Stereo or mono/doubles for the dulcet tones of my fingerpicked D-18?

[expatguy]

I have learned a great deal from the Microphone Thread over the years. Enough to be dangerous. Enough to question my ears no matter what mic and placement I use. Enough to lose enough of my mind so that I can't make up my mind on anything.

The foundation for my songs is my voice and, for the most part, a fingerpicked Martin D-18 guitar (let's say, similar in playing style to Paul Simon and sometimes Sweet Baby James Taylor). I often throw in strums and such which mean there's a pretty wide dynamic range. From there I want to add instruments. I want a prominent, balanced acoustic guitar that will still sit in the mix.

As Harvey said in one of his many informative posts, acoustic guitar players tend only to hear the near-field sound of their guitar. I have recorded stereo using the X-Y configuation with a pair of Sony 33p high-end electret condensor microphones at around the 12th fret about 9 inches out. I was happy with the sound until I reread the thread and realized I was recording the guitar as I hear and not the way others hear it.

So, I am begging anyone truly in the know to make up the mind of a man who can't manage to do it for himself. 1) Nearfield stereo? 2) Farfield stereo from say three feet out? (Noise floor issues in my office, er, I mean studio,I would guess.) A pair of mono doubles instead of stereo? (my mic options improve when I don't record in stereo.)

Yes, I know there are no hard and fast rules here. But I am willing, nay eager, to labor under the illusion that there is a best way in this case.

Speak, and I will listen. Say jump, and I will ask "How high?" Post, and I will be grateful.

 

[formerlyfzfile]

This is what I recommend.

Find some various recordings of fingerpicked guitar whos sound your trying to get close to.

Make several different recordings of yourself using the various mic'ing techniques you know about and at least as many variations and unique combinations as you can come up with.

Put together several blind (but labeled) mix cds with both the reference and recorded tracks.

Listen to them long enough to where you forget about the specifics of how your particular tracks were recorded and can just focus on how each sounds in comparison.

Then choose and refer back to the notes of which technique was used for the track(s) you ultimately like the best.

One technique I found that makes for a nice full sound is to sit facing a reflective surface (paneled walls .....doors work good too) at about a 30-45degree angle. Place a figure-8 mic in between the guitar and reflective surface approximately halfway inbetween (vari distance to taste) and then use a mic or two to "close mic" (or closer mic) the guitar. The reflections captured from the Fig-8 mic give a big sound (chorusy) and the closer mic(s) can be used to fill out the sound and beef it up.

I've used a figure 8 about 2 feet out and in line with the picking hand (just below sound hole) and an XY stereo pair close at the neck/body joint.

The nice thing I found about this technique as the solo prerformer/engineer is that after throwing the mics up and adjusting for phase I could sit down with headphones and the guitar and move my body and the angle of the guitar to find the "sweet spot" in the recording "field".

But this may or may not provide what your looking for so I would definitely do a lot of experimenting.

 

[mrface2112]

caveat emptor: YMMV

i have a martin d-15 which shares some tonal similarities to your d-18.

when i'm recording an acoustic guitar that is the focus of (or main instrument in) a mix, i use a pair of MXL 603's and i start with one about 6" from the 12/14th fret--about where the neck joins the body. the other i hang over the strumming shoulder of the player, aimed at the lower bout of the guitar.

check phase and mono compatibility and pan em wide.

more often than not, i'll also put a 3rd mic between 4-6ft straight out in front and get some of the "distance" sound. again, check for phase and mono compatibility, and pan this one to the middle. this mic often helps "anchor" the two wide-panned mics.

i've found this gives a downright huge guitar sound. it's great for fingerstyle and flatpicking. ultimately, experiment with mics and positioning and find something that works for you--and often that will change depending on the sound you need for the track. sometimes my blue dragonfly or MXL V77 a foot away from the base of the fretboard works perfectly for the track.


cheers,
wade

 

[Harvey Gerst]

Old Martin D-18, or new Martin D-18? Fingerpicks, or bare fingers?

I'll put up some samples of each later today (it does make a difference).

