Thats barrel is the cheapest echo chamber. Dont underestimate ambience treatment. I record amp which right inside bass drum and you will get crazy if you try it, even when plugging the reverb pedal, the reverb will sound like a real thing in the record. And i use sm 57 for close and 2 stereo match pair to get that bass drum reverbnation, but in the mix, you have to ride the fader of that ambience mic as your gut telling it is the time. Im kinda guy who records drum with few mic but more mics for the other.
Love the channel Ryan! I went to school for audio engineering and started as a part time studio engineer soon after I graduated. Even though I learned a lot of concepts and got a lot of mixing experience in school, there was only one live room for tracking. So heading into the studio my experience in recording was definetely sub par. Watching your videos have given me so many ideas and has helped exponentially with the tracking side of things and have greatly improved the sound of the songs I've worked on. Thanks for all the thorough videos!
I love your presentation style, but I respectfully disagree with most of those points in the first section of the video. For anyone curious: 1) I do agree you should have a purpose for choosing two mics as to what you're trying to capture. But the analogy of "are you then going to use two mics on the kick or the toms?" seems such a false equivalence. Drums simply don't have have as complicated a spectrum of frequencies as an electric guitar; especially a distorted guitar. Guitars are fuller range and have more potential for what you can capture. This becomes relevant when you want to reproduce what you're hearing in the room to greater effect, and one mic only captures a fraction of those frequencies. With drums, while one mic does only capture a fraction of the frequencies for a kick drum as well, it doesn't matter because it's less complicated a sound in the first place, and the emulation you get from one mic is quite sufficient. Same with vocals. But amplified signals like guitar and sometimes bass just have more going on; electronics usually do. As to the next point about "do you really need to capture a full frequency range to begin with? For the guitar, or any other instrument?" It depends on what you're shooting for. It's perfectly fair that if in a pop track an electric guitar is supposed to be relegated to one area, your capture method should follow suit, and one mic will probably be best; super focused. But if you're making guitar driven rock music like AC/DC and we're supposed to hear the richness and detail of the guitar parts, you use multiple mics (they used SM57 plus MD 421, I believe. One of those supposed "bad habits" that helped them thrive). Some music, the guitar DOES need a fuller range, and you find a way to make room for it. And it's no wonder that such full range guitar music exists/was stumbled upon to begin with, because, as was said, guitars are fuller frequency at the source. 2) For mics in the front and the back, it was said in the video that great sounds have been heard that way, so credit where credit is due. My only response to this is Dave Jerden did it with Alice In Chains regularly. As to the comments about "do you really need a full range?" I covered that in point 1. 3) This is the closest to something I would agree with. I agree with the part about narrowing the signal path to only the pedals you are using. It will preserve the high end and is a great starting place. On the other hand, if a guitarist normally sets up his signal path with all of his pedals, and he makes it sound GOOD that way, then don't fix what isn't broken. It's possible it could even sound better with the reduced high end if recording to digital. The part about "what's wrong with getting the sound from the amp instead of with the multiple pedals?" Well what's wrong is that the sound with multiple pedals is the sound with multiple pedals. The sound with the amp is the sound with the amp. They will be two totally different things. The default position of an engineer should be to capture what the musicians are bringing, assuming they bring a great sound. If they need extra help in the sound department, THEN a conversation can be had, with the understanding that the musician is essentially your boss. But none of that necessitates that a pedal oriented sound is bad where an amp oriented sound is good. Another real world example, guitarist from The Yeah Yeah Yeah's. He has a nasty, pedal driven sound that seems kind of hideous in solo (listen to the guitar rig rundown video). It works in context for what that band is.
The reason that I put multiple microphones on one amp, whether recording or live, is to give myself options to work with. I don't always end up using both of them, but if I want to, I can compare the sound I'm getting from any of the mics and decide which combination (or which one) gives me the sound that I'm looking for. This is especially helpful in a live setting when it's not always easy to go backstage and change the mic positioning on a whim.
Great video. On pedals: in most cases, you should definitely have the simplest path to the amplifier. However, if you're recording a live off the floor session with a shoegaze band, you may not have that luxury. In this kind of situation, buffers and buffered bypass pedals are actually your best friend. What sucks the high end out of your guitar tone is the high impedance of the multiple feet of cabling from your guitar, in between all your pedals, and back to your amp. A buffer is going to lower the impedance of the signal through all of the cabling and restore much if not all of the top end you get just going direct into the amp. I highly recommend Axxess buffers, but if you can't get your hands on one, try throwing a Boss pedal (or another buffered bypass pedal) at the beginning and end of a long effects chain with 30+ feet of cable. Take them out and watch all of your top end will go with them. I encourage anyone to try this if you don't believe me. It will influence every choice you make after the sound comes out of the amp.
Right on man. Great comment! Yeah, I was made aware of this (As a engineer that came from drumming) from an article that Gibson published. Really changed the way I thought of true bypass pedals and how to really get the best results.
Thanks! There is so much misinformation surrounding buffered and true bypass/which one is better. If anyone's interested, Wampler has a great article re: buffers.
One buffer in your chain does the trick, whether standalone or any Boss pedal. TC delay's have a on/off for a buffer. as for sucking the high end out of the tone, personal choice - with a bright Tele and a bright amp, may be just the thing. The coiled cables Hendrix used rolled off some of the highs - which was a good thing.
As far as the pedals thing goes, you're speaking as an engineer and not a musician. Guitarists with a lot of pedals are used to playing with them, and getting rid of them and abruptly changing their set up and tone will make them play worse. Not to mention if people are working on a modest budget, they probably don't have the opportunity to try out a bunch of different amps/guitars etc. It's all about getting the sound and making the client happy. That being said, I agree with what you're saying
I only singlemic guitars, but I think that especially for guitar driven genres ( metal, rock) it's great. Also, using similar mics that aren't completely the same ( sm75+beta75) and panning them hard left and right can give awesome stereo effects. I like doing such things and then, when doubletracking only panning like 80%. That gives even more space and immersion
I've started making cabs and I need to add the choice of speaker makes a massive difference as well as the cabinet design that its mounted to. In terms of Micing/mixing I always raise the amp off the floor a bit and close mic experimenting with different angles and I also love a few ribbon mics 1 or 2 in a room which I can play with to add a bit of space and depth to the mix.
Hey man, awesome and very informative video, thank for that :) Just one thing - if you lower all of the supply voltage for a tube amp, the tube heaters are going to work with lower voltage as well, and that causes the tubes to wear out faster. I think you are within the specs if you lower the voltage up to 15 percent, but for anything more, you might want to open the amp and lower only the high voltage coming from the amps transformer. Take care :)
I use my 57's off axis, instead of directly in front of the dust cover, facing the front of the paper to the side a little, is a much warmer sound. Nice videos man !
I’ve often not had a decent ribbon to use, and so for high gain guitar it was often dynamic mics or nothing. I found using 2-3 different dynamic mics on the front of a 4x12 helps capture a better overall bandwidth, especially when its just drums, bass, guitar and vocals.
The is the first no-nonsense video on recording I've seen TH-cam. Most other videos are filled with experimental unorthodox techniques instead of using tried and true methods applied with common sense. And for the record, most LDCs can capture the entire FR of a guitar amp using only one mic. Whenever I've done shootouts, LDCs always sound better than dynamics on amps
I'm super agree with positioning the cab off the floor. I put it up evel with the ear ,aim the back to the corner of the room 5ft away. l dail the tone at low volume first (coz at high volume your ear will attenuates the low end). I put the SM57 at the cap edge, 40mm away to reduce proximity effect. In the DAW , i make a gentle EQ dip around 6K-9K, since SM57 tend to hv big spike in that area, and really dail it in to make the mic sound as natural as possible. BAM!!! Sounds 90% like I hear the cab in front of me!!!
Nice, a lot of amps like these little combos are impossible to get the mic right where you want to point it at, but I agree the edge of the cap works really good.
That lowering voltage technique works with tube amps but most transistors amps have a voltage regulator inside, so no matter if you lower a little of the wall voltage, it will keep delivering the same voltage to the circuits
I can answer the multi mic on the amp. VERY SIMPLE: Each mic captures a different character. Try it yourself. Its not for multitracking, its for blending to a single track (at least for me). Now this a very individual preference. I use lots of distortion through Vin 30's and each mike captures a different tone of the driver to provide me with the roar Im looking for. It does take some set-up time simply cause you're trying to get the "best" color frome each mic one at a time, plus adjusting phasing issues. Hope that helps. By the way, on a clean sound I use one mic.
