Thread: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

Results 1 to 12 of 12

  1. #1
    Ducked in here to avoid the paparazzi no, I'm not bitter....really I'm not
    Join Date Dec 2016
    Location U.S. of Corporate Tyranny
    Posts 4
    Rep Power 9

    Sushi Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    Greetings. I’m trying to get an acoustic guitar recording to sound good. This is my first time getting into the technology. I feel like I’ve learned at lot with this project, but it’s like the more you know the more you don’t, you know? I found this forum while searching for advise, and after reading the entire FAQ page, I feel like I’ve come to the right place :):)

    I also can’t afford to be doing this. But thanks to Amazon’s wonderful business policies I bought an at2020 with a focusrite solo, got my recording and then my money back. So rerecording isn’t really an option for me, and the recording I have to work with seems to have some issues. Phase issues I think. And acoustics in this shack that I live in are probably not great.

    I got an acoustic electric yamaha fg700s. Both the at2020 and the fishman pickups are plugged into the focusrite solo, so there’s 2 recordings I’m trying to mix together if possible. I’m learning to use Reaper (a free DAW), and found some free plugins which I’ve ended up really liking a lot. So my attempt so far is looking something like this:

    http://heartofeternal.org/ark/aud/psyd.mp3

    Track1: Acoustic recording (panned 16% to the left).
    TDR Nova (cutting at 195Hz and Q of 3 with a threshold of sorts – there’s just a really bad frequency there which I’m trying to hammer out)

    Track2: DI recording (panned 16% to the right).
    LeXtac Poulin (an amp sim, set yellow, normal, practically no adjustments).

    Master:
    TDR Kotelnikov (compressor, 4:1, 4db knee, .02 attack, 160 release, 5db makeup).
    TDR SlickEQ (160Hz HP, -4db shelf at 420Hz, 1db at 465Hz, 3.4db shelf at 1536Hz).
    VoS NastyDLA (a little chorus mixed in, but mostly dry).
    VoS FerricTDS (no dynamics but a little bit of saturation).

    The 2 recordings are lined up with the very slight timing difference in mind, which seemed to clean up some of the harshness. The beginning still sounds harsh to me, and I can fix that by messing with the phase, but that creates problems elsewhere, so i’m not very sure which way to go with it - save for chopping up the song and patching together all the parts that sound good, but I feel like i’m prone to make too many mistakes.

    Now i’m trying out the PhaseBug plugin from BetabugsAudio, and this thing called the Goniometer. As is, the meter shows a lot of vertical action, and leans heavily towards the +1. If I use the PhaseBug with the yellow and red dots opposite each other at 46 degrees I can get the meter to even out, and the vertical action explodes into a circular blossoming. The sound really opens up too, and the beginning sounds great, but other parts sound harsh and weird, so again, I dunno.

    Poulin also has a cabinet sim and I tried some of the IR’s from redline. They sort of overpowered the acoustic though. I think the cabinet stuff is just way out of my league.

    So yeah, sorry for the long post. Trying to cover everything I can think of. I would of course love any suggestions or advice. Also here’s the raw recording. Acoustic on the left and DI on the right. http://heartofeternal.org/ark/aud/praw.flac It’s a flac file though, hope that’s not a problem if you’re taking a look. Anyway, thanks for reading all of this! Hugs you.
  2. #2
    Join Date Sep 2009
    Location Quake City
    Posts 11,777
    Rep Power 536871398

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    Greetings. I’m trying to get an acoustic guitar recording to sound good. This is my first time getting into the technology. I feel like I’ve learned at lot with this project, but it’s like the more you know the more you don’t, you know? I found this forum while searching for advise, and after reading the entire FAQ page, I feel like I’ve come to the right place

    I also can’t afford to be doing this. But thanks to Amazon’s wonderful business policies I bought an at2020 with a focusrite solo, got my recording and then my money back. So rerecording isn’t really an option for me, and the recording I have to work with seems to have some issues. Phase issues I think. And acoustics in this shack that I live in are probably not great.

