acoustic guitar + vox = spill problem

M

mustardeer

New member
sorry for the stupid question, can't find any answers online.

trying to record vocals and acoustic guitar at the same time, don't want to do it one track at a time.

The AKG c414 is pointing at the 12th fret, and the Neumann U87 is six inches away from the singer (singer is very soft).

The guitar sounds amazing on the guitar track, but I can hear it on the vocal track as well and it's very thin and ugly and ruins the mix. Can't eq it out. I'm also getting vocals on the guitar track.

the guitar is a very warm '68 gibson.
I'm using the Cardioid pattern on both mics. I've tried hypercardioid, but it's still spilling. I've heard something about 1 mic 8 pattern sideways, not sure if that's the solution. Also I don't want to record mono 6 feet away - want control over mix. Wouldn't mind pointing another c414 at the bridge for a fuller sound but that obviously won't solve anything.
Any tips?
 
The only way to get rid of the mic bleed is to record the guitar and vocals separately. Too bad if you don't want to. :D
 
The figure 8 pattern is the most common suggestion because the null in a figure 8 pattern is the most effective null.
You just have to point the null of the guitar mic at the singer's mouth and the null of the vocal mic at the guitar.
You're not gonna achieve total isolation because that's just the nature of sound waves, but you ought to be able to cut down from what the cardioid patterns were picking up.
 
Try recording both together and using that as a template.
Like this.
Assign tracks one and two to Vocal and mic and record your song.
You are now going to play along to those two tracks.
So, while playing back, record just your guitar on track four.
Next, record just your vocals to track three.
Finally, take tracks one and two out of the mix.
Because you have sung and played to tracks one and two, latency is equal for tracks 3 & 4 and should not be an issue.
Sounds confusing?
Just follow those instructions step by step and see if it works for you. :)
 
that's interesting, i'll try that tonight.

does anyone know what the most COMMON way of recording a singer with a guitar is? live or track at a time? guitar and vox - It's such an iconic set up, I'm sure there are a few solid rules. As much as I want to stick a mic inside the guitar and another one inside the singer's mouth I don't want to reinvent the wheel.

I'm talking about bob dylan, elliott smith, tom waits type of music.
 
there is no common way...I have artists who are comfortable doing the seperate and I have some who do them together....with proper mic choice and placement, you can get great tracks doing them together.....think about dynamic mics...they will pick up less off axis and unwanted noise. maybe think of using the U87 as a room mic and beef it up with some dynamics. Jim Lad offered a great solution...record them both at once and use that as a scratch track to listen to while you re-track them seperately... you can get clean tracks that way, but you may loose some of the mood or feeling....

it all come down to the artist and what he/she is most comfortable doing....your job as engineer is to capture the sound as best you can with the tools you have. If you have a U87, I know you want to use it, but if its not the best tool for the job, and a 57 works better, then use the 57... I would sacrifice sound quality for mood or feeling anyday if I had to make the choice.
 
nice. Thank you Jim and Jeremy. I mean Tha Jeremy.

Can someone please explain in English without bringing up sound waves and capsules the difference between dynamic, condenser, and ribbon mics?

All I know is Condenser mics are obviously more sensitive and mostly used in studio and dynamic mics are the cheap ones bands use for live shows. But really, what's the difference?
 
that is wrong....I have 40+ mics in my studio....probably 12 to 15 condensors, 4 ribbons, and the rest are dynamic. dont think for a second that a dynamic mic has no use in a studio, or that they are all cheap. most high gain guitars are recorded with dynamic... most drums are close mic'd with dynamic. If I had to choose just one mic that I will never get rid of, it would be my SM7....next would be my ADK GK67....next would be my other SM7.

now...Im not an electrical kinda guy so I cant comment on what the differances are reguarding the guts of the mics....but yes, condensors are more sensitive, and usually take phantom power to work....dynamic's take much less juice and reject off-axis/unwanted noise much better...you will get some better replies than I can give you....so carry on....
 
You know, that's one that's best answered just by writing your question in the search (Google) bar and seeing what comes up.
There are many wonderful articles, written by extremely knowledgeable people, on this very subject.
Too much information for an answer here though.
 
Personally I would do it completely differently.

I am assuming that the guitarist is also the singer (?)

I would record as a stereo pair and get both together as you would hear it if you were in the same room with him/her giving a performance.

If the U87 and C414 are all you have - then I would set the U87 to cardioid and the C414 to fig-8 and record as an MS pair.

If it was me doing it - I would either use an ORTF pair of good SDCs, an MKH 30/40 MS pair or a Schneider Disk - the choice would depend on the room.

It will sound much better as well as you will be capturing a performance in a room in stereo, rather than recording guitar and voice as two mono sources which you then pan-pot to get a pseudo-stereo image.
 
This is a great article. It clearly (and fairly briefly) explains the differences.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-a-condenser-and-dynamic-microphone.htm

(and here's a longer and at the same time, less detailed article: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1582699/the_difference_between_dynamic_and_pg2.html?cat=15)

Here's a piece of it:


"A dynamic microphone is typically either a moving coil or a ribbon microphone. In a moving coil setup, the coil mdash; called a voice coil mdash; is suspended within a magnetic field. When sound waves hit the diaphragm inside the microphone, this coil moves and enters the magnetic field, and an electrical signal of the sound is created.

A ribbon microphone uses a very thin aluminum ribbon diaphragm suspended in the magnetic field. Similar to a moving coil microphone, sound waves cause the ribbon to move into the magnetic field, which converts sound into electrical signals. Moving coil dynamic microphones are used more often, since ribbon microphones are more delicate.