 

[mrface2112]

Old Martin D-18, or new Martin D-18?

good point--i hadn't thought about that.

i would think that the older ones would have a little more mellow a tone than the newer ones. the couple "Golden Era" D-18's i've played recently have had a very "in your face" kind of tone that i've always more attributed to the HD28V.........whereas the "plain" D-18's have always been a bit "smoother" sounding--much like my all mahogany D-15.


cheers,
wade

 

[Harvey Gerst]

As promised, here's an old 1956 D18, played with fingerpicks and a thumbpick:

Ken Burton

The recording chain was an old Fairchild F-11 condenser mic into an Akai 1214 (at 3-3/4ips) and I added some reverb. The mic was about forehead high and 2 feet out, tilted towards the guitar. No editing was needed.

And here's a track with a newer guitar, no fingerpicks (just a thumbpick):

Rick Ruskin

Rick Ruskin has about 20 albums out at his website. This track I recorded live at an AES show in San Francisco, using a Brauner VM-1 mic into an HHB CD recorder. Rick was in an iso-booth. Dirk Brauner set the mic about 18 inches out, aimed slightly away from the sound hole.

We also used the Soundfield mic in later sessions, which I preferred to the Brauner.

 

[expatguy]

Old Martin D-18, or new Martin D-18? Fingerpicks, or bare fingers?

I'll put up some samples of each later today (it does make a difference).

Wow! So many informative responses in such a short amount of time. It's a pleasure to make everyone's (virtual) acquaintance. Thanks for your input.

I thought I'd answer Harvey's questions first. I don't use finger or thumbpicks; just bare skin on metal. The guitar is a 1973 model, not one of their better years I hear (I've had to have two or three braces reglued already), but a sweet sounding guitar, good string definition but balanced sound between the strings. I have consistently found Martins to be brighter than I like, but this one, although bright, is warmer than most.

I just turned the computer on (awake in Japan while you're all asleep) so I haven't listened to the clips yet. Thanks for posting them, Harvey. I will begin todays lesson in ear training immediately.

Cheers,
David

 

[expatguy]

Harvey,

By posting those recordings, you have solved all of my problems! After being reminded of what virtuoso guitar performances sound like, I have decided to put my guitar away and never even attempt to play it again. No need to worry about recording at all.

Seriously, hearing minimally processed clips and having the information about mic placement and the signal chain is precisely the information most of us need. (By the way, I followed the links, and I particularly like the sound of the clips for the songs See-Saw, Lullaby, and Model Railroad from Ruskin's "Words Fail Me" album. I'd love to know the setup used on those recordings.)

Anyway,in both cases you write that a single mic was used. Impressive results. So we have a large diaphragm microphone (omni/cardoid?) mono track panned dead center in both cases? If so, what would happen if you added a vocalist, when lead vocals are traditionally given the center position given this particular arrangement? That's the assumption (vocal center, guitar panned left and right) that I started with when I made my first post. That is why I figured I'd need to record stereo (although your most recent post on mic matching tells me that stereo isn't technically what I'm getting), to have something to put on both the left and right sides of the soundstage while the vocals occupy the center.

Cheers,
David

 

[expatguy]

caveat emptor: YMMV

i have a martin d-15 which shares some tonal similarities to your d-18.

when i'm recording an acoustic guitar that is the focus of (or main instrument in) a mix, i use a pair of MXL 603's and i start with one about 6" from the 12/14th fret--about where the neck joins the body. the other i hang over the strumming shoulder of the player, aimed at the lower bout of the guitar.

check phase and mono compatibility and pan em wide.

more often than not, i'll also put a 3rd mic between 4-6ft straight out in front and get some of the "distance" sound. again, check for phase and mono compatibility, and pan this one to the middle. this mic often helps "anchor" the two wide-panned mics.

i've found this gives a downright huge guitar sound. it's great for fingerstyle and flatpicking. ultimately, experiment with mics and positioning and find something that works for you--and often that will change depending on the sound you need for the track. sometimes my blue dragonfly or MXL V77 a foot away from the base of the fretboard works perfectly for the track.


cheers,
wade

Wade,

Thanks for the advice. I long ago read about how to check phase but have completely forgotten the method. In fact, fear of phase problems is precisely why I've hesitated to use anything other than X-Y (an attractively simple approach) and hold out hope that a mono recording will give me a promintent guitar that will still sit well in the mix after other instrument tracks are laid down. I'll scan the site and see if I can reeducate myself.

Just curious if you use delay to compensate for the difference in distance from the guitar of the over-the-shoulder mic and/or room mic as compared to the mic facing the fretboard. This is also recommended to reduce phase problems. I think the rule of thumb is one second of delay for one foot of distance from the sound source, but don't quote me on that.