    I got an acoustic electric yamaha fg700s. Both the at2020 and the fishman pickups are plugged into the focusrite solo, so there’s 2 recordings I’m trying to mix together if possible. I’m learning to use Reaper (a free DAW), and found some free plugins which I’ve ended up really liking a lot. So my attempt so far is looking something like this:

    http://heartofeternal.org/ark/aud/psyd.mp3

    Track1: Acoustic recording (panned 16% to the left).
    TDR Nova (cutting at 195Hz and Q of 3 with a threshold of sorts – there’s just a really bad frequency there which I’m trying to hammer out)

    Track2: DI recording (panned 16% to the right).
    LeXtac Poulin (an amp sim, set yellow, normal, practically no adjustments).

    Master:
    TDR Kotelnikov (compressor, 4:1, 4db knee, .02 attack, 160 release, 5db makeup).
    TDR SlickEQ (160Hz HP, -4db shelf at 420Hz, 1db at 465Hz, 3.4db shelf at 1536Hz).
    VoS NastyDLA (a little chorus mixed in, but mostly dry).
    VoS FerricTDS (no dynamics but a little bit of saturation).

    The 2 recordings are lined up with the very slight timing difference in mind, which seemed to clean up some of the harshness. The beginning still sounds harsh to me, and I can fix that by messing with the phase, but that creates problems elsewhere, so i’m not very sure which way to go with it - save for chopping up the song and patching together all the parts that sound good, but I feel like i’m prone to make too many mistakes.

    Now i’m trying out the PhaseBug plugin from BetabugsAudio, and this thing called the Goniometer. As is, the meter shows a lot of vertical action, and leans heavily towards the +1. If I use the PhaseBug with the yellow and red dots opposite each other at 46 degrees I can get the meter to even out, and the vertical action explodes into a circular blossoming. The sound really opens up too, and the beginning sounds great, but other parts sound harsh and weird, so again, I dunno.

    Poulin also has a cabinet sim and I tried some of the IR’s from redline. They sort of overpowered the acoustic though. I think the cabinet stuff is just way out of my league.

    So yeah, sorry for the long post. Trying to cover everything I can think of. I would of course love any suggestions or advice. Also here’s the raw recording. Acoustic on the left and DI on the right. http://heartofeternal.org/ark/aud/praw.flac It’s a flac file though, hope that’s not a problem if you’re taking a look. Anyway, thanks for reading all of this! Hugs you.
    Well, there may likely be some people with some ideas for putting a band-aid (pun intended) on your tracks, but IMO you're barking up the wrong tree. You're never going to make badly recorded tracks sound like well recorded tracks. I think you're beginning to find out that diddling something to work on one problem will merely exacerbate other problems.

    Let me guess - you followed the innernutz "conventional wisdom" and close-miced the guitar, right? And you're trying to "fill out the deficiencies" with the pickup, right?

    First, ALWAYS RECORD WITH FRESH STRINGS! Once the sparkle is gone, it's gone - you can't EQ in what ain't there to begin with. Conversely, if it's a little bright (which it shouldn't be if you follow my advice on mic placement) you CAN always roll a little off the top if need be.

    While I'm on the subject of EQ, DO NOT USE THE HI-PASS FILTER - it's there to remove unwanted HVAC noise, wind from outdoor recording and rumbling from trucks and subway trains running too near your location. It's not intended to be used as EQ and will make your tone wimpy. Remember that an HPF actually starts having a effect at a much higher frequency than the spec'ed number, which is the 3dB down point.

    Second, except in the rarest of cases, built in pickups sound crap for recording. They're OK for live performance and they're great for scratch tracks - like when you're laying down a temporary guide track while the drummer is recording, but most of the time they just don't cut it. I have an LR Baggs Anthem system in my '59 J-200 (one of the best pickup systems you can get) and I don't even record with that except for scratch tracks. If we were cutting a live performance recording I'd probably have to use it, but that's a special case.

