Acoustic Guitar Help

  • Thread starter Thread starter bozmillar
  • Start date Start date
bozmillar

bozmillar

New member
Ok, I've always had a hard time recording acoustic guitar. I'm not quite sure why. I recorded a quick little acoustic guitar take so that I wouldn't forget the song. This is probably the best I've ever been able to get my guitar to sound, but I know it's not perfect.

Any of you acoustic guitar guys out there have any advice on how I can make this guitar sound better. The strings are new. I used 2 condenser mics, not matched, at almost the same distace, about 16-18 inches away, 1 pointing at the bridge, one pointing at about the 15th fret. This clip is post eq/compression/reverb, so it's about as good as I can get it to sound. Let me know what I can do better.

I don't want to give my opinions, because I want to hear what other people think first.

 
honestly sounds pretty damn good!

what software, pre, and mics are you using?
 
It's about as cheap a setup as one can get. Well, no, I've done cheaper.

I'm using a MXL 990 and and Astatic something that I got from Musicians Friend Stupid Deal of the Day. $50 for a stereo pair. The MXL is a bit harsh, and the Astatic is a bit honky, but that can be adjusted for. I run those through an old Behringer mixer to my M-Audio Delta 66. I use Sonar. My guitar is some crappy Johnson that someone gave me because he didn't want it.

I'm a little hesitant to mention all this, because I know people will now say that it's my gear that is keeping me from getting the sound I'm looking for. I am a firm believer, however, that the crappiest gear today is better than some of the best gear 15 years ago, and I know that 15 years ago, it was possible to produce some good sounding stuff. I also know that it's much easier to get a good sound from good gear. People use cheap gear as an excuse to sound bad, and I don't buy that.

That said, aside from spending more money on gear, what might make this sound better?
 
I am a firm believer, however, that the crappiest gear today is better than some of the best gear 15 years ago

Ummmm, no.

I'm using a MXL 990 and and Astatic something that I got from Musicians Friend Stupid Deal of the Day. $50 for a stereo pair. The MXL is a bit harsh, and the Astatic is a bit honky, but that can be adjusted for. I run those through an old Behringer mixer to my M-Audio Delta 66. I use Sonar. My guitar is some crappy Johnson that someone gave me because he didn't want it.

All of this is going to hurt you. Especially the guitar.

That being said, it doesn't sound that bad, and I am sure you can improve it, but what exactly are you going for? What do you like and dislike about the current sound?
 
Ummmm, no.

ok, so I was exaggerating a bit here. but, what cost $500 today would have cost $500,000 not too long ago. I am probably exaggerating here too, but it's not far off.

All of this is going to hurt you. Especially the guitar.


I consider the guitar to be the weakest link. Luckily for me, I have a brother who lives around the corner with a nice martin. I'll have to give his a shot and see what kind of difference that makes.

That being said, it doesn't sound that bad, and I am sure you can improve it, but what exactly are you going for? What do you like and dislike about the current sound?

I think to me it sounds a little distant and a little harsh. I completely understand that nobody can tell me "you need this compression and this eq, and this mic setup for it to sound good," but as you ask these questions, it does spark some ideas of what I might do to improve the sound.

I guess I want it to sound more "in your face." You know, like commercial music.
 
ok, so I was exaggerating a bit here. but, what cost $500 today would have cost $500,000 not too long ago. I am probably exaggerating here too, but it's not far off.

Nope.

I think to me it sounds a little distant and a little harsh. I completely understand that nobody can tell me "you need this compression and this eq, and this mic setup for it to sound good," but as you ask these questions, it does spark some ideas of what I might do to improve the sound.

Well, you said the mics were a tad harsh. That won't be easy to fix. I can imagine the guitar isn't the greatest sounding, so that is strike two. The martin should help. They tend to be pretty mellow, so if your mics are hyped in the high mids, it might balance out somewhat.

You also said it sounds a bit distant. Well, you miced it a ways back, so that is a big part of it. I mic a solo acoustic by putting one mic at the twelfth fret pointing at a 45 defree angle towards the sound hole as close to the fretboard as the guitarist can stand - usually less than 6". I put a second mic at a 45 about 6"-12" out from the bridge. You don't have to go that route, but I'd move in closer if you want it to sound "in your face".
 

Yep X 100.
You also said it sounds a bit distant. Well, you miced it a ways back, so that is a big part of it. I mic a solo acoustic by putting one mic at the twelfth fret pointing at a 45 defree angle towards the sound hole as close to the fretboard as the guitarist can stand - usually less than 6". I put a second mic at a 45 about 6"-12" out from the bridge. You don't have to go that route, but I'd move in closer if you want it to sound "in your face".

I'll try that. Thanks.
 
LOL. Good gear is MORE expensive now. Hell, old gear is WAY more expensive now. :D

What used to cost 500,000, would now cost millions. Not $500. :eek:

I'm only arguing because I think it's fun.

Today, you can buy a $.50 A/D converter that rivals the specs of high end reel to reel tape machines. I'm talking about accuracy here. Noise/distortion levels, frequency response, dynamic range.

There are a few reasons why people will pay more for old stuff.

1) hype. We hear so much about vintage this and vintage that, that many people believe that anything that runs through a tube automatically sounds better.

2) People don't like to change. Once we are used to something, we like to stick with it. We liked Frank Sinatra, so we must like his mic. And really, it was a pretty good mic. for its day. And whoever the producer was, knew how to work the mic, so it made a pretty cool sound. If that mic was invented today, and was never used back then, it would be coming out of chinese production facilities next to Nady. But because FS used it, it's a vintage classic and people will pay thousands for it.

