter of cardioid vs super-cardioid,,,, these e9xx's are miles apart in tone,,, but again, it'll depend on what you're trying to achieve.

The e945 has a velvety, creamy bottom end extension, that is very gradual. Very rich and full sounding mic,,, ideal for solo male vocals (balladeer or crooner). It's one of my favorite mics in my collection. Off-hand, I'd probably not use it in a loud rock-mix, where you might need more of an ability to cut through the mix. The EV N/D 767a is my usual choice for that type of application. Again, it's not for everybody, but, if you're looking for a bright sounding mic, with excellent off-axis rejection, the EV is very hard to beat.

[Andy Howell]

The 58s are clearly fine and reliable mics that get used about everywhere. But different mics will suit differen mics. With my voice the Beta sounds better but the Senheiser 935 is far better still.

If you are using your own equipment a lot it is worth checking out the various options. My 935 suits my voice so well it improves confidence!

[pieterh]

Originally Posted by Andy Howell

The 58s are clearly fine and reliable mics that get used about everywhere. But different mics will suit differen mics. With my voice the Beta sounds better but the Senheiser 935 is far better still.

If you are using your own equipment a lot it is worth checking out the various options. My 935 suits my voice so well it improves confidence!

Exactly! A good all rounder will suit most if not all voices while finding the right mic for YOUR voice will lift everything. Even my favourite mic (my own Neumann KMS104) isn't my first choice for everyone but works great for me.

Having said that, at the price point that the Sennheiser 900 series sits at it is hard to find another mic that is a better choice for so many different voices and styles. A friend of mine uses the e965 (condenser mic) and sings its praises - though it is more expensive, and isn't necessarily the best choice as an alternative to the B58.

[dberkowitz]

Originally Posted by pieterh

The best mics for on-stand use for those who don't
eat the mic are the KMS105/105, especially when a singer can't stay on axis (it happens!).

The problem with the 105 is that it is a brighter mic than the 58 and as such, not the best choice for everyone. I too have a mic kit that includes 58's, Beta 58's, Beta 87's, the 105, M88, as well as the odd show that asks for a 421 for vocals (The Dead used to use these, for example). For live work there are too many variables to say what mic works best and for whom. For whom, in what conditions, through what PA.... A great mic with the wrong singer, or the wrong engineer is no better choice than an SM58 which is a perfectly serviceable mic for live sound. Would I use it in the studio for vocals? Probably not. Most vocals in the studio use large diaphragm condenser microphones such as the Neumann U87 which is a great mic, but not usually the best choice for stage work unless the stage volume is modest (We use these for the NSO on the west lawn of the Capital -- three at center to get an overall sound of the orchestra, in addition to close micing).

[pieterh]

Originally Posted by dberkowitz

The problem with the 105 is that it is a brighter mic than the 58 and as such, not the best choice for everyone. I too have a mic kit that includes 58's, Beta 58's, Beta 87's, the 105, M88, as well as the odd show that asks for a 421 for vocals (The Dead used to use these, for example). For live work there are too many variables to say what mic works best and for whom. For whom, in what conditions, through what PA.... A great mic with the wrong singer, or the wrong engineer is no better choice than an SM58 which is a perfectly serviceable mic for live sound. Would I use it in the studio for vocals? Probably not. Most vocals in the studio use large diaphragm condenser microphones such as the Neumann U87 which is a great mic, but not usually the best choice for stage work unless the stage volume is modest (We use these for the NSO on the west lawn of the Capital -- three at center to get an overall sound of the orchestra, in addition to close
micing).

We also have a pair of old u87s and as you say, not ideal for live though they are great for choirs and orchestras. I like the AKG c414 and c214 in these cases too.

If you see my post above I was already saying what you said, that is that I suit the mic to the singer unless I don't have time or just don't know in advance in which case an all rounder is a safe bet. I just feel there are better all-rounders than the 58. I will also say - again - that there is nothing wrong with the 58 (either version), and it does do the job well. In my experience the Sennheiser does it even better.

Just tried the loaner SM 58. Liked it a lot.