    Third, a cheap mic plugged into cheap preamps in and entry level interface is going to sound like a cheap mic plugged into cheap preamps in an entry level interface. I don't care what the gear pimps and sales weasels claim about Focusrite's "famous pedigree", their cheap stuff is cheap stuff. Rent a good mic and a good preamp and interface for a couple of days to record your track. For a long time my go-to acoustic guitar mic was a brass capsule AKG C-12A, which is great, but since I got my KM-84 (NOT KM-184) that has eclipsed it. I have a couple other mics that work well - one is a dbx badged Earthworks measurement mic (omni) that I got used from GC for $40 because they didn't really know what it is.

    Fourth, forget what everybody says about close micing acoustic guitar. It works to get a particular sort of sound that's popular (was popular?) in certain circles, but it's not a natural, balanced sound. Nobody listens to an acoustic guitar with their ear 6 inches from the strings, and with the mic that close there is no way to get the balanced tone of the whole instrument. Pull the mic back to around 2 or 3 feet. It'll sound a lot more natural. It will also be less sensitive to small movements of the guitar while playing and it will be less susceptible to finger squeaks. A little room sound is a good thing as long as your room isn't really nasty sounding - and if it is you're screwed anyway. Avoid overdamping the room acoustics with excessive, haphazard treatment - it will suck the life from your sound. That's not to say that a little treatment is a bad thing, but you should consult an acoustician who does not have a book out proclaiming himself as "The Audio Expert". Diffusion is at least as important as absorption.

    Remember, as they used to say in the military and early days of computing, GIGO; "Garbage In, Garbage Out". You have to get it right at the time of capture. If you do, it's all easy. If you don't you'll be pissing around forever for an inferior result.

    BTW, acoustic guitar is NOT a stereo instrument and should not be recorded as such except in very specific cases - and in those cases should be recorded mono in a good room with a pair of stereo room mics to provide the effect. Having more than one close mic/pickup on one source like a guitar is just begging for nasty phase cancellation effects and comb filtering.

    Oh, and why would you want to put a cabinet sim on an acoustic guitar?
    http://www.johnnyoklahoma.com/

    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    Everything is some mixture of awesome and suck. We simply want the awesome to be highlighted sufficiently that it distracts listeners from the suck.
    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
    Hey, if I'm Grumpy, where the hell is Snow White????
  3. #3
    Ducked in here to avoid the paparazzi no, I'm not bitter....really I'm not
    Join Date Dec 2016
    Location U.S. of Corporate Tyranny
    Posts 4
    Rep Power 9

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    Yeah, exactly right. I read an article that talked about mixing DI with the mic. The focusrite had an input for both so I grabbed both. After hearing what I got they do seem to sound a lot better put together, even though the DI by itself is terrible. The phase problems make sense though. I wonder why mixing any sound with another doesn't have this much heartache. Are they just too similar? It's so disappointing.

    The mic was very close, about a foot away. The record had a bit of muddy boom. I thought the HP was perfect, but is cutting that out misshaping the tone too much? Should I just take it down with that low end shelf maybe? I've certainly learned how quickly you can suck out the life with too much EQ and get that synthetic sound. That's partly why I got interested in the cabinet sim, because an IR seemed like a way to change the tone without EQ. But yeah, it was a bit overwhelming, if not just the wrong idea.

    I got this guitar used and it came with elixir strings that were likely used. Can you really tell the difference? I actually wanted to record with fresh strings. I got some d'addario, but they felt stiff and didn't seem to produce sound well. So I got some martins, and loved them, feeling good, sounding great, but my recording session didn't go as good as the first time. Sigh. And then I tried elixir again, but they felt and sounded like they were coated. I want those martins back... Ran out of time with my Amazon refund at that point. I barely make enough money to eat, so spending more on a better mic probably wont happen.

