I own a Shure SM58 right which is good for vocals.

However, when it comes to recording my acoustic guitar (no amp) I'm maybe thinking of an SM57? Since I hear it's better equipped for instruments.

However, I'm a terrible vocalist and haven't recorded too many songs, meaning this is really for just goofing around/home demos if anything.

So my question for you guys is, would I still be able to record decent vocals with a dynamic sm 57 maybe encouraging me to trade in the sm 58 for the 57, or should I keep my orignal SM 58 and just shell out the $100 for the SM 57 while keeing my vocal mic as well.

Or better yet, knowing that I'm not recording in a professional studio or am in a serious band, do I even need a SM57 b/c some people tell me there isn't as much of a difference as one would think. So maybe I should just stick with my SM58?

If you want decent, professional recordings, you will not use either.

That being said, why not just try both and see what you like?

RhoneRanger wrote:

If you want decent, professional recordings, you will not use either. That being said, why not just try both and see what you like?

OR

Just use the SM58, you'll know when you become bored with the sound of one microphone.
_________________
Recording Studio Suntans

The difference between a 58 and 57 is as follows, windscreen setup, which creates the +3dB SM 58 vocal 'presence' boost at 4khz. And yes it does make a pretty big difference in what you are hearing. I know this, because my voice already is booming with 4khz, and slapping the 57 on there clears it up. Best yet for me though is the Beta 87C.

As a matter of Stage vs. Studio, vocals and acoustic guitar recording are better suited to a mid to large diaphram condenser. If you're looking into cheap. I'd look at an MXL 990. It's very cheap, simple, reliable, and decent sound for the money. I've used them myself when I borrowed them from a friend for a cheap project, and they did the job suprisingly well.

AC wrote:

OR Just use the SM58, you'll know when you become bored with the sound of one microphone.

Do people still record with these for vocals? If so, why?

RhoneRanger wrote:

AC wrote: OR Just use the SM58, you'll know when you become bored with the sound of one microphone. Do people still record with these for vocals? If so, why?

I actually don't record with them, in fact I can't remember when I last used one. That's not really the fault of the mic, it's cause I have other mics I prefer. Live however I use them a lot.
_________________
Recording Studio Suntans

Of all the mics I'd like to have in my closet, my goal is to never own/use an Sm57/58

uncle_jerr wrote:

Of all the mics I'd like to have in my closet, my goal is to never own/use an Sm57/58

hehe that's funny!
_________________
Recording Studio Suntans

uncle_jerr wrote:

Of all the mics I'd like to have in my closet, my goal is to never own/use an Sm57/58

hehe, that is what I was trying to say, except with a little more tact.

RhoneRanger wrote:

AC wrote: OR Just use the SM58, you'll know when you become bored with the sound of one microphone. Do people still record with these for vocals? If so, why?

RHCP and U2 recorded an entire album each using sm58's for vocals...

xomblei wrote:

RhoneRanger wrote: AC wrote: OR Just use the SM58, you'll know when you become bored with the sound of one microphone. Do people still record with these for vocals? If so, why? RHCP and U2 recorded an entire album each using sm58's for vocals...

Yes, U2 Used 58s when performing live during the recording of "Rattle and Hum"

I see no reason to NOT use a 58 for live sound. They are inexpensive and built like tanks, I have yet to see one break. I even have one in my closet that was run over by the gear truck, and even though the wire mesh around the diaphragm is almost smashed, it still works.

For Studio however, I will never use one for vocals, I MAYBE might record a high-hat or snare drum with the 58.

A similar mic to the SM57 is the Audix i5. It has a little more focus than the 57 and picks up the higher frequencies a little bit better if you wanted to try something similar.
_________________
Bob Seifert, SEIT
LiveSine Productions
Drummer of 3up3down

RhoneRanger wrote:

xomblei wrote: RhoneRanger wrote: AC wrote: OR Just use the SM58, you'll know when you become bored with the sound of one microphone. Do people still record with these for vocals? If so, why? RHCP and U2 recorded an entire album each using sm58's for vocals... Yes, U2 Used 58s when performing live during the recording of "Rattle and Hum" I see no reason to NOT use a 58 for live sound. They are inexpensive and built like tanks, I have yet to see one break. I even have one in my closet that was run over by the gear truck, and even though the wire mesh around the diaphragm is almost smashed, it still works. For Studio however, I will never use one for vocals, I MAYBE might record a high-hat or snare drum with the 58.

they use em to record... using a 58 on drums????? maybe you're thinking 57's?

Nope, I am thinking NEITHER 57s NOR 58s (maybe it is either / or, don't remember my 8th grade grammar classes too good) should be used in recording.

EDIT FOR CLARITY:

My point is you do not need a high-end microphone to capture a snare drum.

unless you can prove it i call bullshit