Re: SM-57 vs. "Butterfield" 545s

In a message dated 9/22/03 2:43:05 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
jpl_pagan@xxxxxxxxx writes:
hey all,

   just to cause a ruckus and since i'm really
curious, i'd like to ask what you all think of the
difference between the modern SM-57 mic and the 545s
model that Butterfield used to use (as opposed to a
MODERN 545). just wondered if anyone had A/B'd them
and had any specific thoughts on how similar or
different they are in terms or frequency response,
tone, what have you...

Well.....A ruckus it is!

I a/bed a Shure 545S with a Shure 57 ( I measure just about all my harp mics 
against the Shure 57), this was about a year ago so I am going by long term 
memory. The Shure 545S was:

1. On feel: Not too bad considering the extra metal you lug around with it. 
The Shure 57 was a little bit lighter (go figure!), and cupping each of them 
was the same due to the mic size on top of either of them. 

2. On output: I would say the Shure 57 beat out the Shure 545S on output, but 
it didn't do so by much. The Shure 57 though is a newer one with a newer 
element and a bit more frequency range, so that also helped it. 

3. On sound: This is a bit of an apples and oranges deal, but the Shure 545S 
was a little bit fatter in tone than the Shure 57. The Shure 57 has a better 
capacity for brightness (again frequency range), but the Shure 545S wasn't that 
bad in that area either. I have a Shure 545SD which beats both of them 
soundwise, but it isn't in the comparison. The Shure 545S seemed to compensate for 
the bottom a bit more, but the Shure 57 seemed to have a delicate wispy top-end 
when played. The Shure 545S also had this top-end,but it wasn't as 

   Conclusion: Buy both microphones, and use the Shure 57 as a spare in case 
the Shure 545S dies on you. They are both good mics and unless you suck, you 
will sound good through either of them. 


This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.