    Anyway, John, thanks. When I get a chance I think I'll try doing the low end better, and maybe try dropping the DI. I don't really mind if it sounds like a cheap record, I know that it is. Just hope it can sound good enough to listen too, and not hurt people in the ear. Band-aid, lol, I actually get it! I'm loving this technology for that matter. It's extremely interesting, and useful. But yeah, send you to the punitentiary. Watch your puns if you drop the soap XD
  4. #4
    Join Date Sep 2009
    Location Quake City
    Posts 11,777
    Rep Power 536871398

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    Yeah, exactly right. I read an article that talked about mixing DI with the mic. The focusrite had an input for both so I grabbed both. After hearing what I got they do seem to sound a lot better put together, even though the DI by itself is terrible. The phase problems make sense though. I wonder why mixing any sound with another doesn't have this much heartache. Are they just too similar? It's so disappointing.

    The mic was very close, about a foot away. The record had a bit of muddy boom. I thought the HP was perfect, but is cutting that out misshaping the tone too much? Should I just take it down with that low end shelf maybe? I've certainly learned how quickly you can suck out the life with too much EQ and get that synthetic sound. That's partly why I got interested in the cabinet sim, because an IR seemed like a way to change the tone without EQ. But yeah, it was a bit overwhelming, if not just the wrong idea.

    I got this guitar used and it came with elixir strings that were likely used. Can you really tell the difference? I actually wanted to record with fresh strings. I got some d'addario, but they felt stiff and didn't seem to produce sound well. So I got some martins, and loved them, feeling good, sounding great, but my recording session didn't go as good as the first time. Sigh. And then I tried elixir again, but they felt and sounded like they were coated. I want those martins back... Ran out of time with my Amazon refund at that point. I barely make enough money to eat, so spending more on a better mic probably wont happen.

    Anyway, John, thanks. When I get a chance I think I'll try doing the low end better, and maybe try dropping the DI. I don't really mind if it sounds like a cheap record, I know that it is. Just hope it can sound good enough to listen too, and not hurt people in the ear. Band-aid, lol, I actually get it! I'm loving this technology for that matter. It's extremely interesting, and useful. But yeah, send you to the punitentiary. Watch your puns if you drop the soap XD
    My old daddy used to say that the bun is the lowest form of bread....

    I'm guessing that your low end boom is likely related to mic placement - proximity effect of the mic interacting with soundhole resonance.

    You cannot adequately fix that sort of problem with EQ.

    I mentioned the Earthworks omni mics - the nice thing about omnis it that they have no proximity effect. Also, really good measurement mics have really flat, uncolored response and have very good off-axis response. Off-axis response is VERY IMPORTANT when you pull the mic back a bit - in many cases a significant amount of what people mistake for a bad sounding room is actually the fact that the mic has horrible sounding off-axis response, which can transform a fairly pleasant reverberant field into horrible sounding crap. If the instrument sounds good acoustically in the room but the recorded sound has bad room tone in it, suspect your mic. Quite a few very popular mics have horrible off axis response - SM57, MD421, many, many inexpensive condensers....

    One of the really lovely things about the Neumann KM84 is that although it's a cardioid mic the off-axis response is the same as the on-axis response ( too bad they couldn't do that with the modern KM184. Damn bean counters...) This is rare in a directional microphone.

    One thing I forgot to mention is instead of using a 2 mic/ mic & DI "stereo" try just doing a double with the takes panned to opposite sides. Since they're different takes it eliminates the phase cancellation/comb filtering crap.

    Try to get it right going in without automatically reaching for the EQ. Work with mic placement.
    Last edited by John Eppstein; December 19th, 2016 at 07:16 AM.
    http://www.johnnyoklahoma.com/

    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    Everything is some mixture of awesome and suck. We simply want the awesome to be highlighted sufficiently that it distracts listeners from the suck.
    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
    Hey, if I'm Grumpy, where the hell is Snow White????
  5. #5
    Ducked in here to avoid the paparazzi no, I'm not bitter....really I'm not
    Join Date Dec 2016
    Location U.S. of Corporate Tyranny
    Posts 4
    Rep Power 9

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    I think that's something I don't understand about phase cancellation. It makes enough sense how sounds cancel each other because they are waves, like completely opposite sounds producing silence because they even out. So why is it that 2 different takes of a song wouldn't mix with exactly the same cancellations problems as 2 different mics? I'm guessing the problems get produced mostly when the sounds are so exactly the same yet not quite, and different takes must be different enough maybe?

