This is a very good article which explains Austrian Audio's ceramic capsule as well as their manufacturing process.

https://www.soundonsound.com/music-business/austrian-audio-building-microphones

 

Firstly SM7B is not that widely used as it seems, it works with some types of male rock vocalists mainly, also it is a glorified SM57 in a fancy body with some switches to appeal to the broadcast market, it became popular because of this, it was rarely found in the studio. A dynamic mic is rarely a good choice for vocals, it DOES need extra gain compared to other mics hence the popularity of Clodlifters & other similar pre-preamps, add this to the cost of the mic too, so maybe if you spend that much money there are better options. With the Rode NT1 it is very low noise @ -14dBa so there is a problem somewhere else, I'm not a fan of most Rode mics as they are too bright, the NT1a is better its not too bright.If I wanted to buy just one mic for recording I would get Slate ML1, this can emulate almost any mic & you could find a good deal on it right now, ML1a is more $$, I trust it as I have used Slate FG series plugins since they started, same with VSX headphones, I totally trust it too, amazing product. But if you can't make the NT1 sound good partly nothing else will do it, you possible need a decent preamp or interface, people are making records with the NT1 probably more than SM7b. Mic technique is important too.
Personally I would not throw a lot of money at something hoping it will meet your expectations, possibly your voice doesn't record well too, that it doesn't sound the way you think it should.

 

It's one of the most widely used mics by Youtubers with a little money to spend. That's probably a reason for the Rode NT1 to replace. Might also explain some other things, too.

 

Hello @canbi, sometimes a visit to an ear doctor is also very helpful for a qualified hearing test. After the hearing test, you'll know which frequencies you can no longer hear and whether you need a hearing aid. As we age, many people lose their high frequencies.

Buy a large-diaphragm condenser microphone for around €400.
If you can buy it from Thomann, you can also try it for 30 days and return it if you don't like it.

 

Get an SM57 with a Shure A2WS windscreen. The sound is almost the same and costs a quarter of the price. Put the extra money into a higher quality interface and decent xlr cable.

 

Having just bought one after many trial and errors looking for a mic to have in the control room, just my two cents in case you're indeed still leaning towards the sm7B : get an SM7dB. yes, the dB version has phantom power if you need the extra juice. but it can also run like the standard SM7B without phantom.
in my case, in terms of noise floor, using an RME UCX interface that is by no means cheap, if i count on the boost of gain from the RME preamp It will be noticibly noisier than if I use the phantom power and the extra 28db of extra power from the mic.
wonderful mic for voice over and for vocals in an untreated space for recording, or if you're recording an extra instrument whilst singing or laying down extra vocal tracks but don't want to go into the booth. It's my mixing/control room mic for the moment. most of the vocals i'll go for the neumann 87ia, but for voice over or some backing vocals etc it's absolutely perfect. need minimal effort to have it sit in the mix. in terms of it being an all rounder, I used to use the sm7B version a couple of years ago for Toms and elec cabs and it also excelled in those two scenarios.
Also, IMHO an SM57 will not get you even close to what the SM7B brings to the table. I have worked for years with both models and they are not comparable. the whole story about the Roided Sm57 comes from an interview:

"According to John, the development of the SM7 went something like this: "A group of Shure acoustical engineers were given the SM57 cartridge element (Unidyne III) and asked, without restrictions on size or cost, to make it better. And they went nuts." This may be one reason why John likes to refer to the SM7B as "an SM57 on steroids"."

also, mic wise, don't believe the hype that a rode nt1 sounds like a neumann. it doesn't. the same way a 57 does not sound like a 7b. it would be wonderful that the gap of 400eur was just hype and marketing. i could just keep using my 57's. but it's not. mic wise more money more quality. it's simple. doesn't mean you can't do the job but it's not the same. a fiat punto can get you to where you're going, but it's not a ferrari.

https://www.shure.com/nl-NL/insights/sm57-on-steroids-the-shure-sm7-b-story

long story short: buy one. You will not regret it.

