| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
advice on mics/recording classical guitar
Yes, i know there have been posts on this but I'm lazy, OK.
I'm recording classical guitar with 2 MXL 603S's into a tascam us122 into laptop. Not completely happy with the sound. It's good but I'm extremely fussy. I've spent countless nights optimizing mic placement and am at the point of saying, well maybe i should have bought one good mic instead of two mediocre one's. At least i would have saved alot of time messing around with placement. So experts, please humor me and except the fact that it's not the room, not my playing, and not placement. Where would you put your money, souncard or mic. The guy at guitar center, I cringe every time i walk in there, suggested i use an omni mic in combination with the 603. What gives there? Anyway, i'm willing to spend maybe a few hundred bucks on another mic if it helps. Any advice/suggestions?? |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Rick Ruskin" wrote in message
... On 7 Nov 2004 18:49:34 -0800, (caveplayer) wrote: Yes, i know there have been posts on this but I'm lazy, OK. I'm recording classical guitar with 2 MXL 603S's into a tascam us122 into laptop. Not completely happy with the sound. It's good but I'm extremely fussy. I've spent countless nights optimizing mic placement and am at the point of saying, well maybe i should have bought one good mic instead of two mediocre one's. At least i would have saved alot of time messing around with placement. So experts, please humor me and except the fact that it's not the room, not my playing, and not placement. Where would you put your money, souncard or mic. The guy at guitar center, I cringe every time i walk in there, suggested i use an omni mic in combination with the 603. What gives there? Anyway, i'm willing to spend maybe a few hundred bucks on another mic if it helps. Any advice/suggestions?? 1. Stay away from Guitar Center's audio Tinker Toys. 2. Get a decent preamp. ($475.00 gets you an FMR RNP from either me or several other dealers that haunt this list.) 3. If the better mic pre doesn't do it all for you, check out the Neumann KM-184 series, Sennheiser mkh 40, and/or offerings from Josephson. http://liondogmusic.com if you have two cardioid mics that are the same model, try a stereo x/y pair. point the mics close together towards each other at a 90 degree angle and back it away and not right over the hole. -greg |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"caveplayer" wrote in message om... Yes, i know there have been posts on this but I'm lazy, OK. I'm recording classical guitar with 2 MXL 603S's into a tascam us122 into laptop. Not completely happy with the sound. It's good but I'm extremely fussy. I've spent countless nights optimizing mic placement and am at the point of saying, well maybe i should have bought one good mic instead of two mediocre one's. At least i would have saved alot of time messing around with placement. So experts, please humor me and except the fact that it's not the room, not my playing, and not placement. Where would you put your money, souncard or mic. The guy at guitar center, I cringe every time i walk in there, suggested i use an omni mic in combination with the 603. What gives there? Anyway, i'm willing to spend maybe a few hundred bucks on another mic if it helps. Any advice/suggestions?? What specifically is wrong? jb |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 12:12:48 -0500, Mike T. wrote
(in article ): On 7 Nov 2004 18:49:34 -0800, (caveplayer) wrote: Yes, i know there have been posts on this but I'm lazy, OK. I'm recording classical guitar with 2 MXL 603S's into a tascam us122 into laptop. Not completely happy with the sound. It's good but I'm extremely fussy. I've spent countless nights optimizing mic placement and am at the point of saying, well maybe i should have bought one good mic instead of two mediocre one's. At least i would have saved alot of time messing around with placement. So experts, please humor me and except the fact that it's not the room, not my playing, and not placement. Where would you put your money, souncard or mic. The guy at guitar center, I cringe every time i walk in there, suggested i use an omni mic in combination with the 603. What gives there? Anyway, i'm willing to spend maybe a few hundred bucks on another mic if it helps. Any advice/suggestions?? You don't say what it is about the recorded guitar sound that doesn't make you completely happy. So I'll guess. The MXL603s is not bad, but it does have an artificial brightness. Some classical guitarists are very sensitive to the plasticky sound of the 1st string. Using mics that have a bright top end usually makes that even worse. Regards, Ty Ford -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric stuff are at www.tyford.com |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
"reddred" wrote in message ...