    Got it sounding a little better, but it's basically the same. Nothing else I've tried comes close. Can't afford to mess around more with mics, and that just leaves me with DI takes now. Guess i'll throw my hat in on this. Was really hoping I could make it work, but yeah, this is life. Thanks again for your help, John. Have a good one.
  6. #6
    Voice like Marcel Marceau Waiting for his millions from Nigeria
    Join Date Nov 2011
    Location Midlands UK
    Posts 255
    Rep Power 536870987

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    I think that's something I don't understand about phase cancellation. It makes enough sense how sounds cancel each other because they are waves, like completely opposite sounds producing silence because they even out. So why is it that 2 different takes of a song wouldn't mix with exactly the same cancellations problems as 2 different mics? I'm guessing the problems get produced mostly when the sounds are so exactly the same yet not quite, and different takes must be different enough maybe?
    That's exactly right. If you have one source miked up with two mics set at different distances, then you mix those two signals together, you're creating a situation where from millisecond to millisecond, throughout the whole song, there are constant, unchanging phase relationships at all frequencies. This causes a fixed pattern of constructive and destructive interference among all the regular sustaining waves called comb filtering, and it also means that every transient happens twice. Your ear picks up on that as a strange and unnatural sound - remember that hearing happens in the brain, where an incredible amount of processing occurs to identify sounds - it looks for clues to separate out different sounds that hit the ear at the same time, and if it's hearing two identical signals separated in time and destructively interfering with each other there's a certain amount of psychological WTF happening.

    Because the phase relationships change based on frequency, things get even weirder if you pan the two tracks out. Every frequency that's in phase will combine to appear somewhere between the two tracks (in the same way that stereo produces a phantom center) and everything that's out of phase will sound panned. So different parts of the sound will swim about between the two tracks as different notes with different overtones are played.

    This is weird, and almost nobody likes this sound.

    Now, it IS possible to get a good sound with two mics on one source. After all, it's how stereo works. It's also possible to have the second mic so far back from the source that it's hearing more room ambiance than direct sound. At that point, because the far mic is hearing a whole host of thousands of reflections from all the room surfaces and they're diffused in time, the two signals could be said to be phase incoherent - ie they're different enough that your ear hears them as two distinct sounds, and they don't interfere with each other as much. This is the principle behind distant room mics.

    It's also possible to just go with the comb filtering, and just position the mics so that comb filtering works for you. That's much easier when it's something like a drum kit, where the sounds will (probably) be the same pitches throughout the whole song. So you can put your close mics, your kit mics, your room mics in a setup where the frequencies you care about (say, the kick drum fundamental) get constructively boosted in the resulting comb filtering pattern, and frequencies you don't want as much of (say, the annoying ring you can't *quite* tune out of the snare) get destructively reduced. This is part of the art of miking.

    When you play two takes, the sound will usually be phase incoherent and your ear will be able to identify that two sounds are happening, because although the two takes will obviously have a lot in common - the same instrument sound, the same notes - they won't be *the same* signal because of the timing, volume and tonal differences between the takes. Of course, there will be elements of the signal that will be common between the two takes from time to time - maybe you'll by fluke or design hit a note in both takes at EXACTLY the same time - but because from millisecond to millisecond the phase relationships are changing, the ear can easily hear past those and identify the two takes as being two distinct sonic events.

    Sometimes it IS possible to be so tight that you can hear comb filtering between different takes, especially with simple electronic instruments where every time you play a note it's literally the same signal being reproduced. Obviously in that situation you need to do something to combat it; maybe pick a different instrument, re-voice chords etc.

