The New Tone Thread

OK, one last try for a little while. Hopefully this is getting me in the right direction. I'll probably still have to make some adjustments, but hopefully this at least doesn't sound as hollow.

Don't mean to hog the thread, guys. No rush for anyone to listen to this. I'll still be tweaking either way.
 

Attachments

  • Test Tickle 2.57.mp3
    8.2 MB · Views: 11
OK, well you should have guessed out loud!!!!! :D

One out of two, actually. It is really loud, volume isn't the issue. But it must be the condenser. Problem is, I've tweaked so much that I'm sure just changing the mic won't be the only solution right now. I have to go back to the 57 but also play with the sound a lot. But I'm recording right now with the 57, so we'll see what that does as a first step.
I think you'll find a surprisingly large improvement going to the 57.
Though I'm not a fan of the mic, they do seem to have a wonderful way with micing speakers.
Something about their frequency response seems to be perfect for bring out that rock sound out of an electric git.
 
Okay these are for JDude....

Here's them pedals...set as clean boosts only. No dirt - max level - tone control at 12:00

Les Paul Traditional - Burstbucker 3 bridge p/u
Marshall JCM 800 2203
Presence - 4
Bass - 7
Mid - 5
Treb - 4
Preamp vol - 6
Master Vol - 3
Marshall 1960B 4x12 - Vintage 30 - Audix i5 on axis, on grill, halfway to edge
No EQ or processing in DAW
Nothing changed between clips except stomping on pedals

JCM 800 + V30 base

Boosted with Boss SD-1

Boosted with Ibanez TS9

This one's a simple crappy lead lick raw, then boosted with SD-1, then boosted with TS9, the boosted with both.
Suckage
 
It might just be me being a Luddite, but I don't know why anyone wants more than a 57 for micing cabs for home recording. Sure if you're trying to record an album for release really get stuck in, but if you just want to record your own songs for yourself or to make a demo I just can't see the need in fannying about. I think you're better off just keeping it simple and making a good job of it.

Maybe if I had access to more gear and the time to practice with it I would think differently... But I have a job.

---------- Update ----------

Okay these are for JDude....

Here's them pedals...set as clean boosts only. No dirt - max level - tone control at 12:00

Les Paul Traditional - Burstbucker 3 bridge p/u
Marshall JCM 800 2203
Presence - 4
Bass - 7
Mid - 5
Treb - 4
Preamp vol - 6
Master Vol - 3
Marshall 1960B 4x12 - Vintage 30 - Audix i5 on axis, on grill, halfway to edge
No EQ or processing in DAW
Nothing changed between clips except stomping on pedals

JCM 800 + V30 base

Boosted with Boss SD-1

Boosted with Ibanez TS9

This one's a simple crappy lead lick raw, then boosted with SD-1, then boosted with TS9, the boosted with both.
Suckage
Cheers, mate. Thanks a lot
 
OK, one last try for a little while. Hopefully this is getting me in the right direction. I'll probably still have to make some adjustments, but hopefully this at least doesn't sound as hollow.

Don't mean to hog the thread, guys. No rush for anyone to listen to this. I'll still be tweaking either way.

Yes that is better for sure to me. I'd cut the gain and up the mids a little more, but you're back on track at least.
 
Good clips Greg. Unfortunately I prefer the TubeScreamer. They're much more expensive, even 2nd hand. Basically I think the clips get progressively better as you go along. Just more meat on the bones without ever turning into mush.

Would like a TubeScreamer but it'll probably come down to price!
 
I think you'll find a surprisingly large improvement going to the 57.
Though I'm not a fan of the mic, they do seem to have a wonderful way with micing speakers.
Something about their frequency response seems to be perfect for bring out that rock sound out of an electric git.

It might just be me being a Luddite, but I don't know why anyone wants more than a 57 for micing cabs for home recording.
I agree with you guys. I always used a 57. I tried to get too cute. I have a use for every one of my mics, so I was just trying to find an excuse to use that condenser on something. Kind of stupid, but I'm kind of obsessive that way.
 
OK, one last try for a little while. Hopefully this is getting me in the right direction. I'll probably still have to make some adjustments, but hopefully this at least doesn't sound as hollow.

Don't mean to hog the thread, guys. No rush for anyone to listen to this. I'll still be tweaking either way.
That sounds much better. You can really pick out the guitars now. Personally I like the gain. I can still hear what everything is doing and it sounds lively.
 
Yes that is better for sure to me. I'd cut the gain and up the mids a little more, but you're back on track at least.
OK, great. Thanx for taking the time, man. At least I have something I can work with again.
 
Good clips Greg. Unfortunately I prefer the TubeScreamer. They're much more expensive, even 2nd hand. Basically I think the clips get progressively better as you go along. Just more meat on the bones without ever turning into mush.

Would like a TubeScreamer but it'll probably come down to price!

It's all just a matter of taste. Both perform very well. Keep in mind your amp is already thick as shit in the lows and mids. You could get the cheaper SD-1 and approximate the Tube Screamer by rolling back the tone and adding a little dirt. They get pretty similar like that. The SD-1 is a little brighter, a little more transparent. The TS is obviously thicker, more midrangey.

There are other overdrives too, although none of them are cheap. The EP Booster is sweet, but it's super pricey for a tiny mini pedal. The TC Spark is pretty good too.

