SM57 vs 545 - Vintage vs New

[@lordgraga]

This was extremely thorough, fantastic work. One data point: I have a USA Unidyne III and some newer SM57's, and the EQ difference match your results: New SM57 has slightly more low end, but slightly less high end from ~5K and up.

[@meistudiony]

Thanks for checking it out and for the reassurance that the differences I found are in line with your own. I'd hardly call the differences night and day as many swear by on certain gear forums. Appreciate the info!

[@raymota4515]

The difference between a 57 and a 545 is 488.

[@meistudiony]

Indeed it is!

[@LoveRaptor]

It's a 57. They were all fine. Most of them sounded identical. The snare test had some slight differences in tone but like you said in the video, that's just as likely due to placement. The idea that people are arguing that one 57 sounds better than another is wild to me. The only thing wilder is the prices some "vintage" 57s go for on Reverb.

[@meistudiony]

Put a high price on something and people think its special. Wish one could do that with old beat up cars…

[@LasseLammert]

Very good video, thank you!

[@meistudiony]

Thanks for checking it out!

[@APMTenants]

The sm57 and 545 don’t have the same capsule. “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. “ -Shure Unidyne iii is referring to a patented technology, not a specific capsule. The old sm57s had 3 wires connecting the capsule and the transformer. The new ones have two.

[@meistudiony]

OK! Thanks for the comment! Lets take a dive into this and see if we can clarify this! From Shures website, the Unidyne I, II and III (and 4 which was in the 548 but didn't take off) refer to the cartridge types. The Unidyne I was the big boxy thing (video coming soon) found in the original 55 mic. The Unidyne II was the first "smaller" version and close to what we have now. The III was about the same as the II but had some added shock mounting features which made the handling of the mic improved over the previous version. (essentially some rubber suspensions and some sponge rings) and what we see in the 545, 57 and 58 (and probably others). "The Unidyne III microphone cartridge first appeared in the model 545 in 1960." - www.shure.com/en-GB/performance-production/louder/shure-unidyne-75-years-of-the-worlds-most-recognisable-mic Same cartridge, different assemblies. (the 57, 58 and 545 all unidyne III's). Rick, (the guy you quoted) has an interesting take. While yes the 545 came out in 1960 and the 57 in 1967, that only means that one was released before the other. When the SM57 was released, the tape ring around the head basket said "SM57 Unidyne III" and the 545 said "545XX Unidyne III". Mic model and cartridge type. In his FULL quote he mentioned that the grilles and housings were different, and, hes just wrong on that. The grilles are different in color only (silver for the 545 and grey for the 57) . Shure only makes a single head basket for both models. (www.shure.com/en-US/products/accessories/rk244g?variant=RK244G) I recently had a couple of mics in for repairs and the parts guy mentioned they've only ever had a single assembly for the baskets, so not sure where Rick got that info. I've repaired mics from the 60's all the way to the 2000s and they all use the same head basket. As far as the housings go, they too are identical, except for the material they are made out of. (545 being plastic and the 57 being all metal, to be more resilient for live use, where as the 545 was seen more as an installation type mic). The rubber at the top and bottom of the assembly is identical, the two sponge rings inside are identical, and either capsule fits into either assembly, and either assembly can screw on to either mic handle (the dimensions and threading are all identical). As far as the capsule assembly itself... again identical. The diaphragms are identical as well. The magnet assemblies have undergone some changes over the years, where some seem CNC bumpy and others smooth. Both are made from the same material and weigh in the same as well (smooth and riged). The voice coil, however IS different. So that part is at least true. The ones i had in had their diaphragms detached and i have both sitting in front of me right now. The 545 is a more reddish copper color whereas the 57 looks more "new penny" kind of. Weight wise, they both come in at less than 1g. (with the diaphragm and coil connected). The magnet assemblies both weigh in at 91g with the mesh ring and no diaphragm attached. Where he got the "the assemblies are different" thing, I dont know, but they just arent and as far as i can tell, never have been different. Ricks original comment was meant to debunk the myth that the SM57s were just 545s that passed all the QC and the 545s somehow didn't... that theory just doesn't even make sense to me. How much of a difference JUST the voice coil makes? Well, the weight COULD make a difference, but when tested, its really not a big one, as we see in the responses in the video. And in the context of a mix (recording or live) I'd go so far to say its a moot point once EQ and compression enter the conversation. Are they different? From a voice coil stand point, it would appear so. One could argue the bigger difference would be with the transformer which has multiple impedances on the 545 and a single on the 57. As far as the leads to the transformer, the black was just a ground that was connected to a washer clip on the magnet assembly. It wasn't connected to the capsule in that no signal was going through it. After shure realized that it made no difference since the entire body was grounded, it was dropped. The black lead is still used on the 545 since the upper is plastic and non conductive. Thanks for bringing this up, its been a fun dip into the knitty gritty of these mics.

