Line out Vs. Miking the amp

[stevieb]

THIS again??!? Somebody PLEASE compose the definitive post on this worn out question, and request the mods make it into a stick.

The top three answers, once again, are microphone, MICROPHONE, MICROPHONE. Line out or direct misses EVERYTHING after the pre-amp stage- power amp (doubly important if using a tube amp, triply important if overdriving said power tubes,) speaker, cab, even the freakin' ROOM.

If you want a lifeless, sterile tone, sure, go ahead and go line. If you care about tone, take the trouble to mic your cab.

 

[Minion]

The only problem I have with miking is that I like to record a whole band at once so that everyone plays better is there anyway I can isolate the drum mics from the guitar mics

I also like to record the whole band at once , what i do is record everyone line out or DI out till you got the Drum takes perfect , then re-record the Guitar and Bass with a Mic then delete the Line in Tracks .....

This way there is no Drum mic bleed but also Mic"d guitar and bass tracks ....


Cheers

 

[bdenton]

Gotta Be A Contrarian On This One...

I submit: The sound coming out of the amp, room, etc. is totally immaterial!

The only thing that counts is the sound coming out of the studio monitors, and by extension, the CD, the MP3, whatever.

I've got a little Park MG30 (lowest end Marshall). I've set up the controls so that it gives me the tone that I want on the direct out. Does it sound great in the room? No, but who cares; nobody is hearing that but me.

But when I run it into Pro Tools and add a little EQ and reverb for seasoning, it sounds exactly the way I want it to!

I won't argue that the better the ingredients the better the cake. If you start with good tone you're probably more likely to end up with great tone than if you started with lousy tone. And while I've had a lot of people tell me I make a really good cake, I've yet to have anyone ask me what brand of eggs or milk I used to do it.

So, if you need 14 mics and a purpose-built room to get the sound you want out of the monitors, so be it. But if you can get what you want out of the direct out jack, why not just do it?

A lot of great recordings have been made using marginal equipment in lousy studios by great musicians and talented engineers, and isn't great recordings what it's all about?

 

[stevieb]

I submit: The sound coming out of the amp, room, etc. is totally immaterial!

The only thing that counts is the sound coming out of the studio monitors, and by extension, the CD, the MP3, whatever.

I've got a little Park MG30 (lowest end Marshall). I've set up the controls so that it gives me the tone that I want on the direct out. Does it sound great in the room? No, but who cares; nobody is hearing that but me.

But when I run it into Pro Tools and add a little EQ and reverb for seasoning, it sounds exactly the way I want it to!

I won't argue that the better the ingredients the better the cake. If you start with good tone you're probably more likely to end up with great tone than if you started with lousy tone. And while I've had a lot of people tell me I make a really good cake, I've yet to have anyone ask me what brand of eggs or milk I used to do it.

So, if you need 14 mics and a purpose-built room to get the sound you want out of the monitors, so be it. But if you can get what you want out of the direct out jack, why not just do it?

A lot of great recordings have been made using marginal equipment in lousy studios by great musicians and talented engineers, and isn't great recordings what it's all about?

I respect your right to have a different view, and you make a reasonable argument, but I don't think you have made a convincing argument.

Not to belabor the point, but the only thing that counts is the sound that is heard and interpreted by the listener. Guitars, amps, speakers, rooms, monitors, etc. are all tools- stops along the way by which we re-direct the path (I imagine it's not called a signal path for nothing) more towards what we want. (We never get it right, but that's another discussion.)

I accept your point that if it sounds good, it is good, but I still think speakers, cabs, rooms, etc. are as important to the path as the monitors, and that any simulation or reproduction is going to be inferior to the original.

Cake? Gimmie a little piece...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFzNXUUSFF0

 

[squibble94]

I submit: The sound coming out of the amp, room, etc. is totally immaterial!

The only thing that counts is the sound coming out of the studio monitors, and by extension, the CD, the MP3, whatever.

I've got a little Park MG30 (lowest end Marshall). I've set up the controls so that it gives me the tone that I want on the direct out. Does it sound great in the room? No, but who cares; nobody is hearing that but me.

