Dynamic vs condensor mics for classical guitar

[TBman]

What's the story with this? I like the warmth I'm getting with my two Warm Audio LDC mics, but I'm a sloppy player and I'm picking up a lot of hand/finger movement. It was suggested to me to try a dynamic mic at the 12th fret for classical guitar? I'm not opposed to buying a matched pair of these to give it a shot.

Better to stick with what I'm doing and just clean up my act or give myself a break and get mics more in line with what I'm doing?

Here's my latest recording with LDC mics, the hand/finger movement is far too prominent:

Lagrima:

[rick-slo]

Neither. Condenser mikes all the way. Transients too important in the acoustic guitar sound.

[RoyBoy]

Barry, I agree the tone on those condenser mics is beautiful and I would stick with them. I would first try using a graphic equalizer and knocking off the high frequencies of the squeaks and above. I don't know what frequency they are, a wild guess would be around 10k, but experimentation will help you zero in on it.

Your playing is very nice BTW.

[Doug Young]

I don't think any mic is going to get rid of the squeeks/hand movement. That's all about technique. Great thing about recording is that you notice things that you probably tune out when just playing. Now that you can hear it, you can just work on not making those sounds. The basic tone you're getting aside from the noises sounds very nice, I wouldn't cripple that with a dynamic mic just in an attempt (which won't work anyway) to get rid of noises.

[rick-slo]

Yes, those string noises are pretty excessive. Lift off a string straight up before moving finger horizontal to the fretboard. Perfect legato no but not necessary in this tune and much better than squeaks.

[Kevin G String]

Im no expert but some or most of that noise sounds to be coming from the right hand, assuming you're a right handed player. Sounds like your finger are travelling along the string before they release. In which case have a look at the length and shape of your nails maybe? I wonder if your nail are on the long side. There was great YT vid about burnishing the edges of your nails. I think she went to 2k grit. Talked about shape too. I'll try and find it later.

Lovely playing. Well worth the effort to address the "sloppy" aspect of it.

[jim1960]

Volume automation and parametric eq are your friends.

[TBman]

Thanks everyone for your input.

Back to the woodshed

And for squeak the answer is...

[Brent Hahn]

For hall/church solo recordings, I don't think that there's any question that a backed-off pair of condensers is the way to go. Almost all of my nylon-string recording experience, though, has been in more pop/americana/country settings, or doing movie music or jingles. There, with other live players in the room, a distant pair isn't practical and doesn't fit with everything else. And a close-in single condenser is worse. Way too much "tink" in the attack.

I like a Sennheiser 421N (the original cream-colored one when I can get it), or a Senn 441, or an RE20. Even a dumb ol' SM58 sounds better to me than any condenser when you're up that close. Which is to say about 8" out from the eastern edge of the sound hole on a right-handed player. This holds for ukuleles, too, but the sweet spot is usually slightly southwest of the bridge.

[runamuck]

Have you tried moving the mic aimed at the fingerboard around to different spots as well as backing it off a bit? That's worked for me.

[TBman]

Originally Posted by runamuck

Have you tried moving the mic aimed at the fingerboard around to different spots as well as backing it off a bit? That's worked for me.

Both of my mics are about back 18" - 24". I just have to clean up my technique, thanks.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by jim1960

Volume automation and parametric eq are your friends.

This is one of those "Who need diet and exercise when you can take a pill?" kinda things.

That's not entirely fair -- sometimes a mixer has to fix someone else's bad playing. But for DIY people, hey, just learn to play it cleaner.

[TBman]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

This is one of those "Who need diet and exercise when you can take a pill?" kinda things.

That's not entirely fair -- sometimes a mixer has to fix someone else's bad playing. But for DIY people, hey, just learn to play it cleaner.

Finger squeaks are usually between the notes, so most of the time you can clip them out without a problem. I didn't do extensive editing on the sample I included in my OP. The other finger noises are the real issue, not so much the squeaking. Learning to play without squeaking though is always a great idea.

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by TBman

Finger squeaks are usually between the notes, so most of the time you can clip them out without a problem.

Man, that would be tedious and probably detectable to the listener. Can't remember ever a time I tried to remove a squeak post recording. Elixir strings are quite helpful to use when recording.

[kurth]

ok but. Yeah a little ...just a few too many...but I like movement squeaks on an acoustic track. It's like when you're able to see the brush mark left in the stoke on the canvas. Imho....it's a hyper realistic footprint of acoustic guitar playing that should be used to heighten the imaginative realism of listening. Subtractive EQ is the answer though, but you don't have to always completely remove them. See guys...I did learn something around here !