Re-amping

  • Thread starter Thread starter Schwarzenyaeger
  • Start date Start date
Schwarzenyaeger

Schwarzenyaeger

Formerly "Dog-In-Door"
Hey,


I was at a workshop today where a guy took about three hours to explain that he records a dry DI signal along with a mic'd amp when recording guitars just in case the amp sound doesn't turn out that way it should have.

Is there a bigger picture to this technique? I found his way of explaining somewhat lackluster and was wondering if there are other benefits to this besides being able to modulate the guitar signal much more than with a mic'd amp recording.
 
I would call re-amping more of a 'second' chance. If for some reason a flaw in the initial tone is not realised until later on in mixing, the performance is still there to make changes later. Not really anything to do with being able to modulate the guitar signal more than the original recording. Just a chance for a 'do-over' to save the performance.

Say A mic was bumped mid tracking, the speaker took a crap, or the fridge kicked on and created a horrible buzz. Sometimes when multitracking instruments one at a time, you may find later that one tone doesn't work with the another that was recorded later. Recording a direct signal will allow you to save the time of actually playing the part again in order to change tone/amp/micing technique, etc...

Also, if you are in a situation where you cannot crank up an amp at a particular time, you could record with an amp sim in headphones, then send out the direct signal later when getting the balls out of a good amp is feasible.

You can sometimes get away with a few patch cables for under $30. Better is to buy a real re-amp box like the Radial JCR Studio Reamper. I changes the signal to be more like the signal directly from a guitar (which the amp expects).
 
Welcome to Orchid Electronics

Or talk to they ^. Very helpful people I hear. They make a re-amp box for about a nifty. They make a range of wee boxes. DI, traff isolators and all are top quality and very competitively priced...AND! British to boot!

But for those VERY strapped, all you really need is a pot in a tin.

Dave.
 
Schwarzenyaeger said:
Hey,


I was at a workshop today where a guy took about three hours to explain that he records a dry DI signal along with a mic'd amp when recording guitars just in case the amp sound doesn't turn out that way it should have.

Is there a bigger picture to this technique? I found his way of explaining somewhat lackluster and was wondering if there are other benefits to this besides being able to modulate the guitar signal much more than with a mic'd amp recording.
Click to expand...

The DI provides a way to edit later as well if needed. It is much easier to edit based off a DI track than it is off a mic'd amp track.
 
witzendoz said:
Or build a kit re-amp box link.

Alan.
Click to expand...

You know I opened my reamp box and there isn't much more to it than the DIY build you posted. I think there was a couple resisters and a nice transformer but that was it to the entire thing.
 
Guitargodgt said:
You know I opened my reamp box and there isn't much more to it than the DIY build you posted. I think there was a couple resisters and a nice transformer but that was it to the entire thing.
Click to expand...

And you don't ACTUALLY need the transformer quite often!

Dave.
 
Also, besides being easier to edit because you can more easily see where the notes a picked, in the case of a close mic/far mic setup, when you edit, you end up chopping the room reverb tail, which makes the edit noticeable. If you do the editing and reamp it, it is captured out of the amp as one cohearant performance. Instead of an edited mess.
 
Farview said:
Also, besides being easier to edit because you can more easily see where the notes a picked, in the case of a close mic/far mic setup, when you edit, you end up chopping the room reverb tail, which makes the edit noticeable. If you do the editing and reamp it, it is captured out of the amp as one cohearant performance. Instead of an edited mess.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I never really thought of that. Could come in handy for a client that is a sloppy player for sure. Sucks, but it happens sometimes... :(
 
jimmys69 said:
Interesting. I never really thought of that. Could come in handy for a client that is a sloppy player for sure. Sucks, but it happens sometimes... :(
Click to expand...
It also works for the guys that play with a lot of reverb, or delay, or any other effect with a decay or modulation to it. You just have to make sure you capture the guitar before the effects.
 
