decent cheap microphone for vocals

suggestions?

depends on if your gonna have a quiet sound proof environment then get an AKG condenser for less than 200 bucks

if the acoustics and background noise are going to be shit get a shure sm57 for 99 bukz

well it aint soundproof but i'm not after perfection. the sm57 has come up before. i think when i asked about a mic for field recordings maybe or guitar micing. i'll look it up thanks

Studio Projects C1.

DONT get a dynamic mike unless you are Aretha Frankllin or Johnny Rotten. If you sing quiet cos you are self conscious, a dynamic will sound like utter shit.

  analogue wings said:

Studio Projects C1.

 

DONT get a dynamic mike unless you are Aretha Frankllin or Johnny Rotten. If you sing quiet cos you are self conscious, a dynamic will sound like utter shit.

thats pretty misleading statement, yah a dynamic isnt exactly out the gate gonna make quiet vocals sound exciting, but it doesnt take that much compression and EQ to turn that statement into fiction. Ive heard a few really good records that had some soft vocals and they were like yeh we just used a dynamic cause the vocalist was used to holding one.

on the other hand its hard to make a condenser not sound really busy and cluttered if you have shitty acoustics and background noise going. cant put a hard gate on vocals and make it sound natural.

  Benedict Cumberbatch said:

well it aint soundproof but i'm not after perfection. the sm57 has come up before. i think when i asked about a mic for field recordings maybe or guitar micing. i'll look it up thanks

Get an SM-58 over the 57, as the capsule is more catered to vocals.

Hey, don't forget to get an SM-58 over the 57, as the capsule is more catered to vocals.

An SM-57 is more of an instrument mic, an SM-58 caters more towards vocals.

Am I right in thinking that an SM-58 caters more towards vocals than the 57 ?

i concur.

beta 58 is a decent and inexpensive mic.

sm57 is great for instruments and drums.

Audio Technica makes some great low priced Condenser Mic's also.

i've used the sm58 for a few years for my live set vocals

sounds alright

i'm not a singer though

more a shouter at my audience

pretty cheap too which is good cos i drunkenly lose around 3 a year for the last 4 or 5 years

bummer haha

SM57vsSM58

"These microphones are essentially identical with one difference: the SM58 is optimized for vocals--i.e. the round windscreen contains a pop filter whereas the SM57 does not. Their response patterns are identical except for a slightly lower presence peak in the 8-11 kh range which I would theorize is due to the damping effect of the windscreen. (This contradicts the popular but erroneous idea that the SM58 has more presence than the SM57--in fact it's about 1db less at the frequencies I just mentioned."

These not things you want for RECORDING vocals, the SM58s (and the Beta58s) are made for LIVE vocals. The SM57 is better for recording anything in general than the SM58 unless you refuse to use a pop filter. Plus from my experiences and its widely known the SM58 has very strong proximity effect of being very bass'y, boom'y, popp'y when you get close.

SM58vsBeta 58A

is summed up as the beta has a hotter output and slightly more high end range but most say the beta "has a tighter pattern, so if you sing into the side of the mic a lot, you might not like it as much."

If you have an SM57 and a pop filter it is much better suited to RECORD anything vs the SM58 or the Beta 58. A much better investment in my opinion unless your gonna be singing live a lot. You can use a SM57 on almost anything but like a bass drum with great results.

Why are you guys just repeating what I'm saying?

I invite you to consider the psychological factors.

If you are going to be recording your own vocals and you have any doubts at all about your abilities as a vocalist, you will be well served to buy a mike that flatters you (a condenser), rather than one that makes you think why am i even bothering (a dynamic).

I don't see the point of making the "technically" better purchase (dynamics are technically shit by the way - SM58s are used for gigs because of their hardiness, not their sound), if you are getting a playback of yourself in all your naked amateur awfulness that makes you want to cry.

I've recorded 10 or 11 different vocalists, and the only time a dynamic worked (oh, they always want to try it), was when we were trying to deliberately make it sound like the band was playing at a shitty club.

I've done a lot of recordings in my time and it doesn't really matter. If you have decent mixing skills, you can make an SM-58 sound really good. Bjork uses an SM-58 in the studio. There have been tons of bands that I've recorded that sound like they're just slamming and they were mic'ed with nothing but 57's and 58's, but they were excellent bands. This microphone won't give anyone talent.

There are definitely better microphones, but saying that a condenser is ALWAYS better than a dynamic is fucking stupid logic. They're used for two different things. If you don't have much cash, need a mic that is going to last a long time, and sounds decent, the SM-58 is a good choice.

Personally, I enjoy an RE-20, a BLUE Blueberry, or a Neumann u87, but those are all pretty expensive.

gotcha thanks guys

now when i said cheap i meant someone post me one

I really dont understand with what I posted and common knowledge why people would still suggest a SM58(a live mic) over a SM57(a recording mic). a SM58 has major drawbacks compared to the SM57 for anything but live vocals.

SM57 with a stand starting bid at 30 bukz

  Blanket Fort Collapse said:

I really dont understand with what I posted and common knowledge why people would still suggest a SM58(a live mic) over a SM57(a recording mic). a SM58 has major drawbacks compared to the SM57 for anything but live vocals.

