Talk:Shure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Professional sound production WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the technology, equipment, companies and professions related to professional sound production. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

Added some info on the SM7 microphone JayroRockola 19:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Beefed up the article drastically in order to concisely explain that Shure is not just a purveyor of Microphones and Phono Cartridges, but also professional, high-end sound. Also, the company is named after an audiophile named Sidney Shure, who is succeeded by Rose Shure.

--Added information to the earphone section; inserted notes on the E1c, proper use, history, and sound quality rivalry with other companies.

[edit] Battle of the Sleeves

This post applies only to the sleeves that can be used for the E3, E4, and E5.

• Very soft flex sleeves (Grey): Moderate sound isolation/dampening, very powerful sound detail, excellent comfort
• Clear Soft Sleeves: Questionable Sound Detail, best sound isolation/dampening, somewhat uncomfortable to use
• Triple-Flange Sleeves: Most comfortable, not-so-good sound isolation/dampening, somewhat good sound detail
• Foam Sleeves: Beginner-friendly, high learning curve, good sound detail, very powerful sound isolation/dampening

— Mark Kim (Reply/Start Talk) 02:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] E500 Clarification

Just now, I realized that some anon edited the article sticking to what Shure claimed on their Consumer Headphone page. I should point out that I had a discussion regarding about the diffrence between the E5 and E500 via E-Mail and here's a comment regarding about the diffrence between the E5 and E500:

The difference between the E5 and the new E500 is that the E5 is a dual driver, where as the E500 is a triple driver. This means, where the E5 has one driver for highs and one for lows, the E500 has one for highs, one for lows and one for mids.

Now here's ANOTHER discussion that you might be interested to hear that I brought up directly to Shure:

The E5 and E500 each have a unique sound. The E500 is warmer then the E5, it seems to have more presence in the midrange. The E5 seems to have a little more detail in the high end. Both earphones do a great job of accurately reproducing sound and it would be very difficult to say one sounds better then the other.

When determining which earphone is right for you it really depends on the application. If you are looking for a pair of in-ear monitors for performance or exercising then the E5 is your solution because it's built very well and very durable and will stay in your ear during physical activity. If you're looking for a pair of earphones to listen to good audio recordings when your traveling, at work or around your home then the E500 is your solution.

For technical differences click on this link: Title: E500PTH vs. E5c URL: https://personalaudio.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/personalaudio.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=3372&p_created=1147122529

Hope this alleviates the reasons why the Shure E500 actually has a tweeter armature, and two dedicated woofer armatures for diffrent note ranges (one woofer for mid-range notes, and one woofer for deep low notes). — Vesther (U * T/R * CTD) 03:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citation needed

The claim is made that this is the standard microphone worldwide for live vocals, but I don't see that this is true (at least there are others, like the AKG Acoustics C1000S, that can hold claim to that title). Could we get a citation on this fact's source? Arkaaito 21:43, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The SM58 is the most common stage mic in the world by leaps and bounds... It is a basic, quality mic for a low price... Look at the sales. The SM58 is litteraly everywhere. It's also, however, one of the worst...

It has a very poor high frequency reproduction, and lousy sibilance, and to keep the feedback at bay, you need to cut damn near every frequency north of 12kHz, as well as 1 and 4 kHz. But it's also bullet proof, and it can be dropped and kicked around a million times and it never dies. It's popular cause most sound people and musicians don't know a damn thing (or want a mic that no one can break)

The C-1000, on the other hand, is a good quality mic with a good sound. It's not all that special, but it's good (I use these regularly). The BEST vocal mics (which you see major acts using in important concerts) would be Electro Voice (I use 767s, Co7s, and Co9s), Sennhieser, Audix, Audio Technica (I use some of theirs), Beyerdynamic, AKG(I use D-880s sometimes, but they lack some highs), Neumann, Sony, etc. The N/D 767s I've used before, and been able to set the EQ gain (Ashly 15 band) to +12 dB without feeding back. The same system, later, with (and set for) shure mics, fed back at +3 dB.

So I digress, industry standard is not the same as best. Shures ARE the industry standard, I'll give you that.ReignMan (talk) 15:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

For a guy who just edited the article to rid it of POV, your Talk entry here is surprisingly full of your viewpoint.

It's my viewpoint (and experience) that feedback depends heavily on venue acoustics and monitor wedge characteristics as well as microphone characteristics such as pickup pattern and frequency response. Your experience with "shure mics" (what model?) isn't typical of what I've seen in my travels. There have been some paint-peeling monitor levels achieved with a Shure as the focus. Just like there've been similar successes with Audix OM-series etc. etc. The live sound mix engineer's style has to flex to highlight the strengths of the mic and the monitors.

You are saying this or that mic has good sound but for what purpose will the mic be used? I see each model of microphone as a spice to add to the stew. Each one has its own sound. Many times in a mix I might not want the high frequency extension of a condensor mic such as the C 1000. I might only want that on sources whose high frequency characteristics are going to be useful in my mix. And the C 1000 picks up too much of the stage around it to be very useful on loud stages.

I see rabid anti-Shure rants as sour grapes. The mics are what they are... You can use an Audix or Shure for two different results just like you can use black pepper or chili pepper in making your soup. Why shut your world off to one of the available spices? Use them both to create a mix that works.

For a surprisingly good mic for male rock vocals, try the Shure Beta57, an instrument mic.  ;^) Binksternet (talk) 15:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm just making sure the article has no POV statements. The talk area is the place to state your point of view. And, yes, Shure's have bad anti-feedback properties. I've used them over every monitor and in any venue you can think of, from JBL, to EV, to Mackie, to Community, to Dynacord, from $400 to $8,000 wedges, powered, and unpowered.

The mics I've used were mostly the Beta 58s, Beta 87s, SM58s, SM91s, and Beta 57s, but I like the SM57 the best of the whole group. It helps to point out that I'm an autistic savant, and my hearing is incredibly sensitive, I can hear the missing highs in the Shure mics, (as well as the AKG D-880s). This is the reason I dislike using them. The EV's +/-3 dB range is from 40 Hz to 22 kHz, the Shure Beta 58 is from 50 Hz to 15 kHz or so. The EV Co7 is a suprisingly good mic, and it costs only about $60. I like that personally, but it cannot be handled without alot of noise and it's not very durable. If I had to choose a mic to hold, I'd choose a Beta 58. The C-1000 isn't all that good of a mic, actually. I said I used them, but I didn't say it was by choice.ReignMan (talk) 15:20, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The SM58 has been out long enough for there to be a bunch of online mentions of its being considered "the industry standard" live vocal mic. None of these links qualify as strong enough for a good Wikipedia source, though. Here's what I found (helps if you search the page for the word "standard":

online sales site

another sales site

yet another online sales site

still another online sales site

Oops, this one is SM57, not SM58

What you get when you google "industry standard" and AKG C1000S is that people use it quite a lot for drum overheads and acoustic guitar. Live vocals? Not common at all. Definitely no comparison to the SM58 in terms of universal recognition as a standard vocal mic.

Don't mistake the phrase "industry standard" for "the best"... Binksternet 00:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)