Sonixx
New member
I haven't thought about it that way... I'm referring to Amp Gain not the level that I'm tracking.
Maybe we're all taking about different things...
Maybe we're all taking about different things...
Roguetitan
New member
regardless, you don't want the amp clipping either
Sonixx
New member
we definitely are on different wavelengths.
Roguetitan
New member
I am not sure where you are coming from either, maybe using the word clipping for amp adjustments was not the right word. I use 2 channels one clean which uses volume and one for over-driven/ distorted tone which uses gain
it is kind of hard to clip the clean channel unless you are using an under rated speaker cab however you can easily muddy up the overdrive channel simply by turning that gain knob too much which will transfer to the recorded track usually two fold in my experience.
there is such a thing as too much amp distortion and there is such a thing as using too much amp volume when miking a cab.
I don't know any better way to explain it than that.
Sonixx
New member
that's well put, but stating the opposite is just as valid. I've posted stuff so you can see where I'm coming from and with more here
Roguetitan
New member
While I do disagree with this approach in general, as a matter of personal taste, I want to call attention to the bolded part in particular.
First, I agree that only in very isolated instances should you consider recording a guitar with an "effect" on the signal. Only effects where their manipulation is part of the performance (volume, whammy, or wah pedals; an effects-driven performance where you're, say, tweaking the knobs of a delay pedal in real time to get a warped sound) or where it changes the way the amp reacts/breaks up (an overdrive to juice the front end a little, or a chewy chorus out front pushing an amp in and out of breakup a la Jimi) would I say it makes sense. Evedrything else, add it in the mix so you don't paint yourself into a corner while tracking.
Second, though... If you like working with amp modelers as a primary source of distortion, that's fine - it does give you a lot of flexibility down the road to reamp or change EQ settings or the like. However, it's flat out not true that you're more likely to "clip a track" if you're mic'ing a cab and using amp distortion. In fact, the reverse is true - distortion actually compresses an amp's transient response, so the vartiation between peak and sustain will be a hell of a lot less than a pristine clean track, which will be peaking all over the place but have very little "body" to the tone, comparatively speaking. I'm at work right now, so I can't pull up waveforms to demonstrate, but I'm sure someone here can and if not I'll do it sometime next week (as I'll be out of town all weekend).
I WILL grant you that sometimes it's harder to tell if a track is clipping through all that gain already on the signal coming in, but that's why you need to pay attention to your input meters.
Sonixx - I don't even know where to begin, exactly, save that as a general "good starting point," if you're micing up one of the plethora of "modern high gain amplifiers," insert your favorite brand here, it's not a bad idea to start (or at LEAST experiment) with less gain than you think you would need. My poison of choice at the moment is a Rectoverb combo into a Recto 2x12 cab, and generally when I run Modern mode with the gain any higher than halfway for a double-tracked performance, I find I'm less happy with the tone than when I go around maybe 11 o'clock. I'm not saying "never turn your gain above 5 for ANY reason" and in fact sometimes you can get pretty cool results doubling a dark, gainy track against a fairly clean one, but my personal experience has been there comes a point on every amp's gain range where you begin to trade off articulation for saturation, and given a fairly tight player (disclaimer, I'm a shyte rhythm guitarist), sometimes that articulation makes you sound heavier than any additional saturation would.
Again, I won't get a chance to record until after the weekend, but if I do get some time I'll try to do a comparison clip between a fully saturated Rectoverb with bass and drums and a less saturated one. I don't necessarily agree that "try less gain" is a worthless suggestion unless someone posts clips to "prove" that statement, as you lose nothing by trying, but screw it.
that is cool if you disagree because I have recorded several bands who insist that I record with amp miked however I insist that they also record by my method. Normally 9 times out of 10 they like the sound of my method over theirs.
the customer is always right until you can show them different
there are more than one way to record and no one way is set in stone on being the decisive way to lay tracks.
I suppose it boils down to what you get the best results with.
whatever works best for you to achieve the end result you are looking for is the best way for you but may not be the best way for some one else.
R
razork222
New member
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
Understatement.
I have NO idea what the dude's talking about either, I've never heard anyone call what a good high gain tube rig does "clipping," exactly, but yeah, the whole point of using an amp for "heavy" guitar is the way it does overdrive. If 9 guys out of 10 prefer a line out "modeled" amp tone to the real thing, dude, then I'm going to guess that it's largely mic selection, mic placement, or both that's turning them off the real thing. Micing an amp up is way harder than a lot of people think, but I've yet to hear very many professional recordings done direct that sound better than a good amp recorded by a good engineer. Still, what I was trying to say is that I disagree with you when you seem to discount the opinion of anyone who doesn't try to "prove" their opinion with recorded clips.