 

SM7B is an iconic mic because it was used by Michael Jackson in the production of Thriller. Now, due to the usual fetishism of some sound engineers, it seems that we have to reverse the reality "MJ was so good because he used SM7B". Obviously it is not like that, on the contrary, just because a mic worked on MJ, doesn't mean it will work for you. Furthermore, MJ will have sung with dozens of different mics in his career.
SM7B is a good mic, but making it the secret weapon for your future hits seems to me a weak thought

 

Michael Jackson used an SM7 and not an SM7B. The mics have slightly different voicings, and the original was prone to electrical interference and so they added a humbucking coil in the modern version. The connection yoke is also different and much improved on the 7B. If you don't believe me ask the guy who recorded him, Bruce Swedien.

 

Interesting, but your clarification doesn't change the point: using that mic won't make you become Mj

 

Last edited: May 27, 2025 at 8:06 PM

Well to be fair I don't think anybody was implying that was the case

 

exactly. The same way a stratocaster won't make you become Hendrix.
But it is true it is a different Mic. if we're nerding out on mics gotta keep it nerdy. and yep an sm7 is not an sm7b
But hey at least the tool is there. somehow at least you can't use the excuse (mentaly or otherwise) "oh if I just had used so and so gear" haha. whilst there are many other factors in the chain, that one is taken cared of.
now you still need to get your own westlake Recording Studios around that mic and have the record company float you $750,000 to record your thriller, that by today's numbers would be more or less about $3,250,000... so... take it with a pinch of salt.

 

OK, Smartypants, then what will? Maybe...

 

I'm getting 2i2 then, unless I'm directed elsewhere

I meant something that could stand on a desk, not on a floor

Can you please tell me how to spot a fake device?

So SM57 + EQ ≈ SM7B?

Also, the price difference between those two is weirdly large — design fee?

I wonder why it doesn't come bundled, it's a same company after all

Spoiler

also look at my setup
$3 plastic tripod from temu and $2 pop filter that knocks it over on each pull


yea its time to change it

 

Also, I have — weird, not weird — request; can any of you record a 48/96 kHz file with high frequency content using SM7B/57/58 and show me the spectrogram?

While using H2n I learned that human voice frequencies are reaching circa 60 kHz, and while I DO NOT expect 96 kHz results from these microphones, I would like to be sure I could record 48 kHz audio with them

For some reason, ABSOLUTELY NONE reviewer shows this detail..

Thanks

 

Well it's not an SM57, they both are based on the Unidyne III cartridge but the SM7B is designed a bit differently for a different response. Although the SM57 has a pretty big proximity effect so you can fake heavier low end with it just by moving it around.

The SM57 isn't generally a mic that's used with a windscreen and not everyone needs one either. It's essentially wasted money spent for Shure when most folks would leave it sitting in the boxes or ultimately just losing them. And hey if someone does need one, here's one you can give us more money for. I have about 8 SM57s at this point, never would I use those in a situation where I needed a windscreen.Those mics live pointed at guitar cabinets, snare drums and toms for the most part. It's a decent utility mic that used 'in a pinch' when you need it, but I would only use it for vocals if it were my only mic I owned. Even then, I'd find someone with an LDC and borrow that instead.

 

Key Clarifications First

Spoiler: Source KI ChatGPT

1. 
   Microphones do not sample audio, they convert sound into analog electrical signals.
   
   
2. The sample rate (e.g., 48 kHz or 96 kHz) is set by your audio interface or recorder (e.g., Zoom H2n, Focusrite Scarlett, etc.).
   
   
3. What matters is the frequency response of the microphone — that is, how well it transmits various frequencies to your interface.

Shure SM7B / SM57 / SM58 — Frequency Response Reality
These are all dynamic microphones, and they inherently have limited high-frequency response. Here are their spec’d upper limits:

• SM7B: 50 Hz – 20 kHz
  
  
• SM57: 40 Hz – 15 kHz
  
  
• SM58: 50 Hz – 15 kHz

These mics roll off sharply above 15–20 kHz. Even if you record at 96 kHz, these mics won’t deliver meaningful energy above 20 kHz, because they simply can’t transduce those frequencies.

✅ Your Zoom H2n: Why You “Saw” Voice Up to 60 kHz
This is likely due to one of the following:

• Aliasing or artifacts from the A/D conversion.
  