I've always perfered lately using interfaces such as line 6, since guitar tone technology has improved and starting to become the better... But now I've learned so much with mixing and mastering I perfer the two mic on the hottest cab speaker inputs ran to one bus track as well as a di line in ran to another track. ... The phasing isn't a problem anymore when you can record test track and line up mics by referencing track wavelength position. Literally takes 5 minutes to get mic phasing perfect
Interesting video. I think less is more is definitely the correct approach. Shorter signal path - less pedals - amp over pedal distortion - closer and varied direction between mic and speaker.
Running a tube amp at any other voltage then intended may harm the tubes, due to them not being heated correctly. There are modification kits that allow you to lower the anode voltage without affecting heater voltages. As for the guitar effects; sure, only put in what you use, but keep in mind that a lot of guitarists are not after pristine guitar tone. All you'll get with some pedals directly after your guitar is a loss of high end, IF you don't have a buffer somewhere. If you have any pedal that's on, then that's the buffer. Boss pedals (among others) are all buffered bypass, so one of those at the start of the chain will do the trick. If you can demonstrate that a buffered signal will still suffer after being run through a realistic number of bypassed pedals, I'd be very interested to see that :). Until then, I highly doubt you can even tell the difference on a scope, let alone by ear.
Personally I think it is song/genre dependent as to whether you use more than one mic to record guitar... Rodaidh McDonald used two mics to record the guitar for the XX’s album (Shure SM57 and a Sennheiser MD421) and then he blended the sounds. The XX are quite minimalist on their use of instruments however which is what probably makes it suitable for this example but as I said it’s all dependent on how many parts you have in the song and what plays the most important role.
I think using more than one mic on an amp is to get as close as possible to the "live" sound of the amp like if you were standing there listening to it in person
Andrew Scheps have been using the SM57+MD421 pair for years now, seems to work great. According to Scheps, these two mics placed straight in front of the cone gives the best representation of the real sound of the amp.
I have my pedals in a switcher that takes them out when not in use. My stereo fx are all true bypass and I have a great tone. How ever I do get your point, with why you suggest removing them. I would try that, if I had more amps to work with. I have a few rigs now that are pretty versatile and ready to go. I just have to switch a few cables and switch out the output cables on my patchbay in my pedal board to change rigs.
Hey man. Been really learning a lot from your videos. Thank you. I don't know if you'll read this, but if you do, I'm having a lot of trouble. I love and take a lot of pride in my guitar tone but when I put a mic in front of it, it sounds like garbage in my daw. Just using an sm57. I guess my question is, is my amp too loud? I still have no idea how loud it should be...
Hi! I'm learning a lot with this channel man! A question: you said something about put the pedals before or pre record... Can you explain more about it? If I want use a pedal or two, theres other way, recording with the clean amp? Sorry my English! Thank you!
in recording school we tried 8-10 different mics on the guitar amp. Sounds weird but hear me out. in that way we shaped the sound by microphasing, we didn't need to use the eq of the amp and got rid of all unwanted resonances which where caused by the speaker, the room and so on. You just filtered everything by the combfiltering by increasing or decreasing the level of a track you of course kinda need to do a submix of those 8-10 tracks so that you only end up with one or two tracks of those. i suggest to just try that out, the amp sounded way better than in the room :)
+VIADeth Yeah, I don't mind that idea if you are really well practiced in it. I like the idea of using mics for flavor, but if they are all in phase. In many things in technology, the simpler the methods, the more effective. My mixes always would transfer well to real world speakers when I did the most simplest methods...and that was just phasing that I induced from EQ. Can't imagine the craziness of phasing from mics. but if you have the time to tweek it, go for it. I just don't have the time to spend, and the client doesn't either.
Cool video. I'm personally a big fan of using multiple microphones on a guitar amp. One big advantage is that it gives you more flexibility in the mixing stage. Who says you have to have all microphones at once?
+Matthew Conn Yeah, I agree. I will often recording with multiple mics, so I have options instead of using EQ. My 635a paired with an sm57 sounds really good to me.
as a guitar player in a psychedelic/doom band, I strongly disagree with this whole video. you want the full range of your guitar sound because it‘s basically the most important thing in this genre. you want many pedals because creating spacy sounds and different gain textures in jam sessions is what this music is about. same goes for shoegaze and other guitar/effects driven genres. outside of these genres though, I agree.
shoegaze is only effects driven when 'trying' to be a shoegaze band. I saw MBV in a carpark too long ago and kevin sheilds best effect was just turning up loud and playing the tremolo (or whammy in 'murican) on one of his J's with tune lock on and strumming every chord with it pushed right down, strings nearly flaccid and releasing the arm up to the in tune chord in a very rehearsed way with the other guitar. maybe some FoH reverb or delay. Megawashfuzzverbdelay came later
An engineers job is to capture the magic of the jam. There’s definitely guitarists out there that are fighting an uphilll battle with too many pedals, but if it’s intentional then that’s what should recorded. It’s much easier that catch a vibe on the way in than it is to create one in a mix.
Watching on my phone. It seems to be cutting off the bottom of the screen. Was this done on purpose or would I have to watch from my computer to get the full screen?
Very nice and informational video again. I use very often so called Fredman Technique for recording high gain (metal) tones. However, I use always Amp Head plus separate cabs. Should I also separate cabs off the floor? Maybe Ill just give it a try. Looking for very tight response for my sound. #cormetalligravis
Good thoughts...and food for thought. While I agree with your assertions in most cases, they are rather contingent on genre. I usually like to keep the mic count low, but I was doing a post-hardcore session, and it seemed like the more mics I added the better it all fit in the mix...ended up using 5 mics on one cab/room. But I was listening and moved them till it sounded best. As with anything, use your ears, and follow the cardinal rule of audio: "If it sounds good, it is good." ;-)
Stephen Tack Yeah, I'm sure they are contingent on the genre. This video was really covering the type of amp pictured. It's hard to be everything to everybody.
I like your preproduction ideas on amp in the room placement. Should be applied by band during rehearsal with the soloist's amp higher up. I do like your style. Great!.But micing an amp in the studio I have to say a few suggestions. The sound you hear from the amp out in front which your tweaking is not the same as close micing it. Yes you get some proximity from the mic and might be fine for live recording where isolation is needed or if your amp has a low output. I really recommend using your 421 out from the amp where you get some amp in the room interaction. could be 6, 12 or even 18 inches out. Now you might like to get the interaction out back of an open back and thus 2 mics but not always needed if you crank the input transformer of your mic preamp! Great series, keep on with it. Cheers
Hey Bart, you made some great points here. You're right, the amp sound 3 feet out from where I listen to dial in the amp will sound different than a close mic that's only an inch away. I guess I've learned to use my ears in front of the amp, and understand that there will be a translation that will always sound different. It's just a starting point for sounds, and then I plan ahead for how the microphone will further shape the sound. As far as putting a microphone 6, 12, or 18 inches out, I do that a lot, but with ribbon mics. I love that sound, and it beats close micing a guitar amp any day. Of coarse, all of this is subjective, so when I say "bad" habits, I hope people just see it as just another perspective. Thanks for watching, and please let me know if you have any topics you want me to cover.
No worries, it is all good. There is infinite possibilities which is one reason recording is an art. LOL One thing with a ribbon mic is enough gain to get some room interaction with the amp and I know that it isn't as simple out front but can work behind phase flipped and the good ol 57 out front. I heard of the mod you done but I could never be bothered!LOL I'd be interested in getting a mic that sounded like it a bit off the shelf?? As for future videos, thank you for asking.. But I love that snare remicing I recall reading about it a long while ago so those obscure tricks that one might forget in a home/Project Studio situation. I think you'l get a good following from old hands with those but The basics are good, the recording space,, room treatment, the mic, the pre, the compressor, the EQ, , micing a drum kit, recording a band "in the room" as opposed to overdubs, mix room treatment, monitor placement, Actually some simple DIY enginnering gadgets is always good too. But mostly seasoned pro tips and tricks if you can dig some up and demo them. But as I said the basics, the fundaments are always good coming from anyone. Cheers
Great teaching tools here! I was wondering if you posted exactly how you modified the mic chord? I would be interested to try that. I was also curious whether you've tried the Pyle-Pro PDMIC78, which is supposed to be a transformerless 57? They cost 9$. Thanks for making these videos. I've really learned a lot.
