Condenser mic distance on guitar cab

[Mike_J]

I've been experimenting with double micing my guitar 4 x 12 cab. An SM57 in combination with a Rode NT1A. While running a 50 watt Marshall head on a master volume of only 4, I'm finding that placing the mic any closer than 14 inches is far too sensitive for the Rode, even having my preamp input gain on zero.
I'm curious to hear from anyone using double micing about what sort of condeser mic distances they are using. If fact, any comments about the techique at all would be interesting.

[Micter]

57 on the grill half way between the dust cover and the speaker edge.
The NT1 about 3 feet back and about 3 feet above the 57 pointed at any one of the speakers.

You might need to adjust slightly for phase cancellation issues.

[dodgeaspen]

I am now experimenting with double miking myself. I've been told things like miking on the edge of the speak with one mic, then use another mic at the halfway point on the speak. You can vary the loudness and distance with the mics. Keep trying.

[Sir_Matthew]

Originally Posted by Micter

57 on the grill half way between the dust cover and the speaker edge.
The NT1 about 3 feet back and about 3 feet above the 57 pointed at any one of the speakers.

Did exactly this recently and got great results.

[Sonixx]

Originally Posted by Mike_J

... I'm finding that placing the mic any closer than 14 inches is far too sensitive for the Rode, even having my preamp input gain on zero.

if your mic-pre had a 20db pad, that would solve this.

seems that 14 inches back would result in a bit of comb filtering resulting in a phased tone.

[Sir_Matthew]

Originally Posted by Sonixx

seems that 14 inches back would result in a bit of comb filtering resulting in a phased tone.

Agreed. Move the mic back. 3 feet is good, as per above.

[Mike_J]

I'm going to try about 3 feet next time around. With the 2 mics, I'm getting a nice range of tones. For some reason, I'm not getting any phase problems at all.

[witzendoz]

I use a NT1 2" from the speaker with the -10db pad in all the time, never had a problem with volume. If it's too loud for the mic it's too loud in the studio and some of the guitarists I record are loud!

Cheers

Alan.

[Mike_J]

Sorry for the ignorance, but what do you guys mean by -10db and 20db pad?

2"? That's close.

[Sonixx]

Originally Posted by Mike_J

Sorry for the ignorance, but what do you guys mean by -10db and 20db pad?

2"? That's close.

a Pad attenuates the signal by that amount. many mic-pres have this ability. you can also buy them separately.

[witzendoz]

The NT1 I use is an early edition, I was a big fan of Rode mics from the start and one of my NT1's is a very early production.

My NT1 has a -10db pad switch that you access by removing the lower body of the mic, this comes off by undoing the knelled ring on the bottom of the mic. It may be that the latter NT1's and NT1A's don't have this feature, there is also a bass roll off switch. The NT2's have the switches on the actual mic.

Maybe owners of later production NT1's can answer this.

The reason the mic itself has a pad is to prevent loud signals overloading the mics internal circuit and to allow more control at the mic pre/console mic input.

Quite a few models of condenser mics have a pad switch.

Cheers

Alan

[Mike_J]

Alan,
Thanks for that. The one I use is borrowed and I'll check the mic properly for a pad switch.
Mike.

[N9XR]

Originally Posted by Mike_J

Sorry for the ignorance, but what do you guys mean by -10db and 20db pad?

2"? That's close.

When you talk about power, decibels are used and they are non-linear. They are logarithmic. So half power is -3 dB, one tenth the power is -10 dB, and one one hundredth the power is -20 dB. One one thousandth is -30 dB and so on.

When we hear things, we do not hear volumes as in linear levels anyway so decibels work well to describe power levels for what we hear.

Attenuators cut the power level. They can be measured in negative dB numbers. Amplifiers will amplify signal levels and are measured in positive dB numbers. Long runs of cable can pick up noise, so if we push high levels of signal through long cable runs, the small amounts of noise will not be so noticeable, but if we run small signals through long runs, we will need to amplify on the other end and the noise will be a large portion of the signal seen by the amplifier and you will have garbagey sound. So it may be better to amplify first and attenuate on the other end in some cases.

I hope this helps.

Jerry

[Mike_J]

Jerry,
Yes mate-it does help. Thanks for that.
M.

[Sir_Matthew]

The NT1 I bought new in 2000 doesn't have a pad switch. I'm not sure which ones do & don't, but I've seen them in a variety of flavors.

[MessianicDreams]

Whilst I have no experience with this particular condenser, you should be able to put it right up by the grill with little problem.

As suggested, use a pad switch either on your pre or on the mic itself; you can also buy separate in-line attenuators which would go between the mic and the preamp.

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by witzendoz

The NT1 I use is an early edition, I was a big fan of Rode mics from the start and one of my NT1's is a very early production.

My NT1 has a -10db pad switch that you access by removing the lower body of the mic, this comes off by undoing the knelled ring on the bottom of the mic. It may be that the latter NT1's and NT1A's don't have this feature, there is also a bass roll off switch.

Originally Posted by Sir_Matthew

The NT1 I bought new in 2000 doesn't have a pad switch. I'm not sure which ones do & don't, but I've seen them in a variety of flavors.

Those switches must be on either *very* early production models, or post-2000 models. I have a pair of NT1s I bought in '99, S/Ns A13090 and A13376. I just opened 13090 up for a look and there are no switches to be found.

G.

[witzendoz]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

Those switches must be on either *very* early production models, or post-2000 models. I have a pair of NT1s I bought in '99, S/Ns A13090 and A13376. I just opened 13090 up for a look and there are no switches to be found.

G.

