Getting big guitar sounds (questions)

K

kristoffereide

New member
Hello!
I´m currently recording with my band, but my guitars sound very dry and the sound is too tight.
I wondering if there is any way to get a bigger guitar sound ?
I play rock with moderate to medium gain, using a Laboga Alligator class A. It sounds perfect to my ears, but not through my mics :(

I´m using a AT-AE3000 on cap, and a SM57 on cone, both on the same 212 V30 cab.

Any tips on mic placement, should I throw in a condencer behind the cab?

I looking for a huge sound!

Note: If this should be in the Guitar-section, i appologize
 
if the amp sounds good in the room then it really will come down to just experimenting with mic positions. first off i'd say just use the SM57 and leave the other mic aside for now. as a starting point i would say start with the 57 about a foot back aimed at the centre of the best sounding cone (the bit below may help figure out which sounds best quickly) if the sound is too bright move it off centre toward the edge of the cone. if the sound is too thin/distant, pull the mic in towards the speaker.

the easiest way to achieve all this is by having another person help you. there's two ways to do it; either you play guitar and listen to the mic in the monitors/headphones and have the other person move the mic around until you hit the "sweet spot" or switch roles (get them to play and you swing the mic whilst wearing headphones until you find the sweet spot)

if you find yourself really struggling to get anywhere near the sound you want with just one sm57 then it may be worth reconsidering the settings on the amp.

if you do have a really nice sounding room, then it may be worth experimenting with the AT AE3000 further back from the amp as a room mic BUT this can create phase problems and, realistically, you should be able to get a big sound from one mic.

also, bare in mind a lot of big sounding guitars on records are at least double tracked, if not more. if you're not already, try recording the guitar part once, and then recording another take of the same part over the top of it and mix them together.
 
I haven't read but the first 1000 words of this, and I totally agree already. 'Twinkie-Ass Boy' is so familiar.

I am going to try to find this guy, and link this as a sticky. :)
 
I just love the huge tangents and rants he goes off on. not only is it a great guide on recording guitar, it's also a wonderful insight into the mind of a great producer/engineer :)
 
Mo Facta said:
There's no better guide. And it's hilarious.
Click to expand...

I've read about half of it now, and you're right it is amazing!



One thing from it though: "See even a church-roasting, goat worshipping, nun-stalking Black-metalhead from a frigid outpost in rural NORWAY has taken the time to write some SONGS".

As a representative of rural Norway I beg to differ.
 
Since I can't hear your tracks, I'll just give a recommendation I've used to fatten up guitars. Take your track and copy it to a new track, or aux send it to a new bus. Pan the original track hard left. On the new track, apply a 1/16 note delay, but turn the dry sound down to zero and the wet sound up to 100%. Pan this track hard right. Now your guitars in time are a bit "fatter" but you can't hear the delay between the two sides. If you do, lower the delay to 1/32 note. Even though the 2 guitars are now hard left and right, it still sounds like one guitar but bigger across the stereo spectrum. Now, this does introduce some phasing of the signals so it could make it sound worse. But I've found it sounds better for the stuff I do. Another option is to record the guitar again. If using a DAW with cab emulation, just run the 2nd track through a different head/cab combination, maybe even using the neck pickup for the 2nd track (or vice versa). Actually, you can do that with what's listed above if your SW will support it.
 
Do not do this. ^^^^^^

I just don't have the energy to explain why....again. Maybe someone else does.

If you want doubled, fatter, thicker, or fuller guitars, record twice.
 
I have been holding back for a while on this subject. There is a good deal of positive results by doing duplication and panning of a track. Yes, recording a track twice is almost always better than the Haas effect way. Though, there are times where this approach actually works. I do it all the time for synth, lead guitar, clean guitar, and backing vocal tracks. I would never actually recommend it as a starting point for a noob, but it is not a carnal sin either. Fuc* anyone who wishes to hear my mixes in mono. None of them will be played in a dance club. Besides, I check my mixes in mono, and do not hear the results that so many say will happen.

That being said, I have never heard a good sounding rhythm guitar track that sounded better by not recording two tracks. I have however, had good results by using the copy/delay/pan thing, and placing the delay track on the opposite side, way quieter than the original tracks. This is with two hard panned guitar tracks. It tends to feel less sterile (for lack of a better word). Hard panning to me, sounds a bit unnatural. Though, this is totally genre dependent I am sure.

10ms can make a world of difference in the stereo image of a track. Your ears will tell you if there is a comb filtering result. I find that this can be quite a pleasing effect at times. We should not rule out the possibility of this as taboo.

Once again, I will say that two tracks of anything, are probably better that the doubling thingy. But it is not always possible. Sometimes, it can actually work. No friggen rules here, just possibilities.

If there were a list of most important things to do when mixing, I would place the copy/delay/pan thing at the bottom, right before pseudo home mastering. It should not be done to fix things, nor a starting point to get huge tone, but used as another tool to fit a particular mix.

My 2 cents... Let the argument begin...

:)
 
My question is why we feel the need to go stereo all the time. Why the obsession with "width"?

Cheers :)
 
jimmys69;3888101 said:
Yes, recording a track twice is almost always better.......


I have never heard a good sounding rhythm guitar track that sounded better by not recording two tracks....

I will say that two tracks of anything, are probably better that the doubling thingy....

If there were a list of most important things to do when mixing, I would place the copy/delay/pan thing at the bottom
Click to expand...
I agree 100%.
 
If one wants a delay, one should just use a delay. It will give one the flexibility of how many repeats, how long the delay, how much modualtion (if any), etc....

Copying and pasting is the same thing as applying that delay, without the options and flexiibility mentioned above. I don't see any good reason to ever do it.
 
RAMI said:
Do not do this. ^^^^^^

I just don't have the energy to explain why....again. Maybe someone else does.

If you want doubled, fatter, thicker, or fuller guitars, record twice.
Click to expand...

Yup. Copy/double/pan/shift sucks. It sucks. Totally sucks.

Record it twice if you want it to sound big, wide, fat, huge, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top