ShanPeyton
Member
This thread is both educational and entertaining. 
How to record electric guitars
- Thread starter Greg_L
- Start date
- Status
R
RAMI
Guest
famous beagle
Well-known member
Haven't read the whole thread, so I don't know if these have been mentioned:
Tom Scholz - starting during the second album, he began using Rockman stuff and recording direct almost exclusively.
David Gilmour - "Another Brick in the Wall, Part 2": the famous clean, funky riff was recorded direct.
"Shine on You Crazy Diamond": Clean intro solo was direct.
The Doors - "When the Music's Over": the fuzz guitar was direct
Maybe you've heard of this next one?
Jimmy Page - "Black Dog": Main riff is a triple-tracked Les Paul through a direct box into the mic channel on the board.
I for one LOVE recording a guitar with a good amp cooking. There is nothing in sims that even comes close.
When you have the amp cooking (clean or dirty), you have the power tube section cooking and doing its thing. Power tube saturation sounds much better than just preamp saturation.
My absolute favorites are;
A 69 plexi (not reissue) cooking at volume.
An early narrow panel tweed Bassman cooking
A 59 tweed Vibroluxe at 7 or 8
And a good old fashioned silverface Fender Champ running at half volume for cleans.
Richard Goodsell super 17
An early Soldano
All these amps are not suitable for a recording studio in a bedroom in an apt (with the exception of the champ)
Your faves may vary, those are just some of mine.
That being said there have been a lot of great recordings that have been done with no amps at all.
The hell with the rules. Do whatever gets YOU a sound YOU think is great.
When you have the amp cooking (clean or dirty), you have the power tube section cooking and doing its thing. Power tube saturation sounds much better than just preamp saturation.
My absolute favorites are;
A 69 plexi (not reissue) cooking at volume.
An early narrow panel tweed Bassman cooking
A 59 tweed Vibroluxe at 7 or 8
And a good old fashioned silverface Fender Champ running at half volume for cleans.
Richard Goodsell super 17
An early Soldano
All these amps are not suitable for a recording studio in a bedroom in an apt (with the exception of the champ)
Your faves may vary, those are just some of mine.
That being said there have been a lot of great recordings that have been done with no amps at all.
The hell with the rules. Do whatever gets YOU a sound YOU think is great.
famous beagle
Well-known member
R
RAMI
Guest
Famous, I don't think anyone can or will argue that there aren't exceptions. But that's what they are, exceptions. In this case, not all good exceptions.
No but seriously, is there even one Doors tune with anything other than a chincy, wimpy guitar sound. There's a reason he's not exactly mentioned in the same breath as Hendrix, Clapton, or Gilmore. One of them is because of his incredible tone.
So yes, you came up with 4 or 5 exceptions to the so-called "rule". But I think that coming up with 4 exceptions out of thousands of examples sort of re-enforces the rule rather than refutes it.
Sure, but his sound is probably one of the most dated sounds in the history of rock. Everyone knows a Rockman when they hear it, and it's usually snickered at. I don't know anyone who has ever tried to re-create Boston's guitar sound, and that's why it's dated, because other than Tom Sholtz in 1981, nobody has ever wanted that sound on their album. People have tried to get Hendrix's tone, Page's feel, Clapton's sustain...I've never heard of anyone trying to get Tom Scholtz's sound. Or else, we'd hear Rockman's all over the place. But, other than Boston, I've never heard a Rockman or anyone trying to sound like a Rockman in the 40 years since.
OK, I'll give you those. I love Gilmore and the sound of those 2 tunes, so I'm not going to try and find an argument just for the sake of arguing. There's one good exception to the rule. A small "but" is that these are both very clean sounds.
Right. And that must be why there are millions of guitar players in the last 40 years who have devoted their careers to try and re-create that awesome Robby Krieger sound.
No but seriously, is there even one Doors tune with anything other than a chincy, wimpy guitar sound. There's a reason he's not exactly mentioned in the same breath as Hendrix, Clapton, or Gilmore. One of them is because of his incredible tone.
Why did he feel a need to triple track it? Again, I'm not going to try and refute what you're saying. You managed to come up with some exceptions. I will say this, though. I don't think Page's magic has ever been his sound. Or, what I mean is, his magic might be his sound, but it's the sound he created with his style of playing and with his fingers. I'm pretty sure Page's sound is un-defineable. He used Tele's, SG's, probably Marshalls sometimes, probably Fender Twins other times, maybe used room mics, direct mics, all over the place. My point is, HE was the magic, not his sound, in my non-guitar playing opinion.