The condenser microphone uses two plates, one movable and one fixed. These two plates create a capacitor, or condenser. The capacitor is charged by the power supply. Sound waves cause the movable plate to fluctuate, creating an electrostatic charge which changes the voltage between the plates.

A condenser microphone is usually more fragile and expensive than a dynamic microphone. As a result, condenser microphones are used most often in a controlled studio environment. Dynamic microphones are well-suited for both studio and live performance use."
 
You could also try putting the guitarist and vocalist at opposite ends of the room, however small or large. Some might say that they'll be too far away from each other and that the 'feel' will go, but on a stage, various band members might be a way away from each other.
It's very rare that I'll record guitar and vocals together, but I have done so. I used a dynamic on both, with them sort of facing each other so that the backs of the mics faced each person, thus cutting down bleed. But in truth, a consequence of recording together is bleed.
I'm interested that you say it's ruining the mix. Bear in mind, that there was a time when this is how music was actually recorded. Reason I point this out is as an encouragement - great recordings were once done this way and with a fraction of what is available nowadays. So it's not unattainable.
You've got some work to do ! #
But it's rewarding work, ultimately.
 
I should have mentioned that the engineer, mixer, singer, the guitar player, and message board-ist are the same person.

I've read a few of those articles before posting.
I guess what I want to know is not the difference between mics but the effect they produce. When do you reach for the condenser, when for ribbon, and when for dynamic?

What I know now is dynamic will block more on the sides than a hypercardioid pattern on a condenser. So one would use them on a drum kit to deal with the spill issue. Correct? When do you reach for a ribbon and why?

I don't want technical mambo jumbo, I'm an amateur, I just want to know when to use what and why.
 
it really all comes with experiance....there is no set rules on this kind of thing....recently, I recorded 2 different artists who were singer/song writers and recorded their vocals and accustic guitar at the same time....I used a similar mic setup on both, and I recorded 4 tracks for each song....

1: DI from accoustic guitar
2: LDC about 10 inches from the sound hole
3: SDC around half way up the neck.

This was the same for both artists, but on one of them, I used an SM7 (dynamic) on vocals, and on the other, I used an AT4050 that the artist owned because that is what he liked on his vocals.

I chose the SM7 because one singer had kind of a nasaly voice and that mic didnt pick up the guitar so I had more control over the sound of the voice without changing the guitar. The vocals did bleed into the guitar tracks but I focused on the sound of the guitar. Once I added everything together, I had to make the vocal track a little darker than Id like because of the nasaly sound of the vocals on the guitar tracks....in the end, everyone was happy....
 
mustardeer said:
I should have mentioned that the engineer, mixer, singer, the guitar player, and message board-ist are the same person.

I don't want technical mambo jumbo, I'm an amateur, I just want to know when to use what and why.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately there is no absolute rule for 'what & why', and any useful discussion, as opposed to simply experimenting, as when to use what will entail a certain about of 'technical mambo jumbo' . . . everything else is pure opinion . . . of the order of 'I prefer mic X because it is warm & wide' but if you can make it through a discussion on this forum Here you should have a fairly decent over view to begin making judgments on mics

again a number of suggests made already are useful places to start . . . record the room, not just the instrument . . . at which point 'bleed' is not an issue. I have record entire multi-instrument ensembles with just a single C414. If you need to edit the individual tracks extensively then tracking individually is almost always necessary. There are some editing tricks, usually involving compression as well as EQ that can reduce impact of 'bleed' but you wont avoid it entirely. Working on arrangements where if the vocalists sings softly the guitar gets quieter when vocals are present, perhaps side chaining vocals to guitar to enhance, can under some circumstances help.

But once a mic is selected for the 'sound' placement is far more critical than type or model. An MD421 is one of the few dynamic mics I'll use, in the studio on an acoustic guitar. It has relatively decent off axis rejection . . . but placement still plays a bigger role then design of mic

have the performer stand,rather then sit, position C414, using figure of 8 pattern, with null facing voice, use something like the SM7 (dynamic) for vocals with vocalist right on top of the mic

(and some of the early Dylan stuff was recorded using single ribbon mic (for both guitar and vocals) on a boom, slightly above mouth level angled slightly downward and it was a big room)
 
Oretez, that link was amazing. Super long but I learned a lot.
Something weird happened yesterday.
I found an old mic in my closet that I bought for my video camera a while ago.
It had two parts that turned out to be a Sunnheiser K6 and a Sennheiser ME64.
Just for kicks I plugged it in and wow, it blew my Neumann U87 away. I was shocked. Then I ran to my band practice space and grabbed a n/d767a which is a dynamic mic for live shows, a bit better than a shure sm58 and gave it a try. I also liked it better than the U87.

Immediately I thought that I needed to sell the Neumann and buy the Shure sm7. Neumann sounded too thin and noisy in comparison to the other two. The other two mics I thought rejected more of the room and had more low end, which is what I wanted. I want a smokers voice you see, but I don't smoke so it's tricky. Then at 2am it hit me. Because the dynamic mic needed way more power, i was eating it, therefore I got less of my horrible room, and because of the proximity effect more low end. I got up, grabbed the U87 again, dialed down on the preamp from 55db to 40db, got right up on the mic and it worked. Beautiful clean sound with plenty of low end.

This hole mic thing reminds me of a funny story of how I kept researching and buying different air purifiers because the air in my bedroom was horrible. I was losing my mind - nothing seemed to work. Two weeks later I found a solution. I opened the window :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top