Quote:
Originally Posted by Larsis
Thank you guys for your advice.
I must say, this is exactly, what I was thinking... the more mics, the bigger sound. Apparently, I was wrong the whole time.
I got my spaced pairs Rode M5 first and I wasn't satisfied with sound, so I bought that Lewitt and after that, I bought AKG 1000C, but I just feel, that the AKG is redundant now.
I'll do it, as you say. Keep my four mics + pickup from the guitar and just try different positions, distance etc. and I'll see, how far I can get.
Again, thank you very much!
|
Perhaps the place to start is see if you can analyze and describe (in as technical or objective terms as possible) what is it about the sound of the pair of Rodes that you were not satisfied with.
Often no matter what mic/s are used with home recording in marginal rooms (i.e. reflection problems) mixing with some specific judicious EQ can bring more spaciousness to the recording as much or more so than different or more mics . In rooms with less reflection problems often little or no EQ is needed. All this very much depends on the room and or the mic position.
And another misconception of beginners (me included when I started) is the notion that for a bigger, more spacious , more present more 3D ish sound that boosting with EQ is the answer, and again more often than not the opposite is true. For example high pass filtering ( cutting the low end ) or finding and cutting specific problem frequencies with a narrow Q filter will help to correct the effect of unwanted frequency build up or (muddiness ) and actually make the recording sound "bigger" where boosting may only make the problem worse.
The reason this is so is because we perceive any build up mud as sound flat and lacking spaciousness and depth sounding more 2D than 3D..
And simply boosting without first cutting this mud, will often actually make the recording worse and flatter,less spacious .