Direct electric guitar and bass recording
Mogens V.
setting up my studio, so I need to plan my purchases.
I'd prefer not having to mike up amps for guitars (working off an
appartment), but have a problem seeing how I do direct recording.
Same goes for rehearsing late using a headset.
I have guitar gear with a build-in cabinetulator; sounds fine through a
clean amp/PA and speakers, but like shit through a headset, so I expect
the same problem when recording.
I'm aware some use a real amp with a powersoak/cabinetulator; seems a
bit of a waste of energy to me, but if it does the job, I'll get a small
15 watt amp or so and the soak/load.
Several [rack] effects offers various build-in amp and speaker emus.
TC gear offers more than I need, and sometimes has a nifty pricetag.
Of cause, so does a small amp and a soak...
I've seen many good references to Line6 products, and might consider one
of their products, if the amp/speaker emu is any useful for recording.
The Toneport UX2 should be useful in Protools via S/PDIF.
It may also be used for bass, which may come handy later.
The amp and speaker emu stuff in the software is of cause what interests
me, provided I can use it as a plugin with PT (dunno if a plugin
converter exist), plus I'll use whatever effects I might happen to like.
I do have a hard time seeing it as really helpful for recording.
Behringer 1224P/2024P are nicely affordable. I'm aware of the criticism
against (some) Beringer products. Dunno if such are always justifiable.
Has amp/speaker emus, though I dunno how helpful for recording.
If they are, some other features may be useful in my guitar rack
Whichever product, being rackable will be an advantage.
So, how do you pros record electric guitars (and bass)?
--
Kind regards,
Mogens V.
TheOldGuitarPlayer
"Mogens V." <mog...@NOYOUDONTvip.cybercity.dk> wrote in message
news:45e1b492$0$184$157c...@dreader1.cybercity.dk...
I have been doing digital recording for about ten years (analog for twenty
years before that...). I always record the guitar direct. I started out
using a pedal board with a Rat, Arion DDL, & Arion compressor, then went to
a Boss ME-20, then a Johnson J-Station. Now I record guitar going through a
Digitech GNX4, into a mixer and then into the soundcard (I am using a Audigy
Platinum). It works great! Bass, same way (although I usually use soundfonts
and MIDI for bass tracks these days).
Headset monitoring never sounds a good as using speakers. You may want to
investigate getting a better headset if you are having difficulties with the
one you are using.
I am using Cakewalk Sonar 5 Producer Edition for software. It's a very good
setup and I get pro quality recordings with it.
You should be able to get quality recordings going direct using any
multieffects processor. Hope this is helpful!
The Old Guitar Player
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
+
"Mogens V." <mog...@NOYOUDONTvip.cybercity.dk> wrote in message
news:45e1b492$0$184$157c...@dreader1.cybercity.dk...
options .
+
DeeAa
news:45e1b492$0$184$157c...@dreader1.cybercity.dk...
> Whichever product, being rackable will be an advantage.
>
>
> So, how do you pros record electric guitars (and bass)?
>
Hello,
I've been using various D/I guitar tools for ages, and currently use
several.
just today I got a new toy, and recorded a clip; here:
http://deeaa.pp.fi/clips/DOD.mp3
SansAmp Tri-AC > Digitech digiverb pedal >
behringer direct-box > PC, all powered with a 9v transformer on the rhythm,
and on the lead (right) I add the DOD FX100 as a booster/distortion pedal.
So the clip is just those 4 stomp boxes direct to PC, the only thing I
added
is panning and some overall reverb, no EQ or anythíng.
The Behringer Ultra-G direct box is one of the first, cheap gadgets I'd
recommend. It has a pretty nice cab emulator. It's a bit dark, but then
again most D/I sounds tend to be too bright. So that's a great box to tame
shrill D/I sounds.
Rule number one IMO is that you need to stack up different cab emulators to
get a good sound.
I use:
- Marshall cab emu (JMP-1)
- RedBox cab emu (CreamMachine)
- Tech-21 cab emu (Tri-AC)
- Behringer can emu (UG100)
- Digitech cab emu (Digiverb pedal)
- DOD cab emu (DOD FX100 pedal)
- Boss cab emu (SE-50 multifx unit)
Now you don't want to use a whole lot of 'em, but I find that for instance
running the Tri-Ac thru the behringer is pretty damned good. And adding the
FX100 and/or the digiverb thingy doesn't hurt a bit.
The red box works alone pretty well but is rather one-dimensional and dark.
The digiverb and FX100 aren't good emus alone but the 'speaker emulated'
output adds a whole lot of reality onto TriAC and behringer.
I've also often ran the Marshall JMP-1 emulated out parallel with the
behringer and mixed them together, even live.
So whatever you try, do try combining various emulated sounds. The UG100 is
a great place to start with your current preamps and emulators.
Here:
http://deeaa.pp.fi/studio.htm
are a few of my tries at 2/5W recording system with cabs, but honestly, it's
most often better to just go D/I and not mike at all. Unless I get to play
louder.
BTW almost all the guitars I've played on the songs on my homepage are D/I
recorded. I haven't used much cab miking live or studio since 1999.
--
Antti 'DeeAa' Heikkinen
http://deeaa.pp.fi
NASCIMVR VT PEREAMVS
VIMIMVS VT VINCAMVS
Grip
detect you not actually micing a tube amp. It takes alot of tweaking and the
right gear( less than you think) , but it's possible all day long. You can
do it with a POD, or just about anything similar. A huge part of the secret
is how you monitor your recordings. Think flat, as flat as possible
"Mogens V." <mog...@NOYOUDONTvip.cybercity.dk> wrote in message
news:45e1b492$0$184$157c...@dreader1.cybercity.dk...
Guncho
wrote:
No offense to anyone but I don't think there's too many "Pros" around
here. Pros use excellent amps, cranked up and miced in top notch
recording studios.
Sounds like you need some sort of modelling gear.
Chris
Guncho
> Direct is VERY doable to the extent that virtually no one would be able to
> detect you not actually micing a tube amp. It takes alot of tweaking and the
> right gear( less than you think) , but it's possible all day long. You can
> do it with a POD, or just about anything similar. A huge part of the secret
> is how you monitor your recordings. Think flat, as flat as possible
Well that's obviously not true or the majority of major label
recording artists would ditch their high end rigs for cheap little
boxes full of computer chips.
Modelling gear is very usuable but let's not kid ourselves here.
Chris
+
"Guncho" <cgu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1172467556.7...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>
> No offense to anyone but I don't think there's too many "Pros" around
> here. Pros use excellent amps, cranked up and miced in top notch
> recording studios.
>
Not allways.
> Sounds like you need some sort of modelling gear.
>
> Chris
>
>
I second that.And AFAIK the V-Amp Pro is the most costeffective gizmo there
is.Some people say GuitarRig 2 (software) is pretty cool also.
Not a bad idea to use those two together.
+
cgu...@hotmail.com
> "Guncho" <cgun...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1172467556.7...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > No offense to anyone but I don't think there's too many "Pros" around
> > here. Pros use excellent amps, cranked up and miced in top notch
> > recording studios.
>
> Not allways.
Not always but most of the time.
Chris
jumpinjavabean
> I have been doing digital recording for about ten years (analog for twenty
> years before that...). I always record the guitar direct. I started out
> using a pedal board with a Rat, Arion DDL, & Arion compressor, then went to
> a Boss ME-20, then a Johnson J-Station. Now I record guitar going through a
> Digitech GNX4, into a mixer and then into the soundcard (I am using a Audigy
> Platinum). It works great! Bass, same way (although I usually use soundfonts
> and MIDI for bass tracks these days).
>
> Headset monitoring never sounds a good as using speakers. You may want to
> investigate getting a better headset if you are having difficulties with the
> one you are using.
>
> I am using Cakewalk Sonar 5 Producer Edition for software. It's a very good
> setup and I get pro quality recordings with it.
>
> You should be able to get quality recordings going direct using any
> multieffects processor. Hope this is helpful!