[@APMTenants]

@@meistudiony the sm57 was released in 1965, not 1967. The sm58 was released in 1966

[@APMTenants]

@@meistudiony “A lot of the variations and the basic design were before my time, but I did know the designer, Mr. Seeler. They were all variants of the original Unidyne III, designed about 1960. The patent didn't issue till 1966. The biggest change I know of was the switch to the aluminum voice coil in the 57. There were probably many minor changes in things like transformers. But the biggest difference from one to the next is the tuning. The capsule is multi chambered and the response is tuned by varying those chambers. Originally the last chamber was actually tunable by turning a little nut inside the capsule. Otherwise it's a function of things like felt density. The classical tuning was for a bass rolloff to compensate for proximity, and of course the +6 at 6K mid peak.” - some guy on GS.

[@APMTenants]

@@meistudiony If the voice coil is different, the capsules are not identical. The voice coil is part of the capsule. That you would continue to call them identical after that basic fact has been established is bizarre

[@meistudiony]

@@APMTenants the magnet assembly and diaphragm are identical. The coils are different. Thought thats what i said. Apologies.

[@nugznmugz]

They all sounded functionally pretty close. There were some slight differences in low and hi between, maybe worth noting in your mic notebook... but certainly not anything you couldn't account for easily with a little EQ. Noting these slight differences might make a recording session go a little faster, but on a stage it would just waste time. That's my two cents.

[@meistudiony]

I agree 100%... what bugs me is im not hearing the HUGE, no contest difference these folks are talking about when its the USA vs MEXICO argument. Thanks for checking it out!

[@r.bar-lb3xw]

All seem to sound good. However, can't help but favor the Old '57. It appears to make the instrument sound more authentic as it would sound if you were listening to it without a mic.

[@meistudiony]

I was partial to the old 545 myself. Just came through more like what I would want to sit in a mix.

[@HoneyWindbutton]

Wow. Great stuff thanks

[@meistudiony]

Thanks for checking it out! Appreciate it!

[@justinhayes3434]

I liked the vintage 545 on the snare. Otherwise, not much difference

[@meistudiony]

Yeah. Its slight and once you hit any of em w eq/compression all bets are off.

[@Verde88]

Fantastic, instant Subscribe

[@meistudiony]

Thanks for checking it out!

[@DapperDanLovesYou]

While I felt like I heard _some_ kind of difference on the guitar, it certainly wasn't anything drastic or wild. I would be hard-pressed to verbalize the difference I heard, and would much more easily chalk it up to product variations or my own brain. As far as the “Hidden Test” … Yeah, I have no f**king clue

[@meistudiony]

I agree with you... the differences were no more or less than two of the same mic from any time period (i do hear a little more top end on the 545's) but the 57's..... same mic. As far as the hidden test goes. I had to keep notes as to where the changes were. one of them is obvious to me, but its still not a GLARING difference. I'll post the time stamps of the changes next week (give anyone that wants to try a chance). This was apparently my 50th video, I think it might be giveaway time again!

[@VinceMusicianG]

I got my 545 for a set of pickups out of a tele and $15 bucks, its definitely not a fake have yet to test it on a cab but it works great for the vocal test.

[@meistudiony]

Nice! Im all about a good trade! The used market, esp for Shure stuff, still scares me right now. Unless I know the person or can verify it, I try to stay away. I think i got burned about 3 times this past year with stuff. I think Shure moving production to china helped make this worse as well. Their stuff was probably stolen day 1.

[@CSGmusical]

My opinion : Not enough changes from one mic to another as a home user... If anything 2 different new mics might differ more than the ones in this test or so does mic placement. But the ear-buds I am using are not the best and lack low end. From my ears perspective : Guitar, the first 57 had a slightly more high end in my initial listening. The 545 seemed to have like slightly more dynamics which sound slightly smoother as well on clean guitar less noticeable as the gain went up, probably from the different transformer. Liked the 57 more on higher gains.

[@meistudiony]

yeah pretty much this... As soon as you hit any of these with compression/eq in post the differences are kind of null at that point. In the context of a mix, I dont think the differences are enough to matter much at all, especially if I plan on post processing.

[@williamburkholder769]

This is a "Who cares, it's a 57 or 545?" thing. They are all good enough to be used where you would use one or the other. Placement, room acoustics, levels, EQ, compression, reverb/delay, and other factors will all change the sound, probably more than the differences among these mics. Individual sample variation will add to the mix. So really, just use one. Why is there an argument?

[@meistudiony]

I dont know. There seems to be those that feel the older US made 57 (and 545) are somehow superior sounding…. Im not hearin it.