Anyway, since it may be a day or two more before I can try to record anything (though I played a bit last night without TOO much pain), it might be worth discussing the "why" behind the idea - if you're after a really "big" guitar sound, then the industry-accepted (to the point where the phrase kind of sounds laughable applied here) approach is to multi-track guitars. If you're layering two, four, or more guitar tracks against each other, then, you've got a lot going on in the mix in the guitar frequencies, and the idea is if you don't want to turn it into a muddy mess, then you should make engineering decisions intended to maximize clarity and articulation, so that all of the tracks, played back at once, don't turn to indistinct mush.
Coupled with this is the fact that many people asking for advice on recording "heavy" guitar are new to either home recording in general or recording guitars in specific, and have probably never listened to the sound of an amp through a microphone before. Most people who've never tried recording a guitar are used to the sound of a "heavy" guitar in isolation, which generally means gain, treble, and bass on 10 and mids at 0. A heavy guitar in a mix is a very different animal, and if this is your starting point, then yes, turning the gain down will probably help.
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
Oh, and the notable exception on the "direct" amp modeling thing - Meshuggah. however, what they're doing sort of works with the "direct" sound in ways that it wouldn't for more bands.
I think the best modeling tone I've ever heard on a professional release was on Porcupine Tree's "Deadwing." Even then, it's worth noting that 1.) they were running Pods into 4x12's and micing them, rather than recording direct, and 2.) they were back with their Bad Cats by "Fear of a Blank Planet," and their tones on "Blank Planet" and the album before Deadwing, "In Absentia" were noticeably better.
I think the best modeling tone I've ever heard on a professional release was on Porcupine Tree's "Deadwing." Even then, it's worth noting that 1.) they were running Pods into 4x12's and micing them, rather than recording direct, and 2.) they were back with their Bad Cats by "Fear of a Blank Planet," and their tones on "Blank Planet" and the album before Deadwing, "In Absentia" were noticeably better.
Roguetitan
New member
You are correct. My bad... I was talking about clean channel DI through the Pre amp to re amp or running amp models.
Hey
... LOL
I
Ironklad Audio
New member
the amount of gain being applied by the amplifier has nothing to do with how hot the track is recorded. if your shit is clipping, you're going to down the mic pre, not the gain on the amp.
anyways...the best way to get a good heavy guitar tone is by using a fucking good guitar, with good pickups, and a good amp with possible a TS or other overdrive in front of it. from there, it's all about having a decent mic and pointing it at the right spot, then playing with the knobs until the shit works for the mix.
easier said that done, but seriously, i don't understand why the topic required 20 pages wrangling?
thebigcheese
"Hi, I'm in Delaware."
To agree with Drew, the OP did specifically say he has never done recording before, so I think the suggestion to turn down the gain a bit is a good one. I know that before I started recording, I always cranked up my gain because it sounded sweet when I was playing it. Lots of feedback and other sorts of fun noises. Once I started recording, I listened to my tracks and found that less gain really helps clarity, as others here have suggested. I do have an example on my external hard drive, but I don't know that I'll get around to uploading it. Suffice it to say, my bandmate's amp sounded awesome in while we were playing it, but combined with my lower-gain amp, I'm not sure it will work out. I might be able to rescue it with some EQ, but it would be better I'd have made more adjustments beforehand. As others have pointed out, just because a high-gain sound works by itself doesn't mean it will work in context, and recording is really all about context.
As another suggestion, you don't always have to record multiple takes to get a fat sound. I recorded what I think is a pretty good sound using one take and three inputs. One was a mic from my amp, one was a direct out from my Distortion Factory pedal, and one was a mic hiding a couple feet away in a jar (turned down in the mix, but it adds a little something). The timing and tone of each are just different enough to make it work. So experiment. There's a sample of that on my band's web site, since some people here seem to think samples=experience=authority: http://www.techniciansband.com. The song is called "shells".
As another suggestion, you don't always have to record multiple takes to get a fat sound. I recorded what I think is a pretty good sound using one take and three inputs. One was a mic from my amp, one was a direct out from my Distortion Factory pedal, and one was a mic hiding a couple feet away in a jar (turned down in the mix, but it adds a little something). The timing and tone of each are just different enough to make it work. So experiment. There's a sample of that on my band's web site, since some people here seem to think samples=experience=authority: http://www.techniciansband.com. The song is called "shells".
thebigcheese
"Hi, I'm in Delaware."
