Recording acoustic guitar .. and more
Jim
For whatever reason I got the idea of working up a totally " real " mix
of the old CCR Have you Ever seen the Rain. The idea was it's an easy
tune to play, and so should be a good test of my recording skill. Can I
get a sound I'm specifically after as opposed to liking whatever sound I
happen to be able to get.
Like a test in school, if I really understand a process, I should be
able to solve a problem and get the right answer. The right answer here
being a reasonable copy. Remember, I'm after the feel, the sound of the
song, not trying to make a mirror image of the notes.
I started out doing a rhythm track on my electric playing to the Logic
metronome. Then I used a measure of midi drums ( I am lazy ). And
metronome click really annoyed me so the sooner they were gone, the
better. Next came the melody line on electric to keep track of where I
was in the song.
It was late, and I don't have a bass here right now, so I sent that mix
to a friend in Arkansas so he could add the bass line. Got that back the
next morning. It was sorta, in his own words, overdone. He doesn't
really like the simplicity of CCR and overplayed it. Not a biggie, I'll
use it temporarily.
Now we're up to yesterday. He and I had a phone chat ( yeah Vonage )
about bass tones and stuff. That caused me to actually dig in my closet
and find the original CCR recording. Got it. Played it. Started
listening real close thru phones. I use those a lot now, remember the
cats don't like LOUD much.
In headphones, the acoustic rhythm track stands out. It's in both
channels, but slightly different. I remember hearing similar acoustic
tracks on the early Highway 101 records. The puzzle is, is it one
recording processed to do this somehow, or what. Google is your friend
and so after a while I had lots of advice on recording a rhythm track.
The majority opinion seems to be suck it up and play the part twice,
recording in mono each time. Then pan one hard left, and the other hard
right. For whatever reason that is the the way.
Oh, and just copying one track then panning that isn't the same. Won't
get the effect.
The idea of this approach is that two similar but not identical tracks
panned hard L and R fill the edges of the sound field and drop off
towards the center leaving sonic space for vocals and such.
That's different from a track that is mono and drops off in volume
towards the edges. A mono bass track would be an example of that.
After so many years of midi, and mono mixed midi at that, this stuff
fascinates me.
Oh, and in listening I realize the CCR record had an organ and a piano
in it. Huh, I thought they were a guitar band. Live and learn.
jim d
hank alrich
Yep, doing it the hard way results in a much richer and genuinely
fascinating sound. Many famous recordings have had the rhythm guitar(s)
handled that way.
> After so many years of midi, and mono mixed midi at that, this stuff
> fascinates me.
That's really cool, Jim, from the viewpoint of an old acoustic
play-it-for-real and live with the "beauty marks" guy.
> Oh, and in listening I realize the CCR record had an organ and a piano
> in it. Huh, I thought they were a guitar band. Live and learn.
>
>
> jim d
--
ha
shut up and play your guitar
Jim
> walk...@nv.net (hank alrich) wrote:
> >
> > The idea of this approach is that two similar but not identical tracks
> > panned hard L and R fill the edges of the sound field and drop off
> > towards the center leaving sonic space for vocals and such.
> >
> > That's different from a track that is mono and drops off in volume
> > towards the edges. A mono bass track would be an example of that.
>
> Yep, doing it the hard way results in a much richer and genuinely
> fascinating sound. Many famous recordings have had the rhythm guitar(s)
> handled that way.
I'm looking forward to having some time to give it a try.
Another approach might be to use two different mics, on two mono tracks,
placed so they pick up the guitar differently and try to get the sound
from one playing. I read that isn't gonna give me the same effect, but I
need to do it for myself and see what it does sound like.
> > After so many years of midi, and mono mixed midi at that, this stuff
> > fascinates me.
>
> That's really cool, Jim, from the viewpoint of an old acoustic
> play-it-for-real and live with the "beauty marks" guy.
I've taken midi as far as I can, time to move on. I probably wont
totally abandon it, but there is plenty midi doesn't do, or doesn't do
well, and I'm ready to explore that.
Thanks for posting the link to your tune. Very nice. That style of music
is EXACTLY my cup of tea :-)
And compliments to your daughter, if I read the credits correctly. She
has a beautiful voice.
jim d
Boyd Williamson
Spunky-6DCEC2....@news.giganews.com, "Jim" <Spu...@theCat.com>
wrote:
> In headphones, the acoustic rhythm track stands out. It's in both
> channels, but slightly different. I remember hearing similar acoustic
> tracks on the early Highway 101 records. The puzzle is, is it one
> recording processed to do this somehow, or what. Google is your friend
> and so after a while I had lots of advice on recording a rhythm track.