And you can "poor man" it with an EQ pedal in front. Hump the mids and boost the output level. Poor man's Tube Screamer.
 
I agree with you guys. I always used a 57. I tried to get too cute. I have a use for every one of my mics, so I was just trying to find an excuse to use that condenser on something. Kind of stupid, but I'm kind of obsessive that way.

You could blend them. The condenser at the edge for low end power, and the 57 for cut and brightness. Blend and balance for mega tone!
 
Yeah, I'll go for the SD 1 based on price alone, I still need to do some tweaking with my eq to be exactly where I want to be anyway. After that I have a lot or re tracking to do. I went through my song list and made notes on my changes the other night. Have 13 tracks between 4 and 5 mins log that I need to fully re track, most of them need extra bits of lead and about half need slight rearranging.

Still best to get the tone sorted first!
 
I agree with you guys. I always used a 57. I tried to get too cute. I have a use for every one of my mics, so I was just trying to find an excuse to use that condenser on something. Kind of stupid, but I'm kind of obsessive that way.

It not stupid at all. I too have tried to make use of my condensers on my cab relentlessly, simply becasue i want to justify their expensive existence under my roof. Sounds lame but it's true. They are great for vocals, but i'd like to use them for something else. However, I find i am always drawn back to my 57 each time i start mucking with it. It's not to say we are messing around in vein, i do think that in the right environment with the right room, perfect conditions etc. you probably could find a hell of tone with a condenser on a loud cab. I will keep trying.
typically when i track i will always just throw a condenser on the cab anyways just for the hell of it. Literally no science to it, i just put it up randomly and see what comes out of it because i know my 57 track will do the job just curious to see what can happen with different set-ups. Most of the time it is shit but i recall my last effort was o.k. I should actually see if i still have those tracks to A/B for fun!

Tones wise your last effort sounds way better. I am listening on my monitors and they have improved a lot. I like the direction they are headed. Could maybe use a little tweak of beef somewhere in the low mids maybe. But only my preference. Actually now that i hear them solo'd on their own around the 2:30 mark i think they have enough beef. Stoked to see where your tweaks take you next.
 
Okay these are for JDude....

Here's them pedals...set as clean boosts only. No dirt - max level - tone control at 12:00

Les Paul Traditional - Burstbucker 3 bridge p/u
Marshall JCM 800 2203
Presence - 4
Bass - 7
Mid - 5
Treb - 4
Preamp vol - 6
Master Vol - 3
Marshall 1960B 4x12 - Vintage 30 - Audix i5 on axis, on grill, halfway to edge
No EQ or processing in DAW
Nothing changed between clips except stomping on pedals

JCM 800 + V30 base

Boosted with Boss SD-1

Boosted with Ibanez TS9

This one's a simple crappy lead lick raw, then boosted with SD-1, then boosted with TS9, the boosted with both.
Suckage

My ears love that TS9. She's right dirty! My jesus, that rig sounds delicious.
 
Ha thanks. Lotta love for the TS.

I'll try some more today with more of the amp's natural gain dialed in so it can be pushed into hair metal territory.
 
Okay these are for JDude....

Here's them pedals...set as clean boosts only. No dirt - max level - tone control at 12:00

Les Paul Traditional - Burstbucker 3 bridge p/u
Marshall JCM 800 2203
Presence - 4
Bass - 7
Mid - 5
Treb - 4
Preamp vol - 6
Master Vol - 3
Marshall 1960B 4x12 - Vintage 30 - Audix i5 on axis, on grill, halfway to edge
No EQ or processing in DAW
Nothing changed between clips except stomping on pedals

JCM 800 + V30 base

Boosted with Boss SD-1

Boosted with Ibanez TS9

This one's a simple crappy lead lick raw, then boosted with SD-1, then boosted with TS9, the boosted with both.
Suckage
Those sound great. Just out of curiosity, would you cut some bass on those in a mix? It sounds to me that there's a low end build up that I would cut if I heard it. But I'm wondering if what I'm interpreting as a little muddy is actually nice fatness that you need in a mix.
 
OK,one last one and then I'm going to put it away for a bit while I do the drums.

I've gone full circle here and I'm back to my 57 and the settings I used before trying to get too cute with my shit. Does this lack something? Low end? High end? Mids? etc......
 

Attachments

  • Test Tickle 2.57.2.mp3
    8.2 MB · Views: 11
Those sound great. Just out of curiosity, would you cut some bass on those in a mix? It sounds to me that there's a low end build up that I would cut if I heard it. But I'm wondering if what I'm interpreting as a little muddy is actually nice fatness that you need in a mix.
That's a good question, and as always, it depends. I probably would not cut any bass, but if it were a problem I'd slap a low shelf on it instead of a cut or high pass. Also, I like to pan my guitars out wide, so that low end becomes less problematic way out to the sides. It almost vanishes actually, but the fullness remains. And really these are tones I probably wouldn't use anyway. I wouldn't normally run my bass setting up that high, but the volume was low-ish on these clips so it helped fatten it up some. Normally I'd use more volume and less bass knob.

OK,one last one and then I'm going to put it away for a bit while I do the drums.

I've gone full circle here and I'm back to my 57 and the settings I used before trying to get too cute with my shit. Does this lack something? Low end? High end? Mids? etc......
That sounds pretty much on-par with what you usually do. I would probably still like a little more high mids, but it's pretty good as-is.
 
Back
Top