+John Pittman Hmm, I have not tried that. Sounds interesting. I find that I'm picky on where I use the tranformerless 57, as there's almost too much highs for electric. Under snare is a usual placement for one.
Your philosophy on using multiple mics for a guitar amp is something I've been saying for years. I'd rather choose one good mic and spend the extra time dialing in the amp settings and mic position. Not to mention that once if you do record with 2 mics, you have more tracks to contend with during the mix, which is a pain in the butt and makes the whole project suffer. Right on dude!
On microphones takes phase issues out of the picture and make track editing, application of effects, and bunch of other post-production stuff a bit easier. If you can do it, that's definitely the way to go. If you have a really limited number of microphones and the only way to get a good sounding signal is to mix multiple microphones, then it might be worthwhile to try using multiple mics, but if you've got any microphone that sounds good by itself, it seems to me that you'll save yourself a lot of aggravation by just sticking with that one and using EQ and/or other effects to shape the sound instead of trying to mix 2 signals together and deal with all the subtly ways the sound waves interact with each other rather than just working on a single sound source. On the other hand, you might just not have a mic that can caputer a good signal by itself, and then it does become useful to try and add some extra mics to get a good complete sound; I think this is more important on bass amps where you are often trying to scoop out the mids than on guitar where you generally want lots of mid-range. It can be hard to get a bass amp tone dialed in with one mic, but one mic with way too much low-end response and another with way too much treble response can produce good results for a bass. But it's still usually easier to use all DI signal and forget microphones on amplifiers entirely for that application.
Yeah it was a long time ago, but I know a 414B-ULS was used as an overhead that was really high. A mic for the shaker over the drummers right shoulder. Panned center. Sounds like snare close mic is panned left. Lots of compression and messing around with it to get that sound, but mostly from getting mics to mix with one another to create something cool.
The thing is, a lot of the time my friend records his twin reverb, he uses an SM57 and a Beyer m160 on the front as well as a C414 room mic and an AEA ribbon behind the speakers. Result? He ends up putting a hipass filter on the whole thing 90% of the time.
Interesting, but sometimes using 2 different mics on guitar cab can actually help to remove some fizzyness - phase differences will help to cancel out some of high frequencies. And in case of pedals - I made a quick test by removing some pedals from my pedalboard www.dropbox.com/s/2qvy16vnw3osk3c/buffers%2Btrafo.wav?dl=0 1 riff - all the pedals 2 riff - removed 1:1 isolation transformer 4 riff - removed transformer and Boss DD-5 delay 5 riff - removed trafo, DD-5 and Ibanez SC10 chorus All other pedals are active(Klon Centaur clone into Big Muff) To my ears differences are more or less subtle, but the SC10 colors tone more, than DD-5 or transformer. And this coloration isn't bad, just a bit different. BTW, the proximity boost from a mic colors the tone way more than some pedals in line. And I personally think, that this extra low end sounds a bit "fake"and I'm trying to keep my mics pretty far from cab(at least 8 inches), if it's possible.
I LOVE old 421s! I use them all the time. What are your thoughts on using a Beta 58 for guitar in the same way that you used the standard 58? Would it be too bright?
KONAROCK1 "too" bright? Not sure, depends on what you pair it with on the rest of the project and the guitar sound. I think an i5 is too bright for the sounds that I record...using a lot of ribbons and such. I've never has much experience with the beta 58 but it is a different polar pattern, and might have more prox effect according to the tech specs. In real life though, it may or may not sound like it has more proximity effect. You'll just have to try it, but the whole idea is to minimize what's in front by taking of the protection.
creativesoundlab KONAROCK1 I used to use a Beta 57a on guitar cabs a lot...it is a little bright, but very usable depending on the cab/amp and genre of the project. While the regular 57 and 58 are similar, the beta counterparts are EXACTLY the same mics, just with different windscreens. Which does change the sound a little bit, but I like the Beta 57 more all around, even for vocals. But I've gone down the ribbon mic rabbit hole lately, haven't used my ol' beta 57 in quite a while.
Stephen Tack You know, I've always wondered why replacement windscreens for the Betas were so much more expensive. Good to know! I had no idea that the mics themselves were identical.
KONAROCK1 yeah, and the old non-A Beta 57 has a sweet looking grill, but they go for more on eBay, so it's hard to justify. www.gearslutz.com/board/attachments/low-end-theory/22920d1154772896-shure-beta-57a-mics-shure-20beta-2057.jpg
very useful ideas thanks! I was always curious why no one ever did that with the sm58. ! Now my question would be has anyone ever done the sm57 mod (transformers) on a 58? did it work? please share cheers
Steve Wills Yes, it should be just as doable as the mod for the sm57. The main difference of the two mics is the way sound is shaped by the windscreens on each mic. The concave shape on the front of the sm57 will shape the audio. If you take off the front of the 58 you can see it's only protected by a small piece of foam. It's not really meant to travel or get any abuse like that, but I think the high frequencies sound different, and the mic element can get in closer giving more proximity effect if needed. - A larger tuning range of getting dialing in the mic sound. I think my next mod will be for the sn58 with a Funkenwerk AMI T58 Transformer from my friend Warren at Zen Pro Audio. I have only heard samples of this, but it seems like the sound smooths out the mids and makes it more even: www.zenproaudio.com/tab-funkenwerk-ami-t58-transformer
+andrewt248 The idea is that the low end is extended, and you get more high end too. I kinda think that they are almost too bright to my ears. I got to try an sm77 this week on snare drum, and it sounded really good. It's basically the sm57 without the transformer, but I'd like to learn more about if that's totally true. There's gotta be some phantom power protection in place, and with the modded 57 there isn't. So that will effect the tone a little I would think.
@@creativesoundlab: The whole design concept of 'Phantom power' is that the supply voltage is like a unobtrusive, unnoticeable phantom to normal dynamic microphones with impedance balanced output with NO electrical connection between the shield & shell and then the 2 signal carrying wires, wired to 3-pin XLR's. Such designs of microphones does not care if there is a DC supply voltage between the shield/shell on one side and on the other side the signal wires. This is equally true for coils in transformers and coils on the diaphragm (although a given transformer may hold up better to mis-wired phantom power than the coil in a capsule). Neither should have a DC voltage across them, i.e. between XLR pin 2 & 3, and properly applied 'phantom power' will not do so. Besides dynamic microphones with 3-pin XLR connectors, there is plenty of electronic equipment that is sensitive and cannot withstand or will just not work properly if it receives proper phantom power. This is most audio outputs without transformers. See also th-cam.com/video/6McmnSmiY5o/w-d-xo.html
Sorry man. Have to disagree with the premise of this video. Everything you discuss here are perfectly valid techniques... but so is micing with multiple mics (say an SM57 and an R121) throwing the amp on the floor and plug into it with a 50' coiled cable and a ton of pedals. To say that these are "bad habits" is misleading.
They are bad habits. The sm57 is a shitty microphone. Dual mic'ing can cause phase issues, why would you dual mic your guitar? What reason would you do that in song? Other than a verse that builds up the other instruments?
Azazel Raiden Thats absurd. There’s thousands of ways to record any source, none of them are wrong if they sound good. Countless records have two mics or more on guitar cabs and phase is only an issue if you don’t understand what it is. Flip the Phase of one mic, find a position with the most out of phase shitty sound then flip the phase back to normal. Takes 5 minutes.
Hey awesome videos! Question: What power type of transformer would you recommend I seek while working with my 78' Princeton verb? I Have been meaning to get a power conditioner lately after I learned of these phenomena, and I was just going to get a 2 spot conditioner by furman (ac215A).
creativesoundlab Fair enough. I found one that needed to be rewired. I find the sound to be close to my sm57. I don't own an sm58 to make a comparison. Thanks anyway!