>
> - Show quoted text -
This may be a dumb question (I'm a newbie as well), but if you're
going to record a guitar direct, wouldn't it be more advantageous to
record the signal dry so you would have more flexibility to add
effects later?
Thanks,
Jonathan
Laurence Payne
<jumpinj...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>This may be a dumb question (I'm a newbie as well), but if you're
>going to record a guitar direct, wouldn't it be more advantageous to
>record the signal dry so you would have more flexibility to add
>effects later?
Sometimes. But guitar effects often aren't just tweaks applied by
recording engineers, they're part the instrument and its playing
style. The musician plays in sympathy and collaboration with the
effect.
The amp and speaker also are integral to the sound. Which is why you
generally mic a guitar cabinet rather than DI-ing it. Bass guitar
responds better to DI than lead guitar.
jumpinjavabean
wrote:
> On 26 Feb 2007 09:24:21 -0800, "jumpinjavabean"
>
>
> Sometimes. But guitar effects often aren't just tweaks applied by
> recording engineers, they're part the instrument and its playing
> style. The musician plays in sympathy and collaboration with the
> effect.
>
certain effects while playing, couldn't you set up your signal path
that way (apply the effect only to the signal you're monitoring)...at
least with simple effects like reverb.
Now that I think about it...as I'm writing this...I can see how some
nondeterministic effects (like feedback and delay) might sound
radically different each time they were applied. Doh! :)
Jonathan
Mogens V.
> On Feb 25, 11:42 am, "TheOldGuitarPlayer" <m...@here.com> wrote:
>
>>I have been doing digital recording for about ten years (analog for twenty
>>years before that...). I always record the guitar direct. I started out
>>using a pedal board with a Rat, Arion DDL, & Arion compressor, then went to
>>a Boss ME-20, then a Johnson J-Station. Now I record guitar going through a
>>Digitech GNX4, into a mixer and then into the soundcard (I am using a Audigy
>>Platinum). It works great! Bass, same way (although I usually use soundfonts
>>and MIDI for bass tracks these days).
>>
>>Headset monitoring never sounds a good as using speakers. You may want to
>>investigate getting a better headset if you are having difficulties with the
>>one you are using.
>>
>>I am using Cakewalk Sonar 5 Producer Edition for software. It's a very good
>>setup and I get pro quality recordings with it.
>>
>>You should be able to get quality recordings going direct using any
>>multieffects processor. Hope this is helpful!
>>
>
> going to record a guitar direct, wouldn't it be more advantageous to
> record the signal dry so you would have more flexibility to add
> effects later?
Often, both the miked guitar rig and the raw string is recorded, and
whatever sounds best after processing is used.
I'm building my studio off my appartment, so SPL is a problem, plus I'm
trying to setup my gear to have the same sound live and when recording.
jumpinjavabean
wrote:
> jumpinjavabean wrote:
> Often, both the miked guitar rig and the raw string is recorded, and
> whatever sounds best after processing is used.
> I'm building my studio off my appartment, so SPL is a problem, plus I'm
> trying to setup my gear to have the same sound live and when recording.
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Mogens V.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yeah...now that I think about it, that's probably the best way to go
if you can swing it.
Les Cargill
I would not be surprised that some relatively expensive session players
have used modellers, some more than once. I *know* they often get used
for live shows... A great many jingles sound just like a PoD to me,
for time is, after all , money....
This is just one of those "never say never" things...
--
Les Cargill
hank alrich
> I would not be surprised that some relatively expensive session players
> have used modellers, some more than once. I *know* they often get used
> for live shows... A great many jingles sound just like a PoD to me,
> for time is, after all , money....
>
> This is just one of those "never say never" things...
Did you see the Pete Anderson piece in _Tape Op_? Hasn't tracked with an
amp in years.
--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam
DeeAa
news:1172467556.7...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> No offense to anyone but I don't think there's too many "Pros" around
> here. Pros use excellent amps, cranked up and miced in top notch
> recording studios.
>
Depends on the definition of 'pro' and then again, whether they really do
much studio work.
If the music is rootsy rock and roll or something in that vein, yeah, most
people do use big amps.
But if by professional we mean people who play for living in dance bands,
playing support for singers who go by their own name and have varying people
in their bands...well that's another story.
I know, we're talking studio here, I'm talking mostly live, but still,
there's no escaping the fact that D/I is pushing it's way into studios as
well.
I know quite a few people who play for living in that fashion, and almost
all of them play some sort of modelers or emulators direct-to-board. Like
this old friend of mine who's played 4 nights a week for 2-3 frontline
top-10 singers for over a decade - he's always played D/I since the first
Alesis Quadraverb GT appeared and had a decent emulated output. He's used a
JMP-1 and GK and I think he currently uses a H&K Tubeman plus in addition to
some other gear, BOTH in studio and live. He said that there's simply no
contest for D/I gear when they're doing TV shows for instance, it's way too
hard to get all the amps and stuff miked properly. And then he naturally
records with them as well, although for those rare lead bits he'll use also
real amps sometimes.
I also have a friend who's toured with international bands and worked in
sound reinforcement for 20+ years and he mixes and arranges all the bands in
the biggest local club, and that includes pretty much all rock bands that
tour hereabouts, except those who are literally too big to fit anywhere else
than stadions - but still including top-10 bands, eurovision contestants
etc. Definitely pro. And he claims at least half of the guitarists these
days - even if they may have big rigs on stage - also provide the mixer with
a direct line. And in the studio as well that is often the only way to
achieve that utterly in-your-ear totally dry sound too.
I'd also call this guy who makes radio jingles etc. for a living a pro - he
makes full-band and orchestral song bits for commercials etc - but the only
thing he mikes is the human voice. Otherwise, his studio is a small room,
practically a closet, and all guitars are played on his Yamaha on D/I and
they sound excellent.
I'm not a pro but I've used D/I gear both live and in studio, and in studios
I'll always use D/I except for when I need feedback and want an especially
wailing lead. I've done it many times that I've had both done on several
tracks at once, and we've always ended up using the D/I sound because it's
better, tighter and more malleable. Then we'd use the miked sound to provide
some room reverb and softness when need be.
There's no contest that open miking does still provide a great sound and
often a better sound, but that's a whole lot more work also, and unless
you're really particular about a certain sound you can only get over the
air, well, D/I does away with hours and hours of mic placement trouble and
still give you pretty much the same sound, and in many respects a lot better
one too.
hank alrich
> No offense to anyone but I don't think there's too many "Pros" around
> here. Pros use excellent amps, cranked up and miced in top notch
> recording studios.
Is Pete Anderson pro enough for you? Take a look at the recent _Tape Op_
and read the interview. He hasn't cut a track using an amp in years.
That may not be my own preferred approach, but it's obviously working
for him. I suspect all his bills are paid.
drichard
fair to say that most pros do use DI/modellers on occasion, and some
use them all of the time.
For someone recording in an apartment, a DI is a godsend. Personally I
like the Pod XT and would recommend it. But others get good results
with other equipment.
Dean
> Chris- Hide quoted text -
Mogens V.
> No offense to you, but I think yours is an outdated attitude. It's
> fair to say that most pros do use DI/modellers on occasion, and some
> use them all of the time.
>>No offense to anyone but I don't think there's too many "Pros" around
>>here...
Guys, when I asked 'you pro's' for comments, I meant there's a load of
good kwowledable dudes (and occational gals) in here.
Lets not get into what Pro is or isn't. Main thing is all have valid
experiences, and since I haven't recorded and made a shitload $$$ on my
first platinum album as yet :-D, I ask where the herd flocks.
Anyways, thanks for all comments. Notes duely taken, shopping awaiting.
Guncho
I guess when I think "Pro" I think of major label recording artists
like Eric Clapton.
I'm sure lot's of session musicians do use modellers but I generally
don't look to them for great tone.
Chris
Guncho
> No offense to you, but I think yours is an outdated attitude. It's
> fair to say that most pros do use DI/modellers on occasion, and some
> use them all of the time.
