Recording acoustic guitar

Wailin

Recently purchased some equipment for home recording and looking for some help, complete beginner in this area. I purchased a focusrite saffire 6 interface, a t.bone sc140 stereoset condenser mics and a rhode NT1-A mic for vocals and also guitar. This is used with a Dell inspiron laptop with Reaper. I am currently testing different mic positions with the stereoset and find one mic positioned where neck meets body and the other between saddle and soundhole, both about 6 inches from guitar, the best. I am finding the sound im getting from the guitar a bit crap and hope its not the t bone mics. They cost enough! I have attached a sample of a simple tune (bright blue rose), forgive my guitar playing it was a quick and rough demonstration!! I recorded the rhythm part with input 1 panned hard left and input 2 hard right to get that stereo affect. I then recorded the solo part in similar fashion but slightly more centred and the harmony part likewise. To me the sound is too muddled with little seperation between tracks. I added no effects or anything. How can i improve the acoustic guitar recording?

Here is the link to the recording (Use headphones or decent pc speakers, sound is quiet low):

http://soundcloud.com/wailin-1/bright-blue-rose

wonski

Hi, any chance to upload your music to soundcloud, and put a link in here?
I am not pro at all, but do plenty of recording at home. Without samples no chance to get any good answers.
Have you listened to separate stereo channels individually? Which one is messed up then?
As for the Tbone mics they cost nothing really (comparing to leading brands), but most (all) of them work fine for home setups.

madtheory

Yes, soundcloud is a good idea. As wonski says, if we can hear it it's much easier to diagnose the issue.

I'll take a guess that your problem is that you're using two mics! You don't appear to be using any of the stereo techniques, so your probably getting destructive interference when you play both back together.

Also, those particular T Bones tend to sound a bit dull IME. You might have more success with the Rode.

The easiest thing to do is to try just one mic, and (as you are clearly aware) take some time and run a few tests to find the sweet spot to position it.

Wailin

wonski wrote: »

Hi, any chance to upload your music to soundcloud, and put a link in here?
I am not pro at all, but do plenty of recording at home. Without samples no chance to get any good answers.
Have you listened to separate stereo channels individually? Which one is messed up then?
As for the Tbone mics they cost nothing really (comparing to leading brands), but most (all) of them work fine for home setups.

Track is uploaded wonski. You may need headphones because its very low on laptop speakers. The rhythm part is a bit muddy while the lead part sounds like it was recorded in a thin can, no width or depth at all. I recorded using input one as left and input two right (mono) to try get a full rich sound. If i use only one mic will that not mean the guitar will come through only one speaker? Sorry, but complete amateur here!

Wailin

madtheory wrote: »

Yes, soundcloud is a good idea. As wonski says, if we can hear it it's much easier to diagnose the issue.

I'll take a guess that your problem is that you're using two mics! You don't appear to be using any of the stereo techniques, so your probably getting destructive interference when you play both back together.

Also, those particular T Bones tend to sound a bit dull IME. You might have more success with the Rode.

The easiest thing to do is to try just one mic, and (as you are clearly aware) take some time and run a few tests to find the sweet spot to position it.

What stereo techniques should i use? I thought that by using the 2 inputs on the interface, one left and one right for each mic would fill the sound?

madtheory

Wailin wrote: »

What stereo techniques should i use? I thought that by using the 2 inputs on the interface, one left and one right for each mic would fill the sound?

Ah.... there's a lot more to it than that. Take a look here for starters:

http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Mic-University.aspx

TheBigRedDog

If you ensure that the input being recorded in Reaper is a mono track then it will come out of both speakers. You can then pan it left or right if needs be. A simple XY set up works fine for those mics, I have them myself. Check here @1:20

wonski

Thanks for the upload Wailin. TheBigRedDog gave you some good advice, I do the same while recording. When You have 3 mono tracks You can easily pan them left/right while mixing together to create stereo, no need to do it at recording stage with two mics at one time. Someone before mentioned phasing, which is interesting issue, worth looking at.
As for your track, one is thin, one is muddly, EQ is I think the most important process to use as mic itself wont achieve the result You want.
Try to record each track separately on one mic (the one that sounds better itself on mono track), mix them together in Reaper making sure to use EQ, and maybe some compressor if needed, and pan them left/right as needed, which does not mean fully right/left each track, as it is not necessary.
There are plenty of websites/forums with guides to home recording that are worth to read, as there is lot to learn...Good luck, hope i helped a little.

wonski

TheBigRedDog wrote: »

If you ensure that the input being recorded in Reaper is a mono track then it will come out of both speakers. You can then pan it left or right if needs be. A simple XY set up works fine for those mics, I have them myself. Check here @1:20

Great clip, never been interested in this as always make stereo while mixing, but midside technique sounds great. On a side note do you think that this, or xy setting is really needed when you record, let's say, 3 tracks on acoustic guitar? Looks cool for recording live, or recording single instrument, but when you have 3 tracks to record, it seems to be easier to just pan them, add some effects and creste nice stereo sound. Correct me if i am wrong, but mixing 3 or more stereo tracks together to get stereo track?