 

SM57 with a stand starting bid at 30 bukz

It's the same mic with a different capsule, dude.

The 57 is an instrument mic.

  Braintree said:

  Blanket Fort Collapse said:

I really dont understand with what I posted and common knowledge why people would still suggest a SM58(a live mic) over a SM57(a recording mic). a SM58 has major drawbacks compared to the SM57 for anything but live vocals.

 

SM57 with a stand starting bid at 30 bukz

 

It's the same mic with a different capsule, dude.

 

The 57 is an instrument mic.

thie capsules are very very similiar, if you would read what I posted up there it talks about the differences, the 57 is not just instrument mic at all, but the SM58 IS made for LIVE vocals.

you get close to an SM58 and it sounds waaay too boomy and poppy, plus the 57 doesnt have its quality diminished by the 58s bulbous thick durable windscreen.

I would RECORD anything with a 57 over a 58 anyday

  Blanket Fort Collapse said:

  Braintree said:

  Blanket Fort Collapse said:

I really dont understand with what I posted and common knowledge why people would still suggest a SM58(a live mic) over a SM57(a recording mic). a SM58 has major drawbacks compared to the SM57 for anything but live vocals.

 

SM57 with a stand starting bid at 30 bukz

 

It's the same mic with a different capsule, dude.

 

The 57 is an instrument mic.

 

thie capsules are very very similiar, if you would read what I posted up there it talks about the differences, the 57 is not just instrument mic at all, but the SM58 IS made for LIVE vocals.

 

you get close to an SM58 and it sounds waaay too boomy and poppy, plus the 57 doesnt have its quality diminished by the 58s bulbous thick durable windscreen.

 

I would RECORD anything with a 57 over a 58 anyday

Are you fucking retarded? Reread what you wrote aloud. Then think about what it says.

"These microphones are essentially identical with one difference: the SM58 is optimized for vocals--i.e. the round windscreen contains a pop filter whereas the SM57 does not. Their response patterns are identical except for a slightly lower presence peak in the 8-11 kh range which I would theorize is due to the damping effect of the windscreen. (This contradicts the popular but erroneous idea that the SM58 has more presence than the SM57--in fact it's about 1db less at the frequencies I just mentioned."

The capsule is more catered to vocals because the windscreen keeps out a lot of the "k," "s," and "t," sounds. A bunch of shit you'll be trying to get out of your mix anyway. Jim Morrison used a 57 for vocals, and you can tell that is has a lot more high frequency transients, especially in the live recordings.

It basically comes down to style. If you want that old crackly hard rock sound then a 57 would be great. If you're going for a smooth R&B sound, then a 58 would be much better, since it's not as abrasive.

It's the same damn mic with a windscreen.

And because I've worked in live sound for a number of years, I will contend that a 57 is used as an instrument microphone 99% of the time.

because youve worked LIVE sound you know that you should not use an SM57 for RECORDING vocals???

That quote I posted should have been changed to they are almost identical except for the SM58 is made for LIVE vocals.

A SM57 with a pop filter will sound way more consistant for RECORDING vocals and anything else than a 58. Why would want someone to record with an SM58 over the an SM57? you gonna have the grab the mic and deep throat it so you need the fatty durable windscreen the dampens the fidelity of the mic?

As what your saying about using a SM57 based on the style of music that makes no sense, an SM57 for recording vocals will just have a little more fidelity, it wont sound drastically different when your up close and get all boomy.

Awkward, please note that Blanket Fort Fuckface has no idea what he's talking about, and please consider that when you're choosing microphones, style of music has a lot to do with what you use.

  Braintree said:

Awkward, please note that Blanket Fort Fuckface has no idea what he's talking about, and please consider that when you're choosing microphones, style of music has a lot to do with what you use.

I love how you ask me if im fucking retarded and I dont get offended and but my intelligent response pissing you off. Your response doesn't actually reference what I said correctly and doesn't actually respond to my points.

I never said style of music doesnt have anything to do with what you use.

I said that your state of for achieving an "old crackly hard rock sound then a 57 would be great. If you're going for a smooth R&B sound, then a 58 would be much better, since it's not as abrasive." doesn't really make a lot of sense unless you have no ability fucking ability EQ then yes it would make sense that you wouldn't want the extra high end fidelity of not having the burly damping windscreen on your recording mic.

I do not understand why smart producer would want to purchase a mic for RECORDING that has less fidelity, is only best for one thing(live vocals) for the same price as a mic that can record a lot more things better when your not wanting to sing live... IT MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE

unless you cant muster up a stand and a pop filter and have no fucking clue how to EQ then yah get an SM58

behringer c-2. two matched condenser mics for under $100. pretty good for vocals and most acoustic instruments!

I would have just suggested a condenser like thisAudio-Technica AT2020(best condenser for less than a hundred bucks to most peeps ears) but then you gotta make sure you got phantom power, no crazy background noise(with most condenser you pick up so much of the surrounding environment/acoustics it can a bit impractical for some people)