Talk:Shure SM58

message: I think Shure Beta 58A should be merged here and redirected.  The other article has very little content. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 00:26, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The two mics are not considered by respected users to be related. The Beta58 is certainly not an extension of the SM series. The SM58 and the Beta58 are two distinct mic models. If the Beta58 is to be merged somewhere, it would be back to the Shure Inc article. Binksternet (talk) 04:28, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Then why is there more about the Beta 58A in this article than in its own article?  Maybe everything about the Beta should be moved from this article to the Beta 58A article.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:53, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, and the images should be split up instead of paired. A single mic should be in one image. Binksternet (talk) 04:58, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I split the images up for SM58 and for Shure SM57. Binksternet (talk) 12:41, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is good - I was thinking of doing that.  How about adding the Beta 58 info to Shure Beta 58A to make it longer than just one sentence?  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 14:49, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well-l-l, I'm just || this far from nominating that stub for deletion. The Beta 58A microphone is not so notable. Binksternet (talk) 15:13, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, one or the other.  I won't object to the Beta 68 article being deleted.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 15:29, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: So, maybe the superlative language is appropriate for a superlative microphone but that minimally needs to be backed up by references but really WP:NPOV doesn't allow editors to get superlative. Superlatives are allowed in quotes or when otherwise attributed. I've restored my  tags until we figure out how best to address this. --Kvng (talk) 20:40, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "Enviable", "robust", "industry standard"? None of these are unreasonable. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Certainly "robust" and "industry standard" are supported by reliable sources. "Enviable" is going to be a little more work in summarizing sources but is clearly true—in any competitive industry—regarding any product that has reached the status of "industry standard". That fact that counterfeit SM58s are made in China is just one piece of evidence for industry envy. Binksternet (talk) 21:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The reworked lead is great. Thanks Binks! --Kvng (talk) 13:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:PEACOCK]] in lead 

message: Something could be added to the article about the fakes that are made in Asia and sold illegally, including perhaps the efforts of Shure to stem this illicit traffic. Binksternet (talk) 22:20, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  The level of piracy for the SM58 in particular is ridiculous. It's at the point where they're not just common, but it's becoming difficult to buy any genuine one. I've had reputable sellers (big name electronics dealers) selling me fakes without realising it. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:55, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Counterfeits

message: I was going to add a citation for
:The SM58 uses an internal shock mount to reduce handling noise.
:
... but I'm not sure the website would strictly meet Reliable Source criteria.
It is self-published but has a transcript, and embeds a YouTube video, of an interview with Shure’s product specialist for wired mics, John Born. How much more reliable could it be ?
Of course, spreading misinformation is an established tactic against piracy - Tu-144#Espionage against and influence of Concorde ( and Capacitor_plague#Industrial_espionage_implicated which may not have been deliberate misinformation ).
But then Wikipedia has no preference for truth over widespread mis-understanding, if I understand correctly. I'm surprised to find I wouldn't insist on truth in this hypothetical case myself.
If you want to copy and paste the citation, you could add "pneumatic" as well.
--195.137.93.171 (talk) 20:00, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That looks like a fine source for "pneumatic" shock system, etc. Binksternet (talk) 21:09, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internal shock mount - pneumatic !