msuzuki : i'm not audio trained although I've been recording DIY freelance for the past half decade only. I can only tell you based on my opinion that those "industry standard" SM57/SM58 mics can be easily outdone by something newer like Audix i5 (nicknamed SM57 killer) HOWever, only possible if based on higher level of experience using them.
what I'm trying to say here is , mics are mics, they're made for a reason , to specialize in either recording an instrument or vocals and each have their own character.and they're widely manufactured and sold.can't be because of SM57 , the rest of the mics are shit?
so to me, mics like sm57/akg d112/neumann U87/sennheisser md-something tom mic for example. are "safe mics". which means widely/majority used by "industry's professionals". if you were to record a guitar cab with Shure SM57, seeking a "sweet spot" is way easier compared to using an Audix i5. but if you knew how to optimize use an audix i5 (it's sweet safe spot range is smaller) you'll know why it's nicknamed "SM57 killer" but does it mean you should stop using SM57 at all? to me I'd rather have both! (and i do)
thats why you'd probably hear this often : "it's not ONLY about what you have, but how you use it." if students use industry level protools. and professionals who produce kickass mixes come from cubase sx / cakewalk sonar (if in case you regard cubase/cakewalk as non-industry standard) , what does that mean to you? should you move on to cubase/ cakewalk? or should the pros move on to protools? or do you think now that DAWs are just DAWs. it's how comfortable you are with it. because it's what the final mix that counts. but just coming from me : industry standard - protools could easily mean , what major commercial companies are using, like TV/Radio station etc. no point learning a new software which no companies use.
as you can see from the rest of the replies, kithsa (another audio.eng.) is using ableton, tera is using cakewalk sonar, zenguan is using protools, someone here will be using cubase/nuendo and I am using cool edit pro 2.0 (the version before adobe audition). why the difference you ask? it's what we "grew up" with. pm them individually and i'm sure they have a history of how they started out that led to their current DAWs. So what if the Cool Edit is buggy and for "amateurs"? it's just a DAW medium and how you use it isn't it? if cool edit sucks, and cakewalk/cubase/protools is better, does it mean if I move on to those DAWs I'll automatically kick ass? I doubt so cos i rely alot of my trademark style in cool edit. I'll just start from ground zero when I mix on another DAW.
end of the day, audio engineers are like musicians but via mixer consoles and faders or mouse and keyboard. we have our own "weapon of choice" (guitar/bass/drums/vocals) , our own style of playing (finger bassist/or pick bassist) , our own "genre preference" (if you like pop music, there's a chance you might not enjoy what you're recording if you're doing a deathmetal band) and different level of commitment (hobbyist? full time commercial career?) just like bands/musicians.
50¢ worth.
.
