Most lavalier microphones on the market are condenser or electret condenser. The Shure SM11 we are reviewing now is dynamic, which is quite unique among lavalier mics. Dynamic microphones are known to be less sensitive and to have a quicker distance falloff than condenser or electret condenser microphones and are often (but not always) more robust (or less fragile) than condenser or electret condenser mics. Regarding sensitivity, the Shure SM11 is even more gain-hungry than Shure’s SM7B, since the SM7B has a rated sensitivity of -59 dBV while the SM11 is even quieter at -64 dBV, which makes it 5 dB quieter than the SM7B, as confirmed by Michael Pettersen of Shure. That’s why the SM11 will challenge the preamps in the RØDECaster Pro II even more than the SM7B would. That’s why this review of the SM11 is a stronger test than those you may have heard from tests with the SM7B connected directly to the RØDECaster Pro II, without any pre-preamp/booster like a Cloudlifter, FetHead or the Simple Sound SS-1 I reviewed in 2019.

About the Shure SM11 and how I made the test recordings

Although Shure describes the SM11 dynamic lavalier mic as “miniature”, it is actually larger than any other lavalier mic I ever remember having seen. I suspect that the “miniature” adjective may be from the original description Shure used at its introduction in 1976 or late 1975, per Michael Pettersen of Shure. The actual Shure SM11 microphone measures 38.1 x 14.29 mm compared with the RØDE SmartLav+ I used as a comparison, where the actual microphone measures 24 x 5 mm. In addition to the differences in technology (the Shure SM11 is dynamic, requiring no external power, while the SmartLav+ is electret condenser and does), the SM11 comes from the factory as balanced with an XLR plug including a belt clip, the SmartLav+ is unbalanced and required active conversion in order to be connected to an XLR input of the RØDECaster Pro II. I used the RØDE VXLR Pro to accomplish that, since it down-converts 48 volts phantom power down to low bias voltage (aka plugin power). I also had to use a passive converter from TRRS to TRS to allow the SmartLav+ to work with the VLXR Pro.

Like most lavalier microphones on the market, both the Shure SM11 and the RØDE SmartLav+ have an omnidirectional pickup pattern. However (as stated by our friend and colleague Curtis Judd), since a lavalier is often mounted on a human body’s chest, the microphone’s pickup pattern then becomes less than omnidirectional, since the human body blocks sound from behind the person.

The SM11 includes a flexible and rather thick “long-life” 121.9 mm (48-inch) cable, two mounting options (tie clasp or tie tack) and a convenient secure belt clip. The SmartLav+ has a much smaller case, a much lighter cable which is slightly longer, and a clip.

During my tests, the RØDECaster Pro II’s input for the SM11 had the phantom power inactive, since directly connected dynamic mics don’t need or want it. I simultaneously recorded the two mics into separate tracks in Hindenburg PRO (covered in many articles, with a free 90-day trial and discount here) via different inputs of the RØDECaster Pro II. All processing in the RØDECaster Pro II was inactive during these recordings. The first part of the recording was done with virtually no background noise. In the final part, I activated a very loud air conditioner to determine which isolates the voice from the air conditioner noise, in addition to the general audio quality differences.

General lavalier disclaimer

Any microphone choice is a compromise. I have never heard any lavalier or head-mounted microphone where the raw quality sound comes close to standard studio mics or “handheld” mics. The lavalier or head-mounted mic’s tiny capsule is part of the challenge. Any lavalier or head-mounted microphone may be equalized to improve the quality. Producers choose a lavalier microphone to save space, visible noticeability and/or to avoid having to hold a microphone in hand. Don’t expect a lavalier microphone to sound as good as a typical studio microphone. If you choose to use a lavalier microphone, use this review to consider the best lavalier microphone for your application.

Test recordings of Shure SM11

Above, raw Shure SM11, without equalization, filtering, noise reduction or compression.

Above, the same recording after mild noise reduction provided by Hindenburg PRO, which does an amazing job to eliminate the air conditioning noise.

Simultaneous test recordings of RØDE SmartLav+

Above, raw RØDE SmartLav+, without equalization, filtering, noise reduction or compression.

Above, the same recording after mild noise reduction provided by Hindenburg PRO, which does an amazing job to eliminate the air conditioning noise.

Observations and conclusions

As stated earlier, I have never heard any lavalier or head-mounted microphone where the raw quality sound comes close to standard studio mics or “handheld” mics. The lavalier or head-mounted mic’s tiny capsule is part of the challenge. Producers choose a lavalier microphone to save space, visible noticeability and/or to avoid having to hold a microphone in hand. Any lavalier or head-mounted microphone may be equalized to improve the quality, if desired. As a dynamic microphone, it is more robust than most condenser microphones. The SM11 (when heard by itself) indeed sounds very intelligible and pleasing, although not as good as many standard studio mics or handhelds often used in a studio.

The new preamps in the RØDECaster Pro II handle the extremely low -64 dBV sensitivity of the Shure SM11 very well, with enough clean gain inboard, rather than many other mixers and interfaces that would require a pre-preamp to get a proper level without noticeable system noise.