Recording METAL GUITAR, help...

LouDogInTheVan

New member
Hello guys,

I'm new here and have heard great things about this forum. Im somewhat new when it comes to recording audio. A friend and I are plannign to record some metal guitars. I have Presonus Studio One Professional & a Presonus 192 Mobile Interface. If im going to plug directly into my Interface ( presonus 192 mobile) should I use a DI Box? Or can I just go straight into my interface? should I get a tube preamp?


- any effects tips? ie: noise gate, reverb, EQ'ing, Double/Quad Tracking?

- amp modeling tips? Presonus Studio One came with a few preloaded Amp VI, do you recommend a particular one?


I hope this isnt confusing because I am all over the place with this, I just want some good tips ya know. Any tips for recording metal guitars would be a HUGE help. Thanks in advance guys, and I'll see you all later.



- John
 
Extreme Metal |

That ^ should start the juices flowing. Now, I am NO guitarists but I would say of all the guitar genres, Metal relies more than most on the qualities of the AMPLIFIER. Metal bands create a monster sound (was is JPriest that were in the GBoR as the loudest band in the world?) I doubt DI'ing can do that justice?

Then, metal gitists tend to 'hit hard'and many AIs clip at their Instrument/high Z inputs for quite modest levels. I dare say the Presonus' are better than most but solid state pre amp clipping you do not want!

If Greg were still here no doubt he would be telling me up Christmas and down Easter that I am talking '%$£g BOLLOX' ! Just my initial thoughts.

Over to the experts...

Dave.
 
I go direct in to my interface, but there's no reason you could have some pedals in line as well. I have a volume and wah pedal I occasionally use, then from the pedal into the interface.

You'll probably want to invest in some type of guitar specific amp sim virtual instrument package, like Guitar Rig or Amplitube (this is what I use). Plenty of stock options for getting a decent sound, then you buy more amps if you need to expand or want a very specific tone. I believe both have a free trial option.
 
Last edited:
You can plug directly into that interface.

You need to find a good amp sim that gives you the sound you are looking for. Metal guitar isn't really specific, it will cover everything from Scorpions to Pantera to five finger death punch... All very different

For rhythm sounds, you need to find a sim that will let you dial in a crunchy distortion, instead of a fuzzy distortion. (assuming you aren't trying to sound like Type O Negative). Sometimes it is hard to get a sim to do that, so you will need to put a comp/sustainer (hardware or software) in the path before the amp sim. This will give you the sustain, so you don't have to have the gain up as much on the sim, which can give you a more open, crunchy distortion.

Record two rhythm tracks and pan them. Any extra guitar ear candy can be flown up the middle.
 
"Metal" is a very broad category and there's no good way to generalize.

As I understand it, most of the Black Metal dudes prefer to do everything "wrong" and get the worst sounds possible - the harshest nastiest pedals they can find, tiny solid state "pocket stacks"...

Seems like most other people nowadays will at least start with something like a TubeScreamer slamming into something like a Peavey 5150 through a 4x12 with a 57 on it.

Really, though, until you designate a target it's pretty tough to zero in your sites.

I would argue, though, that most recorded metal doesn't really benefit from a "real amp". Amp sims nowadays really do all the same things in the the same ways as the amps they simulate. It might not ever sound like that one amp in that one room with that one microphone in that one spot, but the variances will be well within the tolerance of all those variables. I heard a guy playing through an honest to fuck Triple Rectifier the other night, and it really did sound like everything I hate about the modeled Mesas I've tried. :)

The one thing an amp sim doesn't do by itself that a "real amp" does is actually amplify. In situations where the actual SPL in the room makes a difference...well you have to get it somehow. But I don't think most metal really actually takes advantage of that. They tend to want clean, precise, tight rythms and phrasing, and having your guitar want to feedback every note you play forever and squeal in the silences is actually not conducive to that kind of thing. Again, it depends on sub-genre, though. Either way, there are plenty of ways to make an amp sim loud in the room.

If Greg were still here...
That dude is an ultra-conservative hack who doesn't actually know what he's talking about, and just follows the "rules" he learned from Mutt back when mullets were cool. He probably would come through to spew his outmoded ideology (not actually an opinion) and belittle anybody that offered any other options or advice. I find it infinitely amusing that those dicks got fired from here and went and started a site called "Recording Rebels" when most of them are pretty well known as conformists who are stuck in the last century. :)
 
If im going to plug directly into my Interface ( presonus 192 mobile) should I use a DI Box? Or can I just go straight into my interface? should I get a tube preamp?

Did both. Recorded both. Tried both. And got convinced a while ago.
Mic for amp gives more depth. Less flat. IMO better result.

- any effects tips? ie: noise gate, reverb, EQ'ing, Double/Quad Tracking?

Noise gate depending on how much your guitar disturbs.
Reverb not to much.
EQ always.
Double/Quad tracking i shouldn't do. Better play 2 times (perhaps slightly different riffs) if you want more body.