Well I guess that depends on which pros you're talking about. Some
guy recording a jingle for Campbell's Soup? Sure. Eric Clapton,
Slash, Neil Young, not a chance.
>
> For someone recording in an apartment, a DI is a godsend.
I agree. I think modelling amps are great for home use but I can tell
that modelling amps were not used on any cd I own.
Chris
Dave Van
> 'someone' wrote this'n'that:
>> No offense to you, but I think yours is an outdated attitude. It's
>> fair to say that most pros do use DI/modellers on occasion, and some
>> use them all of the time.
>
>>> No offense to anyone but I don't think there's too many "Pros" around
>>> here...
>
> Guys, when I asked 'you pro's' for comments, I meant there's a load of
> good kwowledable dudes (and occational gals) in here.
Which dudes in here do you think are occasional gals?
Scott Dorsey
>
>I'm sure lot's of session musicians do use modellers but I generally
>don't look to them for great tone.
The modelling gadgets give you the option of a wider variety of tones
in a short time period without carrying a lot of equipment in. They
are a godsend on things for jingles where the whole thing has to be
done in a very limited amount of time with very specific tone.
You can get away with them for all kinds of backing tracks. I can't
imagine ever using them for a lead guitar track, but they have a place
in the world.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Guncho
I agree with everything you said.
What I don't agree with is someone saying that no one can tell the
difference or that all pros use these.
Chris
Mogens V.
Agreed. I really have no interest in sounding like this or that
otherwise excellent well known amp, more in creating my own tone.
Still, having each our own signature sound isn't easy these days...
Let's try to narrow this a bit, and forget feature rich modellers.
I already have most of the effects I need, less a few, and BTW would
rather aquire individuallly selected effects as need be.
I'm quite happy with my tone, but, as previously stated, need to work
off an appartment.
If it turns out the best/only way to get a good final tone (and get it
on tracks) is using a _real_ amp and a soak, I'll have that.
Preferably with a small amp, so tone can be had without high SPLs.
(I have another thread about small amps and speaker sizes, not unrelated
to this one)
I've gotten some very good refs to modellers et al, but still need ideas
to (non-multieffects) speakeremus and powersoaks to make decisions.
Further, if such does work, I see no need for a dedicated guitar amp,
but might end up with a two-part setup: A tone/effects/speakeremu rack
and continue using my own (SS) amp plus two speakers for live stuff.
It would be more flexible, as I could leave the amp/speakers for a band
setup, and just take the rack back'n'forth.
A bit like having a wife and a kinky lover all in one package :-D
Agent 86
> I guess when I think "Pro" I think of major label recording artists like
> Eric Clapton.
>
Nile Rodgers?
OR How about skip the DI box altogether and plug your guitar right into
the console a la John Lennon on Revolution?
Is that major enough for you?
Agent 86
I must have missed a post somewhere. Who said NO ONE can tell the diff?
Who said ALL pros use them?
I'm no pro, but I've been at this for a pretty good while. There are
definitely times when I use direct guitar instead of a miked amp because
it fits the track better. Rhythm guitar in a busy mix, tracked in a less
than optimal room with drum bleed everywhere? Where's my Sansamp Classic?
And I haven't miked a bass amp in years, and when I stopped, I hadn't
really used very much of the bass amp track on a final mix for a couple or
years before that.
jtougas
I noticed in January's Sound-On-Sound, in the Les Paul article, that
he uses a Tech21 pedal in his live rig - looks like a ParaDI.
If it's good enough for him, I'm willing to give it a shot...
--
jtougas
"listen- there's a hell of a good universe next door
let's go" - e.e. cummings
Guncho
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:25:54 -0800, Guncho wrote:
> > On Feb 27, 2:24 pm, klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
> >> Guncho <cgun...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >I'm sure lot's of session musicians do use modellers but I generally
> >> >don't look to them for great tone.
>
> >> The modelling gadgets give you the option of a wider variety of tones in
> >> a short time period without carrying a lot of equipment in. They are a
> >> godsend on things for jingles where the whole thing has to be done in a
> >> very limited amount of time with very specific tone.
>
> >> You can get away with them for all kinds of backing tracks. I can't
> >> imagine ever using them for a lead guitar track, but they have a place
> >> in the world.
> >> --scott
> >> --
> >> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>
> > I agree with everything you said.
>
> > What I don't agree with is someone saying that no one can tell the
> > difference or that all pros use these.
>
> I must have missed a post somewhere. Who said NO ONE can tell the diff?
> Who said ALL pros use them?
Grip said virtually no one can tell the difference and the other part
I was exaggerating to make a point. I believe it's called hyperbole.
>
> I'm no pro, but I've been at this for a pretty good while. There are
> definitely times when I use direct guitar instead of a miked amp because
> it fits the track better. Rhythm guitar in a busy mix, tracked in a less
> than optimal room with drum bleed everywhere? Where's my Sansamp Classic?
> And I haven't miked a bass amp in years, and when I stopped, I hadn't
> really used very much of the bass amp track on a final mix for a couple or
> years before that.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
What studio do you own/work at? Who has recorded there?
Chris
Guncho
Are you suggesting that the majority of major label recording artists
don't record with mic'd amps?
Chris
WillStG
> Agreed. I really have no interest in sounding like this or that
> otherwise excellent well known amp, more in creating my own tone.
> Still, having each our own signature sound isn't easy these days...
Well - the tone of the amp is one thing. A very important
thing. But the signature sound of a player comes from the hands, from
how you play your instrument more than anything else. But this becomes
clearer as the player progresses of course, so for the less advanced
player a great tone is extremely helpful, and helps in developing
one's playing considerably.
>
> Let's try to narrow this a bit, and forget feature rich modellers.
> I already have most of the effects I need, less a few, and BTW would
> rather aquire individuallly selected effects as need be.
>
> I'm quite happy with my tone, but, as previously stated, need to work
> off an appartment.
> If it turns out the best/only way to get a good final tone (and get it
> on tracks) is using a _real_ amp and a soak, I'll have that.
> Preferably with a small amp, so tone can be had without high SPLs.
> (I have another thread about small amps and speaker sizes, not unrelated
> to this one)
I find that the response I hear from a live speaker affects my
playing alot in a positive way, and this is evident to me listening
to playback. I have been using a Tech 21 Trademark 10 a lot around
the house for tracking, but using the DI out to track. But even
though the speaker isn't miced, it helps my playing a lot to have the
live speaker to hear subtle things - even LOUD things can have
subtleties.
BTW, the Tech 21 stuff sounds more credible and harmonically
rich I think than any direct system I've used; the Zoom 9002, a
Rockman, digitalmodeling like The Pod, my Roland GT5, or Digitech
Legend 21. I do track clean with the GT5 sometimes though, and use it
together with the Trademark 10 amp, which is at $150 a really great
deal for a 10 watt amp that tracks great. The Tech 21 stuff uses
analog modeling, not digital modeling of amplifiers, and this really
helps a lot, digital modeling suffers from being, well, digital I
guess.
> I've gotten some very good refs to modellers et al, but still need ideas
> to (non-multieffects) speakeremus and powersoaks to make decisions.
>
> Further, if such does work, I see no need for a dedicated guitar amp,
> but might end up with a two-part setup: A tone/effects/speakeremu rack
> and continue using my own (SS) amp plus two speakers for live stuff.
> It would be more flexible, as I could leave the amp/speakers for a band
> setup, and just take the rack back'n'forth.
The only downside of my little tracking setup has turned out to
be now I want a multichannel Tech 21 guitar amp for live! And they do
have a really cool cheap little midi interface that will channel
switch their 3 channel amps, to link up with the multieffects unit.
Regards,
Will Miho
NY TV/Audio Post/Music/Live Sound Guy
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits
DeeAa
news:1172654691.0...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> BTW, the Tech 21 stuff sounds more credible and harmonically
> rich I think than any direct system I've used; the Zoom 9002, a
> Rockman, digitalmodeling like The Pod, my Roland GT5, or Digitech
> Legend 21. I do track clean with the GT5 sometimes though, and use it
> together with the Trademark 10 amp, which is at $150 a really great
> deal for a 10 watt amp that tracks great. The Tech 21 stuff uses
> analog modeling, not digital modeling of amplifiers, and this really
> helps a lot, digital modeling suffers from being, well, digital I
> guess.
