I've been trying to compare mics. Everyone has been saying that Beta58A is better than SM58. They said that the difference is that they took the SM58 and knocked everything up a notch, but for the money the SM58 will do the job. I'm too new to tech specs to understand why the Beta58A is a better mic but not worth it to spend the extra money, right now. So what is the difference and is it worth the extra money to goto Beta?
VonBaas
P.S. I'm the lead vocalist for Condemned Existence, so lots of up-close aggressive growling/screaming vocals. I'm sure my vocal-style could affect the reasoning behind the battle of SM58 vs. Beta58A. I do own 2-SM58 mics and I love them to death. But I never used a Beta before.
SM58 vs. Beta58A
-
Dragan Kalasa
- Gold Member
- Posts: 455
- Joined: Sunday Jan 22, 2006
- Location: Between Hopewell and Everett...a rock and a hard place, PA
-
lonewolf
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6249
- Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
- Location: Anywhere, Earth
- Contact:
The biggest difference between these mics is that the beta58 is a hypercardioid and the SM58 is a cardioid. The hypercardioid pattern will reject feedback and background/stage noise better. Aside from that, they are very similar.
I would recommend an EV ND767A over both of these mics, especially for your style of music. The EV takes a hell of a lot louder beating, rejects feedback and stage noise better and has one of the hottest outputs of any dynamic vocal mic.
I would recommend an EV ND767A over both of these mics, especially for your style of music. The EV takes a hell of a lot louder beating, rejects feedback and stage noise better and has one of the hottest outputs of any dynamic vocal mic.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
-
Dragan Kalasa
- Gold Member
- Posts: 455
- Joined: Sunday Jan 22, 2006
- Location: Between Hopewell and Everett...a rock and a hard place, PA
Add a pop filter for the up-close work, though... I always liked the sound of the 767, but their internal windscreens aren't as effective. I'm guessing the "eating the mic" would exacerbate that. I put a piece of pantyhose material inside the pop filter and that helped, but didn't eliminate it completely. Mic technique can be tougher than many realize, and "working the mic" is a talent unto itself... I've seen lots of good singers who sounded like crap because they held the mic "the way they do it on TV."-------->JMS
Re: SM58 vs. Beta58A
Along with what lonewolf said about the Beta being hypercardioid, the Beta58 will suffer worse from proximity effect. There is a roll off built into the mic to help control this. Proximity effect isn't necessarily a bad thing, but for close mic styles with screaming at such, it can make the vocals harder to understand and sound mushy.Dragan Kalasa wrote:I've been trying to compare mics. Everyone has been saying that Beta58A is better than SM58. They said that the difference is that they took the SM58 and knocked everything up a notch, but for the money the SM58 will do the job. I'm too new to tech specs to understand why the Beta58A is a better mic but not worth it to spend the extra money, right now. So what is the difference and is it worth the extra money to goto Beta?
VonBaas
P.S. I'm the lead vocalist for Condemned Existence, so lots of up-close aggressive growling/screaming vocals. I'm sure my vocal-style could affect the reasoning behind the battle of SM58 vs. Beta58A. I do own 2-SM58 mics and I love them to death. But I never used a Beta before.
-
Dragan Kalasa
- Gold Member
- Posts: 455
- Joined: Sunday Jan 22, 2006
- Location: Between Hopewell and Everett...a rock and a hard place, PA
Re: SM58 vs. Beta58A
When you say suffer worse, is that comparing to the SM58 or the EV767 and are you saying that the SM58 or EV767 is better in the aspect of proximity effect?g1wgs wrote:
Along with what lonewolf said about the Beta being hypercardioid, the Beta58 will suffer worse from proximity effect. There is a roll off built into the mic to help control this. Proximity effect isn't necessarily a bad thing, but for close mic styles with screaming at such, it can make the vocals harder to understand and sound mushy.
-
lonewolf
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6249
- Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
- Location: Anywhere, Earth
- Contact:
I can't speak for g1wgs, but I think he was comparing the Shure's.
Its very hard to make an ND767 sound muddy. As John said earlier, if anything, they could use a windscreen to cut down on sibilance and breath noise.
I typically use very crisp Shure SM87 condensers for stand-mount vocals, but they don't even stand up to my ND757B (predecessor to 767).
Its very hard to make an ND767 sound muddy. As John said earlier, if anything, they could use a windscreen to cut down on sibilance and breath noise.
I typically use very crisp Shure SM87 condensers for stand-mount vocals, but they don't even stand up to my ND757B (predecessor to 767).
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
The beta sounds louder, clearer, and crisper to my ears. I always get more compliments on my voice when I use a beta vs. a plain 58 which sounds muddy in comparison. Not sure if it just suits my voice better or not, but I would say that the beta is far superior in all aspects. I also scream a lot in the third set and I have been told it sounds pronounced and powerful...but, people are usually half deaf by then...so take it for what it's worth 
Consider buying a used beta 58 (NOT A) on ebay (and soak the grille in clorox water before ya use it) rather than a new beta 58A. The old betas (not a) seem much less brittle to my ears.
Sorry I can't give ya scientific reasoning and frequency numbers. I just go by live experience and what sounds good to me.
Consider buying a used beta 58 (NOT A) on ebay (and soak the grille in clorox water before ya use it) rather than a new beta 58A. The old betas (not a) seem much less brittle to my ears.
Sorry I can't give ya scientific reasoning and frequency numbers. I just go by live experience and what sounds good to me.