|
Post by thehightenor on Oct 7, 2021 5:15:45 GMT -6
Any Advice?
I've set my rig up Tim Pierce style, the cab is in a different room to the head (Tone King Imperial MK2) and on the cab I have an AEAR92 into AEA RPQ 500 pre and a SM57 into a BAE 1073D > HEDD 192 > Cubase.
Tim Pierce pre-mixes his 121 and 57 before tracking so he tracks a mono guitar blend of the two, the thing is he has a $7000 Chandler mixer to do this with so his signal stays pristine!
I'm worried if I record to two separate mono tracks I'll end up with so many tracks as I build up my guitar layers it might become unmanageable? or is it well worth the hassle?
.... then how can I pre-mix the R92 and SM57? I don't want to use a cheap Mackie mixer - can I just use the output pots on my two pre-amps to get the blend?
What workflow do others use?
Thanks for any advice and experience you can offer.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Oct 7, 2021 6:05:47 GMT -6
Use separate tracks, group each pair after you determine blend. I always track at least two per guitar track. With electric guitars, a 57 on one speaker and a Royer 121 on the other. Both go through an API 312 without any overload (so, often padded) and into an Audioscape MEQ with little to no EQ (maybe a teensy bit of 700hz area boost), just getting the bottles warm, and a tiny bit of LA3a action on each one. Keeps it all warm and tight. Snug as a bug in a rug. Mix is usually 65-70% Ribbon and 30-35% dynamic. If I remember to, I'll put a sample up here.
|
|
|
Post by robschnapf on Oct 7, 2021 6:49:46 GMT -6
First off I only use two mics if one isn’t doing it. If I use two, I blend em and make it one track. Commit. Recording and making a record is about making decisions as you go and collecting the commitments of said process.
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Oct 7, 2021 7:27:12 GMT -6
Come on guys opposite opinions isn’t helping me !! 😂
Seriously though, thank you for sharing your experience, it’s very much appreciated.
Both opinions makes sense to me.
I’m drawn between both approaches.
Perhaps I need to just give it all a go and find my best workflow, obviously both can work.
Tim Pierce pre-mixes but he has 35 years more experience than me tracking like this.
In general I’m a control freak so separate tracks appeals to that side of me but equally I’ve been trying to speed up the recording process and commit to stuff earlier on.
So many equally great approaches.
|
|
|
Post by srb on Oct 7, 2021 12:48:28 GMT -6
I generally go two mics per cab per take as well. I'll determine a blend later. Lately I've been using an M160 and an SM57.
Sometimes I use a 421 and a BLUE Dragonfly.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Oct 8, 2021 5:18:26 GMT -6
First off I only use two mics if one isn’t doing it. If I use two, I blend em and make it one track. Commit. Recording and making a record is about making decisions as you go and collecting the commitments of said process. That's your method, not my method. Hasn't been since Pro Tools was able to break through the limitations of 16 or 24 tracks. Different methods work in different ways for different processes and projects. And then there's the reason for options: mixing. Otherwise, we may as well go back to live off the floor, direct to two-track. I'll get some audio up today.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Oct 8, 2021 8:31:49 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Oct 8, 2021 8:37:37 GMT -6
What exactly do you think your Mackie is gonna damage, that anyone can tell? Honestly just the photo op more than anything.
|
|
|
Post by Ned Ward on Oct 8, 2021 9:13:16 GMT -6
Two mics, two tracks. You can shift the tonality/EQ of your sound just from changing levels - or change between verse/chorus, etc. No need to commit. Don't compare yourself to Tim Pierce - what he does works for him but he's a session player and knows exactly the sound he needs.
Also as long as you're getting the right gain levels from the preamps, nothing to be gained going through the Mackie. you can always combine the takes in Cubase later.
LABEL everything - GTR Tk1 57, GTR Tk1 92 - etc. That way it's a lot easier to figure out all the tracks. Use that comments section below for more notes.
|
|
|
Post by robschnapf on Oct 8, 2021 11:49:21 GMT -6
First off I only use two mics if one isn’t doing it. If I use two, I blend em and make it one track. Commit. Recording and making a record is about making decisions as you go and collecting the commitments of said process. That's your method, not my method. Hasn't been since Pro Tools was able to break through the limitations of 16 or 24 tracks. Different methods work in different ways for different processes and projects. And then there's the reason for options: mixing. Otherwise, we may as well go back to live off the floor, direct to two-track. I'll get some audio up today.
|
|
|
Post by robschnapf on Oct 8, 2021 11:57:54 GMT -6
That is my method but it’s for a reason. It comes from making records on tape for years and learning to Commit as you go. Which has turned into a philosophical strategy in making a record. Making sounds, committing sounds, reacting to those sounds, making Other sounds that work around those commitments.. I can’t tell you how many records I’ve mixed where There are two or three mics on everything with really no purpose other then options. And one of the mics is out of phase. You don’t need options if you make informed decisions as you go. But also Ward, I respect you having a different method. I’m trying to address doing this just because with no method or strategy.