Not exactly correct. If it's a tube amp, yes, you want to overdrive the amp. If it's solid state, then you just want a distortion pedal/channel on the amp.You are correct. My bad... I was talking about clean channel DI through the Pre amp to re amp or running amp models.
Hey
R
RejectionNinja
New member
Not trying to argue...
But many classic rock recordings have been done direct into the board, for example, David Gilmour says the guitar solo for "Another Brick in the Wall, Part II" was done directly into the board.
http://www.pinkfloyd-co.com/band/interviews/djg/djg96.html
For an example of a clip where you turn the gain down and play a lot cleanER than people realize, check out the little known obscure album "Led Zeppelin". That's the sound of a Fender played into a Fender amp with the post-amp dimed and the pre-amp somewhere around halfway. It's LOUD as hell, but it's a lot cleanER than many people realize.
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
That's really the exception and not the rule, though, and it's worth bearing in mind that Gilmour's solo on that track was a clean tone, and not a "heavy" distorted sound. I've heard very little distorted guitar on a professionally recorded album done direct that sounded decent. Again, barring Meshuggah.
That said, I'm a huge Gilmour fanboi.
Roguetitan
New member
Understatement.
Still, what I was trying to say is that I disagree with you when you seem to discount the opinion of anyone who doesn't try to "prove" their opinion with recorded clips.
Anyway, since it may be a day or two more before I can try to record anything (though I played a bit last night without TOO much pain), it might be worth discussing the "why" behind the idea - if you're after a really "big" guitar sound, then the industry-accepted (to the point where the phrase kind of sounds laughable applied here) approach is to multi-track guitars. If you're layering two, four, or more guitar tracks against each other, then, you've got a lot going on in the mix in the guitar frequencies, and the idea is if you don't want to turn it into a muddy mess, then you should make engineering decisions intended to maximize clarity and articulation, so that all of the tracks, played back at once, don't turn to indistinct mush.
Coupled with this is the fact that many people asking for advice on recording "heavy" guitar are new to either home recording in general or recording guitars in specific, and have probably never listened to the sound of an amp through a microphone before. Most people who've never tried recording a guitar are used to the sound of a "heavy" guitar in isolation, which generally means gain, treble, and bass on 10 and mids at 0. A heavy guitar in a mix is a very different animal, and if this is your starting point, then yes, turning the gain down will probably help.
Hokey dokey Drew here is my point proven.
mic your cab into a mixing console, use the gain to set the distortion for a heavy metal tone, set the amp at a good stage volume then plug in a portable recording device and set the levels all the way down, send the signal through the RCA L&R record out on the mixer into the RCA input on the recording device and see what kind of muddyed up mess you get.
dont mistake youre not knowing what I am talking about to translate into you are right and I am wrong senario.
what it means is you have adapted yourself to record by one method and discarding all other methods.
I can pretty much guarantee you I can make a better sounding clip feom a clean recorded signal than one that has been distorted.
That is how most of the big studios do it... if it is good enough for them it is certainly good enough for me to use their advice and their methods.
I can also pretty much guarantee you that using a double blind comparison between a distorted amp and a model you cannot tell the difference between the two and in most cases choose the model to be the better sound over the miked amp.
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
No, dude, we're talking about two totally different things, lol.
We're talking about PREAMP gain, the amount of distortion that an amp itself is creating. It's possible I misunderstood you, but I recall one of your earlier posts advocating recording a clean signal from the FX send, and then using an amp modeler to provide distortion, rather than micing an amp. If I misread you, my apologies, but if not then we're going to have to agree to disagree.
As for "big studios," no one intentionally clips a digital signal, unless digital noise is their thing.
As for amp modeling, a true double blind comparison is tough for a whole slew of reasons - you need the same player, going into a model that's been convincingly rendered, with the same settings, vs. a well-mic'd cab in a decent room. The fact this is damned hard to find in a home studio environment, IMO, is the real selling point of modeling gear - I've yet to hear it really nail the sound of a well-recorded cab, but it'll allow you to do a perfectly acceptable job by simply plugging in. Of course, I'm kind of a purist snob, so the steep learning curve involved in learning how to mic a cab right is half the appeal for me.
