Shure SM57 vs. Unidyne III (Vintage SM57) Shootout

[@DMKahn]

Wow, there's a vast difference in tone. I was expecting the graphs to be way more different. Interesting how that resonant 3k peak makes such a difference. A way bigger diff than the 421 comparison you just did. I really enjoyed both, thanks for posting!

[@RecordingLounge]

Some might argue that’s because the mics weren’t EXACTLY in the same spot. I did the test both ways and it was slightly different when they were in the same spot but barely. And again, that’s just these particular serial numbers... possible that not every unidyne or modern 57 is this way.

[@gimmigimmigimmi]

also human hearing is really sensitive at 3k

[@fearcandy]

Surprisingly, I could actually tell a difference. It's getting harder to do so in my older years. The Unidyne had more bite on the transient attacks and appeared to capture the loud to quiet drops with more rapid rolloff which gave the music the feel of having more headroom and openness. Cool demo. Thanks.

[@scotti-stringz]

Very helpful. I agree 💯 about the Unidyne. Great playing too!

[@RecordingLounge]

Thank you!

[@Rissna]

I'm so glad I have a couple of these Unidyne mics in my locker.

[@ladycharlesmusic]

Surprised how noticeable the difference is, but this really confirms to me why I've never loved SM57's without EQ - that mid boost just isn't my cup of tea. Still great versatile mics, and I have a few cheap copies without transformers that I actually love, but I'll be looking out for a used Unidyne III.

[@absolving]

That clean piece was BEAUTIFUL!

[@patthesoundguy]

I have been chasing a particular snare drum sound that I used to get 20+ years ago in my earlier years as a FOH engineer. I keep putting a regular SM57 up and getting just ok results. Turns out most of the SM57 I was using back then we're the unidyne 57. I recently found one of those in some of my old gear. The first time I tried the unidyne 57 on a snare I realized it wasn't me it was the newer 57. The current 57 is still a great mic but I like the old version better on snare.

[@RecordingLounge]

I know the feeling. The new one just sounds strange after comparing directly to the unidyne. I can’t un-hear the difference now. Haha

[@albionseed4866]

Try the a81ws windscreen on a 57 or 545. 😉

[@timroberson722]

I always thought the Unidyne had a cleaner smoother sound than the Low Z. This test proved it. The 3k was harsh and muddy. Most people will not know the difference. The highs were not as crunchy as the Low Z. More pleasant to my ears.

[@joeyskar]

The Unidyne sounds amazing for the drive and clean but the 57 has a nice brightness to the clean that you don't really pickup with the Unidyne. If you want to sound slightly more sparkly on clean use the 57.

[@envisiotube]

The same result with voice recording, here the difference is huge. UAD has a Unidyne III Modeling in his Sphere Ocean Way collection called "OW-57U3", and this an amazing and really neutral sounding mic which is similar to the Gefell M930 which I own. I did an A/B comparision with a voiceover recorded by both (Sphere LX Modeling and M930) simultaneously. With no audio editing, the newer SM57 really is not ideal for voice because of it's harshness in the upper voice range.

[@jaredharder5771]

Great video. And great demo. Thanks for being straightforward with it. 🤘🏼

[@CavernCompany]

Very interesting... I often use a regular 57 on the road. Maybe its time to switch over!

[@radioindiana5596]

As a guitarist and recordist, I always thought 57s were pretty meh, had a upper mid frequency that always desperately needed to be addressed through subtractive eq and kind of sounded like the amp was inside a tin can. a fairly successful producer/studio owner friend told me to try a unidyne iii version. this was about a year before the prices doubled, and i found two on ebay for 300. he was right. it is now my go to dynamic on guitar cab and coupled with a condenser that i swap out depending on what i am wanting, the unidyne iii 57 is my fav dynamic for guitar cab. its darker, less harsh, less tin cannish and mostly it is thicker sounding and warmer in the low mids. i havent looked back and count myself lucky to have scored two cheaply.

[@brianfeldtman]

Thanks for posting this shootout. I was A/B 'ing a Unidyne III against a newish 57 today and while my ears prefer the Unidyne over my 57 on guitar (basically a Marshall crunch tone) I will likely sell my Unidyne (for a major profit btw as it was a $20 garage sale bin find) and use a 57 in that application. Not sure if this particular 57 is older or newer. I actually also had an e906 in the shootout which sounded better then either one to me as far as just straight guitar sound but you always have to have a 57 in the locker right? I also included a TLM107 and SM7B in the shootout. SM7B just didn't sound "great" and perhaps I had to push it more as they are notorious for craving a lot of signal. TLM107 sounded good but it picks up a lot of low end that in a mix, would just get EQ'd out of the way anyway so for me, one mic, one take, I'm going e906 as it covers the guitar frequencies well and reduces the need for dramatic EQ'ing in the mix. Just my opinion of course and ymmv. Oh and I should add I put them all center cone 3", edge 3", center cone 9", and center cone 1". To me, center cone 1" was the best overall tone as edge mic'ing is a bit dull and if the on-cone sound is too bright, it's easy to EQ that out.