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Oct 8, 2021 18:42:20 GMT -6
Just sum the tracks digitally if it's really all about committing to a sound— your DAW isn't going to bite you. (And you can do a "save as" to keep Ward happy too).
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Oct 9, 2021 14:34:30 GMT -6
Just sum the tracks digitally if it's really all about committing to a sound— your DAW isn't going to bite you. (And you can do a "save as" to keep Ward happy too). Wait a second . . . why should I be happy?
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Oct 9, 2021 14:38:05 GMT -6
Did anyone listen to the tracks I posted from the link above? My favorites are obviously the combined two mics, and I could have committed at the beginning, but like Ned Ward pointed out, you can adjust and change tonality without having to EQ. Dirty: https%3A//soundcloud.com/user-391297626/dual-dirty-sg-marshall-2203-1%3Fin%3Duser-391297626/sets/microphone-capture-on-heavy-guitars%26si%3D3d57a05ac0ca44b98a8c7ccf7a0cff7bHairy/Clean: https%3A//soundcloud.com/user-391297626/hairy-tele-marshall-plexi%3Fin%3Duser-391297626/sets/microphone-capture-on-heavy-guitars%26si%3Dede1ee2744ee4cb69be2a646b352d696
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Oct 9, 2021 17:37:01 GMT -6
What exactly do you think your Mackie is gonna damage, that anyone can tell? Honestly just the photo op more than anything. I can tell, that's enough for me :-) I found a Radial Mix 2:1 Passive mixer that's of a high enough quality for my purposes. Though at this is stage the vote is swinging me towards recording separate tracks, at least until I've built up enough experience to commit as I record. It's very interesting to hear everyone's different approaches. One things for sure a cab with mics on it sounds way, way better to my ears than an Ox Box or using IR's - especially when you're opening things up a bit and getting the amp and speaker really working then the tone is very exciting and has real energy.
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Oct 9, 2021 18:27:40 GMT -6
Record em to a stereo track. You can then use the downmixer plug to adjust blend if necessary (tho I would endeavor to record them at the correct balance).
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Oct 10, 2021 3:57:40 GMT -6
Record em to a stereo track. You can then use the downmixer plug to adjust blend if necessary (tho I would endeavor to record them at the correct balance). I'm signed up to the Tim Pierce Master course (I've worked professionally as a pianist and drummer the last 40 years!) and so though I've played guitars and basses for 30 odd years it's not my first instrument - though I play musically I like to think :-) Tim is just amazing the way he builds up guitar parts and that's what I've got into in a big way - LRC guitar arrangements - it sound really big and exciting! So having watched some more of the Master Class course I can see advantages to pre-mixing the guitar sound and committing to it at the tracking stage as it makes for a great workflow and a smaller track count in the DAW environment. He's just so darn confident as he works on a song - that's where I'd like to get to.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Oct 10, 2021 8:43:59 GMT -6
Record em to a stereo track. You can then use the downmixer plug to adjust blend if necessary (tho I would endeavor to record them at the correct balance). I'm signed up to the Tim Pierce Master course (I've worked professionally as a pianist and drummer the last 40 years!) and so though I've played guitars and basses for 30 odd years it's not my first instrument - though I play musically I like to think :-) Tim is just amazing the way he builds up guitar parts and that's what I've got into in a big way - LRC guitar arrangements - it sound really big and exciting! So having watched some more of the Master Class course I can see advantages to pre-mixing the guitar sound and committing to it at the tracking stage as it makes for a great workflow and a smaller track count in the DAW environment. He's just so darn confident as he works on a song - that's where I'd like to get to. Always set goals, and never be afraid of the bar being raised. It's admirable you recognize limitations and where you wish to be!
|
|
|
Post by sean on Oct 19, 2021 6:40:50 GMT -6
Like everything, “it depends”. I personally rarely use multiple microphones on an amp, but I were to I’d buss them together. The only exception is if it’s an actual stereo amplifier with tremolo or vibrato or chorus that’s moves between speakers (which is rare) because then I’d actual pan the two microphones apart from one another.
If it’s a song where there’s going to be lots of guitar parts that come and go (say, a clean rhythm, tremolo guitar holding out chords, fills in the second verse, a guitar solo, double distorted chorus guitars, on and on) double tracks on all that shit adds up and get tedious.
And when I’m sent something to mix with multiple microphones 98% of the time I just listen for the one that sounds the best and delete the others.
I think bussing them together once you have a blend you like is the way to go. I mean, that’s the blend where you initially went “this sounds good” so might as well trust your instincts and commit to it.
|
|
|
Post by anders on Oct 21, 2021 6:09:04 GMT -6
The upside of committing is making things more manageable downstream.
The upside of keeping multiple mics separate, maybe including room mics,, is that the blend will emphasise different frequencies and characteristics in the guitar take. So if you don't know exactly what the rest of the picture will be come mix time, and you might be liable to use some EQ (apart from the obvious hi / lo cuts) on the guitar or add room reverbs, you might as well keep tracks separate, and use blending instead of adding EQ and room.
