Miking or DI?

G

Grant Reskey

New member
Hello! My name is Grant, and I'm (obviously) a noob to recording. I play the electric guitar as a hobby, and I want to record covers and the like, and perhaps original music later on. I have a Scarlett 2i2 interface and a sufficient laptop for recording, and was initially convinced that I could use effects pedals while recording electric guitar directly and still achieve a good sound. Boy was I wrong! I really want to use my analog effects pedals that I have already invested in to record, and I have a competent tube amp (Fender Deluxe Reverb Reissue; though I can't exactly crank it), but the only room I have available to record in is my bedroom. On top of that, acoustic treatment more than likely isn't possible for me.

Here is my question: Am I better of simply using amp modeling software and recording a dry signal, or should I pull the trigger on an SM57 and mike my amp in order to use my pedals and amp as desired? Being a novice and all, plugins, EQ, and modeling software are fairly new to me, and I am much more familiar with my physical gear and the tone I can achieve with it. And while I realize the sound I will get from miking an amp in an untreated room is not optimal, will this be enough for what I am trying to accomplish? (covers, etc). If DI is a better option, can anyone recomend decent amp modeling software that isn't overly expensive? On another note, can anyone suggest any reading on recording in general and how to use DAWs as well as EQ, compression, effects, etc.?

Thanks in advance!
 
I'd say learn how to do both. If you have tones from your amp and pedals that you really wanna record, go with the mic. If you close mic with a 57, you won't have huge issues recording in your room. Recording DI has some benefits too. Definitely look around the forums here to learn more about recording. There's so much info on this site that can help you learn.
 
You have a great amp. It would be a shame not to use it. Get the SM57. I take it you're playing the kind of music where that amp would fit in--not metal or some such. As the poster above said, room treatment is not critical when close-miking a guitar amp. Can you find a time when you can get a little bit loud?
 
Hi Grant. This is a common question and a huge problem to many budding guitar recordists.

I am no guitarists so what follows is just what I have absorbed from these pages and other forums plus some time helping a musical son.

Yes, mic'ing the amp is likely to give good results but not guaranteed! The process needs experiment and learning. You say "Can't really crank the amp" Never? In any case you don't need it blowing out windows to get a good tone (an ENTIRELY subjective matter tho'but!) but you might like to investigate the concept of "Re-amping". This technique involves recording a clean* DI signal and getting a technically perfect take.
This signal is then fed to the guitar amp and can be done at a time more suited to loud noise. You can play around with mic positions, pedals etc, without the encumbrance of the guitar.

If 100dBSPLs are REALLY not on, investigate Power Soaks. These devices reduce the power into the speaker by a considerable factor and allow the amplifier to be driven quite hard but a "fairly" socially acceptable sound level to be produced. Not perfect, nothing is but can be useful.

*The very first 2i2s had very poor DI headroom, i.e. they overloaded easily and some say nastily (also put a high level into the PC. You want signals 1/2 way up the DAW meter scale, around -18, even -20dBFS)
You can of course turn the guitar down to avoid overload but use a short, sub 2mtr, guitar lead to avoid HF loss.
Better if you have a problem is a dedicated attenuator before the DI input. This needs a trivial amount of soldering/assembly skill but as a starter in the recording field, getting some electronics smarts is a VERY GOOD THING!

Dave.
 
I'm going for amp sims. You'll have a much broader range of tones available and won't have to worry about bothering whoever else shares your home. The standalone liscence for PodFarm is relatively cheap and definitely decent. There are plenty of other options out there too, and some very good ones for free even.

Don't even worry about the DI/Instrument input on the interface. Run your guitar through at least one pedal and plug into a line input and/or leave it switched to line rather than instrument. You can add gain in the DAW - often in the plugin itself - if you need/want to hit the amp sim harder.
 
I'd recommend trying out Native Instruments for amp sims, there layout could be a little better but I like there tones.

Usually what I do is run my guitar into a D.I. box and one line out goes to interface and the other to my amp for latency free recording and not having to commit to a sound. Then I'll slap on a amp sim to get in the ball park adding drums, bass and whatever...Then I go back and adjust the amp sim to where I want it.