"caveplayer" wrote in message om... Yes, i know there have been posts on this but I'm lazy, OK. I'm recording classical guitar with 2 MXL 603S's into a tascam us122 into laptop. Not completely happy with the sound. It's good but I'm extremely fussy. I've spent countless nights optimizing mic placement and am at the point of saying, well maybe i should have bought one good mic instead of two mediocre one's. At least i would have saved alot of time messing around with placement. So experts, please humor me and except the fact that it's not the room, not my playing, and not placement. Where would you put your money, souncard or mic. The guy at guitar center, I cringe every time i walk in there, suggested i use an omni mic in combination with the 603. What gives there? Anyway, i'm willing to spend maybe a few hundred bucks on another mic if it helps. Any advice/suggestions?? What specifically is wrong? thanks for a sensible question. Well let me put it simply, It (the recording) doesn't sound as good as is does to my ears while playing. It seems to lack depth. The classical guitar has some beautiful nuances that the mics are just not catching. They reproduce the mids very well but the rest is lacking. jb |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Then book some time in a decent studio, shut up, and play your guitar.
Well that sort of sums it up, and you are right! problem is, i will never be able to play a piece clean in a studio. I'd have to book it for a week to get all the stuff i want recorded. But thanks, that's probably the best advice i got on this post. |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mike T. wrote in message . ..
On 7 Nov 2004 18:49:34 -0800, (caveplayer) wrote: Yes, i know there have been posts on this but I'm lazy, OK. I'm recording classical guitar with 2 MXL 603S's into a tascam us122 into laptop. Not completely happy with the sound. It's good but I'm extremely fussy. I've spent countless nights optimizing mic placement and am at the point of saying, well maybe i should have bought one good mic instead of two mediocre one's. At least i would have saved alot of time messing around with placement. So experts, please humor me and except the fact that it's not the room, not my playing, and not placement. Where would you put your money, souncard or mic. The guy at guitar center, I cringe every time i walk in there, suggested i use an omni mic in combination with the 603. What gives there? Anyway, i'm willing to spend maybe a few hundred bucks on another mic if it helps. Any advice/suggestions?? You don't say what it is about the recorded guitar sound that doesn't make you completely happy. So I'll guess. The MXL603s is not bad, but it does have an artificial brightness. I've never listened to a Tascam us122, but I'll have to guess that it's the weak link. The sound of a guitar can include some extreme transients. A preamp with little headroom will clip and distort them. It is, of course, a very transient distortion, but it dan destroy the magic that you're looking for. Try a better preamp. For starters, see if you can borrow a better preamp. The problem could be in the A/D converters in the us122. Mike T. please see my reply to the other guy about the specific problem. Basically, it's just not capturing the full range of sound that my ears hear. And people (not you), stop telling me it's the room, the room is superb, at least to my ears. thanks! |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
"caveplayer" wrote in message
om... Mike T. wrote in message . .. On 7 Nov 2004 18:49:34 -0800, (caveplayer) wrote: Yes, i know there have been posts on this but I'm lazy, OK. I'm recording classical guitar with 2 MXL 603S's into a tascam us122 into laptop. Not completely happy with the sound. It's good but I'm extremely fussy. I've spent countless nights optimizing mic placement and am at the point of saying, well maybe i should have bought one good mic instead of two mediocre one's. At least i would have saved alot of time messing around with placement. So experts, please humor me and except the fact that it's not the room, not my playing, and not placement. Where would you put your money, souncard or mic. The guy at guitar center, I cringe every time i walk in there, suggested i use an omni mic in combination with the 603. What gives there? Anyway, i'm willing to spend maybe a few hundred bucks on another mic if it helps. Any advice/suggestions?? You don't say what it is about the recorded guitar sound that doesn't make you completely happy. So I'll guess. The MXL603s is not bad, but it does have an artificial brightness. I've never listened to a Tascam us122, but I'll have to guess that it's the weak link. The sound of a guitar can include some extreme transients. A preamp with little headroom will clip and distort them. It is, of course, a very transient distortion, but it dan destroy the magic that you're looking for. Try a better preamp. For starters, see if you can borrow a better preamp. The problem could be in the A/D converters in the us122. Mike T. please see my reply to the other guy about the specific problem. Basically, it's just not capturing the full range of sound that my ears hear. And people (not you), stop telling me it's the room, the room is superb, at least to my ears. thanks! Maybe you need to place the microphones where your ears are. That's really the only spot where the instrument sounds like you hear it. Steve King |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Steve King" wrote in message
