Use microphone budget for single great mic, or lesser stereo pair?
 

Generally recording solo acoustic guitar, with some multi-tracking.

For example a single Neumann KM184, or a stereo pair of KSM137s?

If you are not currently recording in stereo, or are committed to learning how...

Then go for the one good microphone.

Stereo miking takes a lot of trial and error, and if you haven't done it much or at all, it will be mostly error.

I love a good stereo recording of solo acoustic guitar, yet not everyone knows how to do it effectively.

When you say "multi-tracking", do you mean other instruments including vocals?

I am committed to learning how, which is why I asked the question. I guess I would like some insight....

Scenario 1: Buy a single mic that can be "matched" in the future, using all of my current budget. Should be high enough quality that if I buy used, it should still retain most of its value 5 or so years down the line. I won't be worrying that my mic itself is the weak point in my signal chain. I can get right to the nuts and bolts of recording, without having to learn about stereo recording.

Scenario 2: Buy a stereo/matched pair using all of my budget. Even if I buy used, probably won't hold its value as well as scenario 1. I will always wonder if the mics are the weak point in the signal chain. Will probably sell in the future to upgrade. BUT, I will start hands on learning stereo recording from the get-go.

Bonus question: At what point does the quality of a mono mic overcome the advantages of having a stereo set of inferiors?

No, just other instruments for now. My question is strictly for acoustic guitar solo, and acoustic guitars multi tracked.

Then go with the one quality mic over the cheaper pair. For the same money as the K184, you could get the Gefell M300. To my ears, it's the better microphone. I think the 184 is a bit harsher in the higher frequencies.

I much prefer recordings of solo acoustic guitar in stereo. I also enjoy the recording process , the experimentation, etc.

What is right for you may also depend on your expectations, how much time you are willing to spend learning, and if you think you'll enjoy the recording process or if it's not of much interest to you.

This all has much interest to me. I have been playing for 30 years and have a couple of amazing sounding guitars. I am now ready to capture all the sounds that have gone through my ears, and put them on the record, so to speak.

Please, only informative replies. Yes, I have the "committment", and "interest"....

I agree about the single quality mic now. Personally I don't think the perfectly matched thing is that important. You could get the same make and model of mic later on and have a great pair. Or maybe later get different type of high quality mic. A spaced pair of SDC and LDC can be very cool -I've done that on a few of my albums. And that would open other possibilities like mid/side recording..

And I'll be the contrarian with the 184's, having just sold a pair Gefell M300's to get a pair of KM184's after spending a lot of time going back and forth. Different strokes :)

I think there are lots of approaches. If what you plan to record is featuring mostly one guitar part (fingerstyle, for example), stereo is what everyone is using these days. If you are planning for a more complex production, mono is probably preferred. I'd check out some examples of the kinds of music you plan to make and try to figure out if individual tracks are mono or stereo.

I don't really think stereo micing is all that hard - if you just follow the common approaches, it will "just work". People who post here with issues almost always come down to either bad room acoustics (in which case, stereo vs mono won't matter), or they're trying to do something odd with the mic setup. Just do it the way endless articles and demos show you and it will be fine. But maybe the kinds of things you want to record call for mono anyway (see suggestion above).

For home recording, especially someone getting started, you can get perfectly fine results from some relatively inexpensive mics these days. Most anything from Audio Technica is fine, the MXL Revelation Mini I just checked out was a pleasant surprise, etc. Depending on your budget, you could maybe get 2 of the more budget mics, giving you more flexibility to learn about recording techniques. It's quite likely that when are you get started, your mic choice won't be the limiting factor, and money spent on a great mic won't automatically get you better results. (No matter what you get, room acoustics will probably be the biggest limiting factor.) On the other hand, I like the "buy right, once" approach, which would argue for buying a single best mic you can afford, learning how to use it well in mono, then get a 2nd one later on down the road if and when you want to go for stereo. The challenge with this approach is that it's hard to know what the best mic for your needs is when you're just beginning, which is why most people start out with a more budget setup and step up as they learn more. In any case, it all depends on your goals, budget, type of music, etc, etc.

For solo acoustic guitar I would recommend going straight to stereo recording, even if it means trading up in the future. I started with a single mic, and soon felt the need to add a second, but not to upgrade the single mic right away

If you enjoy the actual process of recording and producing your music, options on mic arrangements and placement add to the interest, even adding a figure-8 mic (like a ribbon) to try MS recording.

Getting decent stereo recordings should not be too difficult, unless the desire is just to do a point and shoot approach, but this is clearly not the case.

If you have any desire to play your recordings for friends and family it would be best to record them in a format that is reasonably familiar to them, ie. stereo.

Bob

I'd suggest you look at a pair of 3 Zigma hybrid mics, made by ADK. The SD-C TL, which is a small diameter transformerless cardioid, is on sale directly from ADK at $349 each. These mics have swappable capsules, so you could add omni, hyper, or even large diameter capsules later.

I've had a number of these mics, and still have 3 of them. They are well built and very nice for acoustic guitar; the cardioid has a pretty flat frequency response. The omni (free field) capsules are very nice as well.

Back up a step. Recording involves a microphone or two in a space.

If you poke around on this site, you'll find folks who have put money and effort into spaces that sound good, and others who have just gotten lucky, and some who are trying to make the best of what they have without screwing up the decor, and a few who are great players and clearly don't care what they sound like.

Depending on the recording outcome you envision, it may help to know which of the above categories is most like you.

It's hard to recommend anything without knowing your budget as well as knowing what you may already have:

- you'll need a computer with recording software
- you'll need an audio interface with at least 2 mic pres
- you'll need studio monitors or at least a good set of headphones
- you'll need to acoustically treat the space you'll be recording in or
the quality of the mics and everything else becomes irrelevant.


People just starting out often ignore the importance of acoustic treatment,
believing it's a luxury item. It isn't and I found that out first hand after
spending a lot of money upgrading my recording equipment after some
years wondering why my new expensive mics and mic pres didn't sound any
better than the cheap ones.