The Acoustic Guitar Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 09-21-2020, 08:23 AM
rick-slo's Avatar
rick-slo rick-slo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 17,172
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrighty View Post
Thanks Derek - I like it. Interesting how much you cut from the low mids here - a broader sweep than I might normally use. Reverb sounds nice - Seventh heaven?
Actually I have not used Seventh Heaven much. Like on this one I have most often found I like the results using the Waves IR-1 and Waves R-Verb reverbs.
I usually test run the various reverbs I have. Much is tune and raw recording dependent.
__________________
Derek Coombs
Youtube -> Website -> Music -> Tabs
Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs

"Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

Woods hands pick by eye and ear
Made to one with pride and love
To be that we hold so dear
A voice from heavens above
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-21-2020, 09:13 AM
jim1960 jim1960 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 5,961
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrighty View Post
Thanks for taking the time to do this and share the various tweaks - it is always very interesting to see how others approach things.

I like the clarity but (like my original mix) am now hearing the high end emphasis a bit too much - which I didn't hear originally when I did mine but now do..
I just gave it another listen and you're right about the top end. I pushed it too hard.
FYI-I'm going to delete that from my Soundcloud account since any interested parties have heard it by now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrighty View Post
Ok, so a different piece recorded this morning...
That's heads and tails better than THD. Well done.
__________________
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
  #33  
Old 09-21-2020, 09:24 AM
Wrighty Wrighty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Itchen Stoke, UK
Posts: 2,136
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Womack View Post
Here's a tool some of you might consider: Waves F6 Dynamic EQ with Real Time Analyzer. F6 is a parametric EQ with six bands of EQ plus high and low pass filters. The EQ and response curves are displayed over an RTA display.


The idea here is that you not only have fully parametric bands of EQ with frequency, Q, and gain controls, but you can also watch the RTA for intermittent effects, such as a boom or squeak, and set up those bands with threshold, range, attack, and release, and squash those intermittent effects with compression and/or expansion without changing the overall EQ. And band can do parametric EQ, dynamic EQ, or BOTH.

I'm using this quite a bit during COVID where people are recording from home. They may have a room resonance boom that only pops out every so often. I can dial in a band of dynamic EQ tuned to that boom and eliminate only it without thinning out the sound when the boom isn't happening. The EQ curve dynamically changes to show the expansion or compression in action. A couple of tips: If I'm doing this on a voice I can also DeEss the same voice in this plug to save processor overhead. Another tip is to turn off the RTA when you are finished dialing in to save processor overhead. The six bands allow you to handle both the static capsule resonances and the dynamic room effect, usually with bands left over.

I've found this thing indispensable for basic repairs. It is amazing the tools that have surfaced in the last couple of years!

Bob
Hi Bob

This looks great - I have got a copy but have struggled to get on top of dynamic EQ..

I struggle to understand why one might lift a frequency and then squash it with compression for example? (I get why one might cut a frequency and then squash it)

If I find the problem areas by using standard EQ with +12db push and narrow Q as you suggested previously, do I then translate these across to the F6 and add a cut there?
__________________
Burguet AC-007 (2003 - Cedar/Rosewood)
Webber OM (2009 - Sitka/Sapele)


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A...2TVEhWes2Djrig
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-21-2020, 09:25 AM
Wrighty Wrighty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Itchen Stoke, UK
Posts: 2,136
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim1960 View Post
I just gave it another listen and you're right about the top end. I pushed it too hard.
FYI-I'm going to delete that from my Soundcloud account since any interested parties have heard it by now.


That's heads and tails better than THD. Well done.
Thanks - THD is a really tough piece to play cleanly and was patently a bad choice to demo mics!
__________________
Burguet AC-007 (2003 - Cedar/Rosewood)
Webber OM (2009 - Sitka/Sapele)


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A...2TVEhWes2Djrig
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-21-2020, 10:37 AM
alohachris alohachris is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 2,430
Default RE: Celandine Clip

Aloha Peter,

RE: The new "Celandine" clip.