>
I am a huge fan of Tech-21 stuff as well.
I use my Tri-Ac a lot D/I, it takes a lot pf EQ'ing the highs to a
reasonable level and less gain than the presets, but it sure sounds great.
Even better with Behringer G100 D/I box which also has a cab modeler.
I recently found a DOD 'even harmonix' FX100 pedal, and I found that using
it in front of the Tri-AC really lifts the harmonics to an incredibly rich
level. It definitely screams and wails.
All I really need is the Tri-Ac 'ACDC' setup with less gain and highs etc.
and the DOD as a solo booster and all direct to an SS poweramp/speaker or to
board via the Behringer D/I emulator, and it REALLY rocks. Wails. There is
in effect 3 speaker emulators on, then, and it works very well. In fact I'm
hard pressed which system I'll be using live - my Tri-ac setup which is one
floorboard, or my JMP-1 marshall rig. They sound pretty much the same now.
Here's my first test with that setup; triac on left, DOD on top on right,
using it's emulated output. Too saturated, still, but IMO sounds killer and
now I've adjusted it's even better. This has no EQ or any after-the fact
compression etc.
http://deeaa.pp.fi/clips/DOD.mp3
I'm sure if you like the tech-21 sound, you'll be hard pressed to find a
better boost pedal match than that DOD.
Mogens V.
I hear what you're saying. Had a listen, and though we're into different
styles/tone, it's a real good indicator. Thanks.
After this thread I'm more of an optimist. I'll get the studio part up
running and get my feet wet, hands dirty, and take it from there.
Just didn't want to start off shopping the wrong stuff.
Ty Ford
(in article <1172604354....@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>):
I use Groove tube direct boxes (Ditto and Brick) for electric guitar. They
behave very much like the front end of an old Fender tube amp, I have two of
those here as well; mid 1960 Super Reverb and Vibrolux. The guitarists plug
the output of their pedal boards into the direct boxes.
Some of the guitar players get a bit weird about them at first blush, but
after I explain re-amping they settle down. The only ones with problems are
the ones who are so married to their amp sounds (drive and distortion and all
that). But, In an amazing number of cases, the clean sound with some plugins
works best.
I just finished a mix in which the Les Paul was direct and reamped. I ended
up using mostly (84.7%) direct until the choruses and then a bit more on the
outro to add some chonk (not chunk) and we were all very happy with it.
The P bass goes right into the instrument input of my Millennia Media STT-1
(direct).
If you are in a situation where you have the square footage for to put amps
in big rooms, crank 'em up and go for it while the whole band plays and
tracks together, fine, but in many cases, that's a luxury most of us can no
longer afford.
The "pod" technology has revolutionized the industry. More "big" artists than
you could imagine use this technology every day because it works and sounds
good.
Regards,
Ty Ford
--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU
Mogens V.
> Mogens V. wrote:
>
>>Agreed. I really have no interest in sounding like this or that
>>otherwise excellent well known amp, more in creating my own tone.
>>Still, having each our own signature sound isn't easy these days...
>
>
> Well - the tone of the amp is one thing. A very important
> thing. But the signature sound of a player comes from the hands, from
> how you play your instrument more than anything else. But this becomes
> clearer as the player progresses of course, so for the less advanced
> player a great tone is extremely helpful, and helps in developing
> one's playing considerably.
Right. My view is it's mostly the player, but also partly the gear,
though gear may be viewed more as a complement to the players style.
To reverse this, plug someone without personal style into an
acknowledged player rig and it may not be good. Reverse the order, and
it'll most likely be good, simply because of the player.
>>Let's try to narrow this a bit, and forget feature rich modellers.
>>I already have most of the effects I need, less a few, and BTW would
>>rather aquire individuallly selected effects as need be.
>>
>>I'm quite happy with my tone, but, as previously stated, need to work
>>off an appartment.
>>If it turns out the best/only way to get a good final tone (and get it
>>on tracks) is using a _real_ amp and a soak, I'll have that.
>>Preferably with a small amp, so tone can be had without high SPLs.
>>(I have another thread about small amps and speaker sizes, not unrelated
>>to this one)
>
>
> I find that the response I hear from a live speaker affects my
> playing alot in a positive way, and this is evident to me listening
> to playback. I have been using a Tech 21 Trademark 10 a lot around
> the house for tracking, but using the DI out to track. But even
> though the speaker isn't miced, it helps my playing a lot to have the
> live speaker to hear subtle things - even LOUD things can have
> subtleties.
Couldn't agree more, which is also why I need both some sonics and be
able to get the same tone on track. Only, can't do it at decent levels.
> BTW, the Tech 21 stuff sounds more credible and harmonically
> rich I think than any direct system I've used; the Zoom 9002, a
> Rockman, digitalmodeling like The Pod, my Roland GT5, or Digitech
> Legend 21. I do track clean with the GT5 sometimes though, and use it
> together with the Trademark 10 amp, which is at $150 a really great
> deal for a 10 watt amp that tracks great. The Tech 21 stuff uses
> analog modeling, not digital modeling of amplifiers, and this really
> helps a lot, digital modeling suffers from being, well, digital I
> guess.
Mnn, my ADA MP-2, being all-analog (except for some digial stuff in te
loop) also has a 2x12/4x12 cab emu, though only selectable from a
backpanel switch, plus I can't program it on/off. Works well for a
somewhat dark tone, but isn't quite there, and isn't flexible.
I'll have a look at all suggestions in here, and surely find 'it'.
Guncho
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:25:54 -0500, Guncho wrote
That's why you go into a real studio to record.
>
> The "pod" technology has revolutionized the industry. More "big" artists than
> you could imagine use this technology every day because it works and sounds
> good.
That is simply not true. I can imagine a lot of big artists and the
majority don't record like this.
Chris
Guncho
> Mogens V. wrote:
> > Agreed. I really have no interest in sounding like this or that
> > otherwise excellent well known amp, more in creating my own tone.
> > Still, having each our own signature sound isn't easy these days...
>
> Well - the tone of the amp is one thing. A very important
> thing. But the signature sound of a player comes from the hands, from
> how you play your instrument more than anything else. But this becomes
> clearer as the player progresses of course, so for the less advanced
> player a great tone is extremely helpful, and helps in developing
> one's playing considerably.
So why is that the most advanced players are the ones who care the
most about what gear they use? Spending thousands and thousands of
dollars looking for that amp, that guitar etc.
Chris
Guncho
wrote:
> WillStG wrote:
> > Mogens V. wrote:
>
> >>Agreed. I really have no interest in sounding like this or that
> >>otherwise excellent well known amp, more in creating my own tone.
> >>Still, having each our own signature sound isn't easy these days...
>
> > Well - the tone of the amp is one thing. A very important
> > thing. But the signature sound of a player comes from the hands, from
> > how you play your instrument more than anything else. But this becomes
> > clearer as the player progresses of course, so for the less advanced
> > player a great tone is extremely helpful, and helps in developing
> > one's playing considerably.
>
> Right. My view is it's mostly the player, but also partly the gear,
> though gear may be viewed more as a complement to the players style.
> To reverse this, plug someone without personal style into an
> acknowledged player rig and it may not be good. Reverse the order, and
> it'll most likely be good, simply because of the player.
You're confusing playing well with sounding good. If David Gilmour
would sound just as good without all the high end guitars, amps and
effects, he wouldn't use them.
Chris
hank alrich
Are you suggsting the names mentioned are not pro enough for your
distinguished opinion?
Dave
wrote:
> Scott Dorsey wrote:
I usally perfer to mic up the guitar amp for the amp sound and room
noise. In sessions I like to use a dynamic (usally Shure SM57) close
to the amp on or off centre depending on what sound i what. I then use
a capacitor mic (usally Rode NT2A) at the back of the room for a
natural sound.