    But yeah, it's basically about phase coherence or phase incoherence, and how static or dynamic the phase relationships across the whole frequency range are that determine whether your ears hear it as one weird sound or two separate sounds.
  7. #7
    Join Date Sep 2009
    Location Quake City
    Posts 11,777
    Rep Power 536871398

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    I think that's something I don't understand about phase cancellation. It makes enough sense how sounds cancel each other because they are waves, like completely opposite sounds producing silence because they even out. So why is it that 2 different takes of a song wouldn't mix with exactly the same cancellations problems as 2 different mics? I'm guessing the problems get produced mostly when the sounds are so exactly the same yet not quite, and different takes must be different enough maybe?
    It's very simple - two separate takes are not identical signals. Events occur at slightly different times, dynamics are slightly different, the actual vibrations of ther strings are not synchronized, the initial signal IS NOT THE SAME. Therefore you don't get the same cancellation problems as when you have the same initial signal offset by distance, which equals time.

    You get phase cancellation and comb filtering when you have two identical signals with a slight time offset. No two takes are actually identical.
    http://www.johnnyoklahoma.com/

    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    Everything is some mixture of awesome and suck. We simply want the awesome to be highlighted sufficiently that it distracts listeners from the suck.
    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
    Hey, if I'm Grumpy, where the hell is Snow White????
  8. #8
    Join Date Sep 2009
    Location Quake City
    Posts 11,777
    Rep Power 536871398

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    Very good post except for a thing or two.....

    Now, it IS possible to get a good sound with two mics on one source. After all, it's how stereo works.
    Er, not exactly.

    When you've two mics on something like a piano, it's so large an instrument that each mic is actually covering a different range, so it doesn't exactly work like two mics on one source. And even there you have to be careful because it's easy to get an unnatural sound that steps all over the rest of the arrangement.

    When you're getting a stereo recording of a guitar that doesn't work so well, as the two mics will generally be too close together. You'll get comb filtering and phase interference. That doesn't stop people from doing (especially since it's widely hyped to newbies in"instructional" videos and articles all over the internet) it but it does generally stop them from getting as good a sound as they should. The get a stereo recording of a guitar that actually sounds like listening to a real guitar you don't want to use two close mics, you want to use one main mic - which shouldn't be too close so it picks up the full sound of the instrument - in conjunction with a space pair of room mics which is where you stereo is derived from - you're actually micing the reverberant field, which is stereo. Or you can fake the stereo with a good stereo reverb.

    I won't go so far as to say that its impossible to use two mic on a source to get stereo, but it's generally a recipe for trouble on a small, coherent source like a guitar.

    It's also possible to have the second mic so far back from the source that it's hearing more room ambiance than direct sound. At that point, because the far mic is hearing a whole host of thousands of reflections from all the room surfaces and they're diffused in time, the two signals could be said to be phase incoherent - ie they're different enough that your ear hears them as two distinct sounds, and they don't interfere with each other as much. This is the principle behind distant room mics.
    Except that using a close mic and a room mic doesn't really give you stereo - it gives you a mono ambience that should probably be mixed in with the close signal. If you want stereo you need three mics, which with give you a stereo reverberant field, as mentioned above.

    It's also possible to just go with the comb filtering, and just position the mics so that comb filtering works for you. That's much easier when it's something like a drum kit, where the sounds will (probably) be the same pitches throughout the whole song. So you can put your close mics, your kit mics, your room mics in a setup where the frequencies you care about (say, the kick drum fundamental) get constructively boosted in the resulting comb filtering pattern, and frequencies you don't want as much of (say, the annoying ring you can't *quite* tune out of the snare) get destructively reduced. This is part of the art of miking.
    I've never found comb filtering to be really constructive and it's a major problem with the typical drum mic setups that people do with close mics on all the toms, top and bottom snare, overheads, hi-hat, two kick mics, blah, blah and woof, woof. The more mics you add the worse it sounds and you spend way too much time exploring the relationships between every mic and all the other mics just top get things top sound "less worser". It's not even the law of diminishing returns, adding more mics actually makes things significantly worse. Since switching over to Weedy's drum micing method with 4 mics and sometimes a room mic my drum sounds have become a whole magnitude better and setup is really easy.