Thanks for your post,
David

 

[expatguy]

This is what I recommend.

Find some various recordings of fingerpicked guitar whos sound your trying to get close to.

Yep, there's nothing like training the ear.

The nice thing I found about this technique as the solo prerformer/engineer is that after throwing the mics up and adjusting for phase I could sit down with headphones and the guitar and move my body and the angle of the guitar to find the "sweet spot" in the recording "field".

But this may or may not provide what your looking for so I would definitely do a lot of experimenting.

Thanks for the advice. It seems we're in the same boat of being both performer/"engineer" and probably chief cook and bottle washer all at the same time. Repositioning yourself is much easier than repostioning the mics, at least until you pretty sure exactly where you plan to keep them.

Cheers,
David

 

[Ironklad Audio]

have you tried a spaced pair?

i recorded a somewhat crappy fender acoustic the other day with a spaced pair of sm-81's, and was floored by the results. one mic was placed 8-10 in. from the soundhole pointing in at a 45 degree angle, straight towards the hole. the second was placed similarly by the fretboard...again, 8-10 out from 3rd/4th fret, pointing towards the guitar at 45 degrees. both signals were then hardpanned left/right.

the only problem i've run into with this type of setup is getting too much string/finger noise from less-than-great guitarists...but if you're recording finger-picked type of stuff, it should sound great as long as your playing is dead-on. you also don't have to worry about phase cancellations as long as the 3-to-1 rule is followed(distance between mics must be at least 3 times the distance from the source)...8-10 in. from the guitar means the mics must be 24-30 in. from each other - which is approximately the distance achieved with this technique. It seems like this may work well for you, because it picks up the instrument in a similar manner as an x-y pair, but with a larger stereo spread that will let the vocals stand out in the center.

 

[Harvey Gerst]

Harvey,

By posting those recordings, you have solved all of my problems! After being reminded of what virtuoso guitar performances sound like, I have decided to put my guitar away and never even attempt to play it again. No need to worry about recording at all.

That's pretty much how I feel when I record these guys. The late great Dick Rosmini was the same way; why should I even bother picking up my guitar when these guys are around?

Seriously, hearing minimally processed clips and having the information about mic placement and the signal chain is precisely the information most of us need. (By the way, I followed the links, and I particularly like the sound of the clips for the songs See-Saw, Lullaby, and Model Railroad from Ruskin's "Words Fail Me" album. I'd love to know the setup used on those recordings.)

I believe Rick uses an AKG C451 on most of his guitar recordings at his studio in Seattle, placed about 2 feet back from the guitar.

When I was recording Ken Burton, the session was interupted by a phone call. After the 5 minute phone call, I apologized to Ken and mentioned that the call was from an old friend of mine, another fingerpicker, Rick Ruskin.

There was a short silence and Ken asked, "Richard Ruskin? That was Richard Ruskin on the phone just now? You know Richard Ruskin?". I said, "Yes, Rick is an old friend of mine. Why?" Ken replied that he started playing guitar because of Rick Ruskin; Rick Ruskin was Ken Burton's idol.

Anyway,in both cases you write that a single mic was used. Impressive results. So we have a large diaphragm microphone (omni/cardoid?) mono track panned dead center in both cases? If so, what would happen if you added a vocalist, when lead vocals are traditionally given the center position given this particular arrangement? That's the assumption (vocal center, guitar panned left and right) that I started with when I made my first post. That is why I figured I'd need to record stereo (although your most recent post on mic matching tells me that stereo isn't technically what I'm getting), to have something to put on both the left and right sides of the soundstage while the vocals occupy the center.

Cheers,
David

Yes, both mics were cardioids. When you add a vocal into the situation, I usually switch to M/S (to record the singing AND the playing in one pass) or A-B (wide spacing) to record the guitar track in one pass in stereo, then come back and just record a vocal in mono.

But don't discount the use of mono to record everything in one pass; one mic give you total freedom from phase problems, and the raw energy of a one pass track can often make up for the loss of the stereo sound stage.

Stereo is overrated; if God had wanted us to record in stereo, we'd have been born with two mouths.

 

[expatguy]

Yes, both mics were cardioids. When you add a vocal into the situation, I usually switch to M/S (to record the singing AND the playing in one pass) or A-B (wide spacing) to record the guitar track in one pass in stereo, then come back and just record a vocal in mono.

