Which soundclip sounds better?

[Silly Moustache]

Clip 1 - cleaner, more acoustic.

[jim1960]

#1 has too much noise and is unnaturally bright.
#2, while not great, is much closer to where I'd want the sound to be.

If I had to guess, #1 sound like it was recorded with a dynamic mic, while #2 was recorded with a large diaphram condenser.

[rlb9682]

I can see nobody agrees on this one!

I like number 1 better. For me, this one has a slightly muddy tone that I like and number 2 is brighter-which I find annoying. That's just me, ymmv, but I'd pick #1.

[TBman]

Thanks everyone for your input. The entire song (the rest of clip #1) is here.

Clip#1 guitar is the Larrivee OM-05. Clip #2 guitar the Martin D-16GT.

Recording details:

Clip #1: One condenser mic (AKG Perception 150) about 8-10" from about the 3rd fret. Recorded in mono, with the track copied to a second then hard panned. Compression and a touch of reverb.

Clip #2: Two condenser mics (AKG Perception 150 and Rodes NT5). XY mic placement about 8-10" from the sound hole. Then hard panned. A touch of noise removal and compression, no reverb. I also used a equalization thing that lowered the bass (obviously not quite enough, )

I preferred Clip #2 because of the fullness of it and I thought there was less player caused background noise (i.e. sloppy playing) than clip #1.

So the muddiness of clip #2 is probably the result of a few things:

1. Noise reduction - always muddies it a bit.
2. Martin dread
3. Mics too close.

Future plans:
1. I'm going to try turning the mics a bit more away from the guitar (both are cardiod) and spacing them back a bit.

2. Experiment with different panning.

3. Spend more time practicing instead of posting so my playing becomes cleaner.

4. Work on a good combination of effects - reverb when needed, compression, noise reduction and equalization (depending on the guitar used)

Thanks again for the feedback everyone, it was a great help.

[Roccorobb]

Originally Posted by TBman

Thanks everyone for your input. The entire song (the rest of clip #1) is here.

Clip#1 guitar is the Larrivee OM-05. Clip #2 guitar the Martin D-16GT.

Recording details:

Clip #1: One condenser mic (AKG Perception 150) about 8-10" from about the 3rd fret. Recorded in mono, with the track copied to a second then hard panned. Compression and a touch of reverb.

Clip #2: Two condenser mics (AKG Perception 150 and Rodes NT5). XY mic placement about 8-10" from the sound hole. Then hard panned. A touch of noise removal and compression, no reverb. I also used a equalization thing that lowered the bass (obviously not quite enough, )

I preferred Clip #2 because of the fullness of it and I thought there was less player caused background noise (i.e. sloppy playing) than clip #1.

So the muddiness of clip #2 is probably the result of a few things:

1. Noise reduction - always muddies it a bit.
2. Martin dread
3. Mics too close.

Future plans:
1. I'm going to try turning the mics a bit more away from the guitar (both are cardiod) and spacing them back a bit.

2. Experiment with different panning.

3. Spend more time practicing instead of posting so my playing becomes cleaner.

4. Work on a good combination of effects - reverb when needed, compression, noise reduction and equalization (depending on the guitar used)

Thanks again for the feedback everyone, it was a great help.

If your xy configuration was really directly in front of the sound hole, that would be there singular thing I would alter before addressing all those other things. Move it to the 14th free and try again [emoji145]

[islandguitar]

^^^^
Yes, +1 on this!!

[ocmcook]

i chose number 1. i thought there was better note separation and not quite so muddy as number 2.

[Looburst]

Clip 2 without a doubt is more of what you would here on a record. I have worked on a few records so there ya go. Richer tone, better balance and overall much more pleasing. Sounded great to me, Barry!

[TBman]

Thanks everyone!!

[gfsark]

Clip 2 for me. Clip 1 was too bright, too much reverb, and not pleasant to listen to. Clip 2 was someone deader, but more pleasant overall. Noise canceling cancels more than just noise.

[Doug Young]

clip 2 by a long shot. It's warmer, more balanced, less room sound. Clip 1, sounds like it was recorded in a hard-walled room, very bright, too much harsh room sound.

People's preferences may depend on what they listen on - on tiny computer speakers, there may not be that much difference, and the brightness of #1 can help "cut thru", a concept that makes me shudder (I don't want a "cutting" guitar sound), but that does appeal in some cases, may shine on some speaker systems and so on.

Other than noises, clip 2 sounds pretty good. There are a few cases where lower notes seem too prominent, likely from proximity effect. But a bit of EQ could fix that. If it was downloadable, I could do a quick "mastering" pass on it to see what it might sound like with just a touch of polish.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by TBman

Clip #2: Two condenser mics (AKG Perception 150 and Rodes NT5). XY mic placement about 8-10" from the sound hole. Then hard panned. A touch of noise removal and compression, no reverb. I also used a equalization thing that lowered the bass (obviously not quite enough, )

I missed your description of what you did. I wouldn't do XY with different mics like this. Mics don't have to be "matched pairs", but they should be the same type, and ideally even the same brand, so you have similar levels and response. With two very different mics like this, spaced pairs would be the way to go.

What noise reduction are you using? Good noise reduction shouldn't make things muddy. If yours does, I'd probably just skip it. A little noise on an internet post isnt a deal-breaker, and if you go for something you want to release, you can have someone mix/master it who has good noise reduction.

[TBman]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

I missed your description of what you did. I wouldn't do XY with different mics like this. Mics don't have to be "matched pairs", but they should be the same type, and ideally even the same brand, so you have similar levels and response. With two very different mics like this, spaced pairs would be the way to go.

What noise reduction are you using? Good noise reduction shouldn't make things muddy. If yours does, I'd probably just skip it. A little noise on an internet post isnt a deal-breaker, and if you go for something you want to release, you can have someone mix/master it who has good noise reduction.

I was using the noise reduction in Audacity. I can adjust how much noise I remove. I try to remove that "white noise" that I find I get, but when I changed my recording chain it decreased a lot.

I have a MML 991 cardiod condenser that I can use with the AKG. I'll check the specs on them to see how close they are. I've noticed that the Rodes NT5 is more sensitive than the AKG. I'm going to move the mics away from the sound hole and then go from there. Thanks for your help Doug.

[jhmulkey]

No question: clip 2. A lot cleaner mic sound. The difference is really night and day. I'm listening on a nice big pair of studio monitors turned up.

[Doug Young]

I don't use Audacity, but my bet is that it's noise reduction is pretty basic. Older overall noise reduction software definitely tended to damage the sound, and is probably best to just avoid. For anyone wanting noise reduction software iZotope's new RX Elements at $129 appears to be a steal (tho understandably a lot pricier than Audacity...)

But I think your track 2 has plenty of promise - sounds quite good, and would be all you'd be likely to need with just a few tweaks.