Rock Guitar Tone & Phasing

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Yeah.... The thinking behind using the 421 as the innermost mic was the idea that the center produces the highs..

True, but remember that the "center" of the loudspeaker driver is the voice coil area, the circle *around* the dustcap. That's where you'll usually be getting the best and most accurate highs. Anything coming off the dustcap is truely incedental.

That said, that doesn't mean that you'e can't get the sound you want off the dustcap. But I'd try other options as well. There are dozens of different ways to mic a git cab; and what works best for any given session depends upon a long chain of variables from the player style, to the song arrangement, to the guitar/pickup type, to the cab model, to the mic pres used, etc. The implication from your OP is that you have one main recipe for miking the cab. My best recommendation is to open yourself up and tray a whole boatload of positioning options. Take a day and expiriment not only with placement, but with angles as well. Try some ither mics while you're at it. The 57 and the 421 are classic go-tos, no question. But so are Big Macs; and most people would not want to eat a Big Mac for every meal every day of the week.

Probably the easiest solution, if you're worried about phasing, is to use a single microphone. A single 57 or or 421 *placed with care* can sound better than a combo of the two placed just ad hoc. Especially if you're going to double the parts anyway. Record one track with the 57 and the other with the 421, both of them placed with attention to detail, and you can often get a much more textured sound than you can with doubled tracks that are sonically identical.

Mix it up before you mix it down .

G.

 

[peritus]

True, but remember that the "center" of the loudspeaker driver is the voice coil area, the circle *around* the dustcap. That's where you'll usually be getting the best and most accurate highs. Anything coming off the dustcap is truely incedental.

That said, that doesn't mean that you'e can't get the sound you want off the dustcap. But I'd try other options as well. There are dozens of different ways to mic a git cab; and what works best for any given session depends upon a long chain of variables from the player style, to the song arrangement, to the guitar/pickup type, to the cab model, to the mic pres used, etc. The implication from your OP is that you have one main recipe for miking the cab. My best recommendation is to open yourself up and tray a whole boatload of positioning options. Take a day and expiriment not only with placement, but with angles as well. Try some ither mics while you're at it. The 57 and the 421 are classic go-tos, no question. But so are Big Macs; and most people would not want to eat a Big Mac for every meal every day of the week.

Probably the easiest solution, if you're worried about phasing, is to use a single microphone. A single 57 or or 421 *placed with care* can sound better than a combo of the two placed just ad hoc. Especially if you're going to double the parts anyway. Record one track with the 57 and the other with the 421, both of them placed with attention to detail, and you can often get a much more textured sound than you can with doubled tracks that are sonically identical.

Mix it up before you mix it down .

G.

Good post.. Thanks..

Sometimes, the part to double track is almost too intricate for them to replay... Of course, that's a problem with the player, rather than our skill...

I'm glad to be given all these tips...

So thanks to everyone...

 

[funkydrummer]

Anyone know any specifics about led zep tone and guitar miking?

here's an interview from guitar player with jimmy.

"g.p.:the guitar on "communication breakdown" on led zeppelin sounds as if it's coming out of a shoebox.

j.p.:yeah.i put it in a small room, a little tiny vocal booth-type thing and miked it from a distance. you see, there's a very old recording maxim that goes, "distance makes depth." i've used that a hell of a lot on recording techniques with the band generally, not just me. you're always used to those close-miking amps, just putting the microphone in front. but i'd have a
mike right out the back as well. and then balance the two and get rid of all the phasing problems. really, you shouldn't have to use an e.q. in the
studio if the instruments sound right. it should all be done with the microphones. but see, everyone has gotten so carried away with e.q.
pots that they have forgotten the whole science of microphone placement. there aren't too many guys who know it. i'm sure les paul knows a lot:
obviously he must have been well into it, as were all those who produced the early rock records where there were only one or two mikes in the studio."

"g.p.:what is the effect on "out on the tiles" from led zeppelin iii?

j.p.:now that is exactly what i was talking about: close-miking and distance-miking. that's ambient sound. getting the distance of the time lag from one end of the room to the other and putting that in as well. the whole idea, the way i see recording, is to try and capture the sound of the room live and the emotion of the whole moment and try to convey that across. that's the
very essence of it. and so, consequently, you've got to capture as much of the room sound as possible."

i also remember reading somewhere that the distance mic would be at 15 feet.

 

[bennychico11]

lol.. What do you think about them?

I tried to install SignalTools some time ago.. Installation went normally, but the plugins never show up in PT.... I need to figure it out though.. This plug-in looks sweet...

I like it. But what's not to like? It's a meter and it does it's job
Know that you can only use it on stereo tracks....it's a stereo meter. And only as a multichannel RTAS plugin.
I can't use it on my stereo bus because I have an older TDM system.

 

[peritus]

here's an interview from guitar player with jimmy.

"g.p.:the guitar on "communication breakdown" on led zeppelin sounds as if it's coming out of a shoebox.

j.p.:yeah.i put it in a small room, a little tiny vocal booth-type thing and miked it from a distance. you see, there's a very old recording maxim that goes, "distance makes depth." i've used that a hell of a lot on recording techniques with the band generally, not just me. you're always used to those close-miking amps, just putting the microphone in front. but i'd have a
mike right out the back as well. and then balance the two and get rid of all the phasing problems. really, you shouldn't have to use an e.q. in the
studio if the instruments sound right. it should all be done with the microphones. but see, everyone has gotten so carried away with e.q.
pots that they have forgotten the whole science of microphone placement. there aren't too many guys who know it. i'm sure les paul knows a lot:
obviously he must have been well into it, as were all those who produced the early rock records where there were only one or two mikes in the studio."

