Mic'ing an acoustic with built-in PUP's or Mic it as usual?

Muddy T-Bone

Muddy T-Bone

New member
I know there are no hard and fast "rules" on recording IE: is no right way/wrong way, but I would like to get some opinions from you folks-

I just acquired a new acoustic guitar that is equipped with a built-in neck and bridge pick-up. This is new to me as the acoustic I've been recording with is 45 years old and does not have that feature set.

The new guitar sounds great, so I know micing it will get the results I'm after.

My questions are-

Is there a prefered recording technique that many have found successful with acoustic guitars like this? The variations I see are-

Mic the same as before- 1 on the neck and 1 on the body. This one always works for me.
Use the bridge PUP DI, mic the neck
Use the neck PUP DI and mic the body
Use both PUP's and go DI?
 
Personally, I always mic an acoustic. Always. I've never heard onboard pups that sounded good. They're fine for live work but they have "plinky" sound that doesn't cut it for recording.
 
Just depends what sound you're going for.
I think a DI guitar is pretty easy to pick out. It has its own sound.
If you want that close sound then pup it is; If you're not sure, it does no harm to record both.
 
Yup, record all and blend to taste. Every guitar/pickup/mic/room situation is different, as is the sound you are trying to achieve.
 
I've got a Martin with a built in and IMO it actually sounds pretty decent. I use an SDC at the 12th fret about 14 inches away plus the pup.
 
If you can swing it why not record both the direct out of the guitar along with the classic dual mic set up at the same time.

Going with the direct out will give you the "new classic" 80's power ballad sound, while using a large diaphragm condenser on the body and a small diaphragm condenser on the neck, will give you something that sounds more like the guitar actually does. By recording all three, you can then use them to balance out your overall "EQ" of the guitar track.

One thing to keep in mind though, is that in certain situations you want that full acoustic sound, while in other situations it can muddy up your mix. For example, if you are going for a more intimate sound of acoustic guitar, vocals, and some hand percussion, then you will want that full bodied acoustic sound. However, if you're working on a big mix with a bunch of stuff like electric guitars, bass, keyboards, pianos, drums, percussionist, and a bunch of vocals, the thinner sounding direct sound may "fit in the mix" better than the full bodied acoustic sound.

If you only have a 2 channel interface, I'd go for the dual mic thing or even the mono mic/direct setup.

I hope this helps in some way.
 
None of the guitar pickups I have heard avoided sounding thin and unnatural.

But if its a live gig, use the pickup for convenience. If its a recording in a controlled environment., use a mic. Omnis if you have a nice sounding room. Cardis if you have to close mic.
 
Oops! I forgot to mention something: The Fishman Aura DI

If I did more acoustic work I'd get one of these for sure. I'd still mic the guitar more often than not, but I can see this being quite useful.

Article/sales page
Fishman Aura Spectrum DI Imaging Pedal with D.I. | Sweetwater.com

Video parts 1 and 2
[URL=https://en.audiofanzine.com/misc-guitar-effect/fishman/Aura-Spectrum-DI/user_reviews/]Fishman Aura Spectrum DI [Overview] - YouTube[/url]
Fishman Aura Spectrum DI [Audition] - YouTube

Just FYI
 
Raymeous said:
If you can swing it why not record both the direct out of the guitar along with the classic dual mic set up at the same time.

Going with the direct out will give you the "new classic" 80's power ballad sound, while using a large diaphragm condenser on the body and a small diaphragm condenser on the neck, will give you something that sounds more like the guitar actually does. By recording all three, you can then use them to balance out your overall "EQ" of the guitar track.

One thing to keep in mind though, is that in certain situations you want that full acoustic sound, while in other situations it can muddy up your mix. For example, if you are going for a more intimate sound of acoustic guitar, vocals, and some hand percussion, then you will want that full bodied acoustic sound. However, if you're working on a big mix with a bunch of stuff like electric guitars, bass, keyboards, pianos, drums, percussionist, and a bunch of vocals, the thinner sounding direct sound may "fit in the mix" better than the full bodied acoustic sound.

If you only have a 2 channel interface, I'd go for the dual mic thing or even the mono mic/direct setup.

I hope this helps in some way.
Click to expand...

Ray,

Based on the information folks provided I decided to use 2 mics, and the two in the guitar DI, and then mix accordingly. Your suggestion gives a nice description of what to expect sonically going DI. ( I already know how the mics sound)
 
Muddy T-Bone said:
Based on the information folks provided I decided to use 2 mics, and the two in the guitar DI, and then mix accordingly.
Click to expand...
I discovered something similar last year. I use two mics in a standard {or even bizarre }two mic set up plus recording from the acoustic guitar pick up and one from a bottle top mic that I place close to the soundhole. Between the 4 sources, blended eventually, I've gotten the only acoustic guitar sound I've liked in 21 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top