Hi guys,
I will be recording a Flamenco guitarist on Wednesday. I did a test session
with him on Friday and ran into a large problem.

Traditional Flamenco technique can be very dynamic on the guitar. There are
moments when the player can strike the body of the guitar with their index
finger right before strumming a chord. Its an awesome sounding technique
(like a gun shot) but next to impossible to avoid digital overs when
recording. I asked him to tame it back a little and the technique lost the
effect but still peaked hard. I tried micing him much farther away but the
sound suffered too much and still peaked more often than not.

How do I maintain a good level while avoiding digital overs on such an
explosive technique that is performed on a relatively quiet instrument?

Limiting or compressing while tracking?

Better mic pre with more headroom?

Thanks,

Eric

Eric,

How do I maintain a good level while avoiding digital overs on such an
explosive technique

The easy answer is you should record at a lower level. Unless you're using
some really old 10- or 12-bit recorder, simply record with an average level
of -15 or even -20 if that's what it takes to not distort. Even at -20 I'm
pretty sure the ambient noise in the room will be greater than the residual
noise in the recorder.

Of course, you can patch in a peak limiter to catch the transients and
reduce them by maybe 3-5 dB on the way to the recorder. That buys you only
3-5 dB more headroom, but limiting much more than that will probably affect
the sound more than you'd like.

--Ethan

Ethan,

Thanks for responding to my post. I will defintely try your suggestion out
on our next test session.

By the way, I play guitar at Caffe Luna Rosa in Delray Beach, Florida where
they purchased 10 of your microtraps. They have done an amazing job reducing
reflections and tightening up the bass throughout the venue. Complaints
about loud music or averall noise have dropped off next to nothing. I have a
few other venues I play for that are gaining interest in installing traps as
well. Hopefully you will get some more orders from the south Florida region
soon.

Thanks again,

Eric Hansen
www.ericguitar.com




"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message
...
Eric,

How do I maintain a good level while avoiding digital overs on such an
explosive technique

The easy answer is you should record at a lower level. Unless you're using
some really old 10- or 12-bit recorder, simply record with an average
level
of -15 or even -20 if that's what it takes to not distort. Even at -20 I'm
pretty sure the ambient noise in the room will be greater than the
residual
noise in the recorder.

Of course, you can patch in a peak limiter to catch the transients and
reduce them by maybe 3-5 dB on the way to the recorder. That buys you only
3-5 dB more headroom, but limiting much more than that will probably
affect
the sound more than you'd like.

--Ethan

Eric,

they purchased 10 of your microtraps ... Complaints about loud music or
averall noise have dropped off next to nothing.

Very cool! Thanks for letting me know.

--Ethan

Well...

a similar option would be to have the limiter, but to set it so the
threshold is so high it doesn't trigger at all until the slap comes
along. With luck and a little practice slapping, you'll get the
release to the sweet spot where it sounds natural enough not to be
noticed at all, and you won't lose the guitar in the room. (flemenco
guitar can get very quiet, I would think).

Eric Hansen wrote:

How do I maintain a good level while avoiding digital overs on such an
explosive technique that is performed on a relatively quiet instrument?

Turn it down.

Limiting or compressing while tracking?

Definitely not. You can't undo this.

Better mic pre with more headroom?

That is a totally different issue. If your mike preamp does not have
much headroom, turning it up won't make it any better. This is utterly
unconnected with your digital levels.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Eric Hansen wrote:

How do I maintain a good level while avoiding digital overs on such an
explosive technique that is performed on a relatively quiet instrument?

Turn it down.

Limiting or compressing while tracking?

Definitely not. You can't undo this.

Better mic pre with more headroom?

That is a totally different issue. If your mike preamp does not have
much headroom, turning it up won't make it any better. This is utterly
unconnected with your digital levels.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Eric Hansen wrote:

How do I maintain a good level while avoiding digital overs on such an
explosive technique that is performed on a relatively quiet instrument?

Just an idea but....how about using two microphones at different distances and
do some editing.

Eric Hansen wrote:

How do I maintain a good level while avoiding digital overs on such an
explosive technique that is performed on a relatively quiet instrument?

Just an idea but....how about using two microphones at different distances and
do some editing.

Eric Hansen wrote:

Hi guys,
I will be recording a Flamenco guitarist on Wednesday. I did a test session
with him on Friday and ran into a large problem.

Traditional Flamenco technique can be very dynamic on the guitar. There are
moments when the player can strike the body of the guitar with their index
finger right before strumming a chord. Its an awesome sounding technique
(like a gun shot) but next to impossible to avoid digital overs when
recording.

Have you tried reducing the record volume?

I asked him to tame it back a little

You shouldn't have. You have 96 dB dynamic range. More if you do 24 bit.

and the technique lost the effect

Ask him to do as he usually does, that will be what sounds best and
gives the best musical results.

but still peaked hard.

