The Acoustic Guitar Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 09-20-2020, 07:15 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 9,879
Default

Sounds nice, Jim. With solo guitar, my goal is to do almost nothing - get it right going in, which this original track pretty much is. Adjust levels, maybe a touch of mastering-level compression, add reverb. The original recording was quite nice here, so I wouldn't do much to it at all. Your mix adds some clarity, and fixes a few boomy spots, but the one downside is that because it's a lot brighter, the squeaks pop out a lot now. I prefer warm sounding guitars, so I probably wouldn't brighten it that much.

That's another issue with reverb, as well. A bright reverb just adds some "zing" to squeaks and noises. I typically use as transparent a reverb as I can, and if there are squeaks, clicks, etc, I sometimes put an aggressive de-clicker/de-squeaker on the send so the reverb doesn't send the noise zinging around. I'm not especially noticing the reverb in your mix, tho - just a general observation about reverb and noises.

So, not having actually tried to mix this track, I think I'd want to simply try to reduce a few of the boomy notes I noticed on a casual listen, add some reverb, and adjust levels, which is pretty close to ideal, since it's a very pleasant raw track to start with.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-20-2020, 07:42 PM
jim1960 jim1960 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 5,961
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Young View Post
Sounds nice, Jim.
Thanks Doug.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Young View Post
Your mix adds some clarity, and fixes a few boomy spots, but the one downside is that because it's a lot brighter, the squeaks pop out a lot now. I prefer warm sounding guitars, so I probably wouldn't brighten it that much.
I should have been more clear in what I was doing. I was ignoring the noise issues because I really just wanted to focus on the guitar tone as I knew this wasn't a track that was mix ready. So you're right, the noise is enhanced by my treatment but I was working off the assumption that the noise would be mostly eliminated in a mix ready track.

The noise is enough on those mics that I wouldn't choose them if I were going to record Peter. Listening to his other recordings, he's clearly not a overly noisy player so I think much of that noise is the nature of those microphones. The squeaks are loud but squeaks can be volume automated to bring them down to less glaring levels. All the other noise is something he'll have to overcome somehow.
__________________
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
  #18  
Old 09-20-2020, 08:11 PM
sdelsolray sdelsolray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6,951
Default

I auditioned a pair of CM4 mics. They generated too much self noise for my uses, although they did otherwise perform well.

Last edited by sdelsolray; 09-20-2020 at 09:13 PM. Reason: Fixed typo.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-20-2020, 08:33 PM
Chipotle Chipotle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,301
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jim1960 View Post
About two minutes into this I realized something... I never work on solo acoustic guitar instrumental tracks. Everything I've ever worked on has had a vocal track and, to a large degree, that was the thing that drove most other decisions. This is a whole other animal.
Not to hijack the thread, but doing it anyway ... what do you differently if there's a vocal? Different EQ (e.g. scoop the vocal midrange), different volume automation/compression, other fx differences? I ask because most of my stuff does have vocals.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-20-2020, 09:29 PM
alohachris alohachris is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Honolulu
Posts: 2,430
Default Hey Knives & Guitars - I've PM'ed You

Aloha Knives & Guitars,

I've PM'ed you.

alohachris
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-20-2020, 10:09 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

Peter,
On the raw file I did some equalization. I felt it was somewhat congested in the lower registers. Also added some reverb.
If I were to continue I would normally add in a low pass and a high pass filter to the equalization. Also perhaps a volume
envelope to deal with the extra loud notes that jump out.

http://dcoombsguitar.com/Misc/THX2.wav

Picture of the equalization used:
__________________
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

Last edited by rick-slo; 09-21-2020 at 09:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-20-2020, 10:59 PM
jim1960 jim1960 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 5,961
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chipotle View Post
Not to hijack the thread, but doing it anyway ... what do you differently if there's a vocal? Different EQ (e.g. scoop the vocal midrange), different volume automation/compression, other fx differences? I ask because most of my stuff does have vocals.
The vocal is usually the heart of the song. Everything else has to be tailored to play nice with the vocal. So when there's a vocal present, the first thing I do is get that sounding as nice as I can. There's no set plan for how to do that since every voice is different and every song is different. But throughout the process I constantly listen to how the vocal is sitting in the mix. I want to minimize the competition for space so in the frequency range where I feel the vocal really shines, so I'll look for other instruments that are taking up space there and pull them down a bit. That has the effect of pushing the vocal more up front.