... please see my reply to the other guy about the specific problem. Basically, it's just not capturing the full range of sound that my ears hear. And people (not you), stop telling me it's the room, the room is superb, at least to my ears. thanks! Maybe you need to place the microphones where your ears are. That's really the only spot where the instrument sounds like you hear it. Lest you think he's being sarcastic...he isn't. A microphone up above the guitar, at about head level, pointing down, can get remarkable results. A pair of them, on either side, can do well too. However...I don't know of any recording system, with any microphone, that can capture everything your ears hear. I don't care what you use, it will not sound the same. You can get recordings that sound wonderful, that communicate the joy and sorrow of your music, that are sumptuous and rich and warm and sparkly and all the things a good guitar can be, but they'll still be less than what your ears hear. In some ways, the art and science of recording and playback are still pretty darn primitive. Oh, and rooms that sound wonderful to the player are often dreadful for recording. Microphones don't hear the way people do. That said, you can have a lot of fun. Let's start with a basic question: what are the dimensions of your room, and is it carpeted? Peace, Paul |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Paul Stamler" wrote in message
... "Steve King" wrote in message ... please see my reply to the other guy about the specific problem. Basically, it's just not capturing the full range of sound that my ears hear. And people (not you), stop telling me it's the room, the room is superb, at least to my ears. thanks! Maybe you need to place the microphones where your ears are. That's really the only spot where the instrument sounds like you hear it. Lest you think he's being sarcastic...he isn't. A microphone up above the guitar, at about head level, pointing down, can get remarkable results. A pair of them, on either side, can do well too. You're right. I wasn't being sarcastic. However, even putting the microphone(s) where you're ears are will not duplicate what your ears hear. Paul talks about some of the reasons below. Another factor is the polar response of microphones vs. the polar frequency response of your ears. The 'room' you hear is different than the 'room' the microphone hears. Cardioid mics, typically, will accentuate this difference; however, even many omni capsules are not really omni throughout the frequency spectrum. Fussy is good. But, physics is physics. Steve King However...I don't know of any recording system, with any microphone, that can capture everything your ears hear. I don't care what you use, it will not sound the same. You can get recordings that sound wonderful, that communicate the joy and sorrow of your music, that are sumptuous and rich and warm and sparkly and all the things a good guitar can be, but they'll still be less than what your ears hear. In some ways, the art and science of recording and playback are still pretty darn primitive. Oh, and rooms that sound wonderful to the player are often dreadful for recording. Microphones don't hear the way people do. That said, you can have a lot of fun. Let's start with a basic question: what are the dimensions of your room, and is it carpeted? Peace, Paul |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 21:04:55 -0500, caveplayer wrote
(in article ) : Then book some time in a decent studio, shut up, and play your guitar. Well that sort of sums it up, and you are right! problem is, i will never be able to play a piece clean in a studio. I'd have to book it for a week to get all the stuff i want recorded. But thanks, that's probably the best advice i got on this post. Not a problem. If your ego can stand it  , you can do pickups and a goodengineer can edit them together flawlessly. I do it all the time. The only problem I've run into is if the performer can't play the piece the same way so I can find a good edit point. Regards, Ty Ford -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric stuff are at www.tyford.com |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Maybe you need to place the microphones where your ears are. That's really
the only spot where the instrument sounds like you hear it. Steve King Bingo! We have a winner! Ty Ford -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric stuff are at www.tyford.com |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:59:51 -0500, caveplayer wrote
(in article ) : "reddred" wrote in message ... "caveplayer" wrote in message om... Yes, i know there have been posts on this but I'm lazy, OK. I'm recording classical guitar with 2 MXL 603S's into a tascam us122 into laptop. Not completely happy with the sound. It's good but I'm extremely fussy. I've spent countless nights optimizing mic placement and am at the point of saying, well maybe i should have bought one good mic instead of two mediocre one's. At least i would have saved alot of time messing around with placement. So experts, please humor me and except the fact that it's not the room, not my playing, and not placement. Where would you put your money, souncard or mic. The guy at guitar center, I cringe every time i walk in there, suggested i use an omni mic in combination with the 603. What gives there? Anyway, i'm willing to spend maybe a few hundred bucks on another mic if it helps. Any advice/suggestions?? What specifically is wrong? thanks for a sensible question. Well let me put it simply, It (the recording) doesn't sound as good as is does to my ears while playing. It seems to lack depth. The classical guitar has some beautiful nuances that the mics are just not catching. They reproduce the mids very well but the rest is lacking. jb Well THAT sounds like the mics, preamps and A/D converters. You may have to kick it up a notch equipment-wise. The best way to do that might be to go to a real studio. Regards, Ty Ford -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric stuff are at www.tyford.com |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Paul Stamler" wrote in message ...
