Minimalist approach to recording acoustic guitar.

[rbnalv7]

I'm currently doing a song where the main part is acoustic guitar and electric guitar lines revolve around that. The only two options I have for recording acoustic is DI and an SM58. Is there a good combination of the mic and DI I can use to get that bold sound. Think Ben Howard esque. Like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWlKZ6C7cDY but im using verb for dark ambient tunes.
Thanks.

 

[CMolena]

Yes you can get interesting sounds with the setup you have. Its just a matter of experimenting. Place the mic in one spot, think in the front of the guitar sound hole. Then record that and listen back. If it sounds to boomy, place it off the sound hole, like aimed at the 12th fret. If sounds to thin, move it in between those two spots. See, you have to learn how to apply a mic position in order to get a desired sound. Its just a matter of experimenting until you are happy with the sounds you've achieved to get.

I hope I helped you.

 

[Brian Miller]

You can get a pseudo stereo spread by recording DI and SM58 at the same time. If your DI is a bright sound (most are), then aim the 58 towards the soundhole from about 12" away. Record both simultaneously. Then phase align the wavs (zoom in real close and make sure the two wav files are in phase), and send one 30-50% left and the other the same distance right.

Just a thought.

 

[GONZO-X]

a single medium condenser mic is going to sound better than dual signals from DI and a 58,
which is not my first, 3rd, or 10th choice for micing acoustics.

 

[Pinky]

I've never liked how acoustics sound when recorded with a pickup/DI. I just point the condenser mic directly at the 12th fret, a couple inches away. Seems to be best balance of fret sound and acoustic tone. Been doing this for many years with multiple mics and acoustic guitars. If you want a true stereo sound, double track moving the mic slightly to offset things just a touch, then pan the resulting tracks. I'm also a fan of using a stereo spread plugin. If done right can certainly be a worthy substitute for double tracking.

 

[mjbphotos]

The biggest issue with double tracking acoustic guitar is the differences in strumming really show through (more than electric guitars, IMO). It takes a lot of work to get the 2nd track to match up with the first one unless its' a slow consistent strum style - flourishes and fast upsweeps for accents can really give a phased sound when they don't match.

I agree with Pinky - DI seldom sounds good, but it does depend on the pickup system. Most have a quack that is hard to dial out with EQ. I have used it to add a little mid-hi "bite", but have found that its really better to not use it at all.

The only "real" reason to have a stereo track (2 mics) on an acoustic is if it is a solo instrument (with no more than 1 vocal with it). If that's the situation, and your room is well treated, mid-side is the best way (IMO) rather than X-Y of two matched mics.
Even when I use 2 mics, (one at 12th fret aiming slightly towards the soundhole, one at lower bout) I pan them together, or just a few degrees apart.

 

[DM60]

I don't like DI, but I could see people using it. I have had pretty good luck with the 12th, pointing towards the sound hole and behind the bridge pointing to the sound hole. Using a stereo channel since it seems if I need to do any corrections, I get a terrible phasing problem. Then use a stereo spreader utility to get separation (about 15/25% left/right). Usually using the AKG 190 mics (about $100 for a pair, not matched).

For the sound I am going for is the acoustic to offset any digital instruments I maybe using and give it more an organic sound. I think a very artificial synth and acoustic has a really cool sound together.