Rode NT3, AKG C1000S, AT3728, -ACOUSTIC GUITAR

  • Thread starter Thread starter gcounselman
  • Start date Start date
As far as I'm concerned, small diaphragm condensors are better for recording acoustic guitar, and I love the Octava MC-012s and the Marshall 603s, both in pairs, and both affordable.
 
Large and small condensor combos have been around for years.

If you want focused attention to the guitar itself.
Rather than a background color to the ensemble. I like to use this combo on my old Guild for finger style. I can hear it breath if I get it right. Close to the finger board aside my left ear, with a small condensor on the bridge toward the sound hole.
 
anyone got a good response from using only one small condesor?
I've been trying for ages-no luck for me yet..always sounds a bit plugged in:(:(
I'm goin nuts, Any parametic eq experts out there?
 
Well.

I have an AT small condenser about 4 inches from the guitar 3 to 4 inches from the sound hole at the neck and about 35deg off axis toward the sound hole.

By less or more angle you gain boom or lose boom.

What mic are you using? That is obviously important.
 
MXL 603s

You should check out the Marshall MXL603S mics. You can get two of them for $130 and you'd be suprised with how good they can sound. Do a search in this forum and you can get alot of information on the mic's. I've been using them in an x/y stereo configuaration for about a month through a mackie mixer. This is the first time in over 15 years of playing that I have been happy with my recorded acoustic and classical sounds.

I was very skeptical that a $60-70 dollar mic could sound as good as people had been talking about. I found a place with a good return policy, and took a chance. I could not be happier with detailed sound that these mic's produce.

Mark
 
Peter,

Marshall mics aren't being distributed here in Oz yet. If you want to purchase them, it has to be direct from a reseller in the U.S.

BTW, I use Matons too (CW80, EM535, etc) and my best results were obtained using a C1 combined with a direct line from the guitar into a second channel on the desk. I just blend the two tracks to get a real nice sound.

Peace..........ChrisO :cool:
 
For godsakes people, look at the date. This post originally came from december of 2000. How did it get back on the board?
 
i don't care when it started!!!!!!!1
I'm just glad to be getting some cool advice
 
My experience so far: small condensers work way better on my acoustic guitar than large condensers, even good ones that sound great on my voice.

At present I'm using an AKG C480B through a Mindprint Envoice to disk. It's the best sound I've been able to get so far, which includes:

AKG C1000S
Rode NT1
Shure SM57
Shure SM58
Rode NTK

...and ART Tube Pres and Joemeek VC6Q.

Not to flog a dead horse, but if you want to hear GOOD sound on an acoustic guitar, check out Recording Engineer's recent contribution to the mp3 clinic - there's a track of his brother singing and playing guitar that is, forgive me for getting all serious here, quite clearly a benchmark for anybody here recording anything similar. Neumann TLM 103 through a Davisound TB3.
 
Isn't a TLM103 a large condenser ? A small condenser mic is better at picking up the high-energy frequencies produced by the plucked string, and the attack transients. They don't sound as full and "warm" as a large diaphram can. It's best to own both types of mics and experiment and use them according to the sound that the song is demanding. I'm still trying to capture the acoustic sound from ELP's song "From the Beginning".

It's sounds obvious, but it takes a great guitar to get a great guitar sound. Spend the money and time finding the right instrument and you are half way there. With a good guitar you can just throw up any old mic in a drunken stupor and it will sound good. No kidding. :cool:
 
You're right - the 103's large diaphragm - which means that it's a case by case deal, and not whether the mic's large or small diaphragm that counts. But I'm thinking about what you said about the quality of the instrument being so important. I think you're right. So maybe with a lot of less-than-good sounding instruments, small diaphragms sound better because they bring out the top end more and de-emphasize the boxiness? Anyway, I think you're so right about the instrument that it's going to cost me a lot of money. :)
 
I can never decide what I like better on my acoustic steel-string, I only have 2 condensers so they are my only base of reference. My acoustic steel-string is a Taylor with Elixer strings and it's a little bright sounding if you pick it hard (I play with a pick 90 % of the time). The advantage of the large condenser is that I can move it back farther from the guitar than when I'm using the small condenser, so I feel it is giving me a more natural sound because no one listens to a guitar with there ear 6 inches from the instrument. I'm using an AT4033 about 2 feet from the guitar and I almost never use the bass rolloff switch. I don't hesitate to EQ both the high and low end a little bit, but I don't have a problem with the proximity effect or boominess with the mic so far away. I'm sure I could get an even better sound if I used 2 mics but I like the simplicity of only using one.
 
For my Cheap Ass guitar ($150 new 7 years ago), I use the best of both worlds.

I use a 4033 to the right of the sound hole and and Ocktava MC-12 pointed at the twelth fret. (I got the Oktava at GC, no problems yet)

For awhile this realistic/exaggerated combo made my guitar sound great, until the loud buzzing and crack appeared. Oh well, time for a new geetar.

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