So yes, you came up with 4 or 5 exceptions to the so-called "rule". But I think that coming up with 4 exceptions out of thousands of examples sort of re-enforces the rule rather than refutes it.
famous beagle
Well-known member
Famous, I don't think anyone can or will argue that there aren't exceptions. But that's what they are, exceptions. In this case, not all good exceptions.Sure, but his sound is probably one of the most dated sounds in the history of rock. Everyone knows a Rockman when they hear it, and it's usually snickered at. I don't know anyone who has ever tried to re-create Boston's guitar sound, and that's why it's dated, because other than Tom Sholtz in 1981, nobody has ever wanted that sound on their album. People have tried to get Hendrix's tone, Page's feel, Clapton's sustain...I've never heard of anyone trying to get Tom Scholtz's sound. Or else, we'd hear Rockman's all over the place. But, other than Boston, I've never heard a Rockman or anyone trying to sound like a Rockman in the 40 years since.
OK, I'll give you those. I love Gilmore and the sound of those 2 tunes, so I'm not going to try and find an argument just for the sake of arguing. There's one good exception to the rule. A small "but" is that these are both very clean sounds.
Right. And that must be why there are millions of guitar players in the last 40 years who have devoted their careers to try and re-create that awesome Robby Krieger sound.
No but seriously, is there even one Doors tune with anything other than a chincy, wimpy guitar sound. There's a reason he's not exactly mentioned in the same breath as Hendrix, Clapton, or Gilmore. One of them is because of his incredible tone.
Why did he feel a need to triple track it? Again, I'm not going to try and refute what you're saying. You managed to come up with some exceptions. I will say this, though. I don't think Page's magic has ever been his sound. Or, what I mean is, his magic might be his sound, but it's the sound he created with his style of playing and with his fingers. I'm pretty sure Page's sound is un-defineable. He used Tele's, SG's, probably Marshalls sometimes, probably Fender Twins other times, maybe used room mics, direct mics, all over the place. My point is, HE was the magic, not his sound, in my non-guitar playing opinion.
So yes, you came up with 4 or 5 exceptions to the so-called "rule". But I think that coming up with 4 exceptions out of thousands of examples sort of re-enforces the rule rather than refutes it.
I really wasn't trying to prove anything. I'm not arguing the fact that probably over 99% of the classic rock guitar tones are the result of a miked amp. Gerg just likes to state so much as black and white, and I'm not like that, so I was just taking him up on his challenge.
R
RAMI
Guest
I figured that. It's all good, and your post was food for thought, so I tried answering it as best I can, as un-educated as I am in guitarosity.....guitardom???
Maybe yes. In a finished product there are more variables than just the sound of the guitar and amp. The final recorded sound you hear is a result of EVERYTHING in the chain from the player and his gear,all the way down the line to the final mastering stage.While I love miking a loud amp as well, I would be willing to bet a good amount of money that you could certainly be fooled more than once in a blind listening test.
However, side by side comparing amps to the best modelers, sims, plug ins, etc, you can always tell the difference.
Me, I'm an old school analog guy. I got a buddy who is one of these young ITB guys with the best gear, who now ONLY records real guitars and amps once he heard the difference side by side.
But again as I said before, use whatever you feel gives you the guitar sound you are the happiest with.
It's all about the tune, the song, the final representation. People get so caught up in the trivial minutia and forget that.
I don't care how someone gets to the end result. The finest guitar tone in the world will do NOTHING to save a shitty song.
Last edited:
Okay, since you're all into hero worship and lame shit like that because some dated clown recorded direct 70 years ago, now I challenge you to name all of the guitarists that used and still use real amps. Let's see which list is longer. Go. Go now.
Bubba po
Tiny Stonehenge Moment
I don't think he was saying that, Greg. In fact, I think he was championing the very thing that you yourself champion. "Try stuff". "Don't go with accepted knowledge". "Find your own sound". People forget that Gilmour and Page were once pimply guys in their teens and early twenties just trying stuff out. Is that stuff really dated, or is it just adding to the database of recording experience? There's such a thing as "inverse snobbery".
Accepted knowledge is a good thing sometimes, when it's foolproof. Like the sun is hot. It just is. I don't accept the "anything goes" philosophy. It was good for a while when people were talented and creative, but that's what got us where we are now, which is shit town. People have gotten lazy and half assed. It's reflected in music. I try to promote something better, not something that will just get you by. I don't accept purposeful mediocrity. I don't accept "so and so did this, so it's cool".
Raz Klinghoffer
New member
It's 2015
You can use Axe FX, POD, Guitar Rig, Amlitube, Bias, Revalver
Each can get you great results if you know what you're doing.
The biggest bands in the world does that , and the biggest producer and engineers.
This is my personal opinion and I respect others opinion in that matter.
You can use Axe FX, POD, Guitar Rig, Amlitube, Bias, Revalver
Each can get you great results if you know what you're doing.
The biggest bands in the world does that , and the biggest producer and engineers.
This is my personal opinion and I respect others opinion in that matter.