If you record your amp you are stuck with the sound to an extent. yes you can make some adjustments with eq,compression...whatever.

If I want to record an amp for a song, I will do what I said above plus add a mic to the cabinet. Then you have both! D.I. and amp mic'd

Bottom line is really what's gonna be right for the song, I have had effects units that where hard to duplicate.
Good luck
 
Another vote for amp sims / DI. Amplitube fan here. Haven't owned a guitar amp in maybe 5 or 6 years (?). Don't miss the outboard gear a single bit, although I do still have a volume and wah pedal because those things can't be replaced/replicated reliably.
 
Pinky said:
...although I do still have a volume and wah pedal because those things can't be replaced/replicated reliably.
Click to expand...
Sure they can, if you've got some sort of MIDI expression pedal. Volume is easy, and there are plenty of wah plugs out there even before you start looking at other types of filters. There's no good reason not to use the pedals, though.

I advise against a passive DI because: 1) Volume drop through the transformer will need to be made up at the other end and will bring up the noise floor with it, and B) The reflected impedance is usually a little low for passive pickups.
 
There you go Grant ^

This is a "cat" with way more than 9 lives and even more ways to skin it! Download the demos of the major DAWs (and many minor ones) and get a range of softwares to experiment with.

Dave.
 
Aha! I have loaned my regular HP laptop out to son and grandson who are recording up at my daughters. This feeble eMachines laptop works the same on HR as the HP, that is, pressing Post Quick Reply just clears the box, no post until I refresh the page!

So, is the problem to do with IE or W7/64 or the forum? Any ideas mods? I can it seems edit at the moment.

Dave.
 
Nothing wrong with recording direct. However, just to repeat: You have one of the best recording amps on the market today. The Fender DRRI is a truly great amp. Yes, it's easier to plug into a sim. And yes, it takes a bit more time and some trial-and-error to learn how to capture that classic Fender tone with a mic. But you have the amp already. Why wouldn't you want to try miking it?
 
ashcat_lt said:
Sure they can, if you've got some sort of MIDI expression pedal. Volume is easy, and there are plenty of wah plugs out there even before you start looking at other types of filters. There's no good reason not to use the pedals, though.
Click to expand...

Ah, I made the same mistake... I had bought the overpriced amplitube expression pedal, only to find out there's no way to capture/record the expressions in the DAW (or at least a few years ago there was not). You could play along all day, but the pedal's movement was not recorded while tracking the guitar part. At the time I confirmed with Sweetwater and I think IK Multimedia.

I'm perfectly fine with using pedals if they serve a purpose.
 
Grant Reskey said:
Being a novice and all, plugins, EQ, and modeling software are fairly new to me, and I am much more familiar with my physical gear and the tone I can achieve with it.
Click to expand...

Right.

First-time sim users don't miraculously just get great tones...you're going to spend time dialing in things ITB as much as you will with your amp/pedal rig, and doing it ITB may feel awkward to you initially...especially if you are using a lot of those pedals now, and you have them all dialed in with the amp and speakers. You will then have to recreate your sounds ITB....though it's true that sims can also provide many other sounds you currently may not have.

For my money...recording is always more than just a means to an end, but YMMV (and for everyone else too :)).
I think everyone should try recording guitar amps more old-school before they jump ITB. There's something about capturing sounds in air. While not always a easy thing to do, it can be a fun learning experience, and help you to understand better what's going on ITB.

Oh...what kind of cover/original music are predominantly into, and plan to record?
That might also have some bearing on your choices for a recording approach.
 
ecc83 said:
So, is the problem to do with IE or W7/64 or the forum? Any ideas mods? I can it seems edit at the moment.
Click to expand...

Dave, I have mentioned this to you several times over the year, you never responded back. Yes, I have had problems with IE11 and this site. The same problems you are encountering. I switched to Firefox for this very reason.

Back on topic. I have always recorded DI through an amp sim pedal. Recently bought an amp sim plug for my UAD interface and now I use the sim pedal for only stompboxes.
 
miroslav said:
First-time sim users don't miraculously just get great tones...you're going to spend time dialing in things ITB as much as you will with your amp/pedal rig,
Click to expand...