[@RecordingLounge]

I personally love the 906. To me it’s very underrated. So is the Beyer M88.

[@brianfeldtman]

@@RecordingLounge I’m not familiar with the M88 but will check it out I assume there are some YT vids. Thanks!

[@RecordingLounge]

It’s awesome! I think if you like the extra low thump and less bitey texture of the 906 compared to a 57, you’ll like the M88. Really great for rhythms especially.

[@XChristianNoirX]

3-4k, where the non unidyne has a bit of lift is right around where all the metal recordists do notch cuts to de-harsh their guitar sounds.

[@clintsterling2225]

Great video, and fantastic tone! What's the clean riff being player here? Thanks!

[@RecordingLounge]

I think that’s a Mateus Asato riff

[@Greenmantislives]

Did the listens with eyes closed and would agree with you 100%. That midrange harshness just was not there on the Unidyne.

[@RecordingLounge]

After doing this test I can’t un-hear that harshness. Haha

[@minty_Joe]

I think the Unidyne III really shows its difference from the new revised 57 when dealing with fuzzed guitars in a rock music setting. You can hear the mids and highs comparison in that. When comparing the 2 mics in a more quieter passage, such as a blues sound in this video, you can't tell the difference that much. Being an audio engineer, I can pick it up, but just barely.

[@caspermaster-com]

Unidyne sounds very natural. Sounds like modern 57 dont bend to the sound, kinda harsh unmoving midrange in comparison, lack depth therefore

[@monosound81]

Casper Bjerkehagen agreed

[@stevewirtes9669]

VERY Interesting!

[@ayskura3671]

to make a good test you should use a reamped guitar sound (so it's always the same) and swap place to the mic on the same stand careful to not move the stand while doing so as even millimeters makes a huge difference in tonality.

[@ethelvermin2224]

That approach also can remove the cable from the equation, since you can use the same one for both.

[@christianboddum8783]

I did my first record with a Unidyne 3 and a Sennheiser MD 421. We did a SM 57 shootout, and the Unidyne clearly won! It's a long time ago, but the fact never left me. Still looking out for Unidynes, though an IR's is more likely to be used in the future. I hope Celestion will do some IR's with the Unidyne + combos ;-)

[@yosoytumarvel916]

Hola 👋🏾 😊 el unidyne se sigue vendiendo en la actualidad?

[@urbanbeets]

I have one must be 30 years old or more. over 20 singers used it.

[@ArcadeMusicTribute]

The FQ response looks almost exactly the same but the sound on the distorted sound was quite different. Could it had been a result of you placing microphones on different spots? I actually liked Unidyne better on the distorted sound while I couldn't hear any real difference on the cleaner funky crunch sound that you did. The Unidyne sounded softer and smoother with nicer highs on the distorted sound for me. I'm thinking about actually buying one. Anyhow thanks for this video. Btw - I used to own 4 Shure SM 57s and when comparing them 2 pairs sounded totally different than the other 2 pairs. 2 sounded really nice and 2 not so much when compared. The bad ones had this boosted bloated mid section that just sounded horrible. Now I only have one Shure SM 57 left and one modified SM 57 version. I sometimes also use Senheiser MD and Audix i5, but 57 has always been my main microphone for the guitars. About that moded SM 57. I actually bought it by mistake. I thought it was just SM 57 with replaced original parts that sounded better than the original, but it actually sounds more like Senheiser MD. It's a great mic but not something I use a lot. Mostly it's just there with the rest of the mics I hold in my studio from the old days :D

[@RecordingLounge]

To be fair, the frequency response measurements are just peak measurements, so they don’t necessarily show a super precise picture of what it sounded like on something complex like distortion. In short, I agree with you lol

[@erikhughes7150]

Sir, did you put new foam in the vintage SM57? I ask because the original foam pop filters inside the vintage SM57 are usually gone after all these years. They degrade which affects the sound performance of the mic. Just curious if you knew this or not?

[@jimilove7773]

Vintage is always better if the condition is good!

[@recordingrebels4465]

Cool video i just did the same thing over on our forums except with a 544 i converted over to XLR. Only difference between the comparisons is chose use the same spot on the cab/speaker. Not two different locations. 👍

[@CrustaceousB]

I cannot hear a difference at all 😂 but hey I'm a vocalist so that's to be expected. Great video man!