But don't discount the use of mono to record everything in one pass; one mic give you total freedom from phase problems, and the raw energy of a one pass track can often make up for the loss of the stereo sound stage.

Stereo is overrated; if God had wanted us to record in stereo, we'd have been born with two mouths.

For what it's worth, I like to lay down the guitar track first and then add the vocals. So, A-B is what I'll work on if I decide to use two mics on the guitar. Just curious, would you get in closer than two feet with A-B?

By the way, I went back to some rough tracks (no additional eq or anything) I'd done before with mono guitar and vocal (mono, of course) both sitting exactly where Cubase put them, panned dead center. I came away thinking that the guitar and vocal share the same spot pretty well. When you record a mono guitar and then a vocal, is that how you pan them? If so, do you use notched eq to help them sit together even better?

Thanks, as always,
David

 

[mrface2112]

I long ago read about how to check phase but have completely forgotten the method.

hate to put it like this, but i use my ears and if something sounds "off", i move the mic(s) until i hear what i want.

there's a rule for it that goes something like the mics need to be apart 3 times the distance that they are from the guitar (don't quote me on that). i usually put the close mics in pretty close, and the "far" mic is usually about 6ft back.....i listen while i'm doing it--so i don't typically have any problems with comb filtering or any of the other problems typically associated with phase.

In fact, fear of phase problems is precisely why I've hesitated to use anything other than X-Y (an attractively simple approach)

XY is usually a good, safe bet, no doubt. and i use it depending on how i want the guitar to sound in the track. i just happen to like the depth/width of the spaced pair for tracks where the acoustic guitar is the dominant accompaniment.

but really, with a little practice you can very easily hear when something is "not right". it's harder to do when you're doing both the playing and the recording simultaneously, but if you can manage to wrangle someone else to come plunk on the strings while you experiment with moving mics around, you'll learn a bunch in what you hear.

and hold out hope that a mono recording will give me a promintent guitar that will still sit well in the mix after other instrument tracks are laid down.

in a busy mix (drums, vox, electric guitars, bass, keys, percussion, etc), a mono acoustic is pretty much all i ever want. in that case, i put my dragonfly or V77 about 1-2ft out in front and move myself around it until i find the right sound. i've found that stereo acoustic guitars in a busy mix either get washed out by the rest of the mix or they're "too much" and cloud/muddy the mix. IMO, in that case the mono acoustic recording gives you just enough.

Just curious if you use delay to compensate for the difference in distance from the guitar of the over-the-shoulder mic and/or room mic as compared to the mic facing the fretboard. This is also recommended to reduce phase problems. I think the rule of thumb is one second of delay for one foot of distance from the sound source, but don't quote me on that.

i don't typically use delay to compensate for that--i try to "get it right" from the start so i don't have to "compensate" for anything. however, since i'm recording to a computer, if i do find something wrong in the tracks once it's already recorded, i'll slide "the offending track" forward or backwards a millisecond or two until it sounds right. i do this with drums all the time, since it's pretty unavoidable between the overheads and close snare mic, etc.

and FWIW, i think the rule of thumb is one millisecond for every foot, as sound travels more or less 1000fps. one second per foot would be some really dense air/material that sound was moving through.


good luck!

cheers,
wade

 

[expatguy]

Hello Wade,

hate to put it like this, but i use my ears and if something sounds "off", i move the mic(s) until i hear what i want.

You'll get no argument from me on that. It's just that I've never been able to walk away from a recording convinced that I'd gotten the best sound given the circumstances, second-guesser that I am. Reading up on recording has taught me a lot but simultaneously gotten me so worried about phase, room reflections, comb filtering and god-knows-what-else that I don't manage to get much accomplished. The advice on this thread has been invaluable. In fact, it has actually affected me physically: I'm not dragging my feet anymore! If you like, you and the others who have been so generous with your help can start a new thread to discuss what to bill me for this successful round of therapy.

in a busy mix (drums, vox, electric guitars, bass, keys, percussion, etc), a mono acoustic is pretty much all i ever want. in that case, i put my dragonfly or V77 about 1-2ft out in front and move myself around it until i find the right sound. i've found that stereo acoustic guitars in a busy mix either get washed out by the rest of the mix or they're "too much" and cloud/muddy the mix. IMO, in that case the mono acoustic recording gives you just enough.

