Within Shure's versatile SM series, the SM86 condenser microphone appeared a few months ago, and at first glance, given its list price of 199.20 euros (excluding VAT), it looks like the budget version of the SM87 (another condenser mic with several versions, including the well-known Beta, whose list price is 100 euros above our guest). The specs present this model as a "condenser vocal microphone," with a cardioid polar pattern and a frequency response of 50 to 18,000 Hz. That last figure, supplied by the manufacturer, is accompanied by a graph in which we see that 50 and 18,000 Hz are reached at -10 dB, effectively narrowing that range to between 300 Hz and 12-15,000 Hz at -5 dB. Looking at the same curve, we see a peak around 8,000 Hz and a rising curve in the low end of the spectrum that brings the response close to 0 dB from 800 Hz up. The capsule, a small-diameter one (probably 1/4"), is isolated against vibration by three non-rigid mounts, wrapped in three layers of foam to dampen the singer's "pops." Inevitably compared with its bigger brother, and price aside, it also differs in a new, more ergonomic body (better weight balance in the hand has been achieved). Visually it's almost identical to the 87.
A Tough Test
I took this microphone to the Bucbonera Records studios, where, with Tomás Robisco's help, we put the SM86 in a direct comparison against an SM58 and, taking advantage of the occasion, a Neumann TLM103. Aware that Shure is betting on the SM series as a range of products for live applications, we didn't get to verify the SM86's behavior in front of monitors and with feedback, although we anticipate slight difficulties compared with the SM87, first because of its cardioid design (instead of the 87's supercardioid) and second after evaluating it in the studio, as we'll see now.
We ran several tests with the same three microphones. The first was subjective, looking for warmth or versatility in the frequency response. The SM86 proves flexible in the mid and high frequencies, especially on female voices (the peak at 8,000 Hz undoubtedly helps with that). An SM58 (dynamic) gets a response across that same spectrum that is subjectively better for male voices (where the peak occurs around 6,000, more pronounced in its Beta series). In terms of levels, the SM58 comes out behind (though it doesn't need phantom power), while the SM86 achieves a fairly good level. Remember that we didn't test its use through monitors, where you'll surely want a lower gain setting to avoid tedious feedback.
Perhaps because of the steep roll-off applied in the low frequencies (to avoid the proximity effect), the SM86 needs the source to be as close to the capsule as possible, barely two or three centimeters. This became very clear when we progressively moved away from the microphone. Each step back meant not only a drop in signal level (as also happens with the TLM103) but also a sharp drop in dynamics: the lows almost disappear and the highs lose sparkle and presence. With the TLM103, the presence of the voice is assured even at greater distances.
This brings us back to the earlier remark where we mentioned its possible difficulties in monitoring: if the singer holds the microphone 10 or 15 cm away, we'll have to apply a high gain setting to get a correct signal, unless we're willing to lose dynamics.
Handheld, there are no annoying noises, except if we accidentally bump it, but in no case with a noticeable "boom." We did hear the "click" of a ring hitting the mic's metal body perfectly clearly. Moving the cable doesn't bother it either.
Conclusion
In the face of the continuous avalanche of new microphone models from numerous manufacturers, those that already have a reputation in the market know they can't turn a blind eye. Most likely as a response to more affordable options, they introduced the SM86, with the intention of offering a quality condenser microphone for live applications.
Shure's SM86 is very convincing when the source is very close to it: good level, good dynamics and a perfect frequency response (without the annoying proximity effect). Although, subjectively, its 8 kHz peak may make it better suited to female voices (slightly higher-pitched than most male ones).