  
• Ultrasonic harmonics or reflections (from external equipment or environment).
  
  
• Possibly a small amount of real ultrasonic content, especially if you made impulsive sounds (e.g., consonants, clicks, sibilance), and the mic can technically “pass” it on.

The H2n’s onboard mics are electret condensers — they can capture content above 20 kHz under ideal conditions, especially at 96 kHz sample rate. This gives you the illusion that human voice has content up to 60 kHz (which may not be perceptually meaningful but is physically possible in rare cases).

Source KI ChatGPT

What You’re Asking For: Spectrogram Evidence
Unfortunately, I cannot physically record anything myself — but I can walk you through how to do it, or search for spectrograms using real-world tests with these mics. If you want, I can also simulate what a spectrogram would show.

⚙️ How to Do It Yourself (Highly Recommended)
Here’s how you can verify it:

1. Use an SM57/58/SM7B into an audio interface capable of 96 kHz.
   
   
2. Record a sharp sound (claps, consonants, hissing, etc.).
   
   
3. Load it into Audacity, REAPER, or iZotope RX.
   
   
4. View the spectrogram set to 0–48 kHz (or 0–96 kHz).

You’ll notice:

• Clear signal up to ~15–18 kHz.
  
  
• Almost no energy above that.
  
  
• Flat noise floor or nothing beyond 20 kHz.

Would you like me to search for published spectrograms or test recordings from these mics at 48/96 kHz?

Or I can generate a fake-but-accurate spectrogram to visually illustrate what’s expected.

Let me know how you'd like to proceed.

 

In my experience you really need a boom arm to put the mic where you need or want it. This one can attach to the desk and it is not going to cost too much. The height cam be adjusted from 370 bis 600 and the boom arm will pinpoint the placement of the mic.

 

Not sure what/where you have been reading but you might want to stay away from the "AI" garbage spewwers, and read an actual book on the subject matter. None of your sentences above make any sense from any kind of standpoint. We have already told you that the SM7 (like most other dynamic mics) is not noted for delicate high end clarity. The SM7 in particular is designed for human voice transmission in a broadcast application - i.e. television, radio, commercial narrative, etc... Even if you run some sort of equalized pre-amp (which will introduce more noise as well) with a dynamic mic you're still not going to get the same kind of fine detail that you can get with a properly designed ribbon or condenser mic. The nature of the design of dynamic mics prevents it.

 

Last edited: May 29, 2025 at 11:28 PM

The mic tops out at 20khz anyways, record it at 96 all you want, you're never going to see, let alone have a remote chance to hear, anything near that mythical 48khz ceiling. Your ears physically can't even fathom those frequencies above 20khz, not even with a brand spanking new set of eardrums that have never heard sound before.

 

Why do people say things like this? The SM7B is a dynamic cardioid microphone. What frequency range do you think it is supposed to have? Almost none of them go over 20khz in specs information. The "Magic 48khz" represents 2x the Nyquist frequency, which in that case would be 24Khz. Remember Nyquist Theorem? For sample accuracy, the sample rate must be 2x the frequency of the highest frequency in the audio which is being sampled.

This is basic digital audio recording fundamentals. Here's a list from GPT which you can compare and contrast with these "Magic" dynamic microphones which go over 20khz as per their own specs.

Dynamic Cardioid Studio Microphones – Frequency Response Chart
Microphone Frequency Response
Shure SM7B 50 Hz – 20 kHz
Electro-Voice RE20 45 Hz – 18 kHz
Heil Sound PR40 28 Hz – 18 kHz
Sennheiser MD 421-II 30 Hz – 17 kHz
Telefunken M80 30 Hz – 18 kHz
Shure SM58 50 Hz – 15 kHz
BeyerDynamic M88 TG 30 Hz – 20 kHz
Electro-Voice RE320 30 Hz – 18 kHz
Audix OM7 48 Hz – 19 kHz
AKG D5 70 Hz – 20 kHz
Rode PodMic 20 Hz – 20 kHz (claimed, but practically limited in low end)
Samson Q9U 50 Hz – 20 kHz
Aston Stealth (multi-voicing) 20 Hz – 20 kHz (varies by mode)