+nasanction In that case you are in the ballpark. the key to the sound of the 57 and 58 is the mid range in it. Good mids always gets a can't-go-wrong sound, although it may be a slightly boring sound.
Hey there. Could you please tell me what pro audio gear you are using here - specifically, what interface and out board gear are employing and at what rate are you sampling? The reason I ask is that I'm not happy with the guitar sounds I'm recording and need some equipment specifics to know what's making the difference. Cheers, Matthew.
Hi Matthew, As far as what's in the video, it's a '68 Silverface Fender Champ with a SM58 with the screen. For AC power, I'm using a transformer in a box that my amp tech built me that steps the power down just a little (~122V to ~108V, I don't know the exact numbers). I have a modest set up for recording, but I make it work. For guitars it's usually the microphone (sm57/MD421/AEA R88) into a SCA T15 Preamp into a MOTU 24IO. I record so the peaks are about -15 or so giving me plenty of headroom, and I use extra gain on the preamp to give it some flavor and compress it a little. If any of this doesn't make sense let me know and I'll clarify. You can always send me a link to some of your music, I'm happy to have a listen!
creativesoundlab Hi Ryan. Thanks for the reply and the info. Yes, that makes sense. I too have been aiming at a modest set up, but fear it's impacting on the results. I'll link you some sample takes and detail my set up. I'd appreciate the input of a more professional ear. Thanks again. Matthew.
Matthew Tomkins Hey Ryan. I followed your approach was able to substantially reproduce the sounds you got - combination of the input vol level, amp gain and composition structure. However, I continue to be faced with a problem: what I record and play back is not the same as what I monitor when recording. It's most apparent with big guitar sounds. The rich harmonics of a distorted guitar fail to be captured properly. Also, too much of the signal resolves as rumble in the low end and, to a lesser degree, sizzle in the high end. I largely isolate my guitar sound and monitor the input with head phones, so it's not the old problem and contrast of what's heard from standing in front of a stack and what you here played back. I hear what the mic in front of the bin hears. I think I've had some minor improvements from updated drivers for the interface and moving from 44.1 to 96 kHz sample rate, but even on 96 it's still not an accurate capture. I normally run the signal through a pre and outboard comp, but I've run tests direct in and it's little different. Inboard plugins don't solve the problem. I've recently read reports on discussion boards of people suffering the same fate and I've not seen anyone offer a solution. I don't know if a 192 kHz sample rate would improve things. Therefore, on the one hand, it maybe a fundamental limitation with digital recording. On the other hand, all studios are on Pro Tools these days. So, what gives? I thought I'd made some sensible purchases with hardware and software, but the results are underwhelming. Is there something I'm missing here? Cheers, Matthew. Specs: DAW: Pro Tools 10.3.9/ 11.2.1 OS: Windows 7 SP1, 64 bit PC: ASUS G73Jh, i7 1.60 GHz DAI: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 HPs: AKG 271 MkII Pre: ART TPSII Comp: DBX 266xs Mic: SM57/TLM102 Amp: '77 JMP/'89 JCM2550.
Why stop at removing pedals for a purer tone ? I just get rid of the guitar and amp and make guitar noises straight into the mic with my voice. I do use a transformer to make the phantom power exactly 47.89volts though, but you'd have be an idiot not to, right ?
How the hell soldering anything to the signal cable relates to the pressure on the diaphragm? I'm not even saying that people usually use EQ to filter anything they don't need instead of hard-wiring LP or HP or BP filters to the cable. I doubt that you really understand what you're doing..
Agree in theory. Disagree in practice. Examples include Tube Screamer gives a mid hump, which helps fight the natural Fender Blackface mid scoop. EHX Soul Food is perfectly transparent with no overdrive, unity volume, tone around 11:30 (had to try it to believe it. Mind blowing) but effectively a low cut the more you turn up the drive, highs can get gnarly bad but you can roll back tone on pedal or guitar; that pseudonym EQ before amp sounds different than EQ at the desk afterwards. Plus other effects like wah wah, chorus, compression, etc. sound vastly different whether before amp or after mic. But the basic premise is 100% dead on. Simple is better. Get it right before you push record. Keep out extra crap unless there's good artistic reason to put it in.
You've never had an amp that used a treble booster then. Completely different sound. If you like the sound of Brian May's AC30 in Queen, you're hearing a pedal in front of it... I can understand the subjective desire to hear the amp alone, and I've done that as well, but sometimes tonally I want a different sound.
"Forecasting what you want in the mix"? What are we? The Beatles recording to 4 tracks? 😂😂😂😂 Seriously, I agree. I stick the old 57 and concentrate on playing, arrangement instead.
So your list of bad habits about guitar recording are why do guitarists often like to capture a respectable portion of our sound, why do we use the effects that we like, and essentially, why do we want our tone on a recording to be similar to how we sound, and all of these as a sweeping statement where you don't seem to differantiate where your prefered approach might be more appropriate and when it might be not? Well, that doesn't sound very constructive, let alone relevant to the title of your video.
fuck pedals. i use usa made crate glx nice built in fx. n they match tempo for you. built in tunner. have half stack n 2 12 combo. combo with open back records best. half stack has lots more bass.
One mic, one speaker and three large, hollow aluminum barrels, and you have your guitar tone. Rock On.
I'm relatively new to guitar/recording and I wondered what the barrels were for. I initially thought I need "more barrels" (like more cowbell?).
I'm going to assume the aluminum barrels are for reverb
Two steel drums and one plastic one.
Aren't they plastic then steel and steel? or is it fake rust?
Bad habit # 4 : storing barrels of toxic waste in your studio.......
ChrisAndTommy GoodTimeFolkRockShow Ha!!! I'm cracking up!!!
Thats barrel is the cheapest echo chamber. Dont underestimate ambience treatment. I record amp which right inside bass drum and you will get crazy if you try it, even when plugging the reverb pedal, the reverb will sound like a real thing in the record. And i use sm 57 for close and 2 stereo match pair to get that bass drum reverbnation, but in the mix, you have to ride the fader of that ambience mic as your gut telling it is the time. Im kinda guy who records drum with few mic but more mics for the other.
The best thing I ever did for my recording of guitar was ... I learned to play the damn thing!!
+robertm2000 Yes totally!
Love the channel Ryan! I went to school for audio engineering and started as a part time studio engineer soon after I graduated. Even though I learned a lot of concepts and got a lot of mixing experience in school, there was only one live room for tracking. So heading into the studio my experience in recording was definetely sub par. Watching your videos have given me so many ideas and has helped exponentially with the tracking side of things and have greatly improved the sound of the songs I've worked on. Thanks for all the thorough videos!
I love your presentation style, but I respectfully disagree with most of those points in the first section of the video. For anyone curious:
1) I do agree you should have a purpose for choosing two mics as to what you're trying to capture. But the analogy of "are you then going to use two mics on the kick or the toms?" seems such a false equivalence. Drums simply don't have have as complicated a spectrum of frequencies as an electric guitar; especially a distorted guitar. Guitars are fuller range and have more potential for what you can capture. This becomes relevant when you want to reproduce what you're hearing in the room to greater effect, and one mic only captures a fraction of those frequencies. With drums, while one mic does only capture a fraction of the frequencies for a kick drum as well, it doesn't matter because it's less complicated a sound in the first place, and the emulation you get from one mic is quite sufficient. Same with vocals. But amplified signals like guitar and sometimes bass just have more going on; electronics usually do. As to the next point about "do you really need to capture a full frequency range to begin with? For the guitar, or any other instrument?" It depends on what you're shooting for. It's perfectly fair that if in a pop track an electric guitar is supposed to be relegated to one area, your capture method should follow suit, and one mic will probably be best; super focused. But if you're making guitar driven rock music like AC/DC and we're supposed to hear the richness and detail of the guitar parts, you use multiple mics (they used SM57 plus MD 421, I believe. One of those supposed "bad habits" that helped them thrive). Some music, the guitar DOES need a fuller range, and you find a way to make room for it. And it's no wonder that such full range guitar music exists/was stumbled upon to begin with, because, as was said, guitars are fuller frequency at the source.
2) For mics in the front and the back, it was said in the video that great sounds have been heard that way, so credit where credit is due. My only response to this is Dave Jerden did it with Alice In Chains regularly. As to the comments about "do you really need a full range?" I covered that in point 1.
