The Acoustic Guitar Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 02-03-2017, 07:49 AM
Hot Vibrato Hot Vibrato is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 458
Default

Interesting thread...

I was bitten by the guitar bug at age 14. Fast forward thirty years, and I've been bitten by the microphone bug. I'm fascinated with these little contraptions, and like guitars, they all have their own unique sound.

I think that it's possible to get a professional result with inexpensive mics, and it is certainly possible to get amateur results from a high end mic.

The sound of the room and the position of the mic(s) is far more important than which mic you choose. The weakest link in most home recording setups (including my own) is the room acoustics. The obvious choice for recording acoustic guitar in an imperfect acoustical environment would be a directional (cardioid) mic, but an inherent trait of these mics is proximity effect - an exaggerated low end boominess which increases the closer the mic is to the source. Many mics have a low cut switch that will help reduce the boom, and some have a built in high pass filter to reduce proximity effect. Omnidirectional mics, however, are not prone to the proximity effect issue, so you can get away with placing them closer to the guitar. But in either case, the goal is to get a nice balanced recording of the guitar without too much of the room sound coming through.

So, the struggle of the acoustic guitarist who records himself in his living room or bedroom, is finding the right combination of mics and mic positioning that will give a good representation of the sound of the guitar, without sounding too boomy, and without allowing too much of the room sound in. Of course this is a compromise because of the imperfect room acoustics. When you do finally have access to a great sounding recording space, the skies will open up and the clouds will part. You can increase the miking distance, and it sounds even better, because you will now have the room working with you, rather than against you.

Last edited by Hot Vibrato; 02-03-2017 at 07:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-03-2017, 08:38 AM
Trevor B. Trevor B. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Posts: 1,077
Default

A wise man who operated an analog (a what???) recording studio back in the day made this prophetic assertion. "A recording studio is just like a guitar collection. We're all just one piece of gear away from the perfect sound."
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-03-2017, 09:03 AM
jim1960 jim1960 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 5,960
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor B. View Post
A wise man who operated an analog (a what???) recording studio back in the day made this prophetic assertion. "A recording studio is just like a guitar collection. We're all just one piece of gear away from the perfect sound."
I was just telling a friend of mine... I'm one plug-in away from having all the plug-ins I need. I just don't know which plug-in so I have to keep trying them.
__________________
Jim
2023 Iris ND-200 maple/adi
2017 Circle Strings 00 bastogne walnut/sinker redwood
2015 Circle Strings Parlor shedua/western red cedar
2009 Bamburg JSB Signature Baritone macassar ebony/carpathian spruce
2004 Taylor XXX-RS indian rosewood/sitka spruce
1988 Martin D-16 mahogany/sitka spruce

along with some electrics, zouks, dulcimers, and banjos.

YouTube
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-03-2017, 09:11 AM
KevWind's Avatar
KevWind KevWind is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edge of Wilderness Wyoming
Posts: 19,877
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fran Guidry View Post
I don't know if you have the inclination, but it can be very educational to go through the hassle of a careful level matched same source comparison. Small details in the recording process can have a large impact on our impression of the results, so level matching with a test tone, positioning the mics as close the same location as possible, and recording the same session through both mics simultaneously will reduce the variables and allow you to hear the real differences with more confidence.

The reason I keep singing this old song has to do with the thousands I spent on gear when I was trying to learn to improve my recordings. I read the posts on Gearslutz that convinced me I had to have a John Hardy preamp and solid gold a/d converters or I'd be wasting my efforts. Of course, the first session through the Hardy was a revelation - veils were lifted, angels sang, and I was on my way to a Grammy! But the next day my tracks sounded as bad as ever (grin). It took a long time to figure out that a good recording required (as Jim1960 lists above) a good performance, a decent sounding space, a flattering mic position. And once these things were taken care of and the gear didn't add hum or hiss or crackles, didn't wipe out the bass or make the highs shriek, the tracks sounded pretty darned good.

So I try to be the anti-Gearslutz. And today I have plenty of fairly high end equipment and do most of my recording on a Zoom H6 XY.

Fran
Fran we have been round and round on this in many threads.
And you still seem to confuse that when someone suggests that" in general you get what you pay for " that they are saying the gear alone will make your recoding better, that is of course only in your imagination. No one has said or inferred that gear alone will make your mixes better, period.

So your anecdotal experience with thinking that, because someone on GearSlutz told you to by a John Hardy and you still had bad mixes, is fine for your learning curve. But inferring that experience has any relationship to what people might be suggesting , is not only false but frankly a bit insulting . As is your constant demand for proof to justify the notion that in a general sense "you get what you pay for" and better gear might have some value.