    And I've never found phase cancellation EVER to be helpful with a snare drum with an annoying ring. Unless exacerbating the ring is what you're after.
    http://www.johnnyoklahoma.com/

    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    Everything is some mixture of awesome and suck. We simply want the awesome to be highlighted sufficiently that it distracts listeners from the suck.
    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
    Hey, if I'm Grumpy, where the hell is Snow White????
  9. #9
    Join Date Apr 2007
    Location nc
    Posts 1,507
    Rep Power 536871085

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    I've never really been able to find a way to constructively use destructive wave interference.
    It's usually just a clusterfuck, and a deep dark well of endless options, nearly all of which are awful.
    Buyer beware.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I'm a fan of cheese!
  10. #10
    Voice like Marcel Marceau Waiting for his millions from Nigeria
    Join Date Nov 2011
    Location Midlands UK
    Posts 255
    Rep Power 536870987

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    I think I miscommunicated some stuff then because...


    When you're getting a stereo recording of a guitar that doesn't work so well, as the two mics will generally be too close together. You'll get comb filtering and phase interference....
    Yes, I agree. I'd very rarely try to record an acoustic in stereo. My linking of "phase coherence" to stereo miking only really was meant to go as far as the phase relationship between the mics sometimes being part of the thing that helps your ears determine the stereo image, along with timing, volume, tonal differences etc.

    ...Except that using a close mic and a room mic doesn't really give you stereo - it gives you a mono ambience that should probably be mixed in with the close signal. If you want stereo you need three mics, which with give you a stereo reverberant field, as mentioned above....
    Yep, agree, didn't mean to imply that you'd use one close one far mic to get a stereo recording. I was more thinking of a situation where you'd pan both mics to the same place, and wanted to keep it simple since the example was about the difference between the direct sound and reverberant field


    ...Since switching over to Weedy's drum micing method with 4 mics and sometimes a room mic my drum sounds have become a whole magnitude better and setup is really easy.

    And I've never found phase cancellation EVER to be helpful with a snare drum with an annoying ring. Unless exacerbating the ring is what you're after...
    Yep, I like Weedy's way too, I used it on an album I produced earlier this year and was very happy with it. However I am also liable to use more close mics on different projects where I want to, though I suspect you wouldn't like the musical style (I call it nu-phase), let alone the drum sound there. Which is fine!

    And... yeah, I'm not going to pretend I've ever deliberately used comb filtering to get awesome sounds, but I think that it's a fact of life in a lot of drum mic setups, even with few close mics - if you've got kit and room mics, there will be some frequency dependent phase relationship between them unless you can really get the room mics out there.

    And then there's the whole "Money For Nothing" guitar tone... they made comb filtering work for them on that, didn't they?
  11. #11
    Join Date Sep 2009
    Location Quake City
    Posts 11,777
    Rep Power 536871398

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    And... yeah, I'm not going to pretend I've ever deliberately used comb filtering to get awesome sounds, but I think that it's a fact of life in a lot of drum mic setups, even with few close mics
    So is influenza.

    - if you've got kit and room mics, there will be some frequency dependent phase relationship between them unless you can really get the room mics out there.
    Yes, the room mics need to be "out there"...
    http://www.johnnyoklahoma.com/

    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    Everything is some mixture of awesome and suck. We simply want the awesome to be highlighted sufficiently that it distracts listeners from the suck.
    Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
    The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
    Hey, if I'm Grumpy, where the hell is Snow White????
  12. #12
    Join Date Oct 2011
    Location caprica
    Posts 1,558
    Rep Power 536871031

    Default Re: Would love help with acoustic heavy metal

    Why do I get the feeling there's a joke being missed?
    TAP TO MASTER

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Tags for this Thread