Another Form Of Acoustic Hell

  • Thread starter Thread starter spiderhead30
  • Start date Start date
S

spiderhead30

New member
Im in a little acoustic hell of my own....just slgihtly different. I couldn't find a thread that really answered this, im sure there is somewhere but I couldn't find it.

ANYWAY

Im recording with
A Rolnd VS880 Digital 8 track
Sm57
Acoustic electric with built in pre and XLR optional output




Im trying to get a good clean Acoustic guitar recording. I've been experimenting with the EQ boith on the guitar and the 8-track, but it either gets too tinny, or the Lows come from the overall sound and not the guitars natural lows....its not even really that crisp or clear.

Does anyone use a similiar setup? If so any advice?

Or good advice for SM57 mic placement? EQ's? Ive tried a lot of things but cant get anythign I erally like
 
man i am so not qualified to help....but are you micing up and going throught the pre-amp?
 
I mic with the SM57 to one track, and line in from the guitars pre with an XLR cable.
 
I'd skip the DI from the guitar's pickup; that's your "tinny" sound, most likely.

Start with the 57 pointed at the 12th fret, 6-12" away. The 57 is not a very good acoustic mic, imo, except for when you want a chunky strumming sound.
 
seems like with the 57 i have to turn up the gain a lot and get a lot of that white noise sound with it
 
If you are close to a decent sound store, see if you can rent a large diaphragm condensor mic for a few days or a couple of weeks. Put that in place of your SM57 and see if you dont hear an immediate difference. The nature of the 57 is not geared toward the detail you need to get a pristine acoustic sound on tape.

Abandon the DI line at least temporarily, until you get a good mic'd sound. EQ should be the last resort, not the first. Dont forget new strings and experiment with mic placement, do test recordings, analyze, repeat......
 
sm57 and sm58 = crap for acoustics. I used those for a while before gettign my first condenser and it is night and day.

For acoustic, there are a number of decent cheap LDCs, but I think you would most enjoy a SDC. The 603s can be found pretty cheap these days, and there are a bunch of others.
Of course then you will really hear how crappy your room sounds, and need to start treating it, then you wil need better monitors, then...

welcome tothe slipperly slope of gear lust.

daav
 
oh, and don;t forget you need phantom power for a condenser.

And as for the DI from the XLR, it is great for laying down a scratch track that isolated from vocals, so you can later use it as a base track to add vcals over, then go back and replace with a nice sounding mic'd acoustic track. But acoustic instruments need to be mic'd -> therin lies the art of recoridng (if i can get away with saying that out loud, so to speak). A nice mic throgh a decent preamp in a good room makes your recordings magic. The DI signal is just the sound your guitrar makes electroncially.

that said, many take DI tracks and do things like add delay or other effects and blend gently with a mmic'd track to add a flavor, or alternately, delay the mic'd track and blend the DI to add attack, that sort of thing.
 
spiderhead30 said:
haha right on. SDC? not familiar
Click to expand...
Oh, small diameter condenser. After narrow pencil like mics that have a tendancy to bring out brightness in the source that is often well suited for acoustic recording .
 
Heard a mic test with the MXL 603s on an acoustic and in my opinion it blew away every mic under $500. Very comparable to the sound of a Neumann km184, at least on that particular guitar. The wide pattern of the 603 makes the room an issue, but it has a very natural and sweet sound on acoustic. Considering it's about the same price as a 57, it's definitely worth the money and I'm in the market for two if anyone wants to get rid of a pair.
 
IME diaphragm size has no relation to a mic having good low frequency response, brightness or overall sound quality. It's determined by other design characteristics, and is affected by the mic's pattern and construction quality. And of course placement!!

The sm57 isn't a mic I'd use for acoustic gtr, since it isn't very detailed and has a kind of hard edged yet dull tone in that application. I like it on gtr amps though.

Good budget ac gtr mic's IMO are the MXL 603s and KEL HM1. With either of those and a decent pre you can get a very good guitar tone if the source itself sounds good.

Tim
 
Last edited:
unfortunately my budget is prett tight so ill be doing my best with what i have
 
I've actually gotten some pretty decent sounding acoustic tracks by using a SDC pointed at the neck, and using the internal pickup as well in a stereo setup (mic as left side, pickup as the right). This works well in a "rock acoustic" situation, where the DI from the pickup has a bit more "bite" to the string attack and helps cut through the mix a little more, as daav mentioned. It sort of gives it a type of natural delay I guess you can say, and helps fill out the sound.
 
Russtopher said:
I've actually gotten some pretty decent sounding acoustic tracks by using a SDC pointed at the neck...
Click to expand...
Come on guys... Just saying SDC or LDC doesn't say anything meaningful. It just sounds like Musician's Friend ad copy... "Get the warm tones and ultra quiet self-noise level only a large diaphragm can deliver, just like the pro studios" ... "Get the bright, quick transient response only a SDC can give..." and crap like that. There are good, bad, mediocre, bright, phasy off axis, harsh, sweet, quiet, noisy, good transient response, bad transient response, etc... mic's of each type. I mean, saying that it's an omni, cardioid, hypercard, or the make/model tells much more about what you used.

Tim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top