These are exactly the things I was hoping to hear about. I naturally lean to that big, full stereo sound. It's a natural outcome of a Lego approach to recording (I record my isolated "block" and then have someone else add another "block"). But if stereo's not going to suit the mix, I'm happy to go mono, given the advantages you and Harvey point out. I like the fact that it also widens my microphone options considerably.

and FWIW, i think the rule of thumb is one millisecond for every foot, as sound travels more or less 1000fps. one second per foot would be some really dense air/material that sound was moving through.

Excuse me just a second, Wade, while....I....remoooooooove my foot from my mouth. Yeah, I meant milliseconds, but what's a few hundred milliseconds between friends? And, in my defense, I can tell you that in typhoon season, you can cut the air here with a knife. Seriously, I appreciate the diplomatic way that you pointed out my error. On some threads people are not as civil. I guess it's because they don't play Martins.

good luck!

And to you.

Cheers,
David

 

[mrface2112]

It's just that I've never been able to walk away from a recording convinced that I'd gotten the best sound given the circumstances, second-guesser that I am.

i'm a second-guesser by nature too. and even though neither my recording nor mixing spaces are sonically ideal by any means, i've learned them, and i've learned to trust what i'm hearing in there. and in the grand scheme of "home recording", i'd argue that "learning your space" is almost as important as "sinking tons of money into making your space sound good". especially where "making your space sound good" isn't much of an option.

Reading up on recording has taught me a lot but simultaneously gotten me so worried about phase, room reflections, comb filtering and god-knows-what-else that I don't manage to get much accomplished.

well, to quote neil young, don't let it get you down.

in the end, if it sounds good to you, that's really all that matters. remember that. if it sounds good, it IS good.

The advice on this thread has been invaluable. In fact, it has actually affected me physically: I'm not dragging my feet anymore!

Excellent! Glad we could help you get off your butt and do some recording!

discuss what to bill me for this successful round of therapy.

your "bill" (penance?) will be to post a link to something you've recorded over in the MP3 Mixing Clinic. then the 2nd round of therapy can begin.

These are exactly the things I was hoping to hear about. I naturally lean to that big, full stereo sound. It's a natural outcome of a Lego approach to recording (I record my isolated "block" and then have someone else add another "block"). But if stereo's not going to suit the mix

if there's one thing i've learned doing recording and live sound, it's that it's all about the mix. you could have the most loveliest of recorded acoustic guitar sounds in the world.....but if it doesn't suit the mix, that acoustic track isn't worth a damn.

unless of course, you want to restructure the mix around that killer sounding stereo acoustic track.

and that's one of the hardest things to do when you're recording using the Lego Method (i love that!)......is envisioning what you want the final result to sound like, so you can track the instruments to fit the mix from the start. it's an acquired skill.

I'm happy to go mono, given the advantages you and Harvey point out. I like the fact that it also widens my microphone options considerably.

there is definitely an inherent beauty in a well-recorded, nice sounding mono recording. Harvey's the man when it comes to that.

and don't buy into the BS that you "need" to have a "stereo set" of mics to do a "stereo" recording. many great results have been achieved with 2 different mics on the same acoustic guitar--say an SDC on the neck and an LDC near the bridge. guitars produce different sounds from different parts of the guitar, so in some ways it makes sense to tailor your mic selection to the part of the guitar you're placing it at.

the #1 rule is that there are no rules--do some crazy stuff and if you end up with a great sound (or even a unique/creative one), then you've hit on something. play the guitar when you're facing a hard concrete wall from about 2ft away and put a mic 10ft behind you so that it only captures the reflected sound. put a mic in the hallway or hanging from the ceiling or on the floor. you never know when a science experiment might yield that little bit of genius that makes the track shine.

On some threads people are not as civil. I guess it's because they don't play Martins.

i would wager it's more likely that they're just plain assholes.

but then again, i've never met an asshole who plays a martin.


cheers,
wade

 

[expatguy]

i'm a second-guesser by nature too. and even though neither my recording nor mixing spaces are sonically ideal by any means, i've learned them, and i've learned to trust what i'm hearing in there.

Trust your ears and make peace with your environment. Sounds like good advice to me. So good, in fact, that I am compelled to go off on a tangent.

I am convinced that there are two things that stand out above all others as problems in recording. They are....the untrained ears. I sometimes refer to recording as an unnatural act, because we seem to have to do everything in our power to remove or control so many aspects of sound as it occurs in normal conditions. Work to reduce/remove reflections, record a dry signal, then add reverb, delay, and go-knows-what-else to put back in some of the "life" and "naturalness" that we worked so hard to take out in the first place.

