The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > RECORD

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 10-27-2023, 10:37 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 9,925
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by min7b5 View Post
Using Plugin Doctor to actually have a look at what it’s been doing to the bass when I make my tweaks, it looks awful lot like when you’re doing here.
Ah, I hadn't come across Plugin Doctor, looks very useful. Yet another new plugin to download :-)
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-28-2023, 02:37 PM
DupleMeter DupleMeter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,764
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Young View Post
I considered showing more about the mixing, but it'd end up being too long. Might be a dedicated video around that - I'm making a list of future topics...

But here's 3 EQ curves, this is for the Traugott fingerstyle example. I think they're about what I'd expect. The 2 dynamic cuts in each are about the guitar/performance, squeeks or harsh notes. All this is just to my taste, someone else might end up with something entirely different, of course.

SM57: slight bass boost, fairly big cut at 5K to compensate for the fairly nasty presence boost on the mic
Attachment 99518


Schoeps: Fairly flat, just a small lift on bass and highs, to taste
Attachment 99519

N22: Pretty big low end boost to compensate for the low end roll-off. This would be less necessary if I closer-mic'd, this mic comes with a big bass rolloff to counter proximity effect, so that you can mic as close as 1 inch! Slight treble boost. Oddly, this mic sounds brighter than the specs would indicate. Trying to counter the spec'd treble roll-off produced a really bright sound. So this ended up being pretty small, just a 1db shelf on the high end.
Attachment 99520

I’d love to the Schoeps without the bass boost. It felt just a little too much for me. I felt it fought the clarity of the guitar a little.
__________________
-Steve

1927 Martin 00-21
1986 Fender Strat
1987 Ibanez RG560
1988 Fender Fretless J Bass
1991 Washburn HB-35s
1995 Taylor 812ce
1996 Taylor 510c (custom)
1996 Taylor 422-R (Limited Edition)
1997 Taylor 810-WMB (Limited Edition)
1998 Taylor 912c (Custom)
2019 Fender Tele
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-28-2023, 02:39 PM
DupleMeter DupleMeter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,764
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by min7b5 View Post
Thanks for all this goodness Doug.

I think the ProQ3 shots are very interesting. I had recently been enamored with Pultec EQ emulation plugins (the NoiseAsh in particular), which many people probably know you can push pretty hard and it often makes for some unique and very musical curves. I’ve been pleased with bass boosts in particular (though not using the famous attenuation trick very much). Using Plugin Doctor to actually have a look at what it’s been doing to the bass when I make my tweaks, it looks awful lot like when you’re doing here.

The great thing about the Pultec is how musical the boosts can be. A little 10k on the master 2 bus doesn’t do much make it brighter as much as it makes it bigger/airy.
__________________
-Steve

1927 Martin 00-21
1986 Fender Strat
1987 Ibanez RG560
1988 Fender Fretless J Bass
1991 Washburn HB-35s
1995 Taylor 812ce
1996 Taylor 510c (custom)
1996 Taylor 422-R (Limited Edition)
1997 Taylor 810-WMB (Limited Edition)
1998 Taylor 912c (Custom)
2019 Fender Tele
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-28-2023, 02:59 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 9,925
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DupleMeter View Post
I’d love to the Schoeps without the bass boost. It felt just a little too much for me. I felt it fought the clarity of the guitar a little.
There's the "No EQ" part at the beginning, of course. Not really sure why I added any bass boost at all on the Schoeps, but you know how it is. Just what I felt like I wanted to hear at the moment.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-28-2023, 07:18 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 9,925
Default

BTW, I meant to post the raw tracks in case anyone would rather explore them without hearing them via You Tube. So here's the un-EQ'd, un-processed tracks, organized by mic:

https://dougyoungguitar.com/files/12...raw-tracks.zip

and of course you can also play around and try EQing them, etc, yourself if you really want. I'd be interested in what others do with these!
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-06-2023, 09:42 AM
anton's Avatar
anton anton is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Portland OR
Posts: 893
Default

Thanks so much for doing this Doug. That can't have been a small amount of work, what with setting up all the mics, lining up the edits, etc. It was very informative.

I'm most familiar with the Schoepes and AEA's, having used pairs of both of those. I've got an SM57 but only one, so I've never tried recording acoustic guitar with it.

My ears preferred the Schoepes, and the ribbons were not to far behind. Just a nice warm sound. The 57's had a weird top end that stuck out to me.

And man, that Schoenberg 12 fret sounds great. It really stood out to me when it first came up on the recording. All your guitars are world class, and I've been lucky to play some of them, but that Schoenberg is really a winner. Now I want a 12 fret guitar too.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > RECORD






All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=