Recording Guitar Reverb

Z

zolappa

New member
Hello recording pros/fans!

In a few weeks I will record a guy who plays guitar. And he likes to use his reverb pedal quite alot (in my oppinion).
But the problem is: Since it´s a mono pedal and I only record with one mic, the reverb is in mono (obviously). And this sounds shit in my ears.
You know how guitarists, and other musicians, are: they want the sound that they like, and have decided to record.

First of all: Are there any tricks of making the reverb sound stereo (or better) ? I have tried the make him lower the reverb and then add some in post recording, but that doesent sound that good..
Secondly: How do I tell him what to do, cause I dont want to "upset" him because he is one good guitarist

Thanks!

-Alfred
 
Just take a quick 10 minutes or so to do an A/B test and have him try it both ways. Print his reverb on one track as mono, and then try recording dry and adding the stereo verb. Let him listen and see what he prefers.

I personally don't mind mono reverbs/delays/etc., but a lot of people hate them. I also don't mind panned, mono drums for some things, but that's certainly not a popular stance either!
 
He needs to understand that recording guitars, as well as live, calls for adjustments. It has to sit well with everything else. If he can't accept that then he's just gonna ruin the song. You can't just say "oh well, he's just gonna make it sound bad but he plays well." In other words: He needs to compromise for the sake of the recording.
 
Hi Alfred.

zolappa said:
Secondly: How do I tell him what to do, cause I dont want to "upset" him because he is one good guitarist
Click to expand...

Just keep it nice and be honest.
There may not be a problem.


If there is, tell him you'd really like to use the same verb across many instruments(ITB on aux), for continuity.
Do a dry test recording with him and then experiment with a few reverb plugs in the box.
Include him in the process of choosing an ITB reverb.
Keeps him happy, you're not stuck with something that isn't working, and you didn't lie. ;)


zolappa said:
First of all: Are there any tricks of making the reverb sound stereo (or better) ? I have tried the make him lower the reverb and then add
Click to expand...

I don't know about tricks, but adding reverb ITB gives you much greater control than using a pedal.
You'll have full control over the verb volume, panning, type, length etc, plus you can run several things into the same verb for continuity, if you put it on an aux track.
 
with a bit of jiggerypokery you could route a dry signal in then send it back out/split it to his verb pedal and route it back to a monitor/cans mix .. he has his verb and you have a dry signal (although it will be in the wrong part of the chain)
 
Now wait a minute. Exactly who are you recording this for? What is your role in the production? Whose vision are you trying to capture?

If you are trying to produce a commercially viable product and you are specifically in the role of producer thn you might get some say in this decision. If, OTOH, you're just recording some "guy who plays guitar" so that he can have a document of his art for himself, his friends and family, then maybe you should just STFU and document his art.
 
ashcat_lt said:
If, OTOH, you're just recording some "guy who plays guitar" so that he can have a document of his art for himself, his friends and family, then maybe you should just STFU and document his art.
Click to expand...

Thing is....people who don't regularly record may have NO clue what's the best way to go about getting what they really want....so just "documenting" may not provide the right outcome.

I've dealt with artists who want to provide input for the recording/production process, but don't know what the heck they are talking about, so it comes down to their egos...and in the end, you as the engineer get blamed if it sounds bad.
Yes, as a producer you might carry more weight in the decisions, but even as just the engineer, there are times when it is your job to step in and explain why something will not work well.
 
I don't know. Exactly whose ego is the issue here? This guy has put some thought and effort into getting the sound he wants and likes. As the engineer, your job is to capture that and present it in the best light possible. If you honestly think that it just plain sucks, to the point where you don't want your name connected to it, then maybe you're just not the engineer for the job. Unless he's paying you enough that you just can't turn it down, maybe you should suggest he find someone who "gets it" a little better.

Sure, maybe record it and play it back for him and try to show why you don't think it's working, but in the end it's his music, his vision, and should be his call.
 
You're missing the point.
It's not about imposing your vision on the artist...it's about knowing what he wants even when he can't properly express it or tell you how to get it for him, but tries to anyway.
If you just follow his words to the letter and "document"...you could end up with a crappy recording, and then YOU look like the fool who wasn't able to get it right.

I'm just saying that there are times you have to point out things when they are departing from known reality and common sense. I mean, this notion that whatever any artist says in the recording environment should be treated as "gold" is not always what gets the best thing down in the tracks.

It's not like you are documenting live performances of Appalachian folk players up in some remote hilltop, and your job is to simply put up a mic and press RECORD.
 
Greg_L said:
Stupid shit like this is why I very rarely and reluctantly record anyone else.
Click to expand...

Exactly. My studio means MY name is gonna be on whatever heap of shit comes out.

(as if I need someone else's help to create heaps of shit)
 
Reverb on guitar?

I have a listen to how it sounds, if the reverb is defiantly part of the sound record with it on. If you are not sure record with it off. If the guitar player wants reverb to get the feel, put the guitar in the headphones with reverb on it but record the guitar dry.

What usually happens is that I sometimes get the guitar player to have less reverb than they think they want with me telling them that I can add a little more later if they wish.