Learning to recognize a good, unhyped, unprocessed dry signal is a requisite to making good recordings, but when do we ever hear such a thing unless we sit down and make it ourselves? And while there's no substitute for experience, the self-teaching process also invokes the old saying, "He who teaches himself has a fool for a student." Examples of dry recordings like the ones Harvey posted (thanks again, Harvey!) are just what the doctor ordered. Folks like me can then finally compare apples with apples. Nice, ripe apples to boot.

So much of recording is non-intuitive. I suspect that this is why Harvey, Alan Hyatt, and all the other pros who are kind enough to try to teach the less-experienced among us bother to do so at all: they themselves appreciate how counter-intuitive (in addition to highly technical) this stuff can be.

The average person only knows what fully processed and mastered music sounds like, so what I think would be the ultimate learning tool would be deconstructed examples from fully mastered, quality work, presented in reverse order from a sample of the final master, followed by pre-master (if relevant), then, final mix with effects, mix without effects, and lastly dry tracks. That way people who doubt their ears would be able to work back from a known point of reference and better understance how sound sounds at different stages of the recording/mixing process. It's asking a lot, but if anyone did it, they'd have the gratitude of the multitudes. I'm willing to throw in one of my vintage 70's Japanese electret condenser microphones as incentive. Who could pass up such an offer?

and in the grand scheme of "home recording", i'd argue that "learning your space" is almost as important as "sinking tons of money into making your space sound good". especially where "making your space sound good" isn't much of an option.

Again, you will find me in the Amen corner. A while back I read all kinds of articles and posts ranging from "10 cheap ways to tame your room" to stuff by pros saying that you will NEVER, EVER get a good sounding room no matter how hard you try unless you drop a mortgage-like amount of money on a room professionally designed from scratch. And the bottom line according to the pros is that even in the top-of-line rooms, you *still* have to adjust your ears to the environment. Different studio, different environment, new learning curve. I'll bet you that Bob Katz could come into my sonically imperfect, uh, studioffice, and make all kinds of wonderful things happen to my recordings and mixes. In fact, Bob, if you're reading this, would you like to drop by? Refreshments cheerfully provided.

You know, if you think about it, putting in a bed and a nightstand doesn't turn a studio into a real bedroom, so why do so many people that by just adding this and that, they can emulate a real studio? IMHO, the model that home reccers should be emulating is live recording, not studio recording. Some great recordings have come from sonically challenging environments, environments much closer to the situation at home than in the studio.

End of rant. I guess I'm in a reflective mood because my 51st birthday is staring me in the face. One more year down the drain without finishing recording my musical legacy to the world. I may start a mid-life crisis thread here at homerecording.com. I am considering the following as my first post:

"I ran the microphone of life into the amplifier of expectation and the compressor of experience, but everything is distorted and out of phase. Do I need threshold adjustments?"

Cheers,
David

 

[RRuskin]

What/How was used

I believe Rick uses an AKG C451 on most of his guitar recordings at his studio in Seattle, placed about 2 feet back from the guitar.

I never use AKG 451's on anything. They are my least favorite mic. My "go to" mics for guitar are: Sennheiser MKH 40's, 406's, 405's, and Electro-Voice CS-15's. The guitar solos were recorded with a pair of one of the above depending on the tune and what was in the mic locker at the time. I never mix large and small diaphragms when I record guitar.

And for the record - I don't use any picks on my right hand.

 

[Harvey Gerst]

I never use AKG 451's on anything. They are my least favorite mic. My "go to" mics for guitar are: Sennheiser MKH 40's, 406's, 405's, and Electro-Voice CS-15's. The guitar solos were recorded with a pair of one of the above depending on the tune and what was in the mic locker at the time. I never mix large and small diaphragms when I record guitar.

There ya go, from the master himself; I sit corrected.

And for the record - I don't use any picks on my right hand.

That one, I know I got right. I was comparing fingerpicks (Ken Burton) with no picks (Rick).

 

[Harvey Gerst]

And for those of you who don't recognize the name, say hello to my friend, Rick Ruskin, one of the finest guitar players on the planet. Check out his music at www.liondogmusic.com and keep in mind that most of the stuff you'll be hearing is just one guitar - no overdubs!!!