The Acoustic Guitar Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 02-04-2018, 06:44 PM
cghbuilder86 cghbuilder86 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 23
Default mic modeling pre-amp vs effect plugins?

Hi, my current setup is a zoom Q8N recorder, a rode nt4 mic. I found that the mic plugged in direct is very boomy and a little muddy (tried tons of different placement ideas). I found that if I run my mic through my old Behringer tube ultragain 200 (tube mic modeling preamp) through the acoustic guitar setting it gets my guitar so much closer to where I need it to be that I can then lightly tweak the filters and eq to get the sound pretty good. The problem is that its a single channel preamp and the nt4 is a fixed XY stereo mic so I need another preamp to use one on both inputs. Should I buy another pre-amp like this? Reverb has them for about $60. Or is there a newer model of modeling preamp that would have 2 channels and be more advanced sounding better? Or is there some plugin or audio tool that I could use with audacity to do the same thing during audio editing?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-04-2018, 09:50 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cghbuilder86 View Post
Hi, my current setup is a zoom Q8N recorder, a rode nt4 mic. I found that the mic plugged in direct is very boomy and a little muddy (tried tons of different placement ideas). I found that if I run my mic through my old Behringer tube ultragain 200 (tube mic modeling preamp) through the acoustic guitar setting it gets my guitar so much closer to where I need it to be that I can then lightly tweak the filters and eq to get the sound pretty good. The problem is that its a single channel preamp and the nt4 is a fixed XY stereo mic so I need another preamp to use one on both inputs. Should I buy another pre-amp like this? Reverb has them for about $60. Or is there a newer model of modeling preamp that would have 2 channels and be more advanced sounding better? Or is there some plugin or audio tool that I could use with audacity to do the same thing during audio editing?
You can EQ in your DAW (Audacity), but something's wrong - you should be able to get perfectly fine sound with an NT4. If anything, back when I had one, I recall it sounding a little on the thin side. Shouldn't be boomy unless you're aiming it into the sound hole. Is your guitar boomy to start with? Are you in a very lively room? You may be hearing bad room acoustics. Post an example, and you may get more accurate suggestions.

I suppose it could be an issue with Q8N, I don't know that recorder, but the Zoom models I'm familiar with (H4, H6) have perfectly fine preamps and should sound good with no particular EQ, so I'd expect the same here. But in any case, I don't think you need a "modeling" preamp, maybe you could benefit from a regular 2-channel mic preamp. There are tons of these at all price ranges. It depends on your budget and the quality you want. I'd personally avoid Behringer, and $60 may be below the price point where you get something that isn't just wasting that $60. But I'd focus first on why you don't get a good sound right into the recorder. That should work.

Last edited by Doug Young; 02-04-2018 at 11:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-05-2018, 09:50 AM
cghbuilder86 cghbuilder86 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 23
Default

Thanks for the response. I have been using the Q8 for close to a year so any warranty is probably already up. It's always been very boomy I always run the high pass filter at 100-250 hz. on audacity then boost the treble just a hair. Thats the best I can do with eq without getting it funky sounding. It is much better through this tube preamp. I then instead of using the high pass filter I just boost the low a little and cut back the high end and it's sounding good.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-05-2018, 10:22 AM
sdelsolray sdelsolray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6,951
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cghbuilder86 View Post
Thanks for the response. I have been using the Q8 for close to a year so any warranty is probably already up. It's always been very boomy I always run the high pass filter at 100-250 hz. on audacity then boost the treble just a hair. Thats the best I can do with eq without getting it funky sounding. It is much better through this tube preamp. I then instead of using the high pass filter I just boost the low a little and cut back the high end and it's sounding good.
How are you listening to what you have recorded? I ask because often the equipment used to monitor a previous recording is inaccurate, sometimes to an extreme.

A second question. Have you compensated for the Rode NT4's proximity effect with your mic placement(s)? Each mic has a cardioid polar pattern and each generates excessive bass response if placed too close to the source.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-05-2018, 01:02 PM
cghbuilder86 cghbuilder86 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 23
Default

yeah things always seem to sound decent in headphones. I sometimes hear newbies talking about some mic or recording that sounds amazing and they are monitoring it through headphones....I am monitoring with a pair of Roland DM-10 monitors. They are nothing fancy for sure. But better than headphones or cheap computer plug in speakers.
I usually have my mic 1 foot in front of the 14 fret. I have played around with it alot. Closer is always worse, and lower down the neck(towards headstock) tends to sound distant and weak.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-05-2018, 02:18 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cghbuilder86 View Post
yeah things always seem to sound decent in headphones. I sometimes hear newbies talking about some mic or recording that sounds amazing and they are monitoring it through headphones....I am monitoring with a pair of Roland DM-10 monitors. They are nothing fancy for sure. But better than headphones or cheap computer plug in speakers.
I usually have my mic 1 foot in front of the 14 fret. I have played around with it alot. Closer is always worse, and lower down the neck(towards headstock) tends to sound distant and weak.
I think you are dealing with proximity effect and room acoustics - nothing to do with preamps. When you get closer than 16 inches, all cardiod mics start exhibiting proximity effect - an increase in bass. But when you place the mic further away, it sounds bad because now you hear the impact of the room acoustics, and it sounds distant - also you lose that extra bass, and you hear a thinner sound. This is all expected. Ideally, you need a room that sounds good enough that you can place the mic wherever you like, so you don't get excessive bass and have it still sound good. But that takes room treatment of some kind, a whole topic by itself.

What I'd suggest is to try placing your NT4 directly in front of the guitar 12-18 inches away, but raised up above the sound hole, roughly level with the waist of the guitar. You can go lower to get more bass, higher to get less bass. You can tweak the tone with just a few inches of movement. Depending on how bad your room acoustics are, this may or may not help, but I've used this placement in un-treated rooms with success. You can also, to some extent, deal with proximity effect simply with EQ - roll off the bass. It may not be ideal, but without good recording acoustics, it may be a compromise.

The other suggestion is to investigate acoustic treatment - there are tons of threads on it here.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-06-2018, 03:11 PM
cghbuilder86 cghbuilder86 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 23
Default

That all makes sense to me. I didn't try raising the mic above the guitar. I tried it once but it doesn't much count since I had it pointing down at a 45 angle. I have suspected room acoustics could be an issue. Just not many options to deal with it. Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-06-2018, 04:07 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cghbuilder86 View Post
That all makes sense to me. I didn't try raising the mic above the guitar. I tried it once but it doesn't much count since I had it pointing down at a 45 angle. I have suspected room acoustics could be an issue. Just not many options to deal with it. Thanks
It sounds like that would be aimed at the soundhole, so it would certainly be boomy.

You might check out Fran Guidry's demo of a simple way to address room acoustics:

http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2011/...adband-panels/
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-07-2018, 02:28 PM
cghbuilder86 cghbuilder86 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 23
Default

Thanks! Great Topic! I saved that webpage. Lots of good info there.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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

Thread Tools





All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:18 AM.


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=