3) This is the closest to something I would agree with. I agree with the part about narrowing the signal path to only the pedals you are using. It will preserve the high end and is a great starting place. On the other hand, if a guitarist normally sets up his signal path with all of his pedals, and he makes it sound GOOD that way, then don't fix what isn't broken. It's possible it could even sound better with the reduced high end if recording to digital. The part about "what's wrong with getting the sound from the amp instead of with the multiple pedals?" Well what's wrong is that the sound with multiple pedals is the sound with multiple pedals. The sound with the amp is the sound with the amp. They will be two totally different things. The default position of an engineer should be to capture what the musicians are bringing, assuming they bring a great sound. If they need extra help in the sound department, THEN a conversation can be had, with the understanding that the musician is essentially your boss. But none of that necessitates that a pedal oriented sound is bad where an amp oriented sound is good. Another real world example, guitarist from The Yeah Yeah Yeah's. He has a nasty, pedal driven sound that seems kind of hideous in solo (listen to the guitar rig rundown video). It works in context for what that band is.
The reason that I put multiple microphones on one amp, whether recording or live, is to give myself options to work with. I don't always end up using both of them, but if I want to, I can compare the sound I'm getting from any of the mics and decide which combination (or which one) gives me the sound that I'm looking for. This is especially helpful in a live setting when it's not always easy to go backstage and change the mic positioning on a whim.
That's a great tip if you have the channels. Great time saver when you don't want to make people wait on you.
Great video. On pedals: in most cases, you should definitely have the simplest path to the amplifier. However, if you're recording a live off the floor session with a shoegaze band, you may not have that luxury. In this kind of situation, buffers and buffered bypass pedals are actually your best friend. What sucks the high end out of your guitar tone is the high impedance of the multiple feet of cabling from your guitar, in between all your pedals, and back to your amp. A buffer is going to lower the impedance of the signal through all of the cabling and restore much if not all of the top end you get just going direct into the amp. I highly recommend Axxess buffers, but if you can't get your hands on one, try throwing a Boss pedal (or another buffered bypass pedal) at the beginning and end of a long effects chain with 30+ feet of cable. Take them out and watch all of your top end will go with them. I encourage anyone to try this if you don't believe me. It will influence every choice you make after the sound comes out of the amp.
Right on man. Great comment! Yeah, I was made aware of this (As a engineer that came from drumming) from an article that Gibson published. Really changed the way I thought of true bypass pedals and how to really get the best results.
Thanks! There is so much misinformation surrounding buffered and true bypass/which one is better. If anyone's interested, Wampler has a great article re: buffers.
One buffer in your chain does the trick, whether standalone or any Boss pedal. TC delay's have a on/off for a buffer. as for sucking the high end out of the tone, personal choice - with a bright Tele and a bright amp, may be just the thing. The coiled cables Hendrix used rolled off some of the highs - which was a good thing.
Everyone listen to this man. I do the exact same thing and it restores all of the "true high end" your signal path actually has.
As far as the pedals thing goes, you're speaking as an engineer and not a musician. Guitarists with a lot of pedals are used to playing with them, and getting rid of them and abruptly changing their set up and tone will make them play worse. Not to mention if people are working on a modest budget, they probably don't have the opportunity to try out a bunch of different amps/guitars etc. It's all about getting the sound and making the client happy. That being said, I agree with what you're saying
This is a great video, you bring up some awesome points on general tone manipulation when capturing it with mics, looking forward to more videos
MadJack122 Thanks!
I only singlemic guitars, but I think that especially for guitar driven genres ( metal, rock) it's great. Also, using similar mics that aren't completely the same ( sm75+beta75) and panning them hard left and right can give awesome stereo effects. I like doing such things and then, when doubletracking only panning like 80%. That gives even more space and immersion
Great video bro your channel really inspires me to record. I haven't mic my old peavey tube amp yet but I will and I may video it.
thanks for the tips on the SM microphones. ive got some extra ones from when i used to gig live, im going to modify them now and see what happens.
Love that Argentinian wine Barrel!! great tips! cheers from Argentina!
very useful tips. also I like how room sounds while you talking. very nice to ears
Awesome, thanks Ryan
I've started making cabs and I need to add the choice of speaker makes a massive difference as well as the cabinet design that its mounted to. In terms of Micing/mixing I always raise the amp off the floor a bit and close mic experimenting with different angles and I also love a few ribbon mics 1 or 2 in a room which I can play with to add a bit of space and depth to the mix.
Hey man, awesome and very informative video, thank for that :)
Just one thing - if you lower all of the supply voltage for a tube amp, the tube heaters are going to work with lower voltage as well, and that causes the tubes to wear out faster. I think you are within the specs if you lower the voltage up to 15 percent, but for anything more, you might want to open the amp and lower only the high voltage coming from the amps transformer.
Take care :)
I use my 57's off axis, instead of directly in front of the dust cover, facing the front of the paper to the side a little, is a much warmer sound. Nice videos man !
You so right✌😎🎸youre channel is Great men 👍
Excellent video my friend! Love the approach. Where can we find a link to some of your work!
thank you for sharing your info man,,,,,,I appreciate that
Sure thing!
great info thx man!
sweet video, thanks
Like the idea of lifting the Amp off ground.. But crazy how many studio engineers just leave the amps on the floor
I’ve often not had a decent ribbon to use, and so for high gain guitar it was often dynamic mics or nothing. I found using 2-3 different dynamic mics on the front of a 4x12 helps capture a better overall bandwidth, especially when its just drums, bass, guitar and vocals.
The is the first no-nonsense video on recording I've seen TH-cam. Most other videos are filled with experimental unorthodox techniques instead of using tried and true methods applied with common sense. And for the record, most LDCs can capture the entire FR of a guitar amp using only one mic. Whenever I've done shootouts, LDCs always sound better than dynamics on amps
Glad you enjoyed the video!
I'm super agree with positioning the cab off the floor. I put it up evel with the ear ,aim the back to the corner of the room 5ft away. l dail the tone at low volume first (coz at high volume your ear will attenuates the low end). I put the SM57 at the cap edge, 40mm away to reduce proximity effect. In the DAW , i make a gentle EQ dip around 6K-9K, since SM57 tend to hv big spike in that area, and really dail it in to make the mic sound as natural as possible. BAM!!! Sounds 90% like I hear the cab in front of me!!!
Nice, a lot of amps like these little combos are impossible to get the mic right where you want to point it at, but I agree the edge of the cap works really good.
That lowering voltage technique works with tube amps but most transistors amps have a voltage regulator inside, so no matter if you lower a little of the wall voltage, it will keep delivering the same voltage to the circuits
Very interesting.
I can answer the multi mic on the amp. VERY SIMPLE: Each mic captures a different character. Try it yourself. Its not for multitracking, its for blending to a single track (at least for me). Now this a very individual preference. I use lots of distortion through Vin 30's and each mike captures a different tone of the driver to provide me with the roar Im looking for. It does take some set-up time simply cause you're trying to get the "best" color frome each mic one at a time, plus adjusting phasing issues. Hope that helps. By the way, on a clean sound I use one mic.
I've always perfered lately using interfaces such as line 6, since guitar tone technology has improved and starting to become the better... But now I've learned so much with mixing and mastering I perfer the two mic on the hottest cab speaker inputs ran to one bus track as well as a di line in ran to another track. ... The phasing isn't a problem anymore when you can record test track and line up mics by referencing track wavelength position. Literally takes 5 minutes to get mic phasing perfect
Interesting video. I think less is more is definitely the correct approach. Shorter signal path - less pedals - amp over pedal distortion - closer and varied direction between mic and speaker.
A key word is "forecasting" the sound within the mix!
for the 57 could you just solder the resistor into the pins on the mic?
Running a tube amp at any other voltage then intended may harm the tubes, due to them not being heated correctly. There are modification kits that allow you to lower the anode voltage without affecting heater voltages.
As for the guitar effects; sure, only put in what you use, but keep in mind that a lot of guitarists are not after pristine guitar tone. All you'll get with some pedals directly after your guitar is a loss of high end, IF you don't have a buffer somewhere. If you have any pedal that's on, then that's the buffer. Boss pedals (among others) are all buffered bypass, so one of those at the start of the chain will do the trick. If you can demonstrate that a buffered signal will still suffer after being run through a realistic number of bypassed pedals, I'd be very interested to see that :). Until then, I highly doubt you can even tell the difference on a scope, let alone by ear.
