What is a god afordable mic that can do it all.

[firebirdfreak]

I need a good mic but i am poor as hell so what do you suggest mic wise that does it all and is affordable.

[Eric]

Shure SM57? SM58?

What do you need it to do? Vocals? Guitar cabs? Drums?

[Spudman]

Either the 57 or 58 that Eric mentioned is a fine start to any mic collection. Obviously the 57 will be more neutral sounding when placed close toa sound source. The 58 has a proximity effect.

[Robert]

SM-57 for guitar. Around $100 on ebay.

[Katastrophe]

Go with the Shure. I just pulled out an old SM 58 from storage that's twenty years old, and it still looks brand new. You can't go wrong with a Shure, and they are worth every penny.

[markb]

+1 on Shures. You can use them to bang that loose board on the stage down too and they'll still keep working :D

[marnold]

SM-57 for guitar. Around $100 on ebay.

In the States you can get them for $99 brand spankin' new. I've been toying with getting one and a preamp to record my amph.

[wingsdad]

The SM-57's been considered a penultimate guitar amp mic for years but actually is a more versatile all-purpose mic than the 58 b/c of the 58's proximity effect.
Skillful EQ'ing and injecting it through a tube pre-amp makes either mic excellent for vocals, but the 58's better for beefing up thin, reedy or high-pitched voices.
The 58's classic strength is close-mic'd stage vocals, limiting intruding background sounds fairly effectively.
Start with the 57, learn how to process it effectively in different applications and you may/may not find you need another mic, but if you do, get a 58.
Once you've got these 2 dynamics in your mic locker, for recording in a controlled sound environment you can look at adding a Large Diaphragm Condenser for vocals and Small Diaprhagm Condenser or 2 for acoustic instros or high freq percussion. Good condensers can be had in the same price range as the 57/58.

[RobQ]

Just for recording? I'd get a cheapie large diaphragm condenser like an mxr. And a tube preamp, behringer or ART.

[Ch0jin]

Check out the Shure Beta 57a too. Costs slightly more than the 57, but seems to be a bit better at being an "all-rounder" I just got one 2nd hand for $70

[Duffy]

I was at the store by me today and I asked one of the sales guys, a guitar player himself and band member, what would make an excellent inexpensive mic for vocals. He showed me an Audix OM2 dynamic mic. They cost about 100 dollars. I'm thinking of getting one for Charity, as she sings along on my PA to songs I jam to. I have a mediocre mic right now. Plus having two mics will be good.

Here is the link to some information http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-audio/audix-om-2-microphone .

You might want to check one of these out. They are supposed to sound better than the SM58.

I haven't tried on yet so I can't say how they perform in various situations, but the sales guy says that they are definitely real nice.

I hope this helps, in addition to the Shure mic info.

[Tig]

I sorta thought God could afford any mic he wanted.
:poke

[otaypanky]

I like the Sennheiser 835 mics for vocals. For instruments and vocals I have a Shure Beta 57A. For instruments primarily I have a Sennheiser E609 and a Shure SM57.
MXL has the large diaphragm 990 and small diaphragm 991 packaged together as an inexpensive set and they can sound very good. I use the 990 for some room 'air' and close mic with the 57 or 609 when trying to record guitar. The pair of MXL's used together can really do a nice job recording an acoustic guitar.

[deeaa]

First choice is whether you need a condenser or a dynamic mic.
You need a condenser mic when you mic from greater distances and very dynamic material; drum overheads, vocals, pianos, general recording of sound.
Dynamics are good for everything else but picking up from distances and very high or low and transient material.

Generally I would say a Shure 57 is the best cheap all-round mic. You can use it to record vocals with a popscreen, and it's kinda an industry standard and very good for guitar and most drums - yes you can use it even for a kick. And it can take a helluva beating.

A 58 is the exact same mic with a different grille for a better proximity effect and a built-in popscreen for live vocals. Many raspy-sounding or screaming vocalists like to sing to a 57 though because they get 2/3rd inch closer to the diaphraghm for maximum vocal pressure before feedback. I myself also sing into a 57 and practically eat the damn thing sometimes.