I have more, but I think I'll leave a few holes in the argument so that I can keep it going.
 
How much is s pro quality preamp? Mic? Guitar? Amp? Monitor? Studio Construction? Lease? Cabling? Etc?

The thing that has changed is the quality you can get on a budget. That has improved, and gotten cheaper. It has not gotten better than "pro" 15 or even 30 years ago. To match the quality, requires similar grade gear and musicians.

Also, don't get me wrong, you can make great recordings on a budget. Hell, most people listen on their iPod these days. Sound quality is just not important in this age. I have a feeling it will return though. Everything comes back around.

Anyway, I won't clutter up your thread anymore. Good luck with your quest. :D

PS - Grab the Shins "Wincing The Night Away" - friggen amazing sounding. All 2" tape and mixed on a KILLER API console. Now, try that with your fifty cent converters. LOL.
 
Guitar Sound Question!!

Well I am an acoustic player and have done alot of recording on this PC as well as studio. What I hear is too much "Twang" or high end. If you compensate by bringing the mids and bass up on the berringer and cut back slightly on the highs you might get closer to the sound you want. If moving closer is out of yer setup simply increase the gain on the final mix by 2-3 DB and you will get the in your face sound. But as mentioned earlier Mic placement is the main key to "In Your Face" try that with the bass and mid boost and you will be surprised
Good Luck:)
 
Thanks. I'll give that a shot when I get home from work tonight.
 
I record acoustic guitars some. Actually, what you've got would probably work fine in a full mix. I mean, it's not gonna' "wow" anybody, but that's not its job in a full mix. Sounds like every "goo goo dolls" acoustic recording. :D

If you were recording singer/songwriter type stuff, where you've basically got an acoustic and a vocal and maybe a bass, I think you'd need to make some adjustments. You already know the most important link in the chain is the first one, and I'm not talking about the mic, I'm talking about the guitar, so I won't harp on that. But you CAN do a lot with a lot less these days. I think NL5 put it best...the quality of budget recordings have gone way the hell up, but you can still spend 95% of you money getting that last 10% of sound if you want to.

When I first started trying to record acoustic guitars, I read a lot of advice about stereo mic'ing and putting mics like 2 feet away from the guitar, etc. I'm sure that's awesome advice if you've got a fantastic recording space, but most of us are recording in rooms that are more suited to sleeping than recording. So (and this is just me) I recommend close mic'ing for several reasons.

1. You take a lot of the room out of the mix, and for most of us, that's a good thing;
2. You've got more of the audio spectrum to work with. From what I can tell, there's zero low end in that guitar - again, fine for a full mix, but thin for anything else. If you record closely, you'll have more low end, but you'll still have the high end...it just may be masked a bit, so taking some of the low end out fixes a ton of ills. I think it's better to subtract some low end rather than trying to boost an inadequate amount of low end. And let's face it, while yes, it's important to get the sound right at the source, EQ is a necessity the vast majority of the time just because you don't necessarily KNOW what the guitar needs to sound like until you get all the elements of the tune together. So give yourself something to work with.

Finally, I've used that 990 before...once. I'm not a mic snob, I don't think, but I found it VERY VERY difficult to get a desirable sound out of an acoustic with that mic. It's pretty hyped in the top end, and once you do ANYTHING to the track in terms of EQ or compression, it just emphasizes the flaws in the mic. I'm going to reiterate that I'm not a mic snob by telling you that you can honestly get a better, more usable, more versatile acoustic guitar sound by mic'ing it with an SM 58 than with that MXL.

I type too much. I like recording acoustic guitars.
 
18 inches is too far away. I've read most of this thread, but not all. NL5 told you to get closer. Yeah, do that and watch the levels so you don't clip.

I save what I like about my acoustics as an EQ preset. It you don't have that capability, just remember what you cut to get rid of boominess. I'm guessing 2dB at 200 hz.
 
Chrisharris, I was hoping you'd pipe in. Looks pretty unanimous that I need the mics closer, and that I need a better guitar, both which I suspected. My wife probably won't let me screw around recording tonight because we're leaving on vacation in a couple days. I'll try to get a quick take in and see if I get better results. I'll also try sticking with a stereo astatic setup, because the high end is not as pronounced on those mics. Not sure they will be much better though.

Thanks for the help, and yes, I was hoping to have the acoustic guitar be sort of the main instrument, so I need it to sound better than it does now.
 
Chrisharris, I was hoping you'd pipe in.

Why in God's name would you hope that? :D

Looks pretty unanimous that I need the mics closer, and that I need a better guitar, both which I suspected.

The guitar may be fine, man. If you like the way it sounds, then it doesn't matter if it was free or cost $5,000.00. 95% of my acoustic tracks are done with one guitar that I think records decently. It's not an expensive guitar, but the neck's true and it's boomy as hell, which I like.

Incidentally, I think acoustic guitar mud lives in the region of 315 Hz. When you mic it close, you may need to notch it kinda' wide around that area, but again, totally depends on the guitar.

I'm looking forward to some more tracks.
 
ok, here it is. I put the mics closer and swapped out my mxl for another Astatic. I think I like it better. I also used a MB compressor to get rid of some of the boominess without killing the mudrange completely. I just made up that word mudrange, and I feel pretty proud of that too. I would like to publicly coin that term, unless it's been done already.

 
Um, I decided that last mix wasn't much better than the first. Is this one any better? I'm starting to lose my mind.

 
I just made up that word mudrange, and I feel pretty proud of that too. I would like to publicly coin that term, unless it's been done already.

ok, I looked it up, and I surely can't coin the term mudrange. I hereby announce that I'm a dork.
 
Back
Top