No one here has suggested bad room, poor recording techniques, or inexperience can be overcome by more expensive gear. In fact almost universally the opposite happens, where it is suggested that looking to the room and technique should come first.

No one here has suggested you cannot get good recordings with gear that is very modestly priced.

No one here has suggested " a good performance, a decent sounding space, a flattering mic position. And once these things were taken care of and the gear didn't add hum or hiss or crackles, didn't wipe out the bass or make the highs shriek, the tracks sounded pretty darned good.",,,,, is not basically accurate


Perhaps the fact that you "try to be the anti-Gearslutz." is arguably the problem and not the solution you have convinced yourself it is .

You often seem to bring this anti-Gearslutz crusade into discussions about the possible value of higher priced gear. As well intentioned as that might be. It is somewhat predicated on the notion that folks here need to be saved from suffering the same disappointment you went through when you mistook the notion that higher price gear could make up for poor technique and lack of experience or poor room acoustics . As if others will either suffer the same disappointment or delude themselves into believing there is an improvement.

"And today I have plenty of fairly high end equipment and do most of my recording on a Zoom H6 XY".
Is fine for your personal situation, but is a bit arrogant ( smacks of "If it's good enough for me" and "If I can't hear it it isn't there" or have real value) to assume that is corollary of the rest of our situations.

And lastly to answer: The concept that the more noise or hyped anomaly that is the signal chain, becomes increasingly more noticeable when multiplied over increasing numbers of tracks is absolutely common knowledge. Because it is in fact physics not a "phenomenon" as you condescendingly labeled it .
In digital recording there is absolute limit to the dynamic ceiling of signal , and while the increases in track numbers increases the noise and distortion, and raises the noise floor , there no corresponding increase in the absolute ceiling ( 0 db ) so what happens is the noise increases in relation to the absolute signal limit. And that increase in noise does start to increase the loss of sense of space (3D) distinction, and detail, and the mixes become more dull (less detailed) and flatter (more 2D) . And yes I have also experienced it on sessions of multiple tracks.
__________________
Enjoy the Journey.... Kev...

KevWind at Soundcloud

KevWind at YouYube
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...EZxkPKyieOTgRD

System :
Studio system Avid Carbon interface , PT Ultimate 2023.12 -Mid 2020 iMac 27" 3.8GHz 8-core i7 10th Gen ,, Ventura 13.2.1

Mobile MBP M1 Pro , PT Ultimate 2023.12 Ventura 12.2.1

Last edited by KevWind; 02-03-2017 at 11:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-03-2017, 09:17 AM
ctgagnon ctgagnon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 247
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim1960 View Post
How do one quantify "10 times better sound"?
Move the decimal point one place to the right.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-03-2017, 11:16 AM
Fran Guidry Fran Guidry is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Walnut Creek, CA
Posts: 3,712
Default

Kev, I seem to have offended you. I'm sorry. Please accept my apology.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevWind View Post
Fran we have been round and round on this in many threads.
And you still seem to confuse that when someone suggests that" in general you get what you pay for " that they are saying the gear alone will make your recoding better, that is of course only in your imagination. No one has said or inferred that gear alone will make your mixes better, period.

So your anecdotal experience with thinking that, because someone on GearSlutz told you to by a John Hardy and you still had bad mixes, is fine for your learning curve. But inferring that experience has any relationship to what people might be suggesting , is not only false but frankly insulting . As is your constant demand for proof to justify the notion that in a general sense "you get what you pay for" and better gear might have some value.

No one here has suggested bad room, poor recording techniques, or inexperience can be overcome by more expensive gear. In fact almost universally the opposite happens, where it is suggested that looking to the room and technique should come first.

No one here has suggested you cannot get good recordings with gear that is very modestly priced.

No one here has suggested " a good performance, a decent sounding space, a flattering mic position. And once these things were taken care of and the gear didn't add hum or hiss or crackles, didn't wipe out the bass or make the highs shriek, the tracks sounded pretty darned good.",,,,, is not accurate


Perhaps the fact that you "try to be the anti-Gearslutz." is arguably the problem and not the solution you have convinced yourself it is .

You seem to bring this anti-Gearslutz crusade into many discussions about the possible value of higher priced gear. As well intentioned as that might be. It is somewhat predicated on the notion that folks here need to be saved from suffering the same disappointment you went through when you mistook the notion that higher price gear could make up for poor technique and lack of experience . As if others will suffer the same disappointment or delude themselves into believing there is an improvement.

"And today I have plenty of fairly high end equipment and do most of my recording on a Zoom H6 XY".
Is fine for your personal situation, but is a bit arrogant ( smacks of "If it's good enough for me" and "If I can't hear it it isn't there" or have real value) to assume that is corollary of the rest of our situations.

