In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
The SM 58 is one of the most over-rated mics ever.


** On the contrary - the Shure SM58's good reputation for live vocal
work is well justified. Since the late 1960s, it has LITERALLY set the
standard for ALL vocal mics in both appearance and sound quality to
follow.

It set a fashion with those who knew no better - purely because it was
quite good as a 'live' vocal mic feeding a PA etc system. Seeing it on TV
etc gave the idea to amateurs that it was therefore a good general purpose
mic - which it's not. FFS - I've even seen it being used for interviews in
a quiet location. So it's not just amateurs that get fooled so easily.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shure_SM58


Its only virtues are robustness and reasonable noise cancellation.


** You are allowed to have that opinion

- but it is the view of a ****ing idiot.

All you're proving is you've never tried comparing it to a decent mic. The
only time you'll see it used in a recording studio is for possibly a snare
drum where the weird frequency response and high SPL handling can enhance
that sound. And the OP wants a mic for *recording* vocals and acoustic
guitar.


Certainly not sound quality.


** That so many folk PREFER the results given by the SM58 and many
other mics that are essentialy clones of it, proves there is nothing
wrong with the design.

Weird people prefer all sorts of sounds - as you've proved. But as a
general purpose recording mic I can barely think of a worse one.

Cerainly, there are some Shure mic haters out there - just like there
are rabid racists, religious bigots and all kinds of ratbags and mental
defectives who try to foist their mad opionion on others.

Dave Plowman is a first class example of the above.

What microphones do you own or have experience of? Have you *ever* been in
a recording studio etc and observed what is used where?

--
*Learn from your parents' mistakes - use birth control.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.