However if the guitarist has an amp with a nice spring reverb in it, that could be worth recording.

Alan.
 
I get both sides of this one. And Greg--I hear ya, I only record myself these days. But there is a difference between what sounds good when I'm jamming, and what will work in the mix. The problem is, I can't play without my effects--the slight verb and heavy delay are "my sound" and it's a part of the performance. So here's the approach I worked out. (I know it sounds convoluted, but after I figured this setup out, it was a piece of cake.) I double miced the amp--one mic goes through a rack unit with the 80's arena rock 'verb and delay dialed in. That's the mic that feeds my headphones when I'm tracking. The other mic goes dry into my daw so I can add the 'verb and delay after the fact. Best of both worlds--I hear what I need to while recording, but I have a dry track to perfect in the mix.

Now having said all that, that's really what I USED to do. It's even simpler now. My current computer is fast enough to monitor through my DAW as I track--there's no latency. So now I can just use one mic, one track, and monitor that track in headphones as I record. I punch in reverb and delay on that track as I'm tracking, knowing that I can edit those effects afterwards. Same result: I hear the effects I need to when I'm tracking, but I can tweak those effects all I want to after I'm done recording.
 
Please allow me to state the obvious: the success of my previously mentioned method depends completely on using headphones while tracking. That works for me because I'm not laying down final guitar tracks until the drums and bass are done--so I'm using headphones at that point. If you're recording a solo guitar--no other tracks, thus no headphones needed--you're back to square one.

I did that once--the situation was similar to the OP's. A local blues player came over to jam. He's a bit of a legend in the area, and I hadn't seen him in years. Just like you, I wanted to accommodate him (turns out that was my concern, not his; he was mellow and grateful!), but I also figured I knew more about recording than him. He brought his rig and just wanted to track some solo guitar stuff. It was an old Strat through an old Fender amp, and yes, reverb was a big part of his sound. Again, a little convoluted, but I threw up three mics. Standard 57 on the speaker. A second 57 behind the amp (about a foot away, as I recall). And a decent condenser mic about 6 feet away and 2 feet above the amp. The front 57 was 50% of the mix, while the other two were each about 25%. I left the front 57 in the center and spread the other two to the left and right a bit.

That setup made that single mono guitar sound nice and big, but it also gave some separation and depth to the spring reverb coming out of the amp.
 
I would split the signal in two and record dry (no amp, straight) and wet (amp with effects). Then I would have the possibility for reamping later if it really sucks. I know how the guitarist feels, I've been there, I've done that for "art's" sake (and still like to print my effects) :rolleyes: and I'm not a fan of reamping, no feedback :-D
 
Some method is always "not best for the recording" until it becomes an accepted part of the recording process. If engineers were always left in charge to "know what's best" and never challenged by the artist(s), here are a few albums that would not have come to be:

Bluesbreakers with Eric Clapton
Beatles: pretty much everything from Help! onward.
Velvet Underground: White Light/White Heat
Beach Boys: Pet Sounds

I'd say those are some pretty seminal recordings, and each one pushed the boundaries of what was accepted recording practice in the studio.

Of course I agree that the engineer's job is to be experienced with getting predictable "good" sounds every time if possible, but I also think it's important for the engineer to be open to other perspectives, opinions, and possibilities. Just because you have more experience in a studio than the artist doesn't make their ideas invalid.

That's why I say what's the harm in doing a quick A/B test and letting the artist hear for himself?
 
Greg_L said:
Yup. Exactly. But at HR, don't even bother recording an old Fender Twin. You gotta play engineer/producer and add reverb later.
Click to expand...

famous beagle said:
Why is this exactly?
Click to expand...

Well, I suggested tracking dry and adding verb later. This is based on the assumption that the OP's judgement is good.
I'm absolutely all for tracking what happens in the room (it's preferable!), as long as the guy in the room knows what he's doing.

Like, If Greg or Rami turned up here to record, I'd be pointing a mic at their amp and hitting record, but I've had plenty of school age kids coming through who don't realise that their 'kick ass' tone does not contribute to the overall sound.
All these swirly effects, delays that aren't timed well, distortion maxed out etc.

I've worked a level below that where the kids can barely play but my recording serves as a novelty, or a learning curve.
In that case I do totally let them get on with it because sensible constructive suggestions might be soul destroying! lol

I don't see the OPs situation as being any different to when a guitarist has the gain so high that his amp just records like fizz.
We know this happens; Do we just sit smugly and quietly knowing better?
I have no qualms about (in a nice way) saying "I'm turning down the gain because I know it's not going sound good like this".


It's a judgement call. There are people who need to be flattered, those who need guidance, and those who just need to be captured.
IMO this isn't complicated enough to merit a thread like this.
If you (OP) have a problem, voice it. If the guy puts up a roadblock either suck it up, or kindly pass.

I don't agree that you should keep quiet from the get go.
If I have an opinion or a suggestion during tracking, I always voice it.
People are pretty much always glad to hear it, but maybe I've been lucky.


I've actually got into the habit on making the options clear upon introduction.
I tell people I can do/offer X,Y,Z, or I can just track what they do.
Of course, I charge more for X,Y and Z. ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top