And lastly to answer: The concept that the more noise or hyped anomaly that is the signal chain, becomes increasingly more noticeable when multiplied over increasing numbers of tracks is absolutely common knowledge. Because it is in fact physics not a "phenomenon" as you condescendingly suggested .
In digital recording there is absolute limit to the dynamic ceiling of signal , and while the increases in track numbers increases the noise and distortion, and raises the noise floor , there no corresponding increase in the absolute ceiling ( 0 db ) so what happens is the noise increases in relation to the signal limit. And that increase in noise does start to increase the loss of sense of space (3D) distinction and detail and the mixes become more dull (less detailed) and flatter (more 2D) . And yes I have also experienced it on sessions of multiple tracks.
Please consider, in regard to this last point, that since there is an upper limit as you describe, that each track must contribute a smaller part to the whole, so its imperfections must have less impact as well, since the noise, for instance, is a percentage of the signal and will be attenuated along with the signal.

As far as the insulting nature of my suggestion that a demo is better than a statement of opinion, I find this surprising. I would think that providing samples as I do makes it possible for others to make their own judgments.

All the best,
Fran
__________________
E ho`okani pila kakou ma Kaleponi
Slack Key in California - www.kaleponi.com
My YouTube clips
The Homebrewed Music Blog
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-03-2017, 07:53 PM
jim1960 jim1960 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 5,960
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevWind View Post
Perhaps the fact that you "try to be the anti-Gearslutz." is arguably the problem and not the solution you have convinced yourself it is.
I have to say the GS community has steered me right a lot more often than they've steered me wrong. Sure you have to weed through some people with agendas at times, but there's a wealth of information there and some folks are incredibly generous with their knowledge.
__________________
Jim
2023 Iris ND-200 maple/adi
2017 Circle Strings 00 bastogne walnut/sinker redwood
2015 Circle Strings Parlor shedua/western red cedar
2009 Bamburg JSB Signature Baritone macassar ebony/carpathian spruce
2004 Taylor XXX-RS indian rosewood/sitka spruce
1988 Martin D-16 mahogany/sitka spruce

along with some electrics, zouks, dulcimers, and banjos.

YouTube

Last edited by jim1960; 02-03-2017 at 09:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-04-2017, 07:10 AM
bmish bmish is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 196
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockabilly69 View Post
I've also found this to be true in my experience.

But, back to the original question posed, are microphones like guitars? To me, without a doubt they are. I've found that there are quite a few parallels with microphones and guitars, especially with electric guitars and amps, and microphones and pre-amps. I am without a doubt a gear-head. I'm always looking for new tones, and more importantly, I'm always looking to get the tones that I hear in my head. Well, I've been recording, mostly for myself, for a long time (40 years), and playing guitar professionally for many years, and for the first half of that, it was mostly electric playing. So I went through a lot of guitars and amplifiers in search for those tones. In my search for good tones, it didn't take long for to figure out the a Les Paul through a Marshall Plexi would easily give up the proto-typical crunch hard rock guitar sound, or a Telecaster through a tweed Fender Deluxe would give give up a killer roots guitar tone, etc. Well in my time recording, especially in the last 5 years where I am preparing to go full-time pro at it, I am finding the same things. Certain microphones, and just importantly pre-amps, not only make the job easier, they become critical parts of the chain in getting there musically.
Lately I've been recording my wood bodied resonator and voice and I'm finding that a Blue Dragonfly ($500 used) with an ISA One preamp ($399), and a cheap ART Dual Levellar compressor ($200), are giving me a more unique reso tone, than if I would have used a Neumann U87ai ($3000) through a Manley Voxbox ($3500).

Here's an example of that (with a Blue Cactus through the same chain of gear for the voice and both mics bleeding into each other)... Listen on a good set of headphones, and you'll hear how the cheap compressor highlights the way the reso speaker cone compresses. ....




Is it a BETTER tone??? Who's to say, I just find it sounds musical to me, and in the end that's what I'm looking for. It's just, I now know, that that combo will work for when I want to record reso, just like a know a Tele and Tweed Deluxe will work when I need that american roots tone.

With experience, and careful listening, it doesn't take long to figure out what microphones work with what timbres. And what preamps bring out the best in what microphones.

Two pieces of equipment that are time and time slammed on a lot recording websites are the Rode NTK tube microphone, which many people complain has a very harsh/spikey top end, and the Drawer 1960 preamp/compressor, which many people complain are too dark, and the compressor too slow and mushy. Well guess what, put those two together, and presto they both bring out the best in each other, with the Drawmer taking edge right off of the NTK and giving up a great tone.