"Steve King" wrote in message ... Lest you think he's being sarcastic...he isn't. A microphone up above the guitar, at about head level, pointing down, can get remarkable results. A pair of them, on either side, can do well too. However...I don't know of any recording system, with any microphone, that can capture everything your ears hear. I don't care what you use, it will not sound the same. You can get recordings that sound wonderful, that communicate the joy and sorrow of your music, that are sumptuous and rich and warm and sparkly and all the things a good guitar can be, but they'll still be less than what your ears hear. In some ways, the art and science of recording and playback are still pretty darn primitive. Oh, and rooms that sound wonderful to the player are often dreadful for recording. Microphones don't hear the way people do. That said, you can have a lot of fun. Let's start with a basic question: what are the dimensions of your room, and is it carpeted? Peace, Paul OK, let me rephrase that. It doesn't sound as good as other classical guitar recordings i have on disk. You know, like professional ones. I'm afraid I'll get pounced on when i describe the 'room' but here it goes. I sit on the top of a stairway in a hallway facing the stairs, all stairs and floors carpeted, ceiling is about 20 feet high in front of me but about 9 feet high above my head. it's too complicated to describe dimensions further than this because the stairway curves around. Nonetheless, the acoustic sweetspot of my house. There is a little reverb from the hall but not too much. |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
caveplayer wrote:
OK, let me rephrase that. It doesn't sound as good as other classical guitar recordings i have on disk. You know, like professional ones. I'm afraid I'll get pounced on when i describe the 'room' but here it goes. I sit on the top of a stairway in a hallway facing the stairs, all stairs and floors carpeted, ceiling is about 20 feet high in front of me but about 9 feet high above my head. it's too complicated to describe dimensions further than this because the stairway curves around. Nonetheless, the acoustic sweetspot of my house. There is a little reverb from the hall but not too much. Some of that is the difference between the Marshall mikes and something like a Schoeps or B&K. Some of that is the difference between your room and a multimillion dollar facility with controlled acoustics. Some of it might be due to the difference between your guitar and John Williams' guitar too. The other differences are comparatively small. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2004-11-09, caveplayer wrote:
Nonetheless, the acoustic sweetspot of my house. What sounds good when you're playing/listening might not be good for recording. Sounds like a nightmare to me. Make a tent of old duvets, and tape in there, for a contrast. Seems like a 20 foot ceiling at the top of a stairwell is going to have some very ugly reflections. |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Steve King" wrote in message ...