I have plug-ed guitar straight into a mixer before however you need to
DI it first for serveral reasons one being the input impedance of the
mixer will be too low for the guitar, which is likes to drive
impedance of 500 Kohms or more; the guitar output is unbalanced so the
interference-rejecting properties of the mixer's balanced input will
be lost. This all adds hiss onto your track.
What the DI unit does is convert the instruments output to a low-
impedance balanced signal, and also reduces its output leevel to the
millivolt range suitable for feeding a microphone input.
When recording bass I like to DI it through a nice fat compressor
which gives it a really nice sound
Hope this helps
Guncho
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm suggesting that naming two people proves absolutely nothing.
Chris
RichL
Look, this argument is turning into a single coil vs. humbucker,
Fender vs. Gibson, Ginger vs. Maryann, etc. It's personal
preference! The fact that all of you can dig up numerous examples
supporting your view makes my point. If you love one or the other,
fine! If someone else disagrees, get over it! Can't we find better
ways to help our fellow guitarists other than engaging in these drawn-
out pissing contests?
Guncho
>
> - Show quoted text -
If someone wants to use some form of recording guitar other than
micing an amp, that is fine, I've done it myself, but don't try and
tell me that "No one can tell the difference" or the majority of pros
do this.
Chris
Romeo Rondeau
> Mnn, my ADA MP-2, being all-analog (except for some digial stuff in te
> loop) also has a 2x12/4x12 cab emu, though only selectable from a
> backpanel switch, plus I can't program it on/off. Works well for a
> somewhat dark tone, but isn't quite there, and isn't flexible.
> I'll have a look at all suggestions in here, and surely find 'it'.
If you're using an ADA, for god's sake... don't record it direct :-)
Romeo Rondeau
>> you could imagine use this technology every day because it works and sounds
>> good.
>
> That is simply not true. I can imagine a lot of big artists and the
> majority don't record like this.
>
> Chris
Yeah, but it's what the Pod people tell him :-)
WillStG
As I said, tone is _very_ important, but the guy said he wanted a
"signature sound", I was just addressing that. The "signature sound"
of a truly advanced player reveals itself even when the guitar or amp
isn't the greatest, or you aren't micing or capturing them optimally -
in my experience anyway. I think this is true of drummers as well,
Steve Gadd still will sound like Steve Gadd on the crappist drumkit
you can imagine over a single mic.
But sure, we like to use the best gear possible. I like to think
of myself as more of a purist, the right amp and the right guitar.
And I do have lots of tube amps and lots of guitars, even mics and
preamps. However I do hate having to wear the engineering hat when I
am trying to do session work, so a simple setup is a good thing to me.
Speed and flexibility *without sacrificing tone* - this is good
for me. I can't do a Boogie Rectifier type sound or a Marshall
crunch very well with say, just a Champ amp, but I can with just a
Trademark 10. I wouldn't really compare Tech 21 stuff in the same
breath with most other "modeling amps" which can end up sounding like
a gnat buzzing when reduced to "tape". And when I record at home -
which is often these days - with the kids and the wife and neighbors
and all around, the 10 watts the Trademark 10 put out are just fine.
Oh I could use a Champ amp with a mic, something like that, or I could
also use my Lexicon 284 stereo tube amp direct or with a mic. Or I
*could* put out 3 different amps with 10 mics bussed through a Manley
Varimu or something. But with the small Trademark 10 I can just plug
in and go, turning dials till I have what I need, and I don't have to
change setups for every song that needs a different amp.
IMHO the Tech 21 stuff is very credible sounding, it's all analog,
not digital modeling, and it sounds harmonically dense and rich when
you use it for recording.
But YMMV.
JoeT
"Guncho" <cgu...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1172679392....@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Well established artists rarely have to foot the retail bill for equipment
in that regard. The manufacturers seek them out in hopes they will be seen
using their shit! They don't spend thousands and thousands as you state and
you know it, or should given your apparent knowledge of all things. lol
JoeT
Dude the majority of your imaginations aren't facts, they're opinions.
Imaginary ones at that! It's good that you've finally put it in writing
though. A solid first step! lol
Brian Running
> micing an amp, that is fine, I've done it myself, but don't try and
> tell me that "No one can tell the difference" or the majority of pros
> do this.
Excuse me, I know I'm really out of place to bring this up, but --
"Micing" an amp? How do you do that? With more than one mouse? If you
only use one mouse, is it "mousing" an amp?
I tried Wikipedia, but now I have to resort to the second-most-reliable
source of information in the world, guitar players. :-)
Guncho
> "Guncho" <cgun...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1172679392....@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Feb 28, 4:24 am, "WillStG" <will...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > So why is that the most advanced players are the ones who care the
> > most about what gear they use? Spending thousands and thousands of
> > dollars looking for that amp, that guitar etc.
>
> > Chris
>
> Well established artists rarely have to foot the retail bill for equipment
> in that regard.
They do if they want vintage gear and most of the guitarists I listen
to, play vintage gear.
The manufacturers seek them out in hopes they will be seen
> using their shit! They don't spend thousands and thousands as you state and
> you know it, or should given your apparent knowledge of all things. lol
A lot of them do.
Chris
Agent 86
>
> So why is that the most advanced players are the ones who care the most
> about what gear they use? Spending thousands and thousands of dollars
> looking for that amp, that guitar etc.
Another overly broad generalization.
Is Skunk Baxter an advanced player? He likes Sears Silvertones.
And to borrow one of your previous examples, if you see Clapton playing a
vintage Strat, try to keep in mind that it was likely not vintage when
he bought it, as he's getting pretty vintage himself.
Agent 86
> On Feb 27, 7:22 pm, Agent 86 <msm...@control.gov> wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:25:54 -0800, Guncho wrote:
>>
>> > What I don't agree with is someone saying that no one can tell the
>> > difference or that all pros use these.
>>
>> I must have missed a post somewhere. Who said NO ONE can tell the diff?
>> Who said ALL pros use them?
>
> Grip said virtually no one can tell the difference and the other part I
> was exaggerating to make a point. I believe it's called hyperbole.
Maybe Grip was exaggerating to make a point. At least he had the good
sense to stick the word "Virtually" in there so people wouldn't think he
was a dumbass.
> What studio do you own/work at? Who has recorded there?
I told you, I'm no pro. I have my own modest home set up where I record my
own projects and a few outside projects for local musicians that I like
personally.
So what studio do YOU work at? Who has recorded THERE?
Romeo Rondeau
There are major artists who own LOTS of guitars that are not endorsement
instruments. It's a big industry and there's a lot more going on out
there than your above statement, so dare I say... SHUT YER PIE HOLE :-)
Romeo Rondeau
Artists who care about their tone don't use PODs by and large, there are
exceptions and I'm sure you can get them from the Line6 website.
Romeo Rondeau
So, you're saying that big artists don't buy vintage gear? Careful
before you answer...
Mogens V.
> On Feb 28, 9:07 am, Ty Ford <tyreef...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>If you are in a situation where you have the square footage for to put amps
>>in big rooms, crank 'em up and go for it while the whole band plays and
>>tracks together, fine, but in many cases, that's a luxury most of us can no
>>longer afford.
>
>
> That's why you go into a real studio to record.
You're welcome to finance me :-D
Or better yet, get me that contact so I can score that platinum-headed
contract with a major label - as an unknown artist.
Why do you think I ask Q's about getting stuff directly on tracks in a
home studio from an appartment?
(rethorical question, need not be answered)
Mogens V.
It's not an MP-1, but an MP-2, though if you mean due to the stock unit
noise probs, then those have been solved, except for the tube hi-gain
voicing, which is useless since so much gain just doesn't work well with
only two tubes. I'm aware of that.
Compressor rebuild (still need to change it into a sideband), ditto in
the analog chorous, other standard noise mods done, some opamps changed.
So. is it the direct-out or cabemu tone?
Maybe you just don't like them.
Please elaborate a bit more, I know you have a ton to offer..