Paolo_M

perhaps a dumb question, but why record stereo at all?
many great acoustic recordings are recorded in mono. personally i'm still learning to get a great tone from a single mike and i'll be damned if i'm gonna throw a second in to screw it up with phase and other weirdness.
my advise would be to record one track of the guitar part with a single mike to capture the lows and mids, then record the same thing again but this time set up to capture more of the chime (or more aggressive pick attack depending on the style) and pan hard left and right.
i'm not even going to bother with stereo miking techniques until i've access to a great sounding room.

TelePaul

Paolo_M wrote: »

perhaps a dumb question, but why record stereo at all?

I suppose it depends on the extent to which you think an acoustic guitar conveys a stereo image. I'm inclined to say that it does to a point. You can't compare it to a grand piano, but I play a boomy mahogany dreadnought and I'm convinced that the tones produced by the vibrating top differ at various points across the body. For a while, I was running one SDC at the fifth fret and another slightly behind and beneath the bridge. I thought it a nice combination of nuance and attack.

Of course, there's the tendency to pan these tracks aggressively, and the spread ends up exaggerated far beyond that of what you'd normally perceive as a guitarist. That doesn't make it unpleasant though, and I suppose a lot of us are inclined to pan a drum kit every which way. I think there's also merit in recording two mono tracks, as it allows you to EQ and compress easily at the multiband level.

I find it near impossible to double-track an acoustic guitar without it sounding like two separate takes. If I'm going to layer things, I'll add slight variations and typically use a different model the second time.

Paolo_M

TelePaul wrote: »

I suppose it depends on the extent to which you think an acoustic guitar conveys a stereo image. I'm inclined to say that it does to a point. You can't compare it to a grand piano, but I play a boomy mahogany dreadnought and I'm convinced that the tones produced by the vibrating top differ at various points across the body. For a while, I was running one SDC at the fifth fret and another slightly behind and beneath the bridge. I thought it a nice combination of nuance and attack.

Of course, there's the tendency to pan these tracks aggressively, and the spread ends up exaggerated far beyond that of what you'd normally perceive as a guitarist. That doesn't make it unpleasant though, and I suppose a lot of us are inclined to pan a drum kit every which way. I think there's also merit in recording two mono tracks, as it allows you to EQ and compress easily at the multiband level.

I find it near impossible to double-track an acoustic guitar without it sounding like two separate takes. If I'm going to layer things, I'll add slight variations and typically use a different model the second time.

Yeah, different strokes I guess.
As a guitarist I don't consider that I "know" a song part until I can double track it without it appearing obvious as two takes. That probably seems anal to some but that's just the way I role!!

Your method puts more onus of the recording engineer whereas mine put more on the player.
Then again I consider myself a guitarist first and recording guy very much second. Even when I record two mono acoustic tracks I'll pan them and still only process them as a single track, just a touch of eq, if needed, and probably some compression. Same with electric guitars.

Both perfectly valid methods.

For me I've just found that being "lazier" as a recording engineer has produced better results for me. I don't mean lazy in the strictest sense, I just mean taking the attitude "grab a mike, really listen and reposition until it's producing the sounds you want for your project great, if not grab another, then just click record."
I'm getting more done better that way.

wonski

Paolo_M wrote: »

Yeah, different strokes I guess.
As a guitarist I don't consider that I "know" a song part until I can double track it without it appearing obvious as two takes. That probably seems anal to some but that's just the way I role!!

So you are recording the same track twice, You mean playing perfectly correct each take? Or you are talking about double tracking using DAW?

Wailin

Guys can any of you upload a simple recording of your acoustic guitar, no fancy affects or EQ, just to give me an idea of the normal quality expected from your mics. I've been messing around again with different mic positions, combinations etc and still find it difficult to choose which sounds best. The rhode on its own seems to pick up more of the low end of the guitar and is quiet boomy while the t.bone has more chime but sounds very brittle. I spent close to 500 on this set up and would expect a decent sound. I know its my inexperience with home recording but its pissing me off!

Ash.J.Williams

I know this is basic ...but make sure the laptop mic isn't recording you as well.

wonski

You can't expect to have great sound without any processing. I am sure there are mics down there that may not need EQ, but this depends on frequency response of the mic, and instrument that is being recorded. If it is to boomy, reduce some low frequencies, try playing the track and changing EQ settings. You will see the difference.All my tracks are heavily processed, but I am off tomorrow so may record something for You on my Tbone, so you could see how it sounds.