Thanks so much ryan!
Sure! Thanks for watching and commenting!
+creativesoundlab by far one my fav channels on youtube!
Personally I think it is song/genre dependent as to whether you use more than one mic to record guitar...
Rodaidh McDonald used two mics to record the guitar for the XX’s album (Shure SM57 and a Sennheiser MD421) and then he blended the sounds. The XX are quite minimalist on their use of instruments however which is what probably makes it suitable for this example but as I said it’s all dependent on how many parts you have in the song and what plays the most important role.
Nice vid ryan! Can you make a video discussing tips when using a ribbon and a 57 on a cab and how to keep them in phase? Thanks!
Great idea. I will def make a video on that!
I think using more than one mic on an amp is to get as close as possible to the "live" sound of the amp like if you were standing there listening to it in person
Andrew Scheps have been using the SM57+MD421 pair for years now, seems to work great. According to Scheps, these two mics placed straight in front of the cone gives the best representation of the real sound of the amp.
Countless successful guitars recorded this way
I have my pedals in a switcher that takes them out when not in use. My stereo fx are all true bypass and I have a great tone. How ever I do get your point, with why you suggest removing them. I would try that, if I had more amps to work with. I have a few rigs now that are pretty versatile and ready to go. I just have to switch a few cables and switch out the output cables on my patchbay in my pedal board to change rigs.
Hey man. Been really learning a lot from your videos. Thank you. I don't know if you'll read this, but if you do, I'm having a lot of trouble. I love and take a lot of pride in my guitar tone but when I put a mic in front of it, it sounds like garbage in my daw. Just using an sm57. I guess my question is, is my amp too loud? I still have no idea how loud it should be...
Hi! I'm learning a lot with this channel man! A question: you said something about put the pedals before or pre record... Can you explain more about it? If I want use a pedal or two, theres other way, recording with the clean amp? Sorry my English! Thank you!
Ryan can you please provide a schematic for the step-down box?
in recording school we tried 8-10 different mics on the guitar amp.
Sounds weird but hear me out.
in that way we shaped the sound by microphasing, we didn't need to use the eq of the amp and got rid of all unwanted resonances which where caused by the speaker, the room and so on. You just filtered everything by the combfiltering by increasing or decreasing the level of a track
you of course kinda need to do a submix of those 8-10 tracks so that you only end up with one or two tracks of those.
i suggest to just try that out, the amp sounded way better than in the room :)
+VIADeth Yeah, I don't mind that idea if you are really well practiced in it. I like the idea of using mics for flavor, but if they are all in phase. In many things in technology, the simpler the methods, the more effective. My mixes always would transfer well to real world speakers when I did the most simplest methods...and that was just phasing that I induced from EQ. Can't imagine the craziness of phasing from mics. but if you have the time to tweek it, go for it. I just don't have the time to spend, and the client doesn't either.
Cool video. I'm personally a big fan of using multiple microphones on a guitar amp. One big advantage is that it gives you more flexibility in the mixing stage. Who says you have to have all microphones at once?
+Matthew Conn Yeah, I agree. I will often recording with multiple mics, so I have options instead of using EQ. My 635a paired with an sm57 sounds really good to me.
as a guitar player in a psychedelic/doom band, I strongly disagree with this whole video. you want the full range of your guitar sound because it‘s basically the most important thing in this genre. you want many pedals because creating spacy sounds and different gain textures in jam sessions is what this music is about. same goes for shoegaze and other guitar/effects driven genres. outside of these genres though, I agree.
can't you just have full range of your guitar with a large membrane microphone ?
Or a ribbon working in a 8 pattern ?
shoegaze is only effects driven when 'trying' to be a shoegaze band. I saw MBV in a carpark too long ago and kevin sheilds best effect was just turning up loud and playing the tremolo (or whammy in 'murican) on one of his J's with tune lock on and strumming every chord with it pushed right down, strings nearly flaccid and releasing the arm up to the in tune chord in a very rehearsed way with the other guitar. maybe some FoH reverb or delay. Megawashfuzzverbdelay came later
An engineers job is to capture the magic of the jam. There’s definitely guitarists out there that are fighting an uphilll battle with too many pedals, but if it’s intentional then that’s what should recorded. It’s much easier that catch a vibe on the way in than it is to create one in a mix.
Great tips! Is there any more information available on the modified sm57, 1/4" cable, and power supply? How-to videos on these would be awesome!
Yes, I know I've covered that. Look for my video on Secret Weapons or 10 secret weapons.
Watching on my phone. It seems to be cutting off the bottom of the screen. Was this done on purpose or would I have to watch from my computer to get the full screen?
I use a Helix
Very nice and informational video again. I use very often so called Fredman Technique for recording high gain (metal) tones. However, I use always Amp Head plus separate cabs. Should I also separate cabs off the floor? Maybe Ill just give it a try. Looking for very tight response for my sound. #cormetalligravis
I get a lot of noise in my building because of electricity. Will that transformer work? What is its name?
Hey Ryan, what's up with the barrels? Is this some funky bass trapping technique?
Good thoughts...and food for thought.
While I agree with your assertions in most cases, they are rather contingent on genre. I usually like to keep the mic count low, but I was doing a post-hardcore session, and it seemed like the more mics I added the better it all fit in the mix...ended up using 5 mics on one cab/room. But I was listening and moved them till it sounded best.
As with anything, use your ears, and follow the cardinal rule of audio:
"If it sounds good, it is good." ;-)
Stephen Tack Yeah, I'm sure they are contingent on the genre. This video was really covering the type of amp pictured. It's hard to be everything to everybody.
Mendoza Argentina!!!!!!!! Im from Argentina!!!!! Greetings!!!
Very nice! I have students down there!
Im from Córdoba, Argentina. Vamo a toma ferne Ale!
La lata no se mancha!!! (que le saldra cuando use el google translator para saber que quise decir??) Aguante!!!
I like your preproduction ideas on amp in the room placement. Should be applied by band during rehearsal with the soloist's amp higher up.
I do like your style. Great!.But micing an amp in the studio I have to say a few suggestions.
The sound you hear from the amp out in front which your tweaking is not the same as close micing it. Yes you get some proximity from the mic and might be fine for live recording where isolation is needed or if your amp has a low output.
I really recommend using your 421 out from the amp where you get some amp in the room interaction. could be 6, 12 or even 18 inches out.
Now you might like to get the interaction out back of an open back and thus 2 mics but not always needed if you crank the input transformer of your mic preamp!
Great series, keep on with it.
Cheers
Hey Bart, you made some great points here. You're right, the amp sound 3 feet out from where I listen to dial in the amp will sound different than a close mic that's only an inch away. I guess I've learned to use my ears in front of the amp, and understand that there will be a translation that will always sound different. It's just a starting point for sounds, and then I plan ahead for how the microphone will further shape the sound. As far as putting a microphone 6, 12, or 18 inches out, I do that a lot, but with ribbon mics. I love that sound, and it beats close micing a guitar amp any day. Of coarse, all of this is subjective, so when I say "bad" habits, I hope people just see it as just another perspective. Thanks for watching, and please let me know if you have any topics you want me to cover.
No worries, it is all good. There is infinite possibilities which is one reason recording is an art. LOL
One thing with a ribbon mic is enough gain to get some room interaction with the amp and I know that it isn't as simple out front but can work behind phase flipped and the good ol 57 out front. I heard of the mod you done but I could never be bothered!LOL I'd be interested in getting a mic that sounded like it a bit off the shelf??
As for future videos, thank you for asking.. But I love that snare remicing I recall reading about it a long while ago so those obscure tricks that one might forget in a home/Project Studio situation. I think you'l get a good following from old hands with those but The basics are good, the recording space,, room treatment, the mic, the pre, the compressor, the EQ, , micing a drum kit, recording a band "in the room" as opposed to overdubs, mix room treatment, monitor placement, Actually some simple DIY enginnering gadgets is always good too. But mostly seasoned pro tips and tricks if you can dig some up and demo them. But as I said the basics, the fundaments are always good coming from anyone. Cheers
Great teaching tools here! I was wondering if you posted exactly how you modified the mic chord? I would be interested to try that. I was also curious whether you've tried the
Pyle-Pro PDMIC78, which is supposed to be a transformerless 57? They cost 9$. Thanks for making these videos. I've really learned a lot.