"g.p.:what is the effect on "out on the tiles" from led zeppelin iii?

j.p.:now that is exactly what i was talking about: close-miking and distance-miking. that's ambient sound. getting the distance of the time lag from one end of the room to the other and putting that in as well. the whole idea, the way i see recording, is to try and capture the sound of the room live and the emotion of the whole moment and try to convey that across. that's the
very essence of it. and so, consequently, you've got to capture as much of the room sound as possible."

i also remember reading somewhere that the distance mic would be at 15 feet.

Awesome.. Thanks!

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

[j.p.]"...really, you shouldn't have to use an e.q. in the studio if the instruments sound right. it should all be done with the microphones. but see, everyone has gotten so carried away with e.q.
pots that they have forgotten the whole science of microphone placement. there aren't too many guys who know it. i'm sure les paul knows a lot:
obviously he must have been well into it, as were all those who produced the early rock records where there were only one or two mikes in the studio."

Wiser words have NEVER been spoken.

G.

 

[MCI2424]

So.....

Here's the situation:

Mid Size room.. 25W x 15L x 8H

Tube Guitar Amplifier (i.e. Orange, Hi-Watt, etc.)
4x10 Guitar Cab (i.e. Marshall, Mesa, etc.)
Quality Electric Guitar (i.e. Les Paul Custom, ES335, etc.)

We have many microphones, but our all-purpose setup is SM57 and HD421, side by side, on the top left speaker...

Mic's are almost on the grill cloth...

HD421 is pointed almost directly at the center of the "dome"... We use the "2 clicks away from "M" (music) setting, on the roll-off..

SM57 is pointed directly at the edge of the "dome"...

Both mic's will be panned hardish left and right

Mic levels are equalized (peaking just below -6 dbfs...

We check the phase using our Digi 002's mono switch...

Now... This works pretty well. However, I am convinced that we can improve on this technique or maybe develop an alternate... It just seems to me that the phase always leaves something to be desired..

Can anyone offer any advice on this topic? I realize tone is something in the ear of the beholder... However, my favorite tone is very "vintage".. It just seems to me that certain important techniques have been forgotten...

Anyone know any specifics about led zep tone and guitar miking?



Thanks

P.S. Heres a cool link

http://www.eqmag.com/story.asp?sectioncode=41&storycode=8148

Setup the mics listening in mono. Phase will be fixed with better placement of the mics.

 

[peritus]

Agreed...

So....

If I record a sine wave, on a stereo track (one source oscillation to two channels), in pro tools, with the panning sliders at 0 (center), and hit the mono button, what is the result?

Now, without taking off the mono button, if I pan hard left and hard right, what is the result?

I'm thinking it wouldn't cancel, under both circumstances.. However, if this isn't the case, preservation of phase, by mixing in mono, seems useless...

I need to experiment some.. I realize that I'm saying sounds pretty dumb.. So I guess the true question is, how does panning effect the phase, on a stereo track, in pro tools?

 

[bennychico11]

If I record a sine wave, on a stereo track (one source oscillation to two channels), in pro tools, with the panning sliders at 0 (center), and hit the mono button, what is the result?

I'm guessing you're talking about the mono button on the front of the 002. This button just sums your main outs to mono. This would be similar to panning all your tracks center.
If you've taken the sine wave on the stereo track and panned it center...you've now made it mono AND it's louder (approx. 3.5dB louder). You won't hear any difference because both the left and right channels are already in phase with each other. This is ideal "mono compatibility check". If you DON'T hear a change...then it's compatible in mono.
But now do a test by separating the stereo sine wave to two mono tracks. And if you're running at 48kHz, move one of the channels 24 samples earlier in time (Edit-->Shift). Now when you play them back with both channels centered, you won't hear anything. The meters fluctuating but because they are centered (playing out mono) they cancel each other out. Now move the pan slider on one of them slowly to the right and you'll hear the sine wave come back up in volume!


The reason we have "pan laws" is so that we don't hear a volume difference when panning things in our speakers. And by volume difference, I mean the actual perceived volume coming out of the speakers. This is because we use two speakers to listen back to a mono, panned center signal. If we now pan hard left, we only have one speaker playing back. If we had kept the perceived output volume the same, our signal would have reduced in volume to our ears because we've essentially just removed one speaker. So we counteract this phenomenon by allowing the software to govern the volume difference between hard left/right and center.
Do a test in Pro Tools. Create a mono track and set up a sine wave on it. Now create a stereo master fader. Play back the sine wave and pan the slider in the middle. You'll see the master fader's meters read the same in both channels. Now move the pan slider to the left and you'll see see the left channel meter go up a little bit while the right meter goes down a little bit. The computer is compensating but you don't actually HEAR this compensation. If you did it would just mess with your ears.


Just remember the mono button on your 002 does exactly what you did with the panning sliders....pan everything in the middle. This is just so you don't have to pan all of your tracks yourself and mess up your automation. If you hear a weird problem, then you have a mono compatibility issue.

Now, without taking off the mono button, if I pan hard left and hard right, what is the result?

a true stereo sine wave, playing out two channels (probably in phase)...but now approx 3.5dB quieter because of pan laws.

I'm thinking it wouldn't cancel, under both circumstances.. However, if this isn't the case, preservation of phase, by mixing in mono, seems useless...

no, it's VERY important to check for mono compatibility in mono. Because as I said above, things CAN cancel (or frequencies can clash) in mono. Remember, we're not working with pure, in phase, sine waves like your test. We're working with complex waves that aren't always in time.

I guess the true question is, how does panning effect the phase, on a stereo track, in pro tools?

it doesn't affect the phase. It affects the volume of your signal that is playing back through your speakers. Depending on the volume and harmonic content of other sounds coming through that same speaker is what determines the phase relationship of your mix.

 

[peritus]

Much thanks Benny... You are truly the man...