Agent 86
I'm not saying anything of the sort.
I'm using specific contrary examples to point out the inherent flaw in
Guncho's generalizations.
Are you saying all "Big Artists" are advanced players?
And just who ARE the "Big Artists" these days anyway? Last time I saw him,
Leslie West looked like he's lost a couple-a-hundred pounds. Mama Cass is
long gone. I guess we've still got John Popper.
Les Cargill
> On Feb 27, 10:09 am, walki...@nv.net (hank alrich) wrote:
>
>>Guncho wrote:
>>
>>>No offense to anyone but I don't think there's too many "Pros" around
>>>here. Pros use excellent amps, cranked up and miced in top notch
>>>recording studios.
>>
>>Is Pete Anderson pro enough for you? Take a look at the recent _Tape Op_
>>and read the interview. He hasn't cut a track using an amp in years.
>>That may not be my own preferred approach, but it's obviously working
>>for him. I suspect all his bills are paid.
>>
>>--
>>ha
>>Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam
>
>
> I guess when I think "Pro" I think of major label recording artists
> like Eric Clapton.
>
> I'm sure lot's of session musicians do use modellers but I generally
> don't look to them for great tone.
>
> Chris
>
Zappa recorded direct sans modelling. Likewise Zeppelin, the Beatles,
variousl people for David Bowie, and it's been a Nashville staple
for decades. Not reamping, just plain ole direct.
---
Les Cargill
RichL
I probably know more about the Beatles than the others you mention,
but the statement probably applies to the others too. The Beatles
recorded direct when doing so produced the sounds they wanted. Plenty
of examples of micing amps there too. The key is to do whatever you
have to to get what you want. To adhere strictly to one view or the
other is foolishness.
Les Cargill
David Gilmour has used direct injected guitar sounds all his working
life. Go rent the "Classic Albums" of "DSOTM". It's especially
apparent on "The Division Bell".
And, Scott, yes - on leads, too.
--
Les Cargill
RichL
Gilmour did it both ways -- amps and DI. Most of the greats did.
Lesson: don't be closed-minded!
Les Cargill
> On Feb 28, 4:24 am, "WillStG" <will...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>Mogens V. wrote:
>>
>>>Agreed. I really have no interest in sounding like this or that
>>>otherwise excellent well known amp, more in creating my own tone.
>>>Still, having each our own signature sound isn't easy these days...
>>
>> Well - the tone of the amp is one thing. A very important
>>thing. But the signature sound of a player comes from the hands, from
>>how you play your instrument more than anything else. But this becomes
>>clearer as the player progresses of course, so for the less advanced
>>player a great tone is extremely helpful, and helps in developing
>>one's playing considerably.
>
>
> So why is that the most advanced players are the ones who care the
> most about what gear they use? Spending thousands and thousands of
> dollars looking for that amp, that guitar etc.
>
> Chris
>
The reason you think that is because you read it in a magazine which
was designed to sell you equipment. Think about it. We also have
$50,000 motorcylces for yer weekend warrior pseudo-biker.
I am quite serious - in all the touring and recording guys I knew before
1985, only *one* even had more than one amp. These warn't first-call
LA players ( nor even famous at all) , but they have credits and most
toured a lot. Most used a Lab series or a Peavey because they just
wouldn't break. In those days, people were selling Twins for
no money because nobody wanted them anymore.
Carlton and Ritenour used 'em, too. I bet "Peg" off "Aja" was a Lab
Series'.
Ain't the crate. It's the pilot.
--
Les Cargill
DeeAa
news:1172692408.5...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> As I said, tone is _very_ important, but the guy said he wanted a
> "signature sound", I was just addressing that. The "signature sound"
> of a truly advanced player reveals itself even when the guitar or amp
> isn't the greatest, or you aren't micing or capturing them optimally -
> in my experience anyway. I think this is true of drummers as well,
> Steve Gadd still will sound like Steve Gadd on the crappist drumkit
> you can imagine over a single mic.
>
Don't even have to be am 'advanced player'.
I dial in pretty much exactly the same sound whatever I play.
I've currently 3 different setups, one all-tube, one all-pedals, one
rackmount tube/SS hybrid.
I get pretty much exactly the some sound outta them all live; on 'tape' they
capture differently, with the 'all pedals' system giving the best sound
without any further tweaks and hassle.
Guncho
I don't recall mentioning that I had a studio. I can tell you that I
have recorded in pro studios and none of the engineers ever suggested
I use a POD instead of my amp.
Chris
noodles
Guncho...you make me sick (but only slightly).
Okay, I will engage in your goal-post moving counter-challenge strawman
exercise...
What "pro studios" (note the plural) and "engineers" (note the plural) have
you recorded with that didn't suggest you use a POD?
Whoever they are, they should have suggested you use a pitch corrector on
the vocals and a studio cat to play your guitar parts (based on the
garage-site songs you have offered up in the past)
You know...I hate to slag other players but...you just bring out the worst
in others.
Some people suggest that you can do great sounding home recordings with
POD-type gear and you move the goal posts to 'it can't be that great or
major label recording artists would ditch their high end rigs' for modelers.
At that point you've already ruined the thread.
To continue...people respond with examples of Pros using the technology
which you respond with (move goal posts) 'I think of major label recording
artists like Eric Clapton'
It goes further and then someone states this:
"More big artists than you could imagine use this technology every day
because it works and sounds good."
Which you respond with:
"I can imagine a lot of big artists and the majority don't record like
this."
What the hell does that even mean? "I can imagine"???
There's more back-and-forth and then you move the goal posts again and say:
"If someone wants to use some form of recording guitar other than
micing an amp, that is fine, I've done it myself, but don't try and
tell me that "No one can tell the difference" or the majority of pros
do this."
Suddenly it's now "No one can tell the difference" and "the majority of
pros" which nobody claimed. You are a worse debater then my 7 year old
son...
You sir, are an ass. I offically (as a Canadian) revoke your citizenship
and I also (as a musician) revoke your musicianship.
Repair Guy: Thank you for fighting the fight against this f#$&tard
Romeo Rondeau
Not at all, I LOVE EM! I just think they sound best when driving a tube
power amp into a vintage Marshall :-) The ADA is the best kept secret
out there, I have all these guys with these expensive boutique amps walk
up to my rack and say "Damn! This sounds great and it's rack gear!"
Romeo Rondeau
It looks like you both are treating the exception like the rule :-)
Seems to be the norm in here... oops another generalization :-)
Romeo Rondeau
>
> Suddenly it's now "No one can tell the difference" and "the majority of
> pros" which nobody claimed. You are a worse debater then my 7 year old
> son...
>
> You sir, are an ass. I offically (as a Canadian) revoke your citizenship
> and I also (as a musician) revoke your musicianship.
>
> Repair Guy: Thank you for fighting the fight against this f#$&tard
Well I don't use a POD because I think they sound like SHIT! Nothing
sounds like the original. I can hear the difference. I notice it right
away. Period. OK?
Mogens V.
Oh man, you just made me shed a tear or two :) I was about thinking I
might ass well ditch my otherwise beloved modded MP-2. Just kidding.
To continue, I hear what you're saying WRT taking it through an amp.
It's what I do now, only it's through my own SS class A amp with Sanken
output transistors. It halfways works as a tube amp, i.e. a wee bit of
2nd distortion when driven. Sounds great.
Only, it's still that problem recording off an appartment, though...
Guess I have sooo many suggestions now, I'll just have to go over my
notes and make decisions or trying out one or two DI thingies.
If it doesn't do well enuf, I think I may try a H&K Crunch Master with a
powersoak (wattage small enough I can build it myself), and try using
the DI's with that setup. If _that_ doesn't work, I'll get that 'ohh my
god' facial expression, and find a place for micing the setup.
Ahh, maybe a detachable soundproofed box around a smaller speaker/mic
can do it with a small amp like the crunch. Worth trying out.