- amp modeling tips? Presonus Studio One came with a few preloaded Amp VI, do you recommend a particular one?

If you can find it i can suggest the Mesa Boogie Dual Rectifier, or it's modeling.
This is the amp that is used quite regular by metal bands. And i can confirm it sounds great.
 
I find it infinitely amusing that those dicks got fired from here and went and started a site called "Recording Rebels" when most of them are pretty well known as conformists who are stuck in the last century. :)

I'm not sure who you're referring to exactly as "conformist dicks"...?...because there were way more people involved with starting RR than just the people who "got fired from here".

Making music with structure, melodic and rhythmic content, and utilizing known recording techniques and solutions (if that's what you meant by "conformist")...actually takes more skill and effort than doing free-form "artsy noise" and utilizing jury-rigged methods...
...but to each his own. ;)
 
That dude is an ultra-conservative hack who doesn't actually know what he's talking about, and just follows the "rules" he learned from Mutt back when mullets were cool. He probably would come through to spew his outmoded ideology (not actually an opinion) and belittle anybody that offered any other options or advice. I find it infinitely amusing that those dicks got fired from here and went and started a site called "Recording Rebels" when most of them are pretty well known as conformists who are stuck in the last century. :)
lol ...... greg records and plays better than 99% of the home recordists out there .... is he ultra conservative ? >>> don't think so but I can't really speak to that other than to say that's not my personal impression.

But I've got as much and more gigging and playing experience than anyone around ... on the order of 15,000 gigs and easily 100,000 hours of playing .... and I can tell you flat out .... he has skillz.

It's easy to slam someone when they can't reply but I'm gonna jump in here and state that one thing he's not, is a 'hack' .... you might not like him but he gets better guitar sounds that just about anyone ..... his drumb skills are pretty extreme with rock solid timing and I've never heard anyone do that fast blast beat thing better.

As a 'hired gun' for 48 years, I've played with literally thousands of the very best players and like him or not ..... greg ranks up there.
 
Ok it was a bit of a cheap shot. I didn't really mean to derail this thread. I'm not really interested in arguing about it, but I'm not taking it back either.

Trying to keep it brief:

There's more than one way to skin a cat, but in all honestly the best way to get good, consistent results is to learn an "established method" and do it the same way every time. But, you know, not everything is a cat. When somebody drops a "what the fuck is that" in your lap, you can tell them "This sucks. It's not a cat, and I'm not going to deal with it," or if you had actually learned the fundamentals about how and why the "established method" was established in the first place - if you understand basic mammal anatomy and the capabilities of the tools at your disposal, you can adapt your process and find a way to get a really good result anyway. Then too, whether it's a cat or not, if you find yourself without access to your normal tools, but you understand something about how and why they work, and you really need to get the thing skint, you might be able to find or fashion tools that will get the job done.

But whatever. The fact of the matter is that this is not even close to rocket science, and there really aren't any super esoteric secrets to get a good guitar tone. You plug in, you turn the knobs til it sounds good. If it's a real amp, you put a mic in front of it and move it til that sounds good. If you can't get it to sound good, you swap things out. Ideally, you have some idea of how and why things work so that you know where to start, and what you might change to get closer to what you're looking for, but in the end, it really is just this simple. Do those simple things, play something that's worth recording in the first place, and you're going to be just fine.

Anyway, OP has exactly one post on this forum and left us with almost as many questions as answers. Hopefully they'll be back.
 
Leaving the cats out of it... :) ...TBH, what you describe about getting good guitar tone...

"You plug in, you turn the knobs til it sounds good. If it's a real amp, you put a mic in front of it and move it til that sounds good...etc"

...that's pretty "conformist" old-school methodology. :cool:

You're right...there aren't any super esoteric secrets to it, and why that approach is used with regularity even by the most "progressive" recording engineers...so I couldn't quite get what you were getting at in your previous post where you seem to suggest we're all stuck in some antiquated recording methodology, while others (and I assume you) are blazing new trails in that area.
I'm not trying to argue...just saying that "conformist" in this case, and with a lot of recording techniques, doesn't mean anything negative, which is how you were making it.

There's always the young guns who come along with new "tricks" etc...but they rarely improve on tried-n-true old school recording techniques from the "last century". ;)
It's usually more about some attention-getting, and wanting to make some sort of name for themselves...which is understandable.

On another note, and just for some clarification....
For those of us who formed Recording Rebels...the "Rebels" part is not what most people here have incorrectly interpreted.

