Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dick Rees]

Dave Potter wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 05:38

Presumably its the same capsule.

I think it's a societal thing:

PG for the younger set
SM for the weird

[Fred Merkle]

Dave Potter wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 13:32

Well, I'm not a full time pro sound man.  What I AM is a full time professional Manufacturing Engineer so this is pretty much my area.

Amusingly enough, EE is my area.

Quote:

China isn't poor quality because they make things badly.  China makes poor quality because they cut corners in their processes and materials whenever they think they can get away with it (although I'm not sure that they actually think about it).  If they use the right materials (verified) and are held to correct processes with the same design then what you get is the identical product for less money.

While this is getting off-topic, I just wanted to say that I usually see this as a failure of design or process.  Chinese manufacturing is reasonably mature--and in many cases more advanced than stateside.  I usually find that quality failures are due to a design that is either not robust enough to handle operator variability or that the chosen vendor does not have the process capability to manufacture what is asked.

Quote:

So a PG isn't a PG just because its Chinese.

A PG58 is a PG58 because it was designed to cost less to manufacture and to not sound better than an SM58.

Quote:

A dynamic mic is:- a diaphragm, a coil of wire, a magnet a plastic moulding to put it in, a hand grip, a basket .  In he case of the SM series a transformer.

A condenser microphone is not all that much more complicated: a diaphragm, a backplate, a simple impedance conversion circuit, and a chassis.  (Also, FWIW, I can think of very few dynamic microphones on the market that don't use a transformer.)

Quote:

Once you have the processes sorted (they've been making the unidyne for decades) wire is just wire.  Its cheaper in bulk.  Moldings are just moldings.  It is not uncommon for companies to design exactly the same parts into cheaper products.  In some companies I've worked for, they built exactly the same product but disabled the higher functions.

And Shure is no different in these regards.  Any designer worth his/her salt reuses design components when they meet the design requirements.  It's not as easy as you'd imagine to pull money out of a dynamic microphone design like the 58.  Sometimes starting mostly over is the best way to keep unit cost down.

Quote:

I'm not arguing that they ARE the same (hence the question), just saying that in terms of manufacturing cost, it would be possible.

I don't know how many times I have to say they are different before you believe me.    A PG58 would probably cost more were it a derivative of the SM58.

Quote:

Anyway ..... I've no intention of owning one.

So why the post?

Have fun.

-Fred

[Jeff Babcock]

Matt Vivlamore wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 07:50

Beta58 is "better" than a SM58.

I'd be inclined to disagree with that as a generalized statement.

[Mike {AB} Butler]

Jeff Babcock wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 16:46

Matt Vivlamore wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 07:50 Beta58 is "better" than a SM58. I'd be inclined to disagree with that as a generalized statement.

Jeff,
Just curious, what is it that you disagree with in that statement? I would take a Beta over an SM anyday.. even with the hyped "presence" issue in the upper mids..
Regards,

[Thom "Fig" Fiegle]

Mike {AB} Butler wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 16:11

Jeff Babcock wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 16:46 Matt Vivlamore wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 07:50 Beta58 is "better" than a SM58. I'd be inclined to disagree with that as a generalized statement. Jeff, Just curious, what is it that you disagree with in that statement? I would take a Beta over an SM anyday.. even with the hyped "presence" issue in the upper mids.. Regards,

Horses for courses, Mike.  They are different - no question, but better is in the ear of the beholder.

When I'm using a single wedge on a straight mic stand, I prefer the cardiod pattern of the SM.  When I get a mumbler of a singer, the presence peak and extended high freq response of Beta suits.  If the dude can't stay on the mic (within the polar pattern) - back to the SM.

Its like saying a Phillips head screwdriver is better than a flat head... well, it IS for adjusting Phillips heads screws!

[Tony "T" Tissot]

Dick Rees wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 10:36

PG for the younger set SM for the weird

The mind works in strange ways.

[Bennett Prescott]

The difference is,
the PG58 sucks.

It is cheaper because they don't have to put any good in it.

Good is expensive.

[Tommy Stone]

The PG means Poor Guys mic and the SM means Smart Man's mic.

[Dave Rickard]

Thom "Fig" Fiegle wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 08:58

Osci-later, Fig

Clever.

[Marvin Chin]

Tommy Stone wrote on Tue, 24 August 2010 21:23

The PG means Poor Guys mic and the SM means Smart Man's mic.

PG = Poor Guy's mic, that's for sure.
But I have to say, AFTER EQing, compression, etc, I can't tell much difference between the PG and SM
The biggest difference is the handling noise, as someone has noted already; PG's handling noise is pretty brutal, and I think this is definitely where you get what you pay for...