"Paul Stamler" wrote in message ... "Steve King" wrote in message ... please see my reply to the other guy about the specific problem. Basically, it's just not capturing the full range of sound that my ears hear. And people (not you), stop telling me it's the room, the room is superb, at least to my ears. thanks! Maybe you need to place the microphones where your ears are. That's really the only spot where the instrument sounds like you hear it. Lest you think he's being sarcastic...he isn't. A microphone up above the guitar, at about head level, pointing down, can get remarkable results. A pair of them, on either side, can do well too. You're right. I wasn't being sarcastic. However, even putting the microphone(s) where you're ears are will not duplicate what your ears hear. Paul talks about some of the reasons below. Another factor is the polar response of microphones vs. the polar frequency response of your ears. The 'room' you hear is different than the 'room' the microphone hears. Cardioid mics, typically, will accentuate this difference; however, even many omni capsules are not really omni throughout the frequency spectrum. Fussy is good. But, physics is physics. Steve King and the sad part is I'm a fussy physicist, no kidding. |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
caveplayer wrote:
well lets assume I'll never sound like john williams, would i still benefit by investing in a better mic? and if so what should i look into. Yes, but you'll also get a lot by investing in better acoustics. Call a good local studio with an extensive mike cabinet. Tell them you want an hour or so of time to try out some microphones, and you want them to give you a deal on a weird block of time that wouldn't otherwise be used (and can wait a while until one becomes available). Go in, record yourself on a bunch of different microphones, and then listen to the playback on decent monitors. This will give you a sense of just how different the possibilities are, and what kind of a range is available. It is also the first step toward finding out how different things sound in your room compared with a known good room. I mean, I can tell you that the last time someone came in with a classical guitar, it sounded best with a Sennheiser 441, and that the guy with a Macaferri last month sounded great with an old RCA 77DX. But that does not tell you anything useful, really. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
james of tucson wrote in message vatory.com...
On 2004-11-09, caveplayer wrote: Nonetheless, the acoustic sweetspot of my house. What sounds good when you're playing/listening might not be good for recording. Sounds like a nightmare to me. Make a tent of old duvets, and tape in there, for a contrast. Seems like a 20 foot ceiling at the top of a stairwell is going to have some very ugly reflections. i knew this would happen. It's like throwing chum to the sharks. OK, actually i was wrong. i went home and measured it. The ceiling is 8ft, and there is a wall in front of mwe about 7 ft. The 20 feet is really from the bottom of the stairs that curve around. trust me, it sounds great there (to my ears again). This has been a good learning experience. |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Some of it might be due to the difference between your guitar and John Williams' guitar too. Caveplayer what guitar are you playing . . . .. . it must be the guitar.:) Remeber those _Must_ be the shoes ads? I spent a little money and got some good mic's , I happy with my sound, not my playing , just my sound. Good luck , I know how you feel. Peace, Ed Bridge Brooklyn N.Y. http://www.bridgeclassicalguitars.com/ |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
"caveplayer" wrote in message
om... "Steve King" wrote in message ... "Paul Stamler" wrote in message ... "Steve King" wrote in message ... please see my reply to the other guy about the specific problem. Basically, it's just not capturing the full range of sound that my ears hear. And people (not you), stop telling me it's the room, the room is superb, at least to my ears. thanks! Maybe you need to place the microphones where your ears are. That's really the only spot where the instrument sounds like you hear it. Lest you think he's being sarcastic...he isn't. A microphone up above the guitar, at about head level, pointing down, can get remarkable results. A pair of them, on either side, can do well too. You're right. I wasn't being sarcastic. However, even putting the microphone(s) where you're ears are will not duplicate what your ears hear. Paul talks about some of the reasons below. Another factor is the polar response of microphones vs. the polar frequency response of your ears. The 'room' you hear is different than the 'room' the microphone hears. Cardioid mics, typically, will accentuate this difference; however, even many omni capsules are not really omni throughout the frequency spectrum. Fussy is good. But, physics is physics. Steve King and the sad part is I'm a fussy physicist, no kidding. Get help. Get help, now. Share the pain. In response to another of your responses, look up a local film/video rental house and rent a Schoeps or two for a day. That will tell you whether to invest more money in microphones and might reveal something about whether your room is really as good as you think it is... compared to those favorite commercial recordings, which were almost certainly done in an acoustically treated room. Even in a good room, there are sweet spots for certain instruments... often designed that way. Steve King |
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 21:46:51 -0500, caveplayer wrote