Wailin

wonski wrote: »

You can't expect to have great sound without any processing. I am sure there are mics down there that may not need EQ, but this depends on frequency response of the mic, and instrument that is being recorded. If it is to boomy, reduce some low frequencies, try playing the track and changing EQ settings. You will see the difference.All my tracks are heavily processed, but I am off tomorrow so may record something for You on my Tbone, so you could see how it sounds.

Thanks wonski, the boomy sound is from the guitar which is a Martin HD-28, a naturally bassy instrument and prob not ideal for recording, but i have a 2nd guitar, an orchestra type body which records better but still slightly boomy.

wonski

Wailin wrote: »

Thanks wonski, the boomy sound is from the guitar which is a Martin HD-28, a naturally bassy instrument and prob not ideal for recording, but i have a 2nd guitar, an orchestra type body which records better but still slightly boomy.

All you need to do is taking down low frequencies using your EQ (I do not use Reaper meself, but you should be able to find it quickly).
I think you should read some of the information on microphones - frequency response, and why do you need to use EQ. planetoftunes.com is a good place, I found a lot of info there.
There is a little chance that your guitar and your mic just won't work together because of mic's frequency response on low tones, but I dont think this is the case, unless you are using mic designed to work on kick drum or something.

TelePaul

I think this thread is in danger of becoming overly complex. You don't always need to process your signal. You can get great sounds from a Martin HD-28. SDCs aren't prone to the proximity effect so a pronounced low-end should be less of an issue.

madtheory

Thanks telepaul, that is spot on.

Here is an unprocessed guitar recording using XY stereo. No processing at all, not even eq. Soundcloud compression is audible though.

wailin, the recording you've done is actually not bad. The stereo image is odd because of how you've positioned the mics, but the tone is good. What strings were you using? There are not many acoustic guitars out there that don't sound boomy when close miked. It's a resonant body! It's common to have to cut out a notch in the region of 200Hz. It's a sign of a seriously good guitar when you don't need to do that. I always try to position the mics for sweetest tone and minimal boom.

ZV Yoda

Oh no... why'd you have to go & post that clip? That's a great souding guitar.

I was perfectly happy using one mic on my acoustic... now I'm going to have to try out xy.

Thanks a bunch

Wailin

madtheory wrote: »

Thanks telepaul, that is spot on.

Here is an unprocessed guitar recording using XY stereo. No processing at all, not even eq. Soundcloud compression is audible though.

wailin, the recording you've done is actually not bad. The stereo image is odd because of how you've positioned the mics, but the tone is good. What strings were you using? There are not many acoustic guitars out there that don't sound boomy when close miked. It's a resonant body! It's common to have to cut out a notch in the region of 200Hz. It's a sign of a seriously good guitar when you don't need to do that. I always try to position the mics for sweetest tone and minimal boom.

The rhythm section was recorded with Guild GAD orchestra model, size 12 martin SP's while the harmony part was recorded on the Martin, with size 12 martin lifespan strings. I used the martin for that section cos i wanted more bite in the tone but recorded it sounds thin. Its a matter of finding the correct mic position, proximity etc, i'll just plug away until i get it right. Thanks for the upload, where did you position the mics exactly and how did you pan the inputs?

madtheory

Ya, standard Martins are the best strings IME. Seems to me that you should treat your lovely guitars to better mics than those T Bones. The SE1a is one of the best SDCs I've used on acoustic, and they're not expensive.

Because I used XY, I just left it panned hard left and right. XY is intended for close miking.

Yes, it takes ages to find the sweet spot. There's an art to moving an XY pair around while attached to a mic stand, and then clamping it to the spot without altering it! I use a pair of closed headphones to listen to the mics as I move them.

That's all much more awkward if you're recording yourself. You have to do many test recordings. It's not possible to hear what the recording is like while you play.

The room acoustics are important too. Generally I like a duvet behind the player and underneath, a thin rug on a wooden floor. Paul White often recommends a hard reflective surface underneath.

And as I said, there aren't many guitars that don't need a notch cut around 200Hz.

Wailin

madtheory wrote: »

Ya, standard Martins are the best strings IME. Seems to me that you should treat your lovely guitars to better mics than those T Bones. The SE1a is one of the best SDCs I've used on acoustic, and they're not expensive.

Because I used XY, I just left it panned hard left and right. XY is intended for close miking.

Yes, it takes ages to find the sweet spot. There's an art to moving an XY pair around while attached to a mic stand, and then clamping it to the spot without altering it! I use a pair of closed headphones to listen to the mics as I move them.

That's all much more awkward if you're recording yourself. You have to do many test recordings. It's not possible to hear what the recording is like while you play.

The room acoustics are important too. Generally I like a duvet behind the player and underneath, a thin rug on a wooden floor. Paul White often recommends a hard reflective surface underneath.

And as I said, there aren't many guitars that don't need a notch cut around 200Hz.

Yeah i think your right about the t.bones, the sound you recorded is more like what im after! Cheers for the advice.