[@gordongurley3982]

Holy cow, they should change the newer mic to be called the SM57II or something since it sounds completely different.

[@ralfjung]

I do not want to get too nerdy but if the only difference is that 3KHz peak why not applying an EQ which you normally do anyways on an electric guitar after you recorded it....stepping back a few inches though I thought the UNidyne had an overall better meatier tone much more than the EQ curve revealed

[@jiyukaze]

If I decrease 3k by an eq, does it mean the new SM57 would be like the Unidyne?

[@RecordingLounge]

A little less high mids and highs, and a little more low end, and it will be fairly close. They’re really not that far off.

[@jiyukaze]

@@RecordingLounge thanks a lot!

[@randallabracadabra]

You should test the Vintage Unidyne III SM57 against the Unidyne III 545SD.

[@jayfuckinglast5083]

Just wondering what kind of micpreamp these 57's were running into and what the impedance setting was if it is a preamp that has options?

[@RecordingLounge]

I can’t remember off the top of my head - but I would guess either API 312s or an A Designs Pacifica. It’s POSSIBLE could have been a pair of BAEs

[@jayfuckinglast5083]

Thanks for trying to trying to come up with it. I mentioned because to me the 57 in general tends to sound really peaky like that when running into a higher impedance. The more loaded it is the more I like it, with a Neve style pre set to 300 ohms it sounds proper to me, the less you load it the more out of control it gets. Without being there and hearing just how bright the guitar sound was in the room or if the Unidyne was really dark and making up for such a thing is impossible to know. Basically on that source you had there and with what you recorded with, the Unidyne is a winner there but there are as I mentioned some other factors. Would have been interesting to hear both mics on vocal or acoustic guitar to give another reference point.

[@RecordingLounge]

Agreed. No shootout can really be perfect just because so many factors are at play. Given the right source, the Unidyne might lose miserably. But I suppose that should be implied with any shootout. Maybe it’s helpful, maybe it’s not. But if nothing else hopefully it leads to some more investigation and knowledge!

[@jayfuckinglast5083]

I have a Unidyne 545 that seems to be way closer in sound to the four non-Unidyne 57's I currently own than the two mics you did this shootout with are. Either your source was very harsh sounding and the Unidyne was so dark it tamed things down or that's one amazing Unidyne you had there. I suppose the other option is that your non-Unidyne isn't a real Shure mic but a fake, there are a lot of them around and they are kind of harsh sounding. Anyway rather thought provoking as for whatever reason there is quite a difference in the mics in your shootout. As always use your ears and depending on the source use the mic that sounds best.

[@albionseed4866]

The new ones are heavily potted...

[@jafethuerta]

I never heard of these Unidyne III mics before so i came to this video because i just bought one for like £50 and thought it was a SM57 fake/copy/knockoff.... So this is a surprise.... £50 and i still was trying to make an offer jajajajaja

[@jarrydee2799]

Great deal. On reverb they are going for 250-299 dollars. I have one laying around, mixed in with my 57s and never used it.

[@Rompler_Rocco]

Same! I only have two 57's, which I bought years ago off craigslist for $50/each. I nearly walked away when I saw they were all scratched up (not as described). Later, I got home and was like "Wait! Unidyne III??? I got ripped off! What is this crap?!" 😡🤔.....⏳.....🎰🥳🤸

[@ehleroo]

Bogus comparison. The right-angle XLR crimped off some of the high end coming out of the Unidyne. Use straight cables and you'll find they sound identical.

[@RecordingLounge]

LOL

[@HaMa-he2mn]

@@RecordingLounge yeaH, its ture! when sound waves travel through a 90 degree angle the 3k area is semi-blocked and causes a reduction of 2-3db in that frequency.a well known fact.you can correct it by pushing the PHASE button half the way in your mixing console and using a toothpick to make it stay this way steadily (180:2=90) .just kidding,agreed,Unidyne III it is! ,once again.good test.

[@RecordingLounge]

That is too good haha

[@edmundnieginski6114]

Sorry, I been performing since the mid 70's. I own 2 of the early sm57's. The original ones were made in USA. Somewhere in the mid 80's, Shure switch over to the sm 57's being made in Mexico. The difference in sound is there. Better sound from the older models.100% I was hoping it wasn't true. But, yes it is!

[@maxbauhof]

Lmao

[@PhilbertQAverage]

All the love people give 57s always baffled me but maybe the old engineers were talking about the old Unidynes. A 57 always sounded kinda dull and "telephone-y" to me, like all the character from a guitar is removed, but these old models sound way better.

[@rehannoor4961]

i dont know, but for me i like the new one.

[@alejandrovarelagandara7874]

Most of difference in this video is product of mic placement. Bad compare testing video

[@jamesdavis5821]

Mic placement makes this not super helpful.