Yes very early, they were the first mics brought out by Rode. They are still going strong and sound great. The NT2 I have is also the first series NT2, this is also in regular use. If I get a chance I will take a photo of the switches, they were well hidden, I did not know about them tell months after I bought them.

Cheers

Alan.

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by witzendoz

Yes very early, they were the first mics brought out by Rode. They are still going strong and sound great. The NT2 I have is also the first series NT2, this is also in regular use. If I get a chance I will take a photo of the switches, they were well hidden, I did not know about them tell months after I bought them.

I'd also be interested in serial numbers. There's a lot of stories going around about changes to the NT1, but nobody seems to know just when in production the various changes happened. It'd be interesting to put at least some kind of rough limits on when this particular change happened based upon serial number. Also, as long as you have the guts and the camera pulled out, a pic or two of the capsule would be interesting too.
I can take similar pics of mine as a comparison, just for yucks.

I also just noticed you're from Rode's home country. I wonder if there were any differences as to what and when things were shipped locally vs. overseas.

G.

[witzendoz]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

I'd also be interested in serial numbers. There's a lot of stories going around about changes to the NT1, but nobody seems to know just when in production the various changes happened. It'd be interesting to put at least some kind of rough limits on when this particular change happened based upon serial number. Also, as long as you have the guts and the camera pulled out, a pic or two of the capsule would be interesting too.
I can take similar pics of mine as a comparison, just for yucks.

I also just noticed you're from Rode's home country. I wonder if there were any differences as to what and when things were shipped locally vs. overseas.

G.

Hi Glen,

So I don't hijack this thread with the answers, I have started a new one: http://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=285271
Cheers

Alan.

[Mike_J]

Alan,
No worries on the hijacking front. Post away. Its all one big learning curve for me.
Mike.

[Ricman]

After getting some fairly good results from just close-miking a Mesa Dual Rectifier/4x12, this weekend I experimented by added a couple distant mics. The music is loud overdriven guitar punk rock.

I had a modded SM57 about 5” off the grill cloth, angled slightly so that it aimed at about midway between the outer edge and the dustcap, on axis to the angle of the paper cone. About 5’ out in front and slightly higher than the top of the cab I placed two condensers, a SD Josephson C42 and an AT4033 (with –10pad and Lo cut switch engaged) both pointing down slightly toward the upper speakers in the cab. I chose to use two distant mics because I wanted to hear the differences of the two mics on the same performance take and see which I preferred. The C42 has a nice even response while the AT4033 is a bit hyped in the upper end. They each went through an RNP.

On the first couple songs I recorded three tracks, one for each mic. The results were quite good. The main body of the sound comes from the 57, the C42 provided a nice full sound with an even complement of Highs, Mid’s and Lows while the 4033 added a sharp edgy focused character without washing anything out. This actually surprised me little. It was a very usable tone, in fact the two of them together gave me just the additional character I was looking for. After the first couple songs I ended up combining the two distant mics onto one track (mainly to conserve HD space, but also to commit to a sound and have less option overload later). I think the mix of the two distant mics was something like 60/40 : C42/4033. So that gave me a close mic track and a distant mic track.

The end result is that the distant mics added a great element to the sound without sounding too roomy, they were close enough to not sound like a reverb and the amp was loud enough to give them a good jolt of relatively direct sound. (In fact it was very f*ckin loud!) At about 65” away from the cab, I see it as more of a close mic variation than a distant room mic as far as how it sounds and how I use it. It sits seamlessly with the close mic 57.

I think giving some room for the sound to develop helps. Even the SM57 sounds better to me backed off to 5–8” than it did when I had it jammed up on the grill.

On a related note:
I think one of the biggest detriments to getting a good guitar sound, for me, has been not taking the time to REALLY experiment and listen. The average guitar player is a major hindrance in this. They get bored with this stuff after 2 or 3 minutes and start aimlessly playing all sorts of random stuff, doodling around the neck, pretty much anything EXCEPT what you need them to play. This time around I went in and listened to the amp turned way the hell up without anything plugged in, and with a good deal of normal amp hum present and a willing assistant moving the mics around, I was able to hear some sweet spots, both speaker sweet spots and room sweet spots. Then I turned it back down a bit and re-amped a previously recorded DI guitar track so it would play exactly what I wanted it to play while I listened to the studio monitors and made some final adjustments. This made a huge difference from previous efforts.

Experiment and Good luck.

[Mike_J]

Originally Posted by Ricman

I think one of the biggest detriments to getting a good guitar sound, for me, has been not taking the time to REALLY experiment and listen. The average guitar player is a major hindrance in this.
Experiment and Good luck.

In all honesty, I have to say I have been completely guilty of this. I don't how many forum threads I had to read emphasising mic placement testing before I stopped fucking about trying to repair a tonelessly recorded sound with eq. Resolved now though.

The close mic variation you described seem similar to the results I'm getting with my Shure and Rode because I'm not after any real room sound. The 2 mics are giving a good variation in tone that I'd never find in eq adjustments.

[witzendoz]

Hi,

Something else that I try that works well depending on the sound you want:

Use the NT1A close up, say 1 to 2 inches, then put a second condenser about the same distance (on a different speaker if you have more than 1) but have the second condenser in omni pattern. You need a condenser with an omni option of course. The omni mic need not be a large diaphragm condenser, a small will do. Blend the sound and check that the mics are in phase, reverse the phase of the omni if required.

Experiment with mic position and distance of both mics until you get the sound you want with a minimum of eq. You will find that the sound with the omni is very open, almost like a room mic.

Cheers

Alan.