(in article ) : (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ... caveplayer wrote: OK, let me rephrase that. It doesn't sound as good as other classical guitar recordings i have on disk. You know, like professional ones. I'm afraid I'll get pounced on when i describe the 'room' but here it goes. I sit on the top of a stairway in a hallway facing the stairs, all stairs and floors carpeted, ceiling is about 20 feet high in front of me but about 9 feet high above my head. it's too complicated to describe dimensions further than this because the stairway curves around. Nonetheless, the acoustic sweetspot of my house. There is a little reverb from the hall but not too much. Some of that is the difference between the Marshall mikes and something like a Schoeps or B&K. Some of that is the difference between your room and a multimillion dollar facility with controlled acoustics. Some of it might be due to the difference between your guitar and John Williams' guitar too. The other differences are comparatively small. --scott well lets assume I'll never sound like john williams, would i still benefit by investing in a better mic? and if so what should i look into. Schoeps cmc64, or cmc641, probably the latter, about an inch or so off the joint of the neck and body. It will change your life. Regards, Ty Ford -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric stuff are at www.tyford.com |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 21:53:04 -0500, caveplayer wrote
(in article ) : james of tucson wrote in message vatory.com... On 2004-11-09, caveplayer wrote: Nonetheless, the acoustic sweetspot of my house. What sounds good when you're playing/listening might not be good for recording. Sounds like a nightmare to me. Make a tent of old duvets, and tape in there, for a contrast. Seems like a 20 foot ceiling at the top of a stairwell is going to have some very ugly reflections. i knew this would happen. It's like throwing chum to the sharks. OK, actually i was wrong. i went home and measured it. The ceiling is 8ft, and there is a wall in front of mwe about 7 ft. The 20 feet is really from the bottom of the stairs that curve around. trust me, it sounds great there (to my ears again). This has been a good learning experience. I can't imagine that it sounds good, interesting maybe, but not good. Also, I would question whether any good recordings of classical guitar have been made with a stairwell resonance. I think it's probably more likely that you like the bouncy effect. As to what to try, try NOT using the stairwell. Try putting the mic a lot closer; 2 inched off the neck/body joint and angled back slightly to fill in the bass. Regards, Ty Ford -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric stuff are at www.tyford.com |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
caveplayer wrote:
i knew this would happen. It's like throwing chum to the sharks. OK, actually i was wrong. i went home and measured it. The ceiling is 8ft, and there is a wall in front of mwe about 7 ft. The 20 feet is really from the bottom of the stairs that curve around. trust me, it sounds great there (to my ears again). This has been a good learning experience. When you play anywhere, you hear it in the context of that space. If you're in a kitchen (for example), it'll sound fine, because you expect to be in the kitchen, but when that's recorded and you listen to it, you're not expecting a kitchen anymore. It was natural to be in there, but recording it moved the kitchen sound out of its context, making it unnatural. The brain can work for you as well as against you. Your stairwell reverb may be great for a stairwell, but maybe not so good out of context. If you try going to a studio and record just one track, it won't cost much and you will learn more about your particular needs, if only by contrast. |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2004-11-10, S O'Neill wrote:
When you play anywhere, you hear it in the context of that space. Some of my best memories are from playing in warehouse spaces. I'm *so* glad none of that was recorded. |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:45:45 -0500, Ty Ford
wrote: snip As to what to try, try NOT using the stairwell. Try putting the mic a lot closer; 2 inched off the neck/body joint and angled back slightly to fill in the bass. Regards, Ty Ford Gotta disagree with you about putting the mic a lot closer. Classic guitars put out a lot more sound pressure than steel strung. I'd find the deadest space and mic about 18" - 24" away. If the room is no longer a problem, then I'd play around with capsule angle until the closest thing possible to desired results are gotten. Then just like nearly everyone else, I'd add eq and echo. http://liondogmusic.com |
|
#34
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2004-11-10, Ty Ford wrote:
I can't imagine that it sounds good, interesting maybe, but not good. Also, I would question whether any good recordings of classical guitar have been made with a stairwell resonance. I can't stop picturing the scene from Animal House, with the guy playing the guitar and singing in the stairwell, and Belushi smashes it. |
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
|
reddred wrote:
I can't make the 603's sound decent in my living room without a bunch of goboes and some gating, which defeats the purpose. In your average untreated house, the more directional the mic the better IMO. The 603's are pretty wide. For many acoustic music recording situations it's not enough for a mic to sound acceptable on-axis. So much off-axis sound must be part of the capture for anything realisitic, i.e., not your ear in the soundhole, that the off-axis performance becomes really important. Hence the difference between 603's and Schoeps, Josephson, etc. Most home recordists are looking for 'the best condensor mic' etc. but the irony is that good dynamic mics often get much better results. Indeed. Lots of folks would be better off with a pair of 57's and an RNP to get their mic positioning act together and thereafter pinpoint what they'd prefer in better mics. -- ha |
