Thank you for this comparison. I like how you're A/B test went from A to B right away. The Samson eq seems 'fuller' with more lower bottom end. That may be a negative to some, but to non-professional applications it may not be an issue.
Do you have any info about the Q8X??? I’ve owned a Q7 since 2007 and it’s been a great mic, as a lead singer I much prefer it over sure. It’s really easy to equalize even using it with a harmonizer.
I think the Samson Q8X is the successor to the Q8, from what I have read they changed the shape slightly and made some changes to reduce handling noise as well.
Samson Q8x is unbeatable. I've tried Beyerdynamic, sE Electronics, Shure, Sennheiser and many other brands, but then for the sound, I have to go back to the Q8x.
I own the SM58 and hence I am biased, agree that the differences were subtle but if I had to choose I would pick the SM58 for the smoother mid-tones and warmer lows (watched the video with headphones). Surprised at how good the samson was
Yeah. The Samson Q7 sounds really similar to the 58 but I feel the 58 handles the low frequencies better out the gate. But that can be EQ'ed out on the Samson. Economically, if you're on a tight budget, you may as well go with the mic that sounds REALLY similar to the 58 anyhow for a smaller price tag.
Testing the microphone with background music might seem odd, but it's crucial for assessing its real-world performance. It provides insight into its ability to deliver clear audio, even in less than ideal situations.
Fifty cents worth of molded plastic case and slick packaging graphics are what attract uninformed buyers to products, unfortunately. Entirely unrelated to quality specs, perhaps even contraindicated, as electronics design, manufacture, and quality control exist in a separate space, virtually and literally, from where marketing and packaging are handled. A generalization about established top tier products is they cut corners to save $, on packaging, extras like cases and even sold w/o cables, etc. even advertising, because the item sells itself. The rest must add the extras to separate from others, entice via features, and to otherwise make the entire package look more like a bargain, knowing all that stuff really adds little to production costs, compared to upscaling the actual internals of the unit. The informed buyer has to decide if the extra features add enough value to offset the likely reduced quality of the main part in question.
you have introduced no relevant information concerning specs or performance relating to this microphone. Have you had personal experience with this microphone? have you done AB comparisons to any other mic? Can you shed any relevant light to this review other than your rant about marketing and packaging? I have personally used many dynamic mics including the Samson Q7 and find it to be a great value and solid performer. It has a smooth low end and the higher frequencies tend to be less harsh than an SM58. Ultimately, i use an AKG D5.
![โอ้เธอช่าง... - บี้เดอะสกา ft. ต๋อง เทวัญ (Prod. by ป๋าเพชร) [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zbWhiLFmVL0/mqdefault.jpg)
I am very satisfied with Samson Q7. Perfect
what do you think about its construction? do you think it`s a durable mic?
@@pikotaboada very sturdy and durable
im agree With you, i have one since 2007 and it still is in perfecto conditions, regards from Argentina
Thank you for this comparison. I like how you're A/B test went from A to B right away. The Samson eq seems 'fuller' with more lower bottom end.
That may be a negative to some, but to non-professional applications it may not be an issue.
Do you have any info about the Q8X???
I’ve owned a Q7 since 2007 and it’s been a great mic, as a lead singer I much prefer it over sure. It’s really easy to equalize even using it with a harmonizer.
I think the Samson Q8X is the successor to the Q8, from what I have read they changed the shape slightly and made some changes to reduce handling noise as well.
Thank you, I’m considering an upgrade so I might give it a try.
Samson Q8x is unbeatable. I've tried Beyerdynamic, sE Electronics, Shure, Sennheiser and many other brands, but then for the sound, I have to go back to the Q8x.
I own the SM58 and hence I am biased, agree that the differences were subtle but if I had to choose I would pick the SM58 for the smoother mid-tones and warmer lows (watched the video with headphones). Surprised at how good the samson was
Yeah. The Samson Q7 sounds really similar to the 58 but I feel the 58 handles the low frequencies better out the gate. But that can be EQ'ed out on the Samson. Economically, if you're on a tight budget, you may as well go with the mic that sounds REALLY similar to the 58 anyhow for a smaller price tag.
In the future please take out the background music in the sound test part so we can hear the mic properly.
I agree wholeheartedly.
what audio interface do you recommend with samson q7?
There are plenty of options, maybe something similar to this:
• Yamaha AG03 ➜ geni.us/4mn1Y
• Focusrite Solo ➜ geni.us/5EAdJW
I had a q7 for a couple years but it broke. When I was taking out the xlr, the 3 pins came off and looked like I gutted it. I just an sm58 afterwards
The SM58 is a great mic, have been using it for year, good choice!
Sm58 has less clarity. The Q7 definitely sounds better overall.
Yes, Samson Q7 is a nice alternative.
SM58 is a dull and boring sounding mic. The Samson is way better in clarity and bigger tone
Testing the microphone with "background music" is one of the most senseless things in this context!
Testing the microphone with background music might seem odd, but it's crucial for assessing its real-world performance. It provides insight into its ability to deliver clear audio, even in less than ideal situations.
Se me ocurre que el q7 suena mejores en voces femeninas y el Shure sm58 en voces masculina
SM58 is a dull and boring sounding mic. The Samson is way better in clarity and bigger tone
Fifty cents worth of molded plastic case and slick packaging graphics are what attract uninformed buyers to products, unfortunately. Entirely unrelated to quality specs, perhaps even contraindicated, as electronics design, manufacture, and quality control exist in a separate space, virtually and literally, from where marketing and packaging are handled. A generalization about established top tier products is they cut corners to save $, on packaging, extras like cases and even sold w/o cables, etc. even advertising, because the item sells itself. The rest must add the extras to separate from others, entice via features, and to otherwise make the entire package look more like a bargain, knowing all that stuff really adds little to production costs, compared to upscaling the actual internals of the unit. The informed buyer has to decide if the extra features add enough value to offset the likely reduced quality of the main part in question.
you have introduced no relevant information concerning specs or performance relating to this microphone. Have you had personal experience with this microphone? have you done AB comparisons to any other mic? Can you shed any relevant light to this review other than your rant about marketing and packaging? I have personally used many dynamic mics including the Samson Q7 and find it to be a great value and solid performer. It has a smooth low end and the higher frequencies tend to be less harsh than an SM58. Ultimately, i use an AKG D5.
Dont never take long again 4 mic shootout-BORING
Awesome dude, that’s excellent, thanks for letting me know!