It wasn't meant as rebelling against HR or anyone here specifically...and it doesn't mean rebelling against old-school recording.
Actually...it was meant to be totally the opposite...rebelling against some of the new, half-baked approaches and after-the-fact plugin solutions to recording and mixing and the traps that so many of the recording newbs end up falling into.
That's what "Recording Rebels" really means to us...it's about taking recording back to the sound sources, and to the techniques that serve them best, instead of the "fix it later" mentality and overuse of canned solutions you see these days.
Paying more attention to the sounds during tracking...VS just during mixing...etc...and it was meant more in fun, and not as some dark, "rebels" thing that so many here have assumed. :D
 
lol ...... greg records and plays better than 99% of the home recordists out there .... I'm gonna jump in here and state that one thing he's not, is a 'hack' .... you might not like him but he gets better guitar sounds that just about anyone ..... his drumb skills are pretty extreme with rock solid timing and I've never heard anyone do that fast blast beat thing better.

FFS I'm going to agree with Lt Bob here. Greg has forgotten more about writing killer punk and hard rock riffs than I'll ever know.
 
It wasn't meant as rebelling against HR or anyone here specifically...and it doesn't mean rebelling against old-school recording.
Actually...it was meant to be totally the opposite...rebelling against some of the new, half-baked approaches and after-the-fact plugin solutions to recording and mixing and the traps that so many of the recording newbs end up falling into.
That's what "Recording Rebels" really means to us...it's about taking recording back to the sound sources, and to the techniques that serve them best, instead of the "fix it later" mentality and overuse of canned solutions you see these days.
Paying more attention to the sounds during tracking...VS just during mixing...etc...and it was meant more in fun, and not as some dark, "rebels" thing that so many here have assumed. :D

You can do that all you want (go back to source recording), and you can drain your bank account doing it, but that doesn't by itself render newer approaches and solutions moot. There's been bad home recording for as long as home recording has existed. It's just easier now to make a bad recording, and with so many making decent or good recordings those bad examples stick out even more. There's the same proportion of good/bad as there has always been, I know because I've been here a while and have participated by contributing plenty of bad mixes. ;)
 
You can do that all you want (go back to source recording), and you can drain your bank account doing it, but that doesn't by itself render newer approaches and solutions moot. There's been bad home recording for as long as home recording has existed. It's just easier now to make a bad recording, and with so many making decent or good recordings those bad examples stick out even more. There's the same proportion of good/bad as there has always been, I know because I've been here a while and have participated by contributing plenty of bad mixes. ;)

Nothing really to do with a need to "drain your bank account doing it"...of course, everyone indulges as much as they choose to, or as much as they can when it pleases them. ;)

It's not about that. You can use old-school techniques without breaking the bank.

The point isn't really to make newer approaches and solutions "moot"...but rather for those who are stuck making bad recordings, to stop and reevaluate their approaches and solutions, and like with so many disciplines in art, sport and every day life...when in doubt, when it's not working for you...go back to the basics, get that foundation sorted out, and then the new stuff falls into place much easier.

There's been somewhat of an unintentional rejection of "old-school" by newbs, because they simply don't know what they don't know, and there's also the very common assumption that anything new...must be better.
That's kinda what the "rebels" were aiming at...and at the same time, promoting the getting back to some foundations of recording as a way to sort out the bad recordings people make.
Otherwise, there's nothing wrong with new when it works. :)
 
I can't speak to recording metal specifically, but just plug directly in. One caution: It's not a simple as getting a good room tone then miking. The room tone will lead you astray. You can be hearing beautiful music while your mic is hearing shit. The more you can base decisions on what is coming through the mic, the better the result. If you are using sims, none of that matters to you.

Miro, your description of what the recording rebels are up to has got me intrigued. Post some tones dude. I want to hear the magic.

It's ironic that I probably share more of Greg's recording philosophy than most around here. Loud amps and mics is all I use, and as far as I know all he uses. But personalities will clash. The music I have heard from him has been good.
 
Well...it's not some "group project" in the RR forum...rather more about some unifying perspectives, but everyone still has their individual views too. It's not a religion.

AFA tones and mixes...people have been posting them over in RR.
 
I just assumed people lurked.
Like you take this place...there's usually less than 10 active members on a good day...but always like over 400 "guests" lurking.

I posted one mix I was working on...and have more getting finished now that I finally got my studio reset after some major changes/upgrades the last year and a half, that put some of that mix work on hold.
I had/have a lot of song recorded, but there was little point to finishing mixes...and then making the upgrades, once I knew what I wanted to do a couple of years ago.
 
That's cool. I've been hoping you would post something over here. You have a lot of cool old analog studio gear. I'd be curious to know if I can hear the difference between that and the digital stuff most of us are using.
 
Maybe when I get a few things done.

I use digital quite extensively too with my analog gear, and I'll go between the two formats often...so it's not really a clear analog VS digital sonic difference. I'm purely in the analog domain only when I track, and then purely in the digital domain when I edit, comp and pre-mix....but the rest of the time it's a hybrid process, and even during the final mixdown, I'm constantly moving from DAW playback to console & outboard, tweaking both plugins and rack gear.
Hard to say what part of the mix is the result of analog or digital.

If you want to hear pure analog mixes...just check out some of the stuff the guys post here in the Analog forum.
 
Back
Top