That's flamenco, and that's guitar. They are difficult to record.

I tried micing him much farther away but the
sound suffered too much and still peaked more often than not.

There are a few undeefined variables: recorder, digital bit resolution
available, mic(s), mic placement.

How do I maintain a good level while avoiding digital overs on such an
explosive technique that is performed on a relatively quiet instrument?

Reduce record level. A "good level" is one that is not clipped. You
should worry about recording when you record. The dynamic range of a
guitar is not an error to fix, it is a property of the instrument.

Limiting or compressing while tracking?

Absolutely not. It would be incompetent. It would also be incompentent -
in my opinion - not to convey the sonic shock force of a quality guitar
to the listener.

Better mic pre with more headroom?

Better than what mic pre? - also the mic pre is not responsible for
"digital overs", incorrect gain or record level settings are. I tend to
reduce record level during the sound test - if any - until there is no
overload, and then to leave it set for the duration of the concert. Turn
down as required and leave it be.

Thanks,

Conveying a percussive performance to the end listener can require wise
scaling of what goes on, but certainly not brute force kludging during
recording.

The additional headroom in 24 bit technology may be most pleasant to
have available during recordings like the one in question. Chamber type
setups tend to have a large potential dynamic range.

Eric


Kind regards

Peter Larsen


--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

Eric Hansen wrote:

Hi guys,
I will be recording a Flamenco guitarist on Wednesday. I did a test session
with him on Friday and ran into a large problem.

Traditional Flamenco technique can be very dynamic on the guitar. There are
moments when the player can strike the body of the guitar with their index
finger right before strumming a chord. Its an awesome sounding technique
(like a gun shot) but next to impossible to avoid digital overs when
recording.

Have you tried reducing the record volume?

I asked him to tame it back a little

You shouldn't have. You have 96 dB dynamic range. More if you do 24 bit.

and the technique lost the effect

Ask him to do as he usually does, that will be what sounds best and
gives the best musical results.

but still peaked hard.

That's flamenco, and that's guitar. They are difficult to record.

I tried micing him much farther away but the
sound suffered too much and still peaked more often than not.

There are a few undeefined variables: recorder, digital bit resolution
available, mic(s), mic placement.

How do I maintain a good level while avoiding digital overs on such an
explosive technique that is performed on a relatively quiet instrument?

Reduce record level. A "good level" is one that is not clipped. You
should worry about recording when you record. The dynamic range of a
guitar is not an error to fix, it is a property of the instrument.

Limiting or compressing while tracking?

Absolutely not. It would be incompetent. It would also be incompentent -
in my opinion - not to convey the sonic shock force of a quality guitar
to the listener.

Better mic pre with more headroom?

Better than what mic pre? - also the mic pre is not responsible for
"digital overs", incorrect gain or record level settings are. I tend to
reduce record level during the sound test - if any - until there is no
overload, and then to leave it set for the duration of the concert. Turn
down as required and leave it be.

Thanks,

Conveying a percussive performance to the end listener can require wise
scaling of what goes on, but certainly not brute force kludging during
recording.

The additional headroom in 24 bit technology may be most pleasant to
have available during recordings like the one in question. Chamber type
setups tend to have a large potential dynamic range.

Eric


Kind regards

Peter Larsen


--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

Ethan Winer wrote:

Of course, you can patch in a peak limiter to catch the transients
and reduce them by maybe 3-5 dB on the way to the recorder. That
buys you only 3-5 dB more headroom, but limiting much more than
that will probably affect the sound more than you'd like.

A guitar is a sound source that is uniquely good to reveal the
properties of electronics. Less is more.

--Ethan


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

Ethan Winer wrote:

Of course, you can patch in a peak limiter to catch the transients
and reduce them by maybe 3-5 dB on the way to the recorder. That
buys you only 3-5 dB more headroom, but limiting much more than
that will probably affect the sound more than you'd like.

A guitar is a sound source that is uniquely good to reveal the
properties of electronics. Less is more.

--Ethan


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
*******************************************

Raymond,

how about using two microphones at different distances and do some
editing.

That won't work because one mike will sound more present and the other more
distant. But the concept is otherwise valid. You could use one microphone,
through a splitter, and record the exact same source onto two separate
tracks. If one track is set 10 to 20 dB softer than the other you could
later edit/switch to the softer track if the louder one distorts.

--Ethan

Raymond,

how about using two microphones at different distances and do some
editing.

That won't work because one mike will sound more present and the other more
distant. But the concept is otherwise valid. You could use one microphone,
through a splitter, and record the exact same source onto two separate
tracks. If one track is set 10 to 20 dB softer than the other you could
later edit/switch to the softer track if the louder one distorts.

--Ethan