There are better mics for many uses and also cheaper ones, but IMO everyone should have at least one 57 or 58. They just work very well for everything, superb all-rounders. Many a better-sounding mic may fail at kickdrum or maybe handling noise or just mechanical strength...that's why I'd go with a classic.

If you need a condenser mic, one of the best starter single mics are Rode NT-1s. Plenty of choice therein. If you mainly do studio vocals etc, a large diaphragm one is good, but for general recording, maybe a pair of small tubular condensers in stereo is a better choice.

[ToddK]

When using an SM57, it is really nice to have a great mic preamp to get the most out of it.
I use a BAE 1073.

[FrankenFretter]

GLS Audio makes very good Shure clones. I just purchased one of their SM-57 clones (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001W99HE8/ref=ox_ya_os_product), although it hasn't arrived yet. These are on Amazon for $29, about a third of a Shure. These were recommended to me by a guy that's been involved in recording for a while, and they come pretty highly recommended. Here's a link (http://www.amazon.com/GLS-Audio-Vocal-Microphone-ES-58-S/dp/B000RKVH0K/ref=sr_1_1?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1371835974&sr=1-1&keywords=GLS+Audio+ES58) for the SM58 clone.

Good luck!

[davewrites]

I sorta thought God could afford any mic he wanted.
:poke

The only reason I'm reading this thread is because I was curious and hoping to see pictures of a God mic.

But now that I'm here, another vote for the Shure 57, which I've borrowed from a friend a few times. Thrilled to see there's a $29 knock-off. I don't mic much, so $100 is to rich for my blood.

[ToddK]

The only reason I'm reading this thread is because I was curious and hoping to see pictures of a God mic.

But now that I'm here, another vote for the Shure 57, which I've borrowed from a friend a few times. Thrilled to see there's a $29 knock-off. I don't mic much, so $100 is to rich for my blood.

29 dollars for a mic? Wow, why don't you just use a dixie cup with a string attached to it.
What do you think you'll get for 29 bucks?

[oldguy]

29 dollars for a mic? Wow, why don't you just use a dixie cup with a string attached to it.
What do you think you'll get for 29 bucks?

According to over 100 customer reviews on Amazon, you get a pretty decent mic.

[stingx]

Check out the Shure Beta 57a too. Costs slightly more than the 57, but seems to be a bit better at being an "all-rounder" I just got one 2nd hand for $70

2nd this. I bought these a few years ago. The Beta 57a is a fantastic mic.

[Eric]

According to over 100 customer reviews on Amazon, you get a pretty decent mic.
You know, I find that a lot of online reviews are for-the-money reviews, which makes them somewhat less than useful. I mean, you can clearly see how much something costs, right? So it seems like having an absolute scale would be a little more practical. Then again, I realize we all have the limitation of being human and wanting to love the thing we just blew some cash on, so it's probably not going to change. But I never miss an opportunity to whine about something!

First world problems!

[ToddK]

According to over 100 customer reviews on Amazon, you get a pretty decent mic.

Not only do you think you'll get a good mic for 29 bucks, but you actually trust the reviews at Amazon?

Now i've seen everything. LOL

[FrankenFretter]

29 dollars for a mic? Wow, why don't you just use a dixie cup with a string attached to it.
What do you think you'll get for 29 bucks?

Not everything should be judged by it's pricetag.

[davewrites]

29 dollars for a mic? Wow, why don't you just use a dixie cup with a string attached to it.
What do you think you'll get for 29 bucks?

A $29 price tag may not be indicative of GLS quality, but it may provide insight into Shure's profit margins.

If Apple can manufacture an iPhone for well under $100, what makes you think a world-class mic can't be produced for $10 a pop?

[Eric]

A $29 price tag may not be indicative of GLS quality, but it may provide insight into Shure's profit margins.

If Apple can manufacture an iPhone for well under $100, what makes you think a world-class mic can't be produced for $10 a pop?
Fair point. I don't have any interest in defending a Shure SM57, but conceptually don't you think that the average price tag for a SM57-type mic would be a good indicator of profit margins? For instance, if there were tons of viable options out there for $30 and then the 57 was $100, that would seem to be a profit-margin thing. However, if most microphones in that range ran about $100, it would seem likely that GLS is either getting labor on the cheap, is compromising a bit more on the parts, or is smarter than everybody else. Otherwise, it's price fixing/cartel/collusion, which is generally frowned upon/illegal.

