Recording Rhythm Guitar
 

SAMPLE

I have tried different mics, preamps, strings, guitars, settings, position, etc., but I keep getting this annoying metallic jangle when recording rhythm guitar. Anyone ever have this problem? It's in the higher frequency range. It is also a sound I don't hear coming from my guitars in real time.

Rick

Send the recorded track through a parametric equalizer, boost the mid range knob, and then spin spin the frequency knob until that metallic jangle gets right in your face. Now you know the offending frequency, so cut it. If the EQ is fully parametric you can also adjust the Q to take the thinnest amount out of the track without affecting the other frequencies.

I'm sure you can find some free shareware EQ plug-in if you don't already have one.

here let me help you... http://bedroomproducersblog.com/2011...r-vst-plugins/

Try something like this, maybe? (This is an EQ for your track.)

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/416/31...4dd182ff3f.jpg

Thank-you for the input. I will give it a try. Is this commonly done in studios with rhythm guitar tracks, or is the problem my recording space?

The likely answers are yes and yes.

Subtractive eq is very commonly used and an effective way to improve problematic tracks as well as to carve out frequency space so tracks aren't competing for the same real estate.

As for your recording space, unless it's been treated, it could be an issue.

I'm not a pro or anything, so take anything I suggest with a grain of salt.

I'm not hearing this "metallic" sound you're describing. All I hear is a regular old jangly strummed acoustic that needs some of the mids notched out a little.

I am not at my studio so I am listening thru my laptop earbuds. And don't notice a particularly pronounced jangle other than a very slight ring somewhere in high frequency range .

That said: Jim1960's suggestion about subtractive EQ is spot on, as he said for problem frequencies and making more space and maintaining a sense of presence as well as helping distinguish different instruments in a multi track mix. And is used by many pro mix engineers (depending on the situation).

Couple of other thoughts
Taylor guitars are noted for their projection of high end (which can be even more noticeable when recorded into sensitive microphones), particularly the closer you mic to the fret board (my main gig'ing and recording guitar is a Taylor 810)


So some other good diagnostics to try.

On my Taylor I usually use a heavier pic when recording.

If you record and mix in the same room and the room is contributing to the problem, then it can show up in either or both the recording and playback/monitoring during mixing . So try also listening thru a set of decent headphones and see if you still hear the problem and if it is as pronounced.
If it is still as pronounced in HP's then look to the room and consider a good set of 4 inch 703, or rockwool panels on stands to surround your recording position.
If it less pronounced in the HP's then look to the same panels but mounted on the side walls in the first and maybe second reflection point/s from you speakers

^This. I'd like to know what the actual problem is. Is it the pick attack? I hear a decent sounding acoustic track that will likely cut well in a mix.

I hate manipulating acoustics with EQ when it's not necessary. When you have a client with moderate talents and a meager instrument in there, and time is of the essence, you track it the best you can and fix it later. But, when it's your own material and you have the ability to make adjustments, there's no reason to just EQ something because you can't be bothered to address it with the instrument, technique, or mic placement.

Keep in mind, acoustic guitar is something where, save for high pass filtering, subtractive EQing often takes away some of the important elements along with the bad so get it right at the source and EQ to fit a particular mix, not to fix a problem happening in the recording process.

I disagree here. Just yesterday Midwinter and I put up more than a few microphones on his acoustic guitar and placed each where we thought the microphone and guitar sounded best in my pretty good sounding room. I record a TON of different acoustic guitars so I know the room and I know the mics that we using (at least the ones that I own).

The object of our little shootout was to find a microphone that would compliment his guitar, his current microphone collection, and his recording situation. We were testing under $1000 (ballpark) microphones against the mics that he currently owns.

The microphones were a Neumann TLM103, Violet Amethyst Vintage, Blue Blueberry, CAD E200 (in both cardoid and omni settings), Neumann KM184, Octava MC012, Rode M5, Little Blondies, Cascade Fathead II, Shure SM57.

I have many good EQ plugs with real-time spectral analysis, so along with our ears, we had a good spectral representation of what was going on. I can say without reservation most of all the recorded takes could have benefited from a bit of subtractive EQ, yes sometimes you can take what's special away from a track, but knowing what to listen for in the track comes with experience. You can position till the cows come home, but if the guitar or the room has certain quirks, you still need to address them at the EQ end. And in the case of the OP, if he feels the guitar has a metallic edge that he can't live with, find it, and remove it as surgically as possible.

Thanks Kev!

I this case, I used the Martin D-41 for the sample, but the frequencies I am referring to, as I hear them, are there no matter which guitar, etc. I use. My recording chain is pretty high quality, and I hear these sounds no matter what I use to listen back. Maybe it is a frequency I am particularly sensitive to. I do not hear these sounds when I simply listen to the sound of my guitars, it's just the recorded sound. So, I will look more at my recording space.

Thanks!

We can just agree to disagree then. I've been doing this for a long time and my EQs are about as good as they come (Millennia and Pultec) but I still prefer EQ acoustic as little as possible. Granted, I'll still end up EQing most tracks to some degree, but it's always to fit the context of a mix, staying out of the way of a vocal, etc. If there's a metallic edge, I address that with mic placement or mic choice (though that may not be an option for the TS). Since he's the player, he can even address it with pick, strings, technique. So many better options than EQ.

I like to encourage beginners not to reach for EQ as a way to fix the source. Fix the source signal, then use EQ to craft your mix. That should be the goal at least.

Obvious suggestion: are the sounds there when you listen to someone else play your guitar with your pick? I suspect that this is just what your guitar sounds like.

Your welcome.
I have no experience with recording Martin, only Taylor and Breedlove. None the less it is normal for the recorded sound to be quite different than the sound the players hears themselves. If for no other reason than the difference of listening position between the player ears and the mic/s (unless of course the mics are sticking out of ones ears) :D Including a more pronounced high mid or high frequency as they tend to be more directional than mid or bass. As midwinter states above it could just be that difference ... or it could be something going on in room. But regardless if you do not like it, not something you just have to get used to . So along with room, do not overlook subtractive EQ.

Sounds like a realistic recording of a guitar which sounds tinny and metallic. Obvious causes: action is too low, neck is back-bowed, strings are too light, pick is too thin. Probably a combination of these issues is to blame. If so, a pro setup with 12's or 13's, and a medium or heavy pick will do wonders to fatten up your tone.

I use light strings, med pick, action is slightly lower, neck is not back-bowed. I appreciate the input.