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

[PL500@xxxxxxx]

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...

    cheers,
           --Jp 
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 
pronounced. 

   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. 


Andrew