+John Pittman Hmm, I have not tried that. Sounds interesting. I find that I'm picky on where I use the tranformerless 57, as there's almost too much highs for electric. Under snare is a usual placement for one.
Dude!
What is the tremolo you are using in the being song in the episode?
It is gorgeous, amazing!
Please tell.
Thank you
Your philosophy on using multiple mics for a guitar amp is something I've been saying for years. I'd rather choose one good mic and spend the extra time dialing in the amp settings and mic position. Not to mention that once if you do record with 2 mics, you have more tracks to contend with during the mix, which is a pain in the butt and makes the whole project suffer.
Right on dude!
ClamsAnonymous Thanks man!
On microphones takes phase issues out of the picture and make track editing, application of effects, and bunch of other post-production stuff a bit easier. If you can do it, that's definitely the way to go.
If you have a really limited number of microphones and the only way to get a good sounding signal is to mix multiple microphones, then it might be worthwhile to try using multiple mics, but if you've got any microphone that sounds good by itself, it seems to me that you'll save yourself a lot of aggravation by just sticking with that one and using EQ and/or other effects to shape the sound instead of trying to mix 2 signals together and deal with all the subtly ways the sound waves interact with each other rather than just working on a single sound source.
On the other hand, you might just not have a mic that can caputer a good signal by itself, and then it does become useful to try and add some extra mics to get a good complete sound; I think this is more important on bass amps where you are often trying to scoop out the mids than on guitar where you generally want lots of mid-range. It can be hard to get a bass amp tone dialed in with one mic, but one mic with way too much low-end response and another with way too much treble response can produce good results for a bass. But it's still usually easier to use all DI signal and forget microphones on amplifiers entirely for that application.
This guy looks like he's in a back alleyway off Sesame Street
What's this in the side of the amp?
Lovin' the drum sound on the intro clip! What technique did you use for that?
Yeah it was a long time ago, but I know a 414B-ULS was used as an overhead that was really high. A mic for the shaker over the drummers right shoulder. Panned center. Sounds like snare close mic is panned left. Lots of compression and messing around with it to get that sound, but mostly from getting mics to mix with one another to create something cool.
The thing is, a lot of the time my friend records his twin reverb, he uses an SM57 and a Beyer m160 on the front as well as a C414 room mic and an AEA ribbon behind the speakers. Result? He ends up putting a hipass filter on the whole thing 90% of the time.
sm57 better than a condenser mic?
Why do people ruin SM57s when Shure made a transformer-less 58 for less money?
Interesting, but sometimes using 2 different mics on guitar cab can actually help to remove some fizzyness - phase differences will help to cancel out some of high frequencies.
And in case of pedals - I made a quick test by removing some pedals from my pedalboard
www.dropbox.com/s/2qvy16vnw3osk3c/buffers%2Btrafo.wav?dl=0
1 riff - all the pedals
2 riff - removed 1:1 isolation transformer
4 riff - removed transformer and Boss DD-5 delay
5 riff - removed trafo, DD-5 and Ibanez SC10 chorus
All other pedals are active(Klon Centaur clone into Big Muff)
To my ears differences are more or less subtle, but the SC10 colors tone more, than DD-5 or transformer. And this coloration isn't bad, just a bit different.
BTW, the proximity boost from a mic colors the tone way more than some pedals in line. And I personally think, that this extra low end sounds a bit "fake"and I'm trying to keep my mics pretty far from cab(at least 8 inches), if it's possible.
Yeah totally. I havn't yet checked out some of the two mic set ups enough to film about it, but I will.
I LOVE old 421s! I use them all the time. What are your thoughts on using a Beta 58 for guitar in the same way that you used the standard 58? Would it be too bright?
KONAROCK1 "too" bright? Not sure, depends on what you pair it with on the rest of the project and the guitar sound. I think an i5 is too bright for the sounds that I record...using a lot of ribbons and such. I've never has much experience with the beta 58 but it is a different polar pattern, and might have more prox effect according to the tech specs. In real life though, it may or may not sound like it has more proximity effect. You'll just have to try it, but the whole idea is to minimize what's in front by taking of the protection.
creativesoundlab
KONAROCK1
I used to use a Beta 57a on guitar cabs a lot...it is a little bright, but very usable depending on the cab/amp and genre of the project. While the regular 57 and 58 are similar, the beta counterparts are EXACTLY the same mics, just with different windscreens. Which does change the sound a little bit, but I like the Beta 57 more all around, even for vocals. But I've gone down the ribbon mic rabbit hole lately, haven't used my ol' beta 57 in quite a while.
Stephen Tack You know, I've always wondered why replacement windscreens for the Betas were so much more expensive. Good to know! I had no idea that the mics themselves were identical.
KONAROCK1 yeah, and the old non-A Beta 57 has a sweet looking grill, but they go for more on eBay, so it's hard to justify.
www.gearslutz.com/board/attachments/low-end-theory/22920d1154772896-shure-beta-57a-mics-shure-20beta-2057.jpg
What do you think about recording with shure SM27 condenser mic?
I have not tried those yet, but I hear a lot of good things about the KSM44 and 32.
Honestly, the best mindset to go into audio/recording can be stated with two words: Occam’s Razor. The simplest answer is usually the best answer.
thanks
Sure thing
What camera do you use currently?
Blackmagic Pocket Cinema with Voigtlander F.95 17.5 mm. B cam is Nikon D610 with 24mm-85mm
very useful ideas thanks!
I was always curious why no one ever did that with the sm58. !
Now my question would be has anyone ever done the sm57 mod (transformers)
on a 58? did it work? please share
cheers
Steve Wills Yes, it should be just as doable as the mod for the sm57. The main difference of the two mics is the way sound is shaped by the windscreens on each mic. The concave shape on the front of the sm57 will shape the audio. If you take off the front of the 58 you can see it's only protected by a small piece of foam. It's not really meant to travel or get any abuse like that, but I think the high frequencies sound different, and the mic element can get in closer giving more proximity effect if needed. - A larger tuning range of getting dialing in the mic sound. I think my next mod will be for the sn58 with a Funkenwerk AMI T58 Transformer from my friend Warren at Zen Pro Audio. I have only heard samples of this, but it seems like the sound smooths out the mids and makes it more even: www.zenproaudio.com/tab-funkenwerk-ami-t58-transformer
creativesoundlab Can I use an SM 59? I was trying to use a bassy mic, as well as the 59 but i'm wondering if I'd be better off just using the 59
What's the purpose or intended effect of the transformer delete mod on the 57?
+andrewt248 The idea is that the low end is extended, and you get more high end too. I kinda think that they are almost too bright to my ears. I got to try an sm77 this week on snare drum, and it sounded really good. It's basically the sm57 without the transformer, but I'd like to learn more about if that's totally true. There's gotta be some phantom power protection in place, and with the modded 57 there isn't. So that will effect the tone a little I would think.
@@creativesoundlab: The whole design concept of 'Phantom power' is that the supply voltage is like a unobtrusive, unnoticeable phantom to normal dynamic microphones with impedance balanced output with NO electrical connection between the shield & shell and then the 2 signal carrying wires, wired to 3-pin XLR's. Such designs of microphones does not care if there is a DC supply voltage between the shield/shell on one side and on the other side the signal wires. This is equally true for coils in transformers and coils on the diaphragm (although a given transformer may hold up better to mis-wired phantom power than the coil in a capsule). Neither should have a DC voltage across them, i.e. between XLR pin 2 & 3, and properly applied 'phantom power' will not do so.
Besides dynamic microphones with 3-pin XLR connectors, there is plenty of electronic equipment that is sensitive and cannot withstand or will just not work properly if it receives proper phantom power. This is most audio outputs without transformers.
See also th-cam.com/video/6McmnSmiY5o/w-d-xo.html
Sorry man. Have to disagree with the premise of this video. Everything you discuss here are perfectly valid techniques... but so is micing with multiple mics (say an SM57 and an R121) throwing the amp on the floor and plug into it with a 50' coiled cable and a ton of pedals. To say that these are "bad habits" is misleading.