[@7171jay]

Yes, people claiming that vintage 57's and 545's is certainly a "thing" as the very small differences in sound can easily be attributed to aging and condition. Vintage USA made are desirable regardless of what I would say are some pretty questionable "differences" that some attribute to the older mics as being better. I've owned many 57's (USA and Mexican) over the years as well as 545's, and PE54's and they all seemed to be plenty close enough not to get overly excited about it.

[@BandrewScott]

How can you say that the peanut butter is not secret tone sauce!? 😂

[@meistudiony]

Im just a bit of a skeptic. The creamy delicious goodness that smells like a mechanics shop could very well be the key to the mic sounding "soooo much better" or maybe it was "sooo much BUTTER", perhaps i misread the claim!

[@BandrewScott]

@@meistudionyjust finished the video. Absolutely fantastic. Question though, I understand the argument against using descriptive terms like warm/smooth/crispy/etc., but at the same time it seems the best way to convey a sound to someone who may be unfamiliar with audio and the technical side. What do you think the solution is in terms of conveying these ideas to the uninitiated?

[@meistudiony]

@@BandrewScott great question and i was discussing this last night with my podcast partner. The “solution”, i guess you could say, we came up with is to break things into 3 bands. Bass, mid and treble. Generally when someone says bright, airy or crispy, i take that to mean top end, or treble. So what we should ask is, to bring the treble down if its too much. Dark, wooly or fat are usually used for bass and honk, nasal, boxy are mids. When we send mixes to each other for review we’ll usually say “needs a cut at 2k” or “needs a boost above 10k” (actually using frequency bands we hear) but no lay person would be able to do that. Great topic for discussion though for sure!! Thank you!! Edit: i should mention that ive had clients refer to something needing to be warmer meaning reverb…. So its just a conversation that needs to be had as it arises and try to talk it out and figure out what they mean. Lol

[@ObscureTech]

Soooo the question is....do you now LOVE the 57?

[@meistudiony]

that would be a big ol NO from me! haha!

[@morleychallenged]

Never have a switch in a microphone. They always sound like a sketchy switch.

[@meistudiony]

Normally id agree. The switches on the 545 are quite different than your typical mic switch though. That being said, mine are bypassed 😉

[@reaper7264]

my 545s don't have switches. Like sm57

[@meistudiony]

Depends on which version you have and from what year. I believe there were “D” versions with no switch.

[@dindinbre]

There are some slight differences, but in the context of a mix there's no way anyone's telling the difference.

[@meistudiony]

My thoughts as well. Ive had new 57s that were further off from each other than those two. Thanks for watching!

[@veronicalau1734]

Hi. What is your recommendation for a voice over microphone?

[@meistudiony]

What kind of voiceover? Ill use different things for different purposes. Most of my videos now are done with a sennheiser shotgun mic to keep it out of frame. If im doing radio or tv commercial spots i usually go for a large diaphragm condenser and exploit the proximity effect. For podcast kinda stuff my fave is the EV RE20. If im doing voice acting stuff i usually grab my AKG 414XL ii. Thanks for the comment!

[@HugoVarvoglis]

I think 545 is slightly brighter than the 57 but it lucks some low end and the old 545 has a bit more mid range than the new 545, I prefer the 545 on snare as is sure that you will add some highs on the mix and the 545 already has them, nice comparison, thanks for the video.

[@meistudiony]

Ive found the 545s to be a bit on the inconsistent side, especially over the years. We have 6 of them in the studio from the 60’s to one made just a month ago. The newest one is pretty much a 57 with a little more on top and bottom. (Its new) The one from 2010s lacks bottom, not sure why this is. One from the 80s is closer to the newest one but not as much top end (aging?) the ones have have from the 60s and 70s are indistinguishable from a 57. The variations are so slight if any, as theyre no more apart than 2 57s are from one another.

[@elbardo5778]

I can tell old 57 on clean guitar sounds slightly warmer, and it truly gives a bit of a vintage tone even tho it might be very difficult to percive. The other noticable difference I can pinpoint it's the new 545 giving the clearest take for guitars with distortion! You may like a -ever-so-slightly muddier take on dist but I'm "Shure" the new 545 sounds different.

[@meistudiony]

I def hear the difference between the new and old 545... so much so that ive been trying to get another 545 to see if the new one i have is functioning properly. I have 2 or 3 vintage ones and they're all about the same. The bottom end is a little lacking on the new one. (frequency sweeps reflected that as well) Thanks for watching!

[@lordofthemound3890]

@@meistudiony I have an old Unidyne 545 and I totally agree with your assessment. I’ve seen several comparison videos where I asked if the new 545 had an issue. The new ones sound thin and unclear (bordering on distortion).