Through my speakers, it's lower-mid overdrive central - even on the first note?!? Buzzes on the bass notes all over the place w/ distortion. Unlistenable really. As usual, your playing & interpretation are both excellent. But the recording? Man, Too much overkill in lower mid notes. Why?

Several of your clips have been analyzed at AGF with great suggestions & solutions from the guys, including reworking the raw tracks to workable through various editing tools & plug-in's. Yet, your mid-range problems have continued, no matter the song. Why is that? Can you not hear those issues on your system before you share the clips? Is it your guitar? What?

Lower Mid-range issues seem to plague so many newbie player/recordists here. Any opinions as to why that is?

Peter, you should start over & record a new clip. Doug's suggestion seems to ring the truest: stop all the playing around with plug-in's & electronic fixes until you have mastered them. Keep it simple with a light hand on the EQ (by subtraction only) & reverb (barely audible, if any - the brand doesn't matter here), compression (same), etc. Just try to get a clean, clear track without putting so much into editing. Play with your mic placement some more or add treatment to your space. And listen for those lower-mid's wolf notes & cure them before you share them. They are so obvious.

Record the "Celandine" track again, Peter. Share the raw track with us please.

Good Luck.

alohachris

Last edited by alohachris; 09-21-2020 at 10:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-21-2020, 11:23 AM
Bob Womack's Avatar
Bob Womack Bob Womack is offline
Guitar Gourmet
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Between Clever and Stupid
Posts: 26,991
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrighty View Post
Hi Bob
This looks great - I have got a copy but have struggled to get on top of dynamic EQ..
I struggle to understand why one might lift a frequency and then squash it with compression for example? (I get why one might cut a frequency and then squash it)
One quick example is a dull recording that still has sibilance. If you lift the upper frequencies to brighten up the sound and make enunciation clearer, you elevate the sibilance as well. Often the dull sound is caused by the artist not being-on mic. So, you use the shelving eq to brighten up the high end and then sweep another band through the high frequencies until you find the predominant sibilant sound. Pull it back to "0" boost or cut. Now, move the threshold down to where the sibilants go over threshold and the rest of the upper frequencies don't. From there you can adjust the range, watching the dynamic curve to see the interaction of the dynamic curve to oppose the spike of sibilance while listening to make sure you aren't making the high-end dull again. You can also adjust the "Q" to set the width of the skirts of the EQ and try to make the DeEsser as specific as possible without harming the voice otherwise. The range and "Q" controls will figure into the control of the problem prominently.
Quote:
If I find the problem areas by using standard EQ with +12db push and narrow Q as you suggested previously, do I then translate these across to the F6 and add a cut there?
You can use that technique for either the static problems, just like you did before, or the dynamic problems, such as sibilance or room boom.

When you are cleaning up it is often all about compromise. In this, the bypass control is your friend. Use it to A/B your EQ work against the original signal, keeping in mind the Hippocratic oath: "First do no harm." You can bang away at a problem and finally sit back and say, "Wow, that's better!" Then you hit bypass and realize you liked some of the characteristics of the sound better before you started working. Just go back and ease out of your tweaks in the area you like better when you listen in bypass a little bit and see if that doesn't strike a better compromise. There are also EQ programs that offer a couple of temporary EQ memories for instant A/B. You can get something you like, store it, and then tweak further. If you end up not liking the newer results, just call up the stored memory.

Bob
__________________
"It is said, 'Go not to the elves for counsel for they will say both no and yes.' "
Frodo Baggins to Gildor Inglorion, The Fellowship of the Ring

THE MUSICIAN'S ROOM (my website)
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-21-2020, 02:43 PM
Wrighty Wrighty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Itchen Stoke, UK
Posts: 2,136
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alohachris View Post
Aloha Peter,

RE: The new "Celandine" clip.