This comes off as me bashing the GLS mic, which I am not trying to do. But with it being the internet, I fully expect people to try to misinterpret my comments. Oh, internet...

[kidsmoke]

Not only do you think you'll get a good mic for 29 bucks, but you actually trust the reviews at Amazon?

Now i've seen everything. LOL

Ignorance is bliss.

I run sound in a bar in Chicago. Sunday past. I had 5 bands. One was a 12 pc including a 4 pc horn section, 2 percussionists plus drummer, bassist 3 amped electrics. I had 5 vocal mics and mic'd 2 of the guitar cabs.

While this band is an extreme, I do everything from violists to stand up to singer/songwriters to bands, several times a week. (I've got two bands tonight)

I use SM-86's SM-58's SM-57's GLS ES-58's. the latter is in fact a Shure SM-58 clone. When purchased from http://www.speakerrepair.com/ they come in at $28.33 ea.

For 3 years now they function in every way shape and form exactly as the SM-58's.

I purchased them because a sound engineer friend, who pays his (considerable) mortgage running a studio, mixing master tapes for Widespread Panic and running sounds at festivals and venues, directed me to them when I said "Dude, I need mic's and I'm broke". He said they functioned fantastically and if they "walk away" or fail, you're out $29.

You're newer here ToddK, but others here know enough of me to know I'm a dude, with no product to promote or axe to grind. So consider this a review you can trust. Or not.

[stingx]

I bought a Marshall condenser mic for dirt cheap online a few years ago. I had low expectations but took it to the studio to record and had a shit eating grin a mile wide when my tracks sounded as good or perhaps better than the tracks with a several hundred dollar Sennheiser condenser. I wouldn't necessarily knock something because it's cheaper.

[davewrites]

This comes off as me bashing the GLS mic, which I am not trying to do. But with it being the internet, I fully expect people to try to misinterpret my comments. Oh, internet...

To be clear, my post was "inspired" by ToddK's trolling rhetoric. Sorry if it felt like I took a couple of swings in your direction.

[deeaa]

I don't doubt that sometimes you can find killer stuff at really cheap prices as well. But rarely. A 57/58 is a simple mic; I don't think it's impossible to make and sell a mic with just as good properties for sub $30 too, using China labor or cheaper etc. Maybe the only real difference if any could only appear 20 years down the line or something, a leaky cap or rusting frame or whatever.

It's more about security, knowing what you're getting exactly, AND also knowing the thing will retain its value even 10-20 years from now. A well kept 58 could be 20+ years old and not appear any different from a brand new one, and still fetch the same price.

So, when you get a good hint and such, why not...could be just as good. But it's always guesswork.

It's much the same with cars; get a car from VW, Audi, Seat, Skoda, it's all the same, same parts, a bit different design, a bit different target groups. Prices can vary wildly even, especially used.

Is a $100.000 Mercedes any better a car in any real terms than a $40.000 VW? I seriously doubt it. Maybe the merc is a bit more polished but they use the same Bosch electric parts and whatnot; and the merc likely has more parts that could break. But when you sell them off, there will be the same difference in price still...an old merc can be pretty pricey still while you can't give away same age VW's.

So, it could surely be that a cheapo mic could perform just as well as a more expensive one.

However, I have owned a lot of such mics touted as great for price, and indeed many were. We sold a huge bunch of one 57 copy in particular. But for whatever reasons, in the 20 years passed, I only still have some Shures and AKG's...slowly got rid of the cheaper copies for whatever reason. Maybe some appeared to be prone to catching the 'pop' from vocals. Some maybe were suddenly prone to handling noise. Some just plain started to sound bad to me in comparison with something else. Some were very directional. On some a switch broke or the screen flew off when it dropped.

But I still have the 57's and 58's I bought in the 80's and they always do the job, never any issues. It doesn't necessarily mean they sound any better than a $30 mic but they've stood the test of time and I know how they sound and how to position them, and there's never any trouble. Holders fit, they take abuse, they work.

So I guess the bottom line is...hell yeah, I'll buy a cheap mic that does the job well any time to save a buck in a pinch. But, when I get a change to upgrade later..it's always been worth it in the long run.