Listen to the warm tone of this acoustic guitar here...




I have a fairly good collection of microphone, some entry level like the Shure SM57/58s all the way up to high dollar Neumans like the U87/89s etc. I can say without a doubt that what microphone I use is rarely based on cost, although the precentage rate of when a microphone is used is higher with the expensive models. I have certain mics that I know I could use 80% and they will get the job done, whereas there are other mics that I have it may be 20% of the time, but when they are do work, they do the job better than anything I have. The trick is to, when you have the time, record as much as possible, and try everything you have on a source and listen with an open mind.
Off Topic, but just pointing out I love your sound, and your songs.
__________________
Larrivee D03R
'61 Gibson J45
Pono L-20
Pono C-OM-30
Blueridge Br-163
'73 Guild D-25
Recording King Dirty Thirties Parlor
Facebook: Koanical Inhale Project
http://www.youtube.com/user/zencabbage/videos
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-04-2017, 08:00 AM
KevWind's Avatar
KevWind KevWind is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edge of Wilderness Wyoming
Posts: 19,877
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim1960 View Post
I have to say the GS community has steered me right a lot more often than they've steered me wrong. Sure you have to weed through some people with agendas at times, but there's a wealth of information there and some folks are incredibly generous with their knowledge.
Agreed and same thing on this forum
__________________
Enjoy the Journey.... Kev...

KevWind at Soundcloud

KevWind at YouYube
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...EZxkPKyieOTgRD

System :
Studio system Avid Carbon interface , PT Ultimate 2023.12 -Mid 2020 iMac 27" 3.8GHz 8-core i7 10th Gen ,, Ventura 13.2.1

Mobile MBP M1 Pro , PT Ultimate 2023.12 Ventura 12.2.1

Last edited by KevWind; 02-04-2017 at 08:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-04-2017, 11:59 AM
min7b5's Avatar
min7b5 min7b5 is offline
Eric Skye
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 7,668
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atalkingsausage View Post
Does the mic you use to record have a huge influence on the sound you capture or is it more about the room, instrument, eq, performance, etc...
My own experience is that the top three most important things for a great recording are performance, performance, and performance...

There's so many examples of recordings with fidelity that is not even close to what many people would consider good (Pablo Casals' Cello Suites from 39', Glenn Gould's Goldbergs from 55', Robert Johnson, early Andrés Segovia..) that give millions of people goosebumps with every listen -it never works the other way around. So getting your music truly together, and getting and keeping yourself in a relaxed, creative, and inspired state is whole other topic.

Personally I like geeking out about microphones, but personally find the differences sonically to often be absolutely hair splitting. I do think different mics behave differently, in terms of how close or far you can get from the source, phase issues, etc. But when you normalize everything, it's pretty tiny, in my experience. To me it's really about the room, and of course every step after the capture. A great mic is not going to make a bad room better - in fact it'll probably just amplify what makes it a bad room.
__________________
Instruction
Youtube
Instagram
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 02-04-2017, 02:24 PM
Trevor B. Trevor B. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Posts: 1,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ctgagnon View Post
Move the decimal point one place to the right.
So if I move the decimal point two places to the right, Bingo, a 100% improvement in my sound. This little piece of information could save me thousands of dollars!!!
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-05-2017, 03:50 AM
rockabilly69 rockabilly69 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ogden, Utah
Posts: 4,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmish View Post
Off Topic, but just pointing out I love your sound, and your songs.
Thanks you
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-05-2017, 03:55 AM
rockabilly69 rockabilly69 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ogden, Utah
Posts: 4,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bmish View Post
Off Topic, but just pointing out I love your sound, and your songs.
Thanks you And by the way, I see you have a '61 J45!!!
One of favorite guitars is my '64 J45, it just spews classic rock tones, here's the last recording I did with mine....

Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 02-05-2017, 04:04 AM
rockabilly69 rockabilly69 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ogden, Utah
Posts: 4,062
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevWind View Post
Agreed and same thing on this forum
Although I bag on the lemmings, the people the just continue to blindly rehash BAD or overly biased information they've read by some other poster they admire, and the people with an agenda on gearslutz, I have also got some great information from GS, especially about people that are in the know when I need repairs on some of my gear. Just recently I found a guy through GS that is an absolute expert on one of my favorite old Shure Ribbon mics that I needed some work done on, a model 300. And one of my favorite preamps that I use all the time, a Sebatron 4000VMP, is something I learned about through Gearslutz! So I keep my subscription, and try to weed through the chuff.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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

Tags
guitar, mic, mixing, production, recording

Thread Tools





All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:31 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=