If you're comping or doing "virtual punch ins" from multiple takes you really should be playing through the edit point, especially if you have this kind of delay or reverb going on, but for things where you're snipping a piece from here and putting it over there or whatever, editing the dry signal can save you some troubles.
 
ashcat_lt said:
If you're comping or doing "virtual punch ins" from multiple takes you really should be playing through the edit point, especially if you have this kind of delay or reverb going on, but for things where you're snipping a piece from here and putting it over there or whatever, editing the dry signal can save you some troubles.
Click to expand...

I am guessing he is speaking of editing 'after' the performance. Not punching in while tracking. I am sure Fairview knows how to do a punch in... That being said, that does not always work even for punch in with delay or modulation on the input track. The stomp box does not know when the time to start is.

I have had situations where editing the direct signal-then re-amping would have likely been a better outcome. I just never thought of doing it that way.

This is something I will keep in mind in the future. Thanks Fairview. :)
 
Yeah, modulations are a bit different. Delays and reverbs only really last so long, but especially with a slow sweeping phase or flange or such it's pretty tough to line up. There are ways to do it fairly transparently, but yeah.

And yeah, I figured he was talking about trying to fly stuff around, just...
 
Farview said:
....in the case of a close mic/far mic setup, when you edit, you end up chopping the room reverb tail, which makes the edit noticeable.
Click to expand...

Mmmmm....I guess that is possible....

....if the guy is editing only with visual cues from the graphics and not listening to the edits. ;)
 
ashcat_lt said:
Yeah, modulations are a bit different. Delays and reverbs only really last so long, but especially with a slow sweeping phase or flange or such it's pretty tough to line up. There are ways to do it fairly transparently, but yeah.

And yeah, I figured he was talking about trying to fly stuff around, just...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hear ya. Well placed and true.

I must say it is nice to have a thread about 're-amping' that is on topic with the situations that it can and is useful. Not just a 'kick out your neighbors and family, get the tone right the first time, and crank it up' thread.

:)
 
miroslav said:
Mmmmm....I guess that is possible....

....if the guy is editing only with visual cues from the graphics and not listening to the edits. ;)
Click to expand...


Um not necessarily dood. If you 'slip' edit a recorded (with effects printed) part in time, even with crossfade, you can hear the change in reverb tail. Not to mention the change in delay or modulation which is more audible.

Please listen to the conversation. :)

I will also add that it really depends on the player, and the reason for editing. I am talking more about recording full bands. There are times when edits are not just a ms away from correct. Doing a demo for a band (even somewhat mature ones) can have miscues and wish to save their parts. My job is to make it happen while saving my own sanity. And their time. To reschedule guitar player 'A' whom did not play the part exactly the same as guitar player 'B' in his session, is not my place to tell them to start over and go rehearse. I will if it is not a fixable thing. Mine is not a studio that requires a huge budget. Usually I work with the clients to make it work. Hence the editing.

Finding ways to make the best of a bands project is what I do. I do quite well I think.

Keep in mind, the type of music I work with may not be the norm for another. I cannot suggest anything other than the basics to another that is recording themselves or other bands. I can't even fathom telling someone else how to play. I would sound like a complete asshole.

Oh wait, I do actually do that with many musicians thanks to a book called "How To Win Friends & Influence People". LINK

LMAO! Sorry, related to an earlier thread. Thought it funny here
 
Last edited:
jimmys69 said:
Um not necessarily dood. If you 'slip' edit a recorded (with effects printed) part in time, even with crossfade, you can hear the change in reverb tail. Not to mention the change in delay or modulation which is more audible.

Please listen to the conversation. :)
Click to expand...

I understoood Fairview to be talking about two mics...one close, one room...and about edits being easier to see.
Or was he saying something else....?

Sure, if you just visusally slice both tracks where the close mic tail ends, it will be too short for the room mic....but again, monitoring the edit will tell you where the right spot is.

I mean...I'm not knocking reamping if it benefits someone to use it.
I was just commenting on editing in general.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top