Just reiterating this. It is so true. The presets on the amp sim pedal I have all suck. They are a starting point, but I will spend a lot of time dialing in what I want. I never go for a purist tone, like it has to sound exactly like a marshall, but I want tones that work with my tunes.

I will say, the presets on the UAD plug are pretty darn good, but I'm still tweaking them.
 
ashcat_lt said:
I advise against a passive DI because: 1) Volume drop through the transformer will need to be made up at the other end and will bring up the noise floor with it, and B) The reflected impedance is usually a little low for passive pickups.
Click to expand...

You kinda lost me there! Ahaha! How would you define a passive DI? Is that a separate DI box? I'm not sure I understand entirely--keep in mind that I'm a total newbie! :) The noise floor being brought up makes sense to me, but I'm not quite sure what you mean by reflected impedance either.

By the way: In my original post, I used the term "DI" to refer to plugging straight into the 2i2 using the "instrument" setting. I wasn't thinking about using a dedicated DI box. I imagine that wasn't the proper terminology, so I apologize if that was misleading. On that note, do I need a DI box if I want to record direct?
 
Thank you for the quick responses, I appreciate it. I think I will most likely pick up a SM57…based on what I've heard, I imagine I will find a use for it later down the road even if I find I prefer recording direct, and it's cheap enough to boot. I will definitely try out both miking and amp sims. For some odd reason, experimenting with both hadn't crossed my mind until some of you suggested it. I know some of you already recommended some different amp sims, but are there any that stand out for the rest of you? Preferably any inexpensive ones? ;)
 
This guy does some really good guitar amp sims:

Scuffham Amps - S-Gear

Also...don't get hung up on a 57...there are other mics that work well too.
If you want to go the ribbon route...the Cascade Fat Head has become a staple amp mic.

Heck...I would get them both...you're looking at like $300 for the pair.
 
Grant Reskey said:
You kinda lost me there! Ahaha! How would you define a passive DI? Is that a separate DI box? I'm not sure I understand entirely--keep in mind that I'm a total newbie! :) The noise floor being brought up makes sense to me, but I'm not quite sure what you mean by reflected impedance either.
Click to expand...
I was kind of responding to threeheavans' post about splitting through a DI box to hit both the amp and the interface. That would be a separate box. A passive DI doesn't need power. It's just a transformer in a box. It doesn't really have an impedance of its own, but rather "reflects" the impedance of whatever it's plugged into, which kind of means that the impedance your guitar sees is some multiple of the interface input. That input is usually a microphone input, which will be pretty low, and the multiplication factor isn't usually quite high enough. The fact that this would be in parallel with the amp input makes it even smaller. This matters because lower impedance connected to a passive guitar means less treble gets through.

By the way: In my original post, I used the term "DI" to refer to plugging straight into the 2i2 using the "instrument" setting. I wasn't thinking about using a dedicated DI box. I imagine that wasn't the proper terminology, so I apologize if that was misleading. On that note, do I need a DI box if I want to record direct?
Click to expand...
I knew what you meant. The "instrument" in on the 2i2 is plenty high impedance and would obviate the need for a separate DI unless you were wanting to split like threeheavans suggested. Even then, though, I'd rather see you use an active DI that maintains unity gain and actually presents a healthy in-Z.

But like ecc83 said, the "instrument" input on that interface adds gain (or gives less attenuation) compared to the line input. We've heard a number of times that with even reasonably loud pickups it can be too much and cause clipping at the interface. If you're just going to pound it into a distorted amp sim afterwards, it's not that big of a deal, but if you're looking for something cleanish, it can be a real problem.

That's why I suggested you plug through a pedal into a line input. The pedal gives your guitar a decent impedance, and the line input has more headroom, and everybody's happy. I hoped you would pick up from this (and my response to pinky above) that it's perfectly cool to use your pedals before the interface, so you don't really have to replace them with plugins. You lose the ability to tweak the effects after recording, but you gain the convenience of using actual knobs with which you are already familiar.


Pinky - IDK what you were doing or how, but if there was really no way to record the moves from your expression pedal, it's a failure in your DAW. There are at least a couple of ways to do it in Reaper. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top