That was the biggest difference in mixing this track. There was no monophonic track demanding attention. The only track was a polyphonic track that covered a much broader frequency range than most human voices would. It took a few minutes to realize I couldn't treat that guitar track the same way I'd treat a guitar that was backing a vocal. It was some rethinking that I didn't anticipate when I started playing around with the file. My first adjustments weren't quite right, especially when it came to compression. I wound up doing more volume automation than I'd usually do on a guitar track because that's what I'd do for a vocal track. I guess I wound up treating it like a guitar/vocal hybrid of sorts. It's a bit of a different mindset and I felt a little out of my element.
__________________
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
  #23  
Old 09-21-2020, 02:46 AM
Wrighty Wrighty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Itchen Stoke, UK
Posts: 2,136
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Young View Post
Very nice sound, especially on the first recording. Seems like a great option for budget mics. Compared to something like Schoeps, they have a lot more self-noise (according to the specs), but pretty much in line with other budget mics, including the AT2020s, and I don't think that's an issue here.

BTW, the Ozone EQ match thing always seems to want to dramatically boost the high end for me as well. Same with the "auto mastering" option. It seems to me that it's somehow not tuned well for acoustic guitar. I try those now and then, and the first thing I always do is pull those highs back down. It should be a useful tool for at least diagnostics, to see what's different between tracks, but in practice it doesn't seem to work as well as I'd expect. I prefer using Har-Bal when I want to compare the EQ characteristics of 2 tracks. You can do EQ in Har-Bal as well, but I never do, I use it as a learning/diagnostic tool - and just a validation that my EQ balance is at least roughly in line with my references. It seems more accurate for whatever reason, and doesn't try to make me add 10db to the highs on every track!
You have mentioned this tendency with Ozone before - it certainly seems to be the case, and as such I will be very wary of it in EQ terms going forward.

You mention self noise - at 16db is this considered high? I think Schoeps / Neuman tend to be around 13db - is that correct?
__________________
Burguet AC-007 (2003 - Cedar/Rosewood)
Webber OM (2009 - Sitka/Sapele)


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A...2TVEhWes2Djrig
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-21-2020, 02:48 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
Thanks Doug.


I should have been more clear in what I was doing. I was ignoring the noise issues because I really just wanted to focus on the guitar tone as I knew this wasn't a track that was mix ready. So you're right, the noise is enhanced by my treatment but I was working off the assumption that the noise would be mostly eliminated in a mix ready track.

The noise is enough on those mics that I wouldn't choose them if I were going to record Peter. Listening to his other recordings, he's clearly not a overly noisy player so I think much of that noise is the nature of those microphones. The squeaks are loud but squeaks can be volume automated to bring them down to less glaring levels. All the other noise is something he'll have to overcome somehow.
Hi Jim

To be fair to these mics - this piece is without a doubt the noisiest I play in terms of squeak. Even Ed's live version has a fair bit of string noise in it, so it may not be representative.

I will post another piece that tends to be quieter for reference purposes later today / tomorrow.
__________________
Burguet AC-007 (2003 - Cedar/Rosewood)
Webber OM (2009 - Sitka/Sapele)


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A...2TVEhWes2Djrig
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-21-2020, 02:51 AM
Wrighty Wrighty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Itchen Stoke, UK
Posts: 2,136
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rick-slo View Post
Peter,
On the raw file I did some equalization. I felt it was somewhat congested in the lower registers. Also added some reverb.
If I were continue I would normally add in a low pass and a high pass filter to the equalization.

http://dcoombsguitar.com/Misc/THX2.wav

Picture of the equalization used:
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?
__________________
Burguet AC-007 (2003 - Cedar/Rosewood)
Webber OM (2009 - Sitka/Sapele)


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A...2TVEhWes2Djrig
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-21-2020, 02:56 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 spent about 20 minutes playing with your track. I didn't do too much to it and I didn't address the noise issue at all.

