528hemi
52 posts
Nov 23, 2009
3:58 PM
|
Are the Shure 520D Mics from 1995 made in Mexico decent?
How do they compare with the Original 520 and the newest 520dx
Thanks 528hemi
|
LittleJoeSamson
140 posts
Nov 23, 2009
4:39 PM
|
NOPE!
|
Leonid
4 posts
Nov 24, 2009
3:12 AM
|
They are fine. I have Turner mic with one of them installed and It is quite a good mike.
|
jonsparrow
1343 posts
Nov 24, 2009
9:38 AM
|
i use them when i cant find a baseball.
|
congaron
304 posts
Nov 24, 2009
9:53 AM
|
pretty subjective the whole mic thing. I have been fooling around with mics for years, but not on harp. I found over the last 9 months I like them all, now that I know better what to do. I can get the tone i want out of any of them, once I learn the limits of each. I have one that just gets gritty, but not dirty, for example. I have another that stays clean (beta 57) but gives a great harmonica tone. I have one that sounds the most like a trumpet I've ever heard a harmonica sound...my daughter even thought i was playing the trumpet one day....lol.
My personal opinion....2 cents, whatever...based on several years of experimental mic work with electret elements and headset vocal/general purpose mics for music is this:
You just have to get one and see if you can make it sound like you. Nobody else can recommend one you will like with absolute certainty, unless you have the identical amp/cab and harps..and you have heard it yourself. You can improve your odds with forum searches obviously, but in the end it's all subjective.
For me...CB mic elements form the 80's have made some killer harp mics..albeit low impedance, which is not an issue for me. A lower grade vocal mic also serves me extremely well as an all-around tone machine. I still want to spring for a $13 mic i saw at walmart..I really am curios.
|
KingoBad
136 posts
Nov 24, 2009
9:55 AM
|
I have one. It is a sweet mic. It still has a CM element and will do just about everything you want it to do. The 520dx is a dynamic mic and will not sound nearly as good for that Chicago blues sound. However, it is not a bad mic, and you can always pop in a CM element later if you like.
|
MrVerylongusername
652 posts
Nov 24, 2009
10:00 AM
|
They are actually pretty good compared with the 520DX.
I played one for about 15 years before I retrofitted a vintage CM. Output-wise there was little difference. Tonally the 520D was a little brighter, but by no means tinny. No two elements, whatever the brand or vintage, sound the same. You get get good ones and bad ones. My preference would always be for a good, warm sounding vintage CM/CR but the 520D is far superior to the Koibtone element in the current 520DX and is a perfectly good mic.
If you cannot afford vintage, go for it!
**Edit - sorry the Kobitone element is in the equally nasty new bluesblaster, not the DX. Whoever makes it though, the element in the DX is inferior to the 520 and the 520D elements**
Last Edited by on Nov 24, 2009 12:37 PM
|
Bluzdude46
287 posts
Nov 24, 2009
11:57 AM
|
Every once in a while you'll get a good one. that's the problem with the Mexican Bullets, Quality Control. I've never tried a DX /I heard they suck. Buy the 520D if it has decent output and use it until you find a good American Element, then switch them out.
|
Kingley
523 posts
Nov 24, 2009
12:19 PM
|
A lot of people put down the Mexican 520D and the 520DX. Are they as good as the old made in USA elements? Probably not. But that doesn't mean they aren't decent enough mics. If your chops are together then pretty much any mic will sound good. But if your chops ain't there then no mic is going to sound good.
My advice for what it's worth is to buy the Mexican one if you can get it for a good price.
Over the years you'll probably try lots of different mics out. Just because someone says you shouldn't use x, y or z doesn't mean you can't. Try everything you can get your hands on until you find the mic that suits you the best.
|
congaron
309 posts
Nov 24, 2009
12:22 PM
|
When I have to work before practice, I often just use the sm58 sitting there on the stage straight into the PA. Kingley is right..chops matter more. Chicago dirt may elude you without a dirty mic though.
|
Greg Heumann
171 posts
Nov 24, 2009
7:28 PM
|
The element in the 520D is a dual impedance controlled magnetic element and is much closer in design to the original controlled magnetic element. It is (in my opinion) signficantly better than the modern dynamic element in the 520DX. It IS brighter and a little less fat than the older single impedance CM's. Not because of where its made, because of having to fit two different impedance transformer coils where one used to be. Still, I would choose a 520D over a 520DX in a heartbeat.
----------
/Greg
http://www.BlowsMeAway.com
http://www.BlueStateBand.net
|
Hobostubs Ashlock
139 posts
Nov 24, 2009
7:49 PM
|
Kingly wrote
(A lot of people put down the Mexican 520D and the 520DX. Are they as good as the old made in USA elements? Probably not. But that doesn't mean they aren't decent enough mics. If your chops are together then pretty much any mic will sound good. But if your chops ain't there then no mic is going to sound good.) that sounds like good advise i got the 520dx at half price allmost new i love it but i have only my eggstatic mic to compare,Except when i bought mine off a guitar player who didnt want it.A drummer/harp friend of mine who works in a what not shop found a old bullet from the 60's or 70's it looked old it was used as a mic on a small mic stand like a dispatcher used it didnt have a volume knob like my 52odx has. he put a guitar cord on it and i checked it out and i couldnt relly tell that much diference although it probelly did some,but i liked mine just as well.i just wish the 520dx had a cord that could be changed easier like some of the other mics have
Last Edited by on Nov 24, 2009 7:55 PM
|
Greg Heumann
172 posts
Nov 25, 2009
9:48 PM
|
When you're a beginner it is hard to hear the difference between mics. that's because you don't have much tone or mic technique yet. Listen to the old timers. The 520 is better than the 520D which is still way better than the 520DX - IF YOU WANT a fatter, dirtier tone when cupped. The 520DX is also heavier and bigger around than any of its predecessors.
Almost all Shure bullets came with built in cables - and the cable always fail inside the mic. Any can be converted to a screw-on connector, but with the 520DX the retaining ring on the cable will interfere slightly with the volume control.
----------
/Greg
http://www.blowsmeaway.com
http://www.BlowsMeAway.com
http://www.BlueStateBand.net
|
Hobostubs Ashlock
142 posts
Nov 25, 2009
10:30 PM
|
are they very hard to fix if they develop a short inside them,I tinker a little,Ive made sure to take real good care of the cable,but its something that in time is bound to happen,if there anything like guitar cords.
|