|
#36
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article y.com,
james of tucson wrote: On 2004-11-10, Ty Ford wrote: I can't imagine that it sounds good, interesting maybe, but not good. Also, I would question whether any good recordings of classical guitar have been made with a stairwell resonance. I can't stop picturing the scene from Animal House, with the guy playing the guitar and singing in the stairwell, and Belushi smashes it. That guy was Stephen Bishop, by the way. -Jay -- x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x |
|
#37
|
|||
|
|||
|
hank alrich wrote: For many acoustic music recording situations it's not enough for a mic to sound acceptable on-axis. So much off-axis sound must be part of the capture for anything realisitic, i.e., not your ear in the soundhole, that the off-axis performance becomes really important. Hence the difference between 603's and Schoeps, Josephson, etc. I hear this an awful lot but has anyone made an attempt to measure and quantify these particular differences between the good and the bad? In theory, you don't get anything like independat control of on-axis and off-axis responses of a design. The overall geometry, of which there is little variation in design, determines how one morphs into the other. I think this is one of those things that has been hardened into fact by repitition, not science. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
|
hank alrich wrote: For many acoustic music recording situations it's not enough for a mic to sound acceptable on-axis. So much off-axis sound must be part of the capture for anything realisitic, i.e., not your ear in the soundhole, that the off-axis performance becomes really important. Hence the difference between 603's and Schoeps, Josephson, etc. I hear this an awful lot but has anyone made an attempt to measure and quantify these particular differences between the good and the bad? In theory, you don't get anything like independat control of on-axis and off-axis responses of a design. The overall geometry, of which there is little variation in design, determines how one morphs into the other. I think this is one of those things that has been hardened into fact by repitition, not science. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob Cain wrote:
hank alrich wrote: For many acoustic music recording situations it's not enough for a mic to sound acceptable on-axis. So much off-axis sound must be part of the capture for anything realisitic, i.e., not your ear in the soundhole, that the off-axis performance becomes really important. Hence the difference between 603's and Schoeps, Josephson, etc. I hear this an awful lot but has anyone made an attempt to measure and quantify these particular differences between the good and the bad? In theory, you don't get anything like independat control of on-axis and off-axis responses of a design. The overall geometry, of which there is little variation in design, determines how one morphs into the other. Yes, some folks have, and Sank's JAES paper has some discussion of it. And yes, the difficulty in controlling off-axis response is part of why it's become a problem. Note that response in the right-left plane is more important that response in the top-down direction. Remember if you are recording with a coincident pair, the center of the stereo image where the most important stuff is, is way off-axis. Maybe as much as 60 degrees off-axis. I think this is one of those things that has been hardened into fact by repitition, not science. If your primary signal source is 60' off-axis, it would seem clear that response at that point was important. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob Cain wrote:
hank alrich wrote: For many acoustic music recording situations it's not enough for a mic to sound acceptable on-axis. So much off-axis sound must be part of the capture for anything realisitic, i.e., not your ear in the soundhole, that the off-axis performance becomes really important. Hence the difference between 603's and Schoeps, Josephson, etc. I hear this an awful lot but has anyone made an attempt to measure and quantify these particular differences between the good and the bad? In theory, you don't get anything like independat control of on-axis and off-axis responses of a design. The overall geometry, of which there is little variation in design, determines how one morphs into the other. Yes, some folks have, and Sank's JAES paper has some discussion of it. And yes, the difficulty in controlling off-axis response is part of why it's become a problem. Note that response in the right-left plane is more important that response in the top-down direction. Remember if you are recording with a coincident pair, the center of the stereo image where the most important stuff is, is way off-axis. Maybe as much as 60 degrees off-axis. I think this is one of those things that has been hardened into fact by repitition, not science. If your primary signal source is 60' off-axis, it would seem clear that response at that point was important. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| mic location for classical guitar??? | Pro Audio | |||
| mic location for classical guitar??? | Pro Audio | |||
| Mic Questions | Pro Audio | |||
| Microphone to record vocals + classical & acoustic guitar | Pro Audio | |||
| mic placement for classical guitar | Pro Audio | |||
Linear Mode