Through my speakers, it's lower-mid overdrive central - even on the first note?!? Buzzes on the bass notes all over the place w/ distortion. Unlistenable really. As usual, your playing & interpretation are both excellent. But the recording? Man, Too much overkill in lower mid notes. Why?

Several of your clips have been analyzed at AGF with great suggestions & solutions from the guys, including reworking the raw tracks to workable through various editing tools & plug-in's. Yet, your mid-range problems have continued, no matter the song. Why is that? Can you not hear those issues on your system before you share the clips? Is it your guitar? What?

Lower Mid-range issues seem to plague so many newbie player/recordists here. Any opinions as to why that is?

Peter, you should start over & record a new clip. Doug's suggestion seems to ring the truest: stop all the playing around with plug-in's & electronic fixes until you have mastered them. Keep it simple with a light hand on the EQ (by subtraction only) & reverb (barely audible, if any - the brand doesn't matter here), compression (same), etc. Just try to get a clean, clear track without putting so much into editing. Play with your mic placement some more or add treatment to your space. And listen for those lower-mid's wolf notes & cure them before you share them. They are so obvious.

Record the "Celandine" track again, Peter. Share the raw track with us please.

Good Luck.

alohachris


Hi Chris

Thanks for the input.

I don’t hear any lower mid distortion or buzz on my system at all - that’s very strange.

I’d be interested if anybody else hears that?

I get a nice clean warm tone with plenty of clarity. Did you hear the same issue on the first raw file of the handing down?

Previously I don’t recall this being an issue of any note either.

I am definitely on the same page re less is more, and this last recording of Celandine was almost a raw file and had only subtractive EQ and a small amount of reverb - nothing else (so little point in re-recording)

Here is a fairly raw file - a little dynamic EQ and reverb only. Is this any better to your ears?

__________________
Burguet AC-007 (2003 - Cedar/Rosewood)
Webber OM (2009 - Sitka/Sapele)


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A...2TVEhWes2Djrig

Last edited by Wrighty; 09-21-2020 at 02:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-21-2020, 02:56 PM
Wrighty Wrighty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Itchen Stoke, UK
Posts: 2,136
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Womack View Post
One quick example is a dull recording that still has sibilance. If you lift the upper frequencies to brighten up the sound and make enunciation clearer, you elevate the sibilance as well. Often the dull sound is caused by the artist not being-on mic. So, you use the shelving eq to brighten up the high end and then sweep another band through the high frequencies until you find the predominant sibilant sound. Pull it back to "0" boost or cut. Now, move the threshold down to where the sibilants go over threshold and the rest of the upper frequencies don't. From there you can adjust the range, watching the dynamic curve to see the interaction of the dynamic curve to oppose the spike of sibilance while listening to make sure you aren't making the high-end dull again. You can also adjust the "Q" to set the width of the skirts of the EQ and try to make the DeEsser as specific as possible without harming the voice otherwise. The range and "Q" controls will figure into the control of the problem prominently.You can use that technique for either the static problems, just like you did before, or the dynamic problems, such as sibilance or room boom.

When you are cleaning up it is often all about compromise. In this, the bypass control is your friend. Use it to A/B your EQ work against the original signal, keeping in mind the Hippocratic oath: "First do no harm." You can bang away at a problem and finally sit back and say, "Wow, that's better!" Then you hit bypass and realize you liked some of the characteristics of the sound better before you started working. Just go back and ease out of your tweaks in the area you like better when you listen in bypass a little bit and see if that doesn't strike a better compromise. There are also EQ programs that offer a couple of temporary EQ memories for instant A/B. You can get something you like, store it, and then tweak further. If you end up not liking the newer results, just call up the stored memory.