> The majority opinion seems to be suck it up and play the part twice,
> recording in mono each time. Then pan one hard left, and the other hard
> right. For whatever reason that is the the way.
>
> Oh, and just copying one track then panning that isn't the same. Won't
> get the effect.
>
> The idea of this approach is that two similar but not identical tracks
> panned hard L and R fill the edges of the sound field and drop off
> towards the center leaving sonic space for vocals and such.
The "standard," "optimum" way to record acoustic guitar that I've learned is
to record with a large diaphragm condenser mic over the soundhole, and a
small diaphragm condenser up near the nut. On playback, throw these hard R
and L. This would be optimum if you're only using one acoustic guitar track.
If you're using more than one track, I would record the same way, but pan
both mics of one track to one side, and both mics of the second track to the
other. Of course, if both mics are to one side, you probably could have
recorded them mixed to a mono track to begin with.
Generally, two separate takes will sound better than one track processed to
sound "doubled." It is the little differences in sound between the two that
makes the sound bigger and richer. Copying one and panning each to each side
will still be essentially mono because there are no variations in the
waveforms, and the listener's ear can't separate them.
Chorus units work by introducing little pitch differences between the
original and the copy. This is also why a 12-string sounds richer than a
6-string, because of the subtle differences in pitch between 2 identically
tuned strings. Some 12-string players even tune two identical strings
slightly different for a bit more effect.
Two separate takes on acoustic, playing the same thing and panned to
different sides, will sound like two tracks (two separate instruments)
because, no matter how identically you play the part, the waveforms will not
match up exactly, and the listener's ear will separate them.
If you're featuring a guitar part specifically, you may not want to double
track it. If, on the other hand, you're using acoustic guitar to build up a
rhythm section, two is good, but why stop there? Jeff Lynde is quoted as
saying there's no such thing as too many acoustic guitar tracks!
Zoid
LoDan
Except for the mic at the nut part, this is what you speak of. I
doubled the guitar part and did pretty good until the very end.
I don't if this link will work, if not...nevermind..
http://www.reverbnation.com/tunepak/song_2738981
Jim
> LoDan <lde...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > If you're featuring a guitar part specifically, you may not want to double
> > track it. If, on the other hand, you're using acoustic guitar to build up a
> > rhythm section, two is good, but why stop there? Jeff Lynde is quoted as
> > saying there's no such thing as too many acoustic guitar tracks!
> >
> > Zoid
>
> Except for the mic at the nut part, this is what you speak of. I
> doubled the guitar part and did pretty good until the very end.
> I don't if this link will work, if not...nevermind..
> http://www.reverbnation.com/tunepak/song_2738981
Leo, the link worked fine. Cool.
Zoid, I hadn't thought of two mics then still doing two takes. There's
lots to try.
I did some tracks yesterday to experiment and yeah, it works and is
mostly what I'm after. The things to watch are to play something you CAN
do twice, or, or mayeb and, play two parts that compliment each other.
One real straight dynamically the other with accents .... as an example.
The tracks I did have another problem They sound harsh. That could be
mic choice or placement. Or if could be that I'm doing this at 16 bit
and then raising the gain in software. Or it could be something else. I
use a lossless compression to email the files to someone, and it is
those versions I listen to. Definitely harsh. I'm gonna take a track,
compress it, then uncompress it, then compare that to the original.
Invert phase ( polarity ) of one copy, play them back together and see
if I get silence. If the compressed then uncompressed version is really
identical, they should cancel each other out That will tell me if the "
lossless " compression really is lossless.
If it is, then the next step if to move to 24 bit recording and see if
that smooths things out.
It that doesn't help, then I'll fuss with the micing.
jim d
pTooner
>
> - Show quoted text -
Damn Leo, I knew you were a picker but that's something else!
Gerry
LoDan
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Damn Leo, I knew you were a picker but that's something else!
>
> Gerry
Thanky Gerry, I recorded the two guitar parts a couple of years apart
and was pretty much just having fun but got fairly close...till I
stopped getting close :)
My best to you pal.
Boyd Williamson
aae65fdc-23ed-4f66...@37g2000yqm.googlegroups.com, "LoDan"
<lde...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Except for the mic at the nut part, this is what you speak of. I
> doubled the guitar part and did pretty good until the very end.
> I don't if this link will work, if not...nevermind..
> http://www.reverbnation.com/tunepak/song_2738981
Sounds good to me Leo! Some pretty dang fine pickin' there, too!
Zoid