Mixing / Panning Question

[RedJoker]

I was goofing around this evening with my new mic (GLS ES-57) and have a question. This new mic is less noisy than the last so I can boost the gain more than the old mic. I thought I'd play with mic position. In this case, I had the mic at mouth level but pointed down at the neck of the guitar a bit. This allows it to pick up a bit of the strings. In this recording, I have the vocal panned about 30% to the right and the guitar pickups panned about 30% to the left. I normally add just a bit of reverb to the vocal but with an 'airier' mic, I thought it sounded better flat.

So what do you folks think about that? I'd prefer to have the vocals panned center but I like that it has just a bit of stereo effect. This percentage split seemed to be a compromise.

https://soundcloud.com/trjredjoker/a...-but-mine-4-21

(I was also goofing around with how I played / sing this song. There are a few stumbles but I don't expect anyone to get very far into it to have a preference on the panning question. And you can here the birds singing along at the end. )

[whitecloud]

The panning option you chose is fine, nothing like some old Beatle records where things get crazy etc. My observation is that the guitar sounds like another player behind the singer. I would use Reverb on both vox and gtr. tracks. Consider that most of the audio from the guitar is from a pickup not a mic, there is no sense of 'room". Adding some compression might "glue" things together and if you have a fairly decent Reverb plug-in I would use it. An amazing and very affordable Reverb plug-in is "Vahalla Room" or VahallaVintage Verb". Google it to read reviews. Can't believe they are only 50 bucks a piece. PC/Mac compatible.
I use Vahalla Room but many like VintageVerb even more. I will have to pick that one up. These plugs destroy the cheaper Lexicon boxes. Decent preset starting points as well. I was not going to suggest you applying Reverb without suggesting one that I own and use and hardily recommend.

[Ty Ford]

RJ,

I hear a static flange or phase cancellation of high frequencies on the guitar; probably due to your positioning of the mics.

"I normally add just a bit of reverb to the vocal but with an 'airier' mic, I thought it sounded better flat."

I like the dry sound with no reverb. Flat refers to EQ, not reverb. Effects are either wet or dry. EQ is flat if there is no EQ and peaked, pinched, pumped, dipped, and a bunch of other descriptors.

I would like to hear just a little more high end on the guitar.

Do continue to experiment with mic placement! Hopefully you'll discover your own personal sacred geometry for how you work. I use a figure of eight mic for vocals when I play guitar and position it so the guitar is in one of the nulls of the pattern. That lets me apply different effects and EQ to the voice without coloring the guitar sound so much.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[MikeBmusic]

Have you tried recording the guitar separately from the vocals? Record the guitar alone, miked on one track and the DI on another, then overtrack the vocals. This will give you more options on mixing, should eliminate phase issues (hopefully)on the guitar. The GLS mic can work on an acousitc (I use 2 sometimes), using just a touch of DI for the high-end 'bite'.
Be careful about adding reverb to acoustic guitar - too much can sound jangly. When mixing, put a reverb plug-in on a separate buss (at 100% wet) and then send both the vocal and guitar signal to it, but keep the guitar send very low.

[RedJoker]

Thanks for the education and suggestions, folks. I'll give them all a try.

[whitecloud]

Originally Posted by MikeBmusic

Have you tried recording the guitar separately from the vocals? Record the guitar alone, miked on one track and the DI on another, then overtrack the vocals. This will give you more options on mixing, should eliminate phase issues (hopefully)on the guitar. The GLS mic can work on an acousitc (I use 2 sometimes), using just a touch of DI for the high-end 'bite'.
Be careful about adding reverb to acoustic guitar - too much can sound jangly. When mixing, put a reverb plug-in on a separate buss (at 100% wet) and then send both the vocal and guitar signal to it, but keep the guitar send very low.

I never use Reverb as an insert. I always create a FX track with a Reverb plug-in and use the sends on individual tracks. Depending on the project/song I will pick a setting that I feel works. If I want a natural sound I will pick the type of room that I imagine would appropriate. Vahalla Room is of high quality and can replicate all different types of rooms, hall and chambers in a very convincing way. Nice tails. Of course when mixing your room needs to be treated, having good monitors is important, but having good ears and mixing chops is equally important. Telling him to keep the guitar send low sound like an absolute statement. If you have the three elements I mentioned above you won't go overboard with Reverb(unless you use it as more of an effect). If someone uses a UST system, how natural sounding is that? Reverb on that track should match the vocal track to sound like they are in the same room and whatever it takes to achieve that should be recommended.

[RedJoker]

Originally Posted by whitecloud

I never use Reverb as an insert. I always create a FX track with a Reverb plug-in and use the sends on individual tracks.

What software are you using? I ask because I haven't spent much time learning to record / mix / etc. I'm just using Audacity (becasue its free) to record myself for educational purposes. Initially, this exercise was just playing around with stuff to see the effect but I now realize I'm far less educated than I thought. (The more you learn, the less you know, right?)

This is all fascinating so I really appreciate all the input.

[Ty Ford]

It's a slippery slope!

Regards,

Ty Ford

[RedJoker]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

It's a slippery slope!

Regards,

Ty Ford

No doubt. Example: I have a pre-amp arriving on Friday as I now realize the impedance on my interface is too low for my guitar pickup, causing the guitar to sound crappy. That was actually the origin of playing with mic placement.

Further down the slope I slide....

[whitecloud]

Originally Posted by RedJoker

What software are you using? I ask because I haven't spent much time learning to record / mix / etc. I'm just using Audacity (becasue its free) to record myself for educational purposes. Initially, this exercise was just playing around with stuff to see the effect but I now realize I'm far less educated than I thought. (The more you learn, the less you know, right?)