Bob
Thanks Bob - that's really helpful in piecing it together more..
__________________
Burguet AC-007 (2003 - Cedar/Rosewood)
Webber OM (2009 - Sitka/Sapele)


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A...2TVEhWes2Djrig
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-21-2020, 03:17 PM
rick-slo's Avatar
rick-slo rick-slo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 17,172
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrighty View Post
Hi Chris
Thanks for the input.
I don’t hear any lower mid distortion or buzz on my system at all - that’s very strange.
I’d be interested if anybody else hears that?
I get a nice clean warm tone with plenty of clarity. Did you hear the same issue on the first raw file of the handing down?
Previously I don’t recall this being an issue of any note either.
I am definitely on the same page re less is more, and this last recording of Celandine was almost a raw file and had only subtractive EQ and a small amount of reverb - nothing else (so little point in re-recording)

Here is a fairly raw file - a little dynamic EQ and reverb only. Is this any better to your ears?

Raw file is a bit less boxy though still somewhat of a closed in sound. Even lower pitched notes can have some sense of air.

Play around with mike spacing and distance. Sometimes a less correlated waveform between R and L channels can open up the sound. Also on reverbs some bring out more of the overtones (higher frequencies) than others and that can give more air and openness to the sound.
__________________
Derek Coombs
Youtube -> Website -> Music -> Tabs
Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs

"Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

Woods hands pick by eye and ear
Made to one with pride and love
To be that we hold so dear
A voice from heavens above
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-21-2020, 03:27 PM
alohachris alohachris is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 2,430
Default Aloha Peter

Aloha Peter,

Thank you for your response.

I just listened to your most recent, improved "Celandine" clip (a good piece for hearing guitar recording quality, IMO) on my much better, separate system here & ran it through my Adams A7X monitors. Yes, it is better in terms of the amount of intense lower range distortion & clarity in the high's, but the lower mid issues are still there. It seems particularly acute on the first note attack (probably using a thumbpick?). There is distortion in the lower mid's in many sections of the track.

It's not my system because I've been listening to Derek's recordings all morning without issues.

Your playing & other frequencies on the track are pristine. But the distortions, no matter how subtle, kill the beauty of that. Maybe roll off the lower mid's more? Or even lower the levels a tad. I am not playing it at a very high amplitude.

Just offerring feedback on what I hear. Again, your playing is beautiful.

alohachris

PS: As a former luthier I have to ask. It sounds almost like a guitar top brace is slightly loose (common) that distorts in the lower freq's when the attack is harder. Humor me. Please tap the guitar top (with the guitar not resting on surface, holding it at the heel) with your thumb & listen for any distortions or strange resonances. Just for fun. -alohachris-

Last edited by alohachris; 09-21-2020 at 03:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 09-21-2020, 03:36 PM
Wrighty Wrighty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Itchen Stoke, UK
Posts: 2,136
Default New mics - Line Audio CM4

Quote:
Originally Posted by alohachris View Post
Aloha Peter,

Thank you for your response.

I just listened to your most recent, improved Celandine clip (a good piece for hearing recording quality, IMO) on my much better, separate system here & ran it through my Adams A7X monitors. Yes, it is better in terms of the amount of intense lower range distortion & clarity in the high's, but the lower mid issues are still there. It seems particularly acute on the first note attack (probably using a thumbpick?). There is distortion in the lower mid's in many sections of the track.

It's not my system because I've been listening to Derek's recordings all morning without issues.

Your playing & other frequencies on the track are pristine. But the distortions, no matter how subtle, kill the beauty of that. Maybe roll off the lower mid's more? Or even lower the levels a tad. I am not playing it at a very high amplitude.

Just offerring feedback on what I hear. Again, your playing is beautiful.

alohachris

PS: As a former luthier I have to ask. It sounds almost like a guitar top brace is slightly loose (common) that distorts in the lower freq's when the attack is harder. Humor me. Please tap the guitar top (with the guitar not resting on surface, holding it at the heel) with your thumb & listen for any distortions or strange resonances. Just for fun. -alohachris-


Thank you for listening - I appreciate the honest feedback and will listen again to try to hear what I am obviously missing (no thumpick, just nail)

I will do as you suggest on levels - this was about -6db before the maximiser was used to adjust to -14 LUFS (Ozone)

Can you help me with where lower mids begin and end in frequency terms?