I sometimes what wonder what "the pros" and wannabe pros like you are so afraid of. I can understand a modest home recorder in an apartment not being able to crank amps and blast drums. Totally understandable. But in a "pro" situation there are no noise restrictions. There should be no skill restrictions. There should be no gear restrictions. So why on earth would "the biggest bands in the world does that , and the biggest producer and engineers."? It makes no sense to me and I've yet to hear one valid explanation for it that isn't rooted in laziness at the very least. In the old days, a band got an advance and they were usually instructed to use part of that advance on killer equipment for touring and recording. The rest went to booking a killer recording studio and personnel. Does a professional recording musician not own a good amp anymore? Does a professional engineer not know how to mic that amp? Does that professional studio not have a room for an amp or drums? Does that professional mixing engineer/producer not know how to mix a mic'd signal? What the fuck are they so afraid of? Why do loud noises scare the fuck out of you people so much now? It's really sad and pathetic.
Paschalis I.
Banned
The pros have nothing to be afraid of.
They just used the mics, knew how they work, got their tones and then used axe fx to get "there" easier and quicker.
It's not always about boredom, it's about saving time and getting where they want to go faster.
In the old days, we also used to turn on the TV by standing up and pressing buttons, but I don't see you complaining about using the remote controller, right?
I fully agree that someone must spend some time with mics, amps and cabs to create his own sound.
And I prefer for someone that uses a kemper/axe fx to actually import his custom made sound (that'd got with mics) rather than getting a preset from the internet,
but we've got to understand that people can't afford all this expensive gear and they get a kemper and ready-made preset.
If i were in this kind of situation where money was an issue, I'd choose a kemper with a preset through the internet over not recording music at all.
Music must not have limits, especially money limits.
Steenamaroo
...
Not a great analogy, is it.
Using buttons on the TV and buttons on a remote achieves exactly the same thing.
Yeah because a Kemper or AxeFx is cheap? Lol. Massive logic fail.
But besides that, why would you prefer someone use a Kemper or AxeFx? Because it's easier for you than actually miking a cab? So it's a combination of laziness and lack of recording skill? That's pretty much what I figured.
I really don't care what kind of halfassed shortcuts you choose to use. I really don't. Your fucking youtube channel of amp sims means nothing to me. I don't listen to your music or any of the music you "produce" and I most likely never will. I just don't like that people are getting into this hobby thinking that all of this fake shit better than the real thing because MIDI, samples, and sims have for some no-good reason become the go-to tools for music production. I personally DO NOT think it's a good thing that entire albums can be made without a mic being used for anything but a vocal track. I think that's lame. I know I'm fighting a losing battle against the growing number of hacks out there, but that's just how I feel.
Paschalis I.
Banned
Where did you get all this kind of info? I never said anything about me or my youtube channel with amp sims and I could care less if you would check it out or not.
It wasn't created for you anyway, but for people that can't afford expensive gear, as I said I love helping out people that want to record yet can't afford much.
A kemper cost less than $2000 while a full guitar rig for a commercial sound including mics, amps and cabs can exceed the $5.000 price range quite easily.
At least, that's a price range for a guitar rig for modern metal (you may spend less for a different genre).
So < $2.000 is better than > $5.000
I sense some anger in your post, did something make you go mad? I see no reason to do that, here's a forum you must expect to hear something different from what you believe is true.
If you can't accept a different perspective, then forums is not the ideal place for you to be.
But besides that, why would you prefer someone use a Kemper or AxeFx? Because it's easier for you than actually miking a cab? So it's a combination of laziness and lack of recording skill? That's pretty much what I figured.
I said that for someone that uses a kemper, I prefer him to use custom made sounds from mics if he can do it. If not, it's still better to get ready-made presets from the internet or using the stock ones, than choosing to not record music at all. Music must not be stopped cause lack of money. That's what I said.
Please read the whole sentence till the end. Don't let the anger lead you to false assumptions.
That's just my opinion you don't have to agree with me chill man!
Take care
Last edited:
Paschalis I.
Banned
Profiling also achieves the same sound from your rig:
This guy is a recording, mixing and mastering god and spend years using the mics, yet he uses the kempers.
He is just open-minded and loves going forward and make his life easier, yet achieve outstanding results.
I actually profiled my custom rig and it's like I'm having my custom made rig with me where I go.
The sound is perfect and the same.
Perfect for Live situations too
Last edited:
Your pricing is inaccurate. You inflated the real amp cost to bolster your point. You seem to only be focused on "modern metal". I've seen it in other posts from you too. That's cool and all. That kind of music has gone the way of heavy editing and quantization, so it makes sense that you'd stand up for all sorts of DAW trickery.
I'm angry because your different perspective is empty and inaccurate, but you will present it anyway and dummies will fall for it. I know that not everyone will not agree with me, and people rarely do most of the time. I've been here a long time and I'm quite used to that. I just wish that someone would make a counterpoint that isn't total bullshit.
I'm not making false assumptions. I'm responding to the words you typed out. As far as being better than not recording at all? I disagree with that wholeheartedly. I think there's already way too much music out there because it's cheap and easy for any clown to record his garbage and flood the world with it. But that's another topic and you don't want to hear me expound on that.
- Status