Using Acon Equalize, I rolled off at about 120 with a 24 degree slope and hollowed out at about 180, 380, and 4000 because I thought those cuts brought some clarity and separation to the notes.

Next I did some volume automation to get the track close to where I thought the dynamic range should be, then I used the UAD Gray LA2A to polish it up. I don't think the compressor hit anything higher than -3db. Mostly it was in the -1-2db range when it was kicking in.

I brought in the Softube Curve Bender next. I pulled down about 1 db at 300, boosted .5 at 500, boosted 1.5 at 3600, and gave a 1db shelf boost at 16000.

I added a bit of polish with the Kush Clariphonic. It doesn't have traditional settings so this will be meaningless to anyone who doesn't have it, but I set open-tight about 2 o'clock on the first adjustment, and silk 10 o'clock on the second.

I set the UAD Capitol Chambers reverb up on an aux track. I tried a bunch of presets and thought "Chris Dugan - Big Stereo Guitars Sauce" was closest to what I wanted. There may have been a better choice but I don't have the time to hunt them all out right now. I rolled off the verb below 600 and above 10k at a 15 degree slope (credit: Abbey Road).

About two minutes into this I realized something... I never work on solo acoustic guitar instrumental tracks. Everything I've ever worked on has had a vocal track and, to a large degree, that was the thing that drove most other decisions. This is a whole other animal. I'm not sure how close I got to where I'd want to end up. I think I'm pretty close but I'd have to rest my ears and come back to it again.

Any of you guys who have done more of this type of music, feel free to criticize my effort on this. I'm happy to hear what you'd do differently or what you hear that I should have done differently.

Edit: Doug's comment made me realize I should have explained myself better here. I ignored the noise because I know this wasn't being presented as a mix ready track. I made adjustments as if the noise were not an issue. So I'm really only focused on the guitar and I disregarded what my changes did to enhance the noise.


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 am not familiar with a few of those plug ins so will have to look them up now :-)
__________________
Burguet AC-007 (2003 - Cedar/Rosewood)
Webber OM (2009 - Sitka/Sapele)


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8A...2TVEhWes2Djrig
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-21-2020, 03:31 AM
Wrighty Wrighty is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Itchen Stoke, UK
Posts: 2,136
Default New mics - Line Audio CM4

Ok, so a different piece recorded this morning with mics in the same position.



Limited then to a high pass filter and some subtractive EQ (see pic) and then a little room reverb on a bus (Seventh Heaven)



I think they sound quieter and warmer with this piece but please let me know your thoughts.





IMG_0111.jpg
__________________
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 04:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-21-2020, 04:57 AM
Bob Womack's Avatar
Bob Womack Bob Womack is online now
Guitar Gourmet
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Between Clever and Stupid
Posts: 26,990
Default

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
__________________
"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
  #29  
Old 09-21-2020, 08:05 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
Ok, so a different piece recorded this morning with
mics in the same position.
Limited then to a high pass filter and some subtractive EQ (see pic) and then a little room reverb on a bus (Seventh Heaven)
I think they sound quieter and warmer with this piece but please let me know your thoughts.
This one is cleaner (individual notes not getting obscured) but of course it's a much different collection of notes than the
other clip (note spacing and lack of higher frequency notes, etc.)
__________________
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
  #30  
Old 09-21-2020, 08:14 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

The Waves F6 Dynamic EQ with Real Time Analyzer is much like the FabFilter ProQ I used above. The FabFilter ProQ Natural Phase option gives particularly nice results . IMO much worth trying out the demo.
__________________
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

Last edited by rick-slo; 09-21-2020 at 08:24 AM.
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 12:50 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=