I will also check the guitar as you suggest - I can also re-record Celandine using my Webber to see what you hear there and if the issue is guitar rather than recording.

Have a good evening..
__________________
Burguet AC-007 (2003 - Cedar/Rosewood)
Webber OM (2009 - Sitka/Sapele)


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A...2TVEhWes2Djrig
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-21-2020, 07:35 PM
alohachris alohachris is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 2,430
Default Frequency issues on Celandine

Aloha Peter,

In response to your question, the distortion issues seem to occur most frequently at between 83 Hz (low E) through 200 Hz - basically the bottom three open wound strings. Bottom open A at 110 Hz is a problem. And it occurs most often at the first attack & beginning (on the bass key note(s) of a phrase or section. This noticeable distortion/almost buzz can't be hidden by the clarity of the high's, which are really good.

You might want to experiment again w/ the low pass filter & dialing in more subtractive EQ on the lower to mid frequencies before moving to other fixes. Save & compare as Bob suggests, so you don't lose any of the "good" changes.

I just listened again on my pretty good system, at a low level, & still hear it (just to check if it's my aging ears at different times of the day - Ha!). Like the helicopter in "Goodfella's," it's still there.

Man, you're so close & much improved, Peter. Hope you can tame those. Soon, "Celandine" will be perfect!

You have a good night too, my talented friend.

alohachris

Last edited by alohachris; 09-21-2020 at 07:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-21-2020, 08:05 PM
Rudy4 Rudy4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 8,796
Default

Poking around the Line Audio website as relating to the CM4 mic reminded me very much of watching all the folks who raved about the inexpensive Naiant Audio microphones several years back. At the time Naiant featured entry into high quality inexpensive mics based on commercially available back-charged electret capsules.

Naiant has progressed a whole bunch in the microphone development field and now offer a whole range of specialty mics:

https://naiant.com/studio-electronic...le-microphone/

The field of high quality SDCs based on back-charged electret capsules has moved steadily forward, with manufacturers such as RODE entering the market for these mics with their M3 back-charged electret mic or the wide range of offerings from DPA.

It's good to see yet another manufacturer producing a small form factor SDC based on this technology, which used to be looked down on by serious recordists. There are obviously some very high end versions of these mics, so I'm not disparaging them in any way.

Last edited by Rudy4; 09-21-2020 at 08:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-21-2020, 08:31 PM
Chipotle Chipotle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,301
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy4 View Post
It's good to see yet another manufacturer producing a small form factor SDC based on this technology, which used to be looked down on by serious recordists. There are obviously some very high end versions of these mics, so I'm not disparaging them in any way.
Rumor (on Gearslutz) has it that the capsules in the Line Audio and 3U Audio mics also appear in much more expensive brands. Nobody will spill the beans, though. Of course there's more to a mic than a capsule but we all know that cost vs price can be deceiving.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-21-2020, 08:40 PM
Rudy4 Rudy4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 8,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipotle View Post
Rumor (on Gearslutz) has it that the capsules in the Line Audio and 3U Audio mics also appear in much more expensive brands. Nobody will spill the beans, though. Of course there's more to a mic than a capsule but we all know that cost vs price can be deceiving.
The problem with Gearslutz is there's so many wack jobs "contributing" that it makes my tinnitus act up just reading any of it.

Exactly. When there was all the buzz about the Niant (MH-1s?) a lot of users reported they could be really variable as far as circuitry noise. It's a very strong possibility that the capsules themselves are cherry-picked to select the ones that are acceptable in a higher-end product. I don't know that for a fact, but I have a pretty good understanding of where "self-noise" comes from in a mic.

The other possibility is they come from the manufacturer already pre-screened, or even manufactured to a higher level for a manufacturer such as DPA.

A mic that retails for less than $150 probably doesn't have that level of clout with capsule manufacturers.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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

Thread Tools





All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:56 PM.


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=