This is all fascinating so I really appreciate all the input.

I use Cubase 7 but have demoed Reaper(60 bucks) and a Pal here in town uses Reaper and likes it. I might of gone a little overboard as I realize this experience for you was more of an experiment. It all comes down to how far do you want to go, to learn. How much time, effort and money are you willing to invest. Do keep asking questions. If I had the Internet when I was learning how to multi-track back in the 80's things would of gone so much smoother.

[whitecloud]

Originally Posted by RedJoker

No doubt. Example: I have a pre-amp arriving on Friday as I now realize the impedance on my interface is too low for my guitar pickup, causing the guitar to sound crappy. That was actually the origin of playing with mic placement.

Further down the slope I slide....

what pre-amp? What interface? After some thinking perhaps the "playing with mic placement" is a happy mistake. I have a couple Breedloves's that have UST pups and onboard preamp. Since I am not playing live, I use the tuner and forgo plugging in. When I first bought them I did a blend of direct and mic, but now it is all mic(s) as far as recording acoustic guitar. Plugging in is great for scratch tracks, but I think a handheld recorder will capture these late night ideas when I don't want to fuss with a computer etc.

[RedJoker]

Originally Posted by whitecloud

what pre-amp? What interface? After some thinking perhaps the "playing with mic placement" is a happy mistake. I have a couple Breedloves's that have UST pups and onboard preamp. Since I am not playing live, I use the tuner and forgo plugging in. When I first bought them I did a blend of direct and mic, but now it is all mic(s) as far as recording acoustic guitar. Plugging in is great for scratch tracks, but I think a handheld recorder will capture these late night ideas when I don't want to fuss with a computer etc.

To make a short story long, I just started learning guitar ~7 months ago. One good suggestion was to periodically record myself so I could track progress and objectively evaluate what I'm doing. (That's why my soundcloud link in my sig has several versions of the same songs.) I started with a Samson GoMic but didn't like that I couldn't separate the guitar and the vocals. I know I play differently when I'm trying to sing and wanted to capture that.

A month or so ago, an AGF member was selling their Scarlett 2i2 so I bought it. Now I can plug my JJB equiped guitar into one channel and an old dynamic mic into the other. For educational purposes, it's great that I can really separate the two but when I want to share with friends and family, I don't want to send them exactly what comes out of the interface. That's what led me to playing with all this recording stuff, I didn't / don't intend to make great recordings, just slightly better ones. I have played with micing the guitar and I like that much better but I currently only have one mic and one mic stand.

So to answer your question, I have a used Scarlett 2i2, I haven't bought any real mics, and the guitar preamp is just a cheap behringer adi21. I know this equipment isn't great but I don't have much money in any of it and I figure I'll learn with what I have to help guide me where I'm going (which I don't really know where that is). If I didn't stumble on this deal for the cheap preamp, I probably would have bought/borrowed another mic and stand as that could be used no matter what I want to do in the future.

This forum is really teaching me a lot and I'm SO thankful for everyone's input.

[MikeBmusic]

The best thing I can advise: experiment and don't blow too much money on equipment until you understand what you have and what something new would allow you to do.
You can quickly invest $500-$1000 and notice virtually no difference in the recordings you make if you don't spend the money on the right things first (good monitors and acoustic treatment).

Audacity is a fairly limited recording tool, and not a full-featured DAW, but if it allows you to do what you want at this stage, use it.
I use Reaper (its free to download the full version, $60 to register it). AS whitecloud says, using reverb as an insert is not necessarily the way to do things, but I'm not Audacity allows you to creat a reverb bus. Reaper comes with a ton of VST FX, including Reaverb, and you can download impulse files for it (free) that really give you some good 'room' options.

[whitecloud]

Originally Posted by MikeBmusic

The best thing I can advise: experiment and don't blow too much money on equipment until you understand what you have and what something new would allow you to do.
You can quickly invest $500-$1000 and notice virtually no difference in the recordings you make if you don't spend the money on the right things first (good monitors and acoustic treatment).

Audacity is a fairly limited forcirding tool, and not a full-featured DAW, but if it allows you to do what you want at this stage, use it.
I use Reaper (its free to download the full version, $60 to register it). AS whitecloud says, using reverb as an insert is not necessarily the way to do things, but I'm not Audacity allows you to creat a reverb bus. Reaper comes with a ton of VST FX, including Reaverb, and you can download impulse files for it (free) that really give you some good 'room' options.

I think you nailed it as I was coming back to add about the same sentiments about not spending too much money at this stage. After 7 months of playing back in the 70's I was glad I knew a handful of chords and could play and sing at the same time. Can't beat Reaper for the price so that might be the next recommended investment.

[RedJoker]

Originally Posted by MikeBmusic

The best thing I can advise: experiment and don't blow too much money on equipment until you understand what you have and what something new would allow you to do.
You can quickly invest $500-$1000 and notice virtually no difference in the recordings you make if you don't spend the money on the right things first (good monitors and acoustic treatment).

Audacity is a fairly limited forcirding tool, and not a full-featured DAW, but if it allows you to do what you want at this stage, use it.
I use Reaper (its free to download the full version, $60 to register it). ....

Great advice that I happen to already be following. You'll be happy to know that if I bought a $60 copy of Reaper, it would double what I've spend on recording so far. I also worked in an acoustic test lab for several years so I'm definitely aware of the need for acoustic treatment. We used to give some incredible demonstrations showing the effect of good acoustic treatment vs. expensive equipment. Good acoustic treatment always beat expensive equipment and was always cheaper.

Thanks again folks!