That said, if you want to talk specifics, then anecdotally I can offer evidence that more often than not, I CAN discern a direct recording from a mic'd one. I remember the first time I spun Revis's "Caught in the Rain" on CD, after hearing the track on the radio for a while, and immediately thinking, "Hrm, there's something really funky with the guitars" right after the distorted part kicked in. Fizzy highs, slightly blurred upper mids... Sure enough, I grabbed the liner notes, and they're endorsed by Line6. Porcupine Tree's "Deadwing" I've already mentioned (I didn't know it was all Pod until after I'd listened a couple times, but my initial reaction was that while the mix was great, Wilson had kind of sacrificed the guitar sounds to get there). Meanwhile, on Satriani's "Super Collossal," while all in all I thought the guitar tones were pretty lacking, I remember a few tracks sounded like he'd finally gotten the hang of dialing in his Palmer speaker simulator - some of the rhythm guitar on "Redshift Riders" sounded awfully real, and I really dug the lead guitar on "A Cool New Way." I picked up a guitar mag a few weeks later, only to find that while most of the disc was Palmer, he specifically mentioned using a 4x12 on those two parts.
I haven't heard a thing on the new Satriani album yet, but if you want a "blind" comparison here, my ears are telling me it's mostly mic'd cabinets and not his Palmer. If I'm wrong, I'll apologize and admit that modeling has finally gotten good enough that it's even throwing me with some consistency.
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
EDIT - Haha, ok, it looks like I might be wrong. Midway down Joe mentions doing most of the guitars in his home studio, where he was using speaker simulators on a lot of the tracks, driven by various tube rigs.
http://iheartguitar.blogspot.com/2008/10/interview-joe-satriani.html
I look like a moron, lol, but oh well. Still, I stand by the above statement - most of the time I'm pretty good at picking out direct guitar. It's just that Joe finally got the hang of tweaking that Palmer not to sound like ass.
http://iheartguitar.blogspot.com/2008/10/interview-joe-satriani.html
I look like a moron, lol, but oh well. Still, I stand by the above statement - most of the time I'm pretty good at picking out direct guitar. It's just that Joe finally got the hang of tweaking that Palmer not to sound like ass.
R
RejectionNinja
New member
That's really the exception and not the rule, though, and it's worth bearing in mind that Gilmour's solo on that track was a clean tone, and not a "heavy" distorted sound. I've heard very little distorted guitar on a professionally recorded album done direct that sounded decent. Again, barring Meshuggah.
That said, I'm a huge Gilmour fanboi.
"Artists like Jimmy Page and Van Halen have relied on straight-to the -board or speaker simulation for their signature sound for years."
http://www.brevsullivan.com/blogandnews/
The above reference is admittedly a sales pitch and thus the veracity is questionable. Maybe someone here knows more.
I vaguely recall reading an interview years ago (that I'm pretty sure was) with Jimmy Page. In it he said that they pulled some line preamps out of an old discarded console and were direct recording guitar solos. They were killing these old preamps and getting a ferocious nasty sound.
Recording clean tracks for later re-amping is pretty common from what I've read in Tape-Op, but that's a different topic.
I guess I'm mostly curious about why micing an amp is (allegedly) required for a heavy guitar sound. I'm a guitar player before anything else and (IMO) the hardest part about getting a good thrashing heavy sound is preserving clarity so that you can clearly hear pitch (turning down the preamp and turning up the post amp helps
). It seems to me that a DI (with a proper selection of effects and simulators) is a step toward controlling the clarity, whereas micing a speaker cabinet complicates things. (Not saying it makes it worse, but it can complicate things.)Of course, the "heaviest" guitar of all is the bass guitar, and that instrument is widely recorded via DI.
I guess what I'm driving at is "What is the EMPIRICAL explanation for one technique over the other?" (Not "who does it this way" vs. "who does it that way"?)
R
RejectionNinja
New member
I'd never argue that it's impossible to sound like crap with Line6 equipment, but is it *SO* impossible to sound like crap with an authentic tube amp and microphone? (You were apparently right in this case, but come on, there are some horrible sounding authentic analog & tube amp recordings out there.)
In the interests of full disclosure, I own a couple all-tube amps, I own a Line6 Pod XTLive, and (through my day job) I'm legally defined as "a person of scientific competence [...] informed by scientific knowledge" in the field of computer simulation, emulation, and modeling. I do gag a little whenever I read that, though.
Most of the time I run my Line6 into an all-tube head just to piss off people on either side of the issue.