[@meistudiony]

@@lordofthemound3890 so fun story. I ordered a brand new one (545), made in china now to compare to the one i have made in mexico. I have to say the bottom end is definitely better. For whatever reason the early/mid 00's 545s seemed to have some weird issues with them. Hopefully its been corrected with the lasted iteration of it. I should update this at some point as it is a significant improvement. The latest one i got sounds WAY closer to the old version especially on the bottom end.

[@meistudiony]

i recently got another 545 ive had on order for almost a year. New one is made in china and they seemed to have fixed the lack of bottom end on the more modern 545s (from the early mid 2000s). The mic sounds fuller than the ones i have from the early mid 00's and more like the original and made in USA versions. I think we have 6-8 545s in the studio at this point... i really have to stop buying them when i see them lol.

[@julianpedro3215]

Made in USA have good mid range and clarity . with acoustic guitar the differences are better appreciated. Thanks for the video!

[@meistudiony]

From my sweep tests, ive found that theyre no more different from a new sm57 than any two sm57s made from any time period. Ive been meaning to pick up one of the new ones made in china to see how those react. I did get a new 545 and its freq response is better than the last gen in the bottom end.

[@CreativeMindsAudio]

Oh this is awesome! Thanks for doing these tests! I thought the 545 was the best. The old vs new was almost the same. I saw a larger difference in the 545 old vs new than the 57.

[@meistudiony]

Yes and you're right about the 545. I've been trying to get my hands on some other 545s to further test this and have found that the version of the 545 (new) that I got may have been a little wonky. I wound up getting another new one about a week after i released that video and it was quite a bit closer to the old one. QC seems to be slipping a bit since shure moved their production to China. And to be clear, thats on Shure not the factory. They should be paying closer attention to things.

[@CreativeMindsAudio]

@@meistudiony for sure! Thanks for the follow-up about that!

[@subtonic24]

I purchased a pair of the new 545SD earlier this year and it looks like they moved production of them to China. I was a bit suspicious at first when mine said made in china, but I bought them brand new from Sweetwater so I knew they were the real deal, not scams. I'm curious how it sounds compared to your newer Mexico 545. I did a video on my channel comparing it to a current Mexico SM57 and I found it has slightly less low end but more top end than a 57. That said, they really are just 57's/545's. Old vs new is not worth losing sleep over imo. Just make great music!

[@meistudiony]

Totally agree and WHERE did you find 545's?! I've been on waiting lists to get a brand new one for over a year now! SW keeps telling me they'll be in any day now (this is since June or July) and i have a couple other mom n pop stores across the country keeping tabs on it. I'd like to test the same. Shure moving production to china (IMO) is not good for them. There were enough fakes on the market to begin with, now the fakers will have the actual source materials to make them even closer. I got a 545 made in china but turned out to be a fake (the head basket grille wasn't dented in and was the wrong mesh material). Doesn't sound very good either. But the packaging (box, bag, strap, paperwork etc. was all EXACT shure product, down to the sticker on the side of the box since all the classic mics ship in the same box with a sticker over which one it actually is)

[@subtonic24]

@@meistudiony I guess I just got really lucky. I got mine the first two weeks of March back when Sweetwater only had about 10 in stock. They went out of stock late March/early April and have been on backorder since. Yea that is a good point about potentially having access to accurate parts to make fakes even closer. That may officially ruin the used market for Shure mics.

[@meistudiony]

@@subtonic24 exactly my thoughts. Not sure i could ever buy a used shure product again unless i know the person selling it really well.

[@ggoohhnnjjaalltt]

Fun and well done video thank you. Does anyone know if the similar bodied Shure DY45G Unidyne III are in fact cost saving transformer-less versions? The vintage USA made 545s and 57s anecdotally just sound dustier and have more vibe compared to modern made ones. 🤷‍♀

[@meistudiony]

If i remember correctly, the DY45 and the 545 are the same mic (similar to the pe54d-cn). They were just packaged with other equipment (radio use or something perhaps). The only places i see mentioning it not having a transformer are some gear space references in speculation. There are a few up for sale and the claim on the listings is its identical to the 545. The DY was the prefix used for dynamic mics. According to this from Shure. The DY45 was the 545 as well (service.shure.com/s/article/oem-models-dy-ca-cb-cm-cr-gr-microphones?language=en_US). Though the G suffix isnt mentioned, perhaps that denotes transformerless? Ill look into this.

[@meistudiony]

Shure did make a 545 gold… perhaps the DY45G is the oem version of that? Is the xlr or any part of it gold plated?

[@ggoohhnnjjaalltt]

No gold but that sounds cool, they look just like the 545, however, both DY45Gs I own have 3pin female Amphenol jacks, sans on/off switches.@@meistudiony

[@meistudiony]

@@ggoohhnnjjaalltt i made a cool 3D printed solution to those amphenol connectors that swaps it out for XLR without having to mod the body. www.thingiverse.com/thing:5907790