But when I run it into Pro Tools and add a little EQ and reverb for seasoning, it sounds exactly the way I want it to!

I won't argue that the better the ingredients the better the cake. If you start with good tone you're probably more likely to end up with great tone than if you started with lousy tone. And while I've had a lot of people tell me I make a really good cake, I've yet to have anyone ask me what brand of eggs or milk I used to do it.

So, if you need 14 mics and a purpose-built room to get the sound you want out of the monitors, so be it. But if you can get what you want out of the direct out jack, why not just do it?

A lot of great recordings have been made using marginal equipment in lousy studios by great musicians and talented engineers, and isn't great recordings what it's all about?

When you put it that way, yes you're right. To tell you the truth, I don't think people even notice the way things sound in music. I know before I started recording, I didn't pay attention to guitar tones or drum sounds or the mix. All I cared about was the actual song. I believe that goes the same for everyone else. People just want to hear the song. So with that being said, if you get a good guitar tone with the DI, people won't really care. It might even go unnoticed by people who deal with audio every day of their lives. Basically, it's all personal preference. If DI sounds better in a mix, I'll use DI. If it's a mic'ed amp sound I'm looking for, I'll use a mic. I've even used amp simulators over my amp before. It's whatever serves the mix best.

 

[nialldoran]

Personally i would DI alot of the time but mic'ing is a good option as moresound said IF the player has a good tone and amp, other wise dont try turd polishing, DI and re-amp, Lecab is probably the most used guitar processor in my folder,

 

[Guitargodgt]

Guitars are always a mic unless it scratch tracks. Bass, eh not so black and white. I've done mic, just di from nice bass pre and a combination of both.

I think you can get away with direct from the bass easier than you can with guitar.

 

[grimtraveller]

THIS again??!? Somebody PLEASE compose the definitive post on this worn out question.

As definitive as you may find, though not quite what you may have hoped for....

To tell you the truth, I don't think people even notice the way things sound in music. I know before I started recording, I didn't pay attention to guitar tones or drum sounds or the mix. All I cared about was the actual song. I believe that goes the same for everyone else. People just want to hear the song. So with that being said, if you get a good guitar tone with the DI, people won't really care. It might even go unnoticed by people who deal with audio every day of their lives. Basically, it's all personal preference. If DI sounds better in a mix, I'll use DI. If it's a mic'ed amp sound I'm looking for, I'll use a mic. I've even used amp simulators over my amp before. It's whatever serves the mix best.

 

[squibble94]

As definitive as you may find, though not quite what you may have hoped for....

Thanks Grim

 

[DrewPeterson7]

I submit: The sound coming out of the amp, room, etc. is totally immaterial!

The only thing that counts is the sound coming out of the studio monitors, and by extension, the CD, the MP3, whatever.

And I submit, you're probably not a guitarist.

Yes, from an engineering standpoint, all that matters are the results. But this misses the other half - the performance standpoint. And, the sound coming out of the amp/room can matter a great deal to the guy playing the part, and a happening room sound can be the difference between a decent part, and an inspired performance.

I love Slipperman's Distorted Guitars from Hell for a number of reasons, but one of the most important observations he makes was that a player's tone is his "blankie," and when you're recording, you don't fuck with his blankie. He's probably nervous anyway, and if you try to get him to drop his Dual Rectifier running wide open he's used to hearing live in favor of a little Park solid state combo, then no matter how well it might record you're really not doing him any favors.

 

[GONZO-X]

we're talking JUST guitar amps here?

i do neither (mostly)

i use the speaker out, into a Palmer PDI-09 to capture the sound of the amp, and then send the palmer thu signal to a weber mass lite, to attenuate the volume for monitoring while i record.

i can monitor super loud, or super quiet, but it does not change the capture at all.
it's a line level capture.

most line outs on guitar amps sound like ass.
unless they have a cab filter built into them, like the Peavy JSX Mini Colossal, or some of the Hughes and Kettners, Blackstar, etc....