Before someone cries "Pro's don't do that", remember my appartment,
yes?, and _I_ haven't turned Pro - yet, maybe next year :-D
+
"Mogens V." <mog...@NOYOUDONTvip.cybercity.dk> wrote in message
news:45e6ad21$0$181$157c...@dreader1.cybercity.dk...
from hands and from a quality instrument.So it doesn`t matter much which amp
gizmo to use.Many of them do just fine.
Real thing is a real thing though.Just can`t allways go that way
Peace
+
Ty Ford
(in article <1172679137.9...@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>):
>> If you are in a situation where you have the square footage for to put amps
>> in big rooms, crank 'em up and go for it while the whole band plays and
>> tracks together, fine, but in many cases, that's a luxury most of us can no
>> longer afford.
>
> That's why you go into a real studio to record.
>
>>
>> The "pod" technology has revolutionized the industry. More "big" artists
>> than
>> you could imagine use this technology every day because it works and sounds
>> good.
>
> That is simply not true. I can imagine a lot of big artists and the majority
> don't record like this.
>
> Chris
Imagine what you will Chris. The "real studios" still existing in the mid
atlantic are mostly gone or have turned into schools. This is the new
reality.
Regards,
Ty Ford
--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU
Ty Ford
(in article <1172679392....@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
> On Feb 28, 4:24 am, "WillStG" <will...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Mogens V. wrote:
>>> Agreed. I really have no interest in sounding like this or that
>>> otherwise excellent well known amp, more in creating my own tone.
>>> Still, having each our own signature sound isn't easy these days...
>>
>> Well - the tone of the amp is one thing. A very important
>> thing. But the signature sound of a player comes from the hands, from
>> how you play your instrument more than anything else. But this becomes
>> clearer as the player progresses of course, so for the less advanced
>> player a great tone is extremely helpful, and helps in developing
>> one's playing considerably.
>
> So why is that the most advanced players are the ones who care the
> most about what gear they use? Spending thousands and thousands of
> dollars looking for that amp, that guitar etc.
>
> Chris
>
Where are your facts on this? the most advanced players, WHO GET NOTICED, get
gear for free from companies that hope others will also notice and buy the
gear. You know, endorsement deals. That's how a LOT of ads work in the MI
business. In order to make some sort of impact, a gear maker needs to make
ads that show high profile people (champions, as they are called in marketing
lingo) to show off the stuff.
Stories about clever artists who take the gear and other stuff, money, tour
support, etc. but only use the gear when they need to show it off are pretty
standard.
And while the thought that the most advanced players are the only "ones who
care about what gear they use? Spending thousands and thousands of dollars
looking for that amp" isn't really true either.
There are a lot of top shelf players (many of whom no one know about relative
to those players who have been sucked up into the star maker machinery) who
use very simple rigs. I saw Joe Pas in Annapolis, MD many years ago with an
arch top and a really small practice amp. he blew everyone away.
John Prine did a LOT of his first album with a beat up Gibson Roy Smeck Stage
Deluxe.
You also find musicians who get a jones for their instrument or gear,
collecting ten to a hundred of them, but that's just a jones. They are
collectors the collections doesn't have a lot to do with how good they are or
the search for the perfect piece of gear.
Ty Ford
(in article <pan.2007.02.28...@control.gov>):
Thanks for my first chuckle of the day.
Ty Ford
(in article <1172686824....@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>):
> On Feb 28, 12:17 pm, walki...@nv.net (hank alrich) wrote:
>> Guncho <cgun...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Feb 27, 7:09 pm, Agent 86 wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:59:00 -0800, Guncho wrote:
>>>>> I guess when I think "Pro" I think of major label recording artists like
>>>>> Eric Clapton.
>>
>>>> Nile Rodgers?
>>
>>>> OR How about skip the DI box altogether and plug your guitar right into
>>>> the console a la John Lennon on Revolution?
>>
>>>> Is that major enough for you?
>>
>>> Are you suggesting that the majority of major label recording artists
>>> don't record with mic'd amps?
>>
>>> Chris
>>
>> Are you suggsting the names mentioned are not pro enough for your
>> distinguished opinion?
>>
>> --
>> ha
>> Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> I'm suggesting that naming two people proves absolutely nothing.
>
> Chris
>
I'm suggesting you like to argue for the sake of arguing. :)
Point is, we use what we use to make it sound the way we think it should
whether anyone else likes it or not until someone we respect and defer to
says they don't like it and then we tell them to fuck off FIRST before
heading off to find something "better."
Tom Scholz and his funny little boxes turned the world on its ear for a
while. While you can go all weird and snotty with me and poo-poo the boxes,
their impact on rock music can not be denied. He changed the landscape of how
a guitar sounds and what people can expect to plug into.
I think you can make a case for an amp modeler not as a replacement for the
amp, but as an effects box that creates a particular set of sounds you may
like. The last few guys through here brought in so many floor pedals and
racks that their guitar (well pickups and electronics) didn't have a lot to
do with the actual sound. And ALL of them way overused the compressor in
their rigs. (What's up with that anyway?)
I had a small solid state/tube practice amp, a Gorilla that I bought for less
than $100, new. With my tele, I got all sorts of great clean and crunchy
sounds. I could get it to sound absolutely HUGE. People would hear my tracks
and ask what amp I was using. I'd point to the Gorilla and they'd laugh and
say, "No, really, what amp did you use?"
Mind you, I don't put mic modelers in the same category. Call me a hypocrite,
but you can't really get a dynamic mic to perform like a condenser or ribbon
mic because the physics of how they capture sound (among other things) is
different. Yes, I have EQd an RE20 so that it sounds very much like a
condenser mic, but only in a limited application.
Regards,
Ty Ford
(in article <1172688098.4...@8g2000cwh.googlegroups.com>):
> If someone wants to use some form of recording guitar other than micing an
> amp, that is fine, I've done it myself, but don't try and tell me that "No
> one can tell the difference" or the majority of pros do this.
>
> Chris
OK. You can have that thought.
OTOH, when Max Ochs was here to record electric lap steel on one cut for the
CD I just sent off to his record company, I used a Groove Tube Ditto and
looped through it to a classic Fender Super Reverb. I miced the amp with a
Schoeps CMC641 and recorded Ditto and mic to separate tracks.
Mind you, the Ditto is not just another direct box. It's like the front end
of an a tube amp that sounds A LOT like a vintage fender amp. Those of you
who know the circuitry of the 1960s Fender amps would help us all here by
comparing those diagrams with what's in the Ditto and Brick. I gotta believe
the components and specs are very similar.
During the mix I compared the two. The miced amp sound was infinitessimally
less bright and slightly noisier. I could have EQed the amp to make them even
closer. I went with the direct Ditto sound and it was sweet as could be.
Neither Max or the record company came back on me to complain about using a
direct box instead of micing the amp.
Take away message: Don't knock it if you haven't tried it.
Mogens V.
> Tom Scholz and his funny little boxes turned the world on its ear for a
> while. While you can go all weird and snotty with me and poo-poo the boxes,
> their impact on rock music can not be denied. He changed the landscape of how
> a guitar sounds and what people can expect to plug into.
Yup, got the albums, still like his tone. That 6-band SS distortion
wasn't bad at all.
BTW, did you ever use the octopussy? AFAIR, it was pretty simple, but
likewise didn't take up much space for MIDI'ing something on/off.
Don't remember if it'll do on/off's only or also routing. No big deal...
> I think you can make a case for an amp modeler not as a replacement for the
> amp, but as an effects box that creates a particular set of sounds you may
> like. The last few guys through here brought in so many floor pedals and
> racks that their guitar (well pickups and electronics) didn't have a lot to
> do with the actual sound. And ALL of them way overused the compressor in
> their rigs. (What's up with that anyway?)
Exactly why I'm converting my compressor into a sideband for a more
natural envelope, and having some sustain function as strings fades off.
> I had a small solid state/tube practice amp, a Gorilla that I bought for less
> than $100, new. With my tele, I got all sorts of great clean and crunchy
> sounds. I could get it to sound absolutely HUGE. People would hear my tracks
> and ask what amp I was using. I'd point to the Gorilla and they'd laugh and
> say, "No, really, what amp did you use?"
