Shure SM57 vs older 545 & 456 Unidyne

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

What differences, if any, is there in build and sonics between the
SM-57 and the older Shure Unidyne mics that look virtually identical,
anyone know?

Al

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

The following information (from 1995) was found in the Google archives
of rec.audio.pro...


From: shure...@aol.com (ShureGuy)
Subject: Re: Help ID Shure Mic - Please
Date: 1995/09/12
Message-ID: <434ucs$pts@newsbf02.news.aol.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 109959180
sender: r...@newsbf02.news.aol.com
references: <432p8d$a34@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
reply-to: shure...@aol.com (ShureGuy)
newsgroups: rec.audio.pro

Please allow me to set things straight. The 545 is not made of reject
parts from the SM57. The SM57 has a voice coil made of a different
material than the 545. The 545 uses an all copper voice coil, which
makes
it a little heavier than the SM57 coil. In fact, we started making the
545 about 7 years before the SM57. Also, do to manufacturing reasons,
it
is impossible to use 57 rejects for the 545. Since the 545 and SM57
have
different grills, the cartridges are mounted differently. Also, since
the
cartridges are manufactured into the mounting assembly, it is
impossible
to use a reject SM57 for the 545. The mounting hardware will not allow
it.

This is a widely held myth of our products and I hope this helps clear
things up.


Rick Waller
Applications Group
Shure Brothers Inc
Shure...@aol.com
ph: 708-866-2634
fx: 708-866-2606

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

playon wrote:
> What differences, if any, is there in build and sonics between the
> SM-57 and the older Shure Unidyne mics that look virtually identical,
> anyone know?

The story I've heard is that the capsules come off the same line. After QC
testing, the ones with the most accurate, widest response become 57/58's,
and 'rejects' become the lower priced clone mic's. These days, I guess that
would be an SM-48....

Anyone else corroborate this?

jak
>
> Al

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Paul Thomas wrote:
> The following information (from 1995) was found in the Google archives
> of rec.audio.pro...
>
>
> From: shure...@aol.com (ShureGuy)
> Subject: Re: Help ID Shure Mic - Please
> Date: 1995/09/12
> Message-ID: <434ucs$pts@newsbf02.news.aol.com>#1/1
> X-Deja-AN: 109959180
> sender: r...@newsbf02.news.aol.com
> references: <432p8d$a34@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
> organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
> reply-to: shure...@aol.com (ShureGuy)
> newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
>
> Please allow me to set things straight. The 545 is not made of reject
> parts from the SM57. The SM57 has a voice coil made of a different
> material than the 545. The 545 uses an all copper voice coil, which
> makes
> it a little heavier than the SM57 coil. In fact, we started making
> the 545 about 7 years before the SM57. Also, do to manufacturing
> reasons, it
> is impossible to use 57 rejects for the 545. Since the 545 and SM57
> have
> different grills, the cartridges are mounted differently. Also, since
> the
> cartridges are manufactured into the mounting assembly, it is
> impossible
> to use a reject SM57 for the 545. The mounting hardware will not
> allow it.
>
> This is a widely held myth of our products and I hope this helps clear
> things up.
>
Thanks for pulling that up, Paul. Another Urban Myth put to rest (until
someone like me brings it up again, ten years from now....).

jak
>
> Rick Waller
> Applications Group
> Shure Brothers Inc
> Shure...@aol.com
> ph: 708-866-2634
> fx: 708-866-2606

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

jakdedert <jdedert@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>playon wrote:
>> What differences, if any, is there in build and sonics between the
>> SM-57 and the older Shure Unidyne mics that look virtually identical,
>> anyone know?
>
>The story I've heard is that the capsules come off the same line. After QC
>testing, the ones with the most accurate, widest response become 57/58's,
>and 'rejects' become the lower priced clone mic's. These days, I guess that
>would be an SM-48....
>
>Anyone else corroborate this?

This used to be the case at one point. Today, I think the consistency is
high enough that it doesn't happen that way any more.

The 545 is still a production item, and it still sounds just like an SM57
to me. It sells for considerably more than the SM57, though, and it is
extremely popular in Asia where the metal finish is a big deal. You'll see
them on Chinese music programs all the time.

It has gone from being a cheaper mike to a more expensive one somehow.
Marketing is weird that way.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> jakdedert <jdedert@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>> playon wrote:
>>> What differences, if any, is there in build and sonics between the
>>> SM-57 and the older Shure Unidyne mics that look virtually
>>> identical, anyone know?
>>
>> The story I've heard is that the capsules come off the same line.
>> After QC testing, the ones with the most accurate, widest response
>> become 57/58's, and 'rejects' become the lower priced clone mic's.
>> These days, I guess that would be an SM-48....
>>
>> Anyone else corroborate this?
>
> This used to be the case at one point. Today, I think the
> consistency is high enough that it doesn't happen that way any more.
>
> The 545 is still a production item, and it still sounds just like an
> SM57 to me. It sells for considerably more than the SM57, though,
> and it is extremely popular in Asia where the metal finish is a big
> deal. You'll see them on Chinese music programs all the time.
>
> It has gone from being a cheaper mike to a more expensive one somehow.
> Marketing is weird that way.

When I first went to work for a German sound company in the 80's, I was
surprised to see those things used all of the time...usually used in
preference to mic's like Sennheiser 421's--or various models of (much
superior, IMO) Beyers and AKG's--which are common as dirt over there.

Being 'American' made them sound better....<g> I wonder if that's still the
case these days. It's been over 15 years since I worked in Europe.

jak
> --scott

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

The Urban Myth I'd heard was that the Shure capsules that didn't pass
QC to become SM58's got sold to RadioShack to become Highball 2 mics!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"jakdedert" <jdedert@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:R1mCd.11064$7N4.7678@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> Thanks for pulling that up, Paul. Another Urban Myth put to rest (until
> someone like me brings it up again, ten years from now....).

Interesting.

When the SM-56 and SM-57 were first introduced in the late 1960s, they were
advertised as having the same capsule as the highly reguarded model 546 and
the 546 had been advertised as having a "selected" Unidyne III, aka 545
capsule. If it's an urban myth, it's one that Shure started! I suppose
everybody could be right if the 57 or the 545 no longer uses the same
capsule.

--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http/www.hyperback.com