They are bad habits. The sm57 is a shitty microphone. Dual mic'ing can cause phase issues, why would you dual mic your guitar? What reason would you do that in song? Other than a verse that builds up the other instruments?
Azazel Raiden
Sm57 is not shitty.
Your recording techniques are shitty apparently
the sm57 is my go-to mic. i've even used it on vocals, and drum overheads. it goes where other mics cannot.
Azazel Raiden Thats absurd. There’s thousands of ways to record any source, none of them are wrong if they sound good. Countless records have two mics or more on guitar cabs and phase is only an issue if you don’t understand what it is. Flip the Phase of one mic, find a position with the most out of phase shitty sound then flip the phase back to normal. Takes 5 minutes.
@@emoboi311 lmaooo learn to position a mic/flip phase and you can do it in five minutes, it's not rocket science
Hey awesome videos! Question: What power type of transformer would you recommend I seek while working with my 78' Princeton verb? I Have been meaning to get a power conditioner lately after I learned of these phenomena, and I was just going to get a 2 spot conditioner by furman (ac215A).
That's way over my head, I have no idea.
In the video you said an amp tech made this for you, I guess ill ask around at the shop. Thanks!
Great vid! Why do you have an argentinian wine barrel? I'm from Argentina btw.
Thanks! My friend found that because he collects junk percussion stuff, and he liked that it was for wine rather than oil.
Yes! From Mendoza. gret wines! I'll take you one if I go to the states!
Would you consider a Peavey Diamond 20 to be similar to the sm58?
+nasanction I have no idea.
creativesoundlab
Fair enough. I found one that needed to be rewired. I find the sound to be close to my sm57. I don't own an sm58 to make a comparison. Thanks anyway!
+nasanction In that case you are in the ballpark. the key to the sound of the 57 and 58 is the mid range in it. Good mids always gets a can't-go-wrong sound, although it may be a slightly boring sound.
Hey there. Could you please tell me what pro audio gear you are using here - specifically, what interface and out board gear are employing and at what rate are you sampling? The reason I ask is that I'm not happy with the guitar sounds I'm recording and need some equipment specifics to know what's making the difference. Cheers, Matthew.
Hi Matthew, As far as what's in the video, it's a '68 Silverface Fender Champ with a SM58 with the screen. For AC power, I'm using a transformer in a box that my amp tech built me that steps the power down just a little (~122V to ~108V, I don't know the exact numbers). I have a modest set up for recording, but I make it work. For guitars it's usually the microphone (sm57/MD421/AEA R88) into a SCA T15 Preamp into a MOTU 24IO. I record so the peaks are about -15 or so giving me plenty of headroom, and I use extra gain on the preamp to give it some flavor and compress it a little. If any of this doesn't make sense let me know and I'll clarify. You can always send me a link to some of your music, I'm happy to have a listen!
creativesoundlab Hi Ryan. Thanks for the reply and the info. Yes, that makes sense. I too have been aiming at a modest set up, but fear it's impacting on the results. I'll link you some sample takes and detail my set up. I'd appreciate the input of a more professional ear. Thanks again. Matthew.
Matthew Tomkins Sounds great. My email is just Ryan at my website name.
creativesoundlab Thanks Ryan.
Matthew Tomkins Hey Ryan. I followed your approach was able to substantially reproduce the sounds you got - combination of the input vol level, amp gain and composition structure.
However, I continue to be faced with a problem: what I record and play back is not the same as what I monitor when recording. It's most apparent with big guitar sounds. The rich harmonics of a distorted guitar fail to be captured properly. Also, too much of the signal resolves as rumble in the low end and, to a lesser degree, sizzle in the high end. I largely isolate my guitar sound and monitor the input with head phones, so it's not the old problem and contrast of what's heard from standing in front of a stack and what you here played back. I hear what the mic in front of the bin hears. I think I've had some minor improvements from updated drivers for the interface and moving from 44.1 to 96 kHz sample rate, but even on 96 it's still not an accurate capture. I normally run the signal through a pre and outboard comp, but I've run tests direct in and it's little different. Inboard plugins don't solve the problem.
I've recently read reports on discussion boards of people suffering the same fate and I've not seen anyone offer a solution. I don't know if a 192 kHz sample rate would improve things. Therefore, on the one hand, it maybe a fundamental limitation with digital recording. On the other hand, all studios are on Pro Tools these days. So, what gives? I thought I'd made some sensible purchases with hardware and software, but the results are underwhelming.
Is there something I'm missing here?
Cheers,
Matthew.
Specs:
DAW: Pro Tools 10.3.9/ 11.2.1
OS: Windows 7 SP1, 64 bit
PC: ASUS G73Jh, i7 1.60 GHz
DAI: Focusrite Scarlett 18i20
HPs: AKG 271 MkII
Pre: ART TPSII
Comp: DBX 266xs
Mic: SM57/TLM102
Amp: '77 JMP/'89 JCM2550.
so is the power supply basically like a variac?
+keeelane Well, it's set at a certain voltage, and it only cost me 10 bucks plus some labor from my amp tech.
Yes it's exactly like a variac. The only difference is his has a set voltage where a variac is variable voltage.
Mr. Jones and me, tell each other fairy tails..... just kidding. one of the best productions sites on the web. thanx
Jeb McGovern Wow thanks Jeb.
Why do you have 55 gallon steel drums in your house...???
Yeah why use pedals when you could use a thicker pick?!
Why stop at removing pedals for a purer tone ? I just get rid of the guitar and amp and make guitar noises straight into the mic with my voice. I do use a transformer to make the phantom power exactly 47.89volts though, but you'd have be an idiot not to, right ?
Gee what is that in your pocket, a guitar? Lol.
Agree 100% with your philosophy, keep it as simple as possible yet always make the very most of it.
+André-Michel Goulet No idea what was in my pocket. Simple can be amazing for sound.
How the hell soldering anything to the signal cable relates to the pressure on the diaphragm? I'm not even saying that people usually use EQ to filter anything they don't need instead of hard-wiring LP or HP or BP filters to the cable. I doubt that you really understand what you're doing..
I’d say honestly the only reason to use a pedal in a recording is if you absolutely need to have fuzz
Agree in theory. Disagree in practice.
Examples include Tube Screamer gives a mid hump, which helps fight the natural Fender Blackface mid scoop. EHX Soul Food is perfectly transparent with no overdrive, unity volume, tone around 11:30 (had to try it to believe it. Mind blowing) but effectively a low cut the more you turn up the drive, highs can get gnarly bad but you can roll back tone on pedal or guitar; that pseudonym EQ before amp sounds different than EQ at the desk afterwards.
Plus other effects like wah wah, chorus, compression, etc. sound vastly different whether before amp or after mic.
But the basic premise is 100% dead on. Simple is better. Get it right before you push record. Keep out extra crap unless there's good artistic reason to put it in.
You've never had an amp that used a treble booster then. Completely different sound. If you like the sound of Brian May's AC30 in Queen, you're hearing a pedal in front of it... I can understand the subjective desire to hear the amp alone, and I've done that as well, but sometimes tonally I want a different sound.
"Forecasting what you want in the mix"? What are we? The Beatles recording to 4 tracks? 😂😂😂😂 Seriously, I agree. I stick the old 57 and concentrate on playing, arrangement instead.
Yeah sure, always keep in mind the big picture.
Whats your beef? Um your amp is rocking back and forth and making a clunk clunk sound. lol
So your list of bad habits about guitar recording are why do guitarists often like to capture a respectable portion of our sound, why do we use the effects that we like, and essentially, why do we want our tone on a recording to be similar to how we sound, and all of these as a sweeping statement where you don't seem to differantiate where your prefered approach might be more appropriate and when it might be not? Well, that doesn't sound very constructive, let alone relevant to the title of your video.
cripple horse spoken like a typical guitar player
Guitarists? Aren't those those douchebags that hang out with drummers? You can have a perfectly good band without them. :)
fuck pedals. i use usa made crate glx nice built in fx. n they match tempo for you. built in tunner. have half stack n 2 12 combo. combo with open back records best. half stack has lots more bass.