Also duly noted...
Guncho
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm not the one who started with the generalizations. Someone said
that no one could tell a guitar track was not miced which is obviously
false and someone said that the majority of pro guitar players are not
recording with miced amps which is also, obviously false.
I'm not saying modellers etc suck or no one uses them, far from it.
I've used them myself. But don't try and tell me that the majority of
my cd's were recorded with them or that no one could tell the
difference.
Chris
Guncho
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm talking about guitarists who are household names.
Chris
Guncho
> "Guncho" <cgun...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Okay do you agree with these statements?
"No one could tell the difference between a guitar track recorded with
a microphone or not"
"The majority of pro players do not record by micing amps"
That is all I am disagreeing with.
I personally have recorded with a POD. It's great for home use. But
I'm pretty sure say Glyn Johns could tell the difference. Also I know
a lot about the bands I listen to and they record with miced amps.
Chris
Guncho
> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:16:32 -0500, Guncho wrote
>
> - Show quoted text -
I know a lot about the bands I listen to. They generally use top
notch tube amps with US Fender or Gibson guitars and they record by
micing their amps.
I'm not making this shit up.
Chris
+
channel in my jubilee Marshall.
I wouldn`t have to use it even for that cause my TC-Gmajor could do that
too.
But since the octopussy has served my so well so long I have kind of
accustomed to it.
TC came later.
+
Guncho
> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 13:20:24 -0500, Guncho wrote
>
> - Show quoted text -
You're totally misreading me. I am not saying, "Modellers are bad" or
"Recording DI is bad" or "Cheap gear is bad", I'm saying that the
statement of "No one could tell that a guitar track was not miced" is
false. There are people who could tell the difference. I'm also
saying that the statement, "The majority of pros do not record with
miced amps" is false, because I know a lot about a lot of famous
guitarists and they do mic their amps when they record.
Chris
Guncho
> On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 13:41:38 -0500, Guncho wrote
> Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU
I have tried it and I'm not knocking it.
On My Way on my Myspace site was recorded with all the guitars going
through a bass pod. Sounds fine to me but I'm not kidding myself into
thinking it sounds as good as it would with a sweet amp and a great
mic.
Ty Ford
(in article <1172765067.7...@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>):
> You're totally misreading me. I am not saying, "Modellers are bad" or
> "Recording DI is bad" or "Cheap gear is bad", I'm saying that the statement
> of "No one could tell that a guitar track was not miced" is false. There are
> people who could tell the difference. I'm also saying that the statement,
> "The majority of pros do not record with miced amps" is false, because I know
> a lot about a lot of famous guitarists and they do mic their amps when they
> record.
>
> Chris
Chris,
Oh, thats' different. Never mind.
Take a trip over to my Music Sampler page and listen to the max ochs cut. can
you tell which amp was used on the guitar?
Ty Ford
--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
combssl
"Mogens V." wrote:
>
> Agreed. I really have no interest in sounding like this or that
> otherwise excellent well known amp, more in creating my own tone.
> Still, having each our own signature sound isn't easy these days...
>
> Let's try to narrow this a bit, and forget feature rich modellers.
> I already have most of the effects I need, less a few, and BTW would
> rather aquire individuallly selected effects as need be.
>
> I'm quite happy with my tone, but, as previously stated, need to work
> off an appartment.
> If it turns out the best/only way to get a good final tone (and get it
> on tracks) is using a _real_ amp and a soak, I'll have that.
> Preferably with a small amp, so tone can be had without high SPLs.
> (I have another thread about small amps and speaker sizes, not unrelated
> to this one)
>
> I've gotten some very good refs to modellers et al, but still need ideas
> to (non-multieffects) speakeremus and powersoaks to make decisions.
>
> Further, if such does work, I see no need for a dedicated guitar amp,
> but might end up with a two-part setup: A tone/effects/speakeremu rack
> and continue using my own (SS) amp plus two speakers for live stuff.
> It would be more flexible, as I could leave the amp/speakers for a band
> setup, and just take the rack back'n'forth.
>
> A bit like having a wife and a kinky lover all in one package :-D
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Mogens V.
The main advantage of the modelers is getting a big variety of tones
from one box, very useful if you're playing covers or like some have
said, backing tracks in a short amount of time. If you already have your
tone and want to duplicate without amp/speaker/mic, you have your work
cut out for you to find the right combination of gadgets to get the same
tone direct. Don't limit yourself just the the newer modeling boxes,
there's older gear out there that will get great tones, they're just not
swiss army knife boxes.
Agent 86
>
> John Prine did a LOT of his first album with a beat up Gibson Roy Smeck
> Stage Deluxe.
And a lady never fared as well who traveled through so much.
Sorry, got carried away for a moment.
Agent 86
No, you're talking about pop-40 players.
To serious guitarists, Carlton and Ritenour ARE household names.
Guncho
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 11:04:27 -0500, Guncho wrote
>
> > You're totally misreading me. I am not saying, "Modellers are bad" or
> > "Recording DI is bad" or "Cheap gear is bad", I'm saying that the statement
> > of "No one could tell that a guitar track was not miced" is false. There are
> > people who could tell the difference. I'm also saying that the statement,
> > "The majority of pros do not record with miced amps" is false, because I know
> > a lot about a lot of famous guitarists and they do mic their amps when they
> > record.
>
> > Chris
>
> Chris,
>
> Oh, thats' different. Never mind.
>
> Take a trip over to my Music Sampler page and listen to the max ochs cut. can
> you tell which amp was used on the guitar?
>
> Ty Ford
>
> --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
> Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU
Ty
I thought I replied to this, but it hasn't shown up so...........
I couldn't find your sampler page but thought the song you played in
the Youtube video was awesome. Really, really nice stuff there.
Chris
Guncho
No I'm talking, Jimmy Page, Jimi Hendrix, Jerry Garcia, Eric Clapton,
Duane Allman, Derek Trucks, Carlos Santana, Slash, Neil Young, etc,
etc, etc.
Chris
Agent 86
>>
>> > I'm talking about guitarists who are household names.
>>
>> No, you're talking about pop-40 players.
>>
>> To serious guitarists, Carlton and Ritenour ARE household names.
>
> No I'm talking, Jimmy Page, Jimi Hendrix, Jerry Garcia, Eric Clapton,
> Duane Allman, Derek Trucks, Carlos Santana, Slash, Neil Young, etc, etc,
> etc.
All of whom I dig as well.
And out of the nine, only Trucks has never had a pop-40 hit.
hank alrich
> I'm talking about guitarists who are household names.
You might want to get out of the house more if you don't recognize
Ritenour and Carlton.
hank alrich
Every one of those cats would tell you Lee and Larry are worldclass
guitarists.
Ty Ford
(in article <pan.2007.03.01....@control.gov>):
I saw LR on the Ramsey Lewis show a few weeks ago. I forget what an amazing
player he is.
Ty
--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU
Ty Ford
(in article <1172795986.9...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>):
You need to get out More. :) Jerry and Jimi haven't been doing much studio
work lately.
Ty Ford
Ty Ford
(in article <1hub234.164jgg01jklsqeN%walk...@nv.net>):
> Guncho wrote:
>
>> I'm talking about guitarists who are household names.
>
> You might want to get out of the house more if you don't recognize
> Ritenour and Carlton.
>
>
STOP copping my "don't get out much" licks!. :) BTW the power company ain't
showed up yet and I think America is up on the top level of the archive.
Ty
Ty Ford
(in article <1172795850.8...@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>):
Hmm,
go to my website, the fast one, look up in the top of the page with the "TY"
keys. There are about 5 links up there. One is Music Sampler.
Thanks...I did NOT use an amp for that piece. :)
Ty Ford
--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU
Guncho
> On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 19:37:30 -0500, Guncho wrote
>
> - Show quoted text -
What's picking up the acoustic? Just the camera mic?
Chris
Romeo Rondeau
That ain't no camera mike :-)