This can be overwhelming and time consuming come mix time if the guitar player is inexperienced, and hasn't been able to contain him/herself in the arrangement and recording process, and there are several competing tracks, each with their own sets of mics. But then the solution is maybe rather weeding out unnecessary parts. If it is just one or two guitars, it isn't necessarily harder to handle than EQ / reverb balancing, and might give more pleasing results.
|
|
|
Post by nick8801 on Oct 21, 2021 7:13:57 GMT -6
I like using one mic for mono sources. If you have to use two, I agree with the commit to it sentiments here. I used to do the ribbon/dynamic thing, but besides the occasional phase issues from setting up too fast and not getting it right, the amount of tracks I had to deal with when stacking guitars was a pain. If a ribbon is too dark, use a booster pedal into the amp to brighten it up. Just get the sounds you want up front and be done with it. I don't like making those decisions during mixing. I'd rather just react to the music and balance it all out, rather decide on which mic or blend is the one worth using. It takes my head out of the game. YMMV
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 21, 2021 10:37:39 GMT -6
That is my methid but it’s for a reason. It comes from making records on tape for years and learning to Commit as you go. Which has turned into a philosophical strategy in making a record. Making sounds, committing sounds, reacting to those sounds, making Other sounds that work around those commitments.. I can’t tell you how many records I’ve mixed where There are two or three mics on everything with really no purpose other then options. And one of the mics is out of phase. You don’t need options if you make informed decisions as you go. But also Ward, I respect you having a different method. I’m trying to address doing this just because with no method or strategy. I can certainly see that. I have a studio I record in all the time - but I don't engineer - but really familiar with the sounds. I immediately go in and disable and hide, ride, crotch mono, stereo room 2, bass dirty, EG DI (1,2,3) sometimes depending on the guitar player, I make it simple by using either the ribbon or 57...etc. Just tons of stuff that gets in the way. Blending Schmending. lol The idea is the whole picture not individual. But - I've also had one or two of those things save me...
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Oct 21, 2021 14:56:21 GMT -6
What exactly do you think your Mackie is gonna damage, that anyone can tell? Honestly just the photo op more than anything. I can tell, that's enough for me :-) I found a Radial Mix 2:1 Passive mixer that's of a high enough quality for my purposes. Though at this is stage the vote is swinging me towards recording separate tracks, at least until I've built up enough experience to commit as I record. It's very interesting to hear everyone's different approaches. One things for sure a cab with mics on it sounds way, way better to my ears than an Ox Box or using IR's - especially when you're opening things up a bit and getting the amp and speaker really working then the tone is very exciting and has real energy. There's no better way to gain experience and know what you want than making mistakes up front. I say commit. After mixing others projects with 100+ guitar tracks - a couple dozen or three dozen overlapping parts with 3 mics each and a half dozen alternated playlists, I have hated the overwhelming drag that options "give". You can DOUBLE the hundred + when the guitarist insists on recording stereo, with DI's and using 2 amps - both with 2-3 mics. It completely kills creativity, and bogs down the process. The first thing I do if mixing that kinda insanity is nuke as much of it as I can. Blend and bounce the rest. Much of the unique and creative stuff that we love in old recordings comes from HAVING to commit. Personally, when I make a mistake - I use it to push me a new direction that I wouldn't have naturally taken. Often works out great. Occasionally makes me re-do something. I'm with Rob robschnapf here. Making records is about commitment, and driving creativity in positive directions. Not sorting thru hundreds of guitar tracks and balancing them. I do Wards way too sometimes when I'm working with a player I don't know, or on a project that is not "mine" - but when given the chance, I tend to commit. Works with keyboards too. And drums. And most other stuff. If you want to see the creativity passion that committing can give - check out the Beato video on Queens Bohemian Rhapsody. I can guarantee that much of the "magic" would have been lost if they were using a DAW and had been committed to keeping all options open.
|
|
|
Post by robschnapf on Oct 21, 2021 15:00:24 GMT -6
Yeah John, totally. But I usually just start with getting the overheads good. Play around with extra drum mics if the room is good. If it isn’t a good room then I want as little of it around as possible. I wont even bother recording room mics that I’d mute later. Fuck em. When a mic for the ride is needed I’ll add it at that time. No need to be carrying that around until necessary. But man, the insta 3 mics on a guitar on different speakers Making a beautiful combfilter means somebody isn’t listening. Anyways that’s how I think about it and approach it. Make less work later by making decisions sooner. And It's harder to fuck it up with one mic then it is with 3 or more....
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Oct 22, 2021 5:55:53 GMT -6
I've decided to go with the pre-mix workflow. I have very good ears and I know what I want. I also like layering guitar and as you say drbill trying to deal with 100+ tracks of multi tracked multi miced audio is a massive headache! Sure, if it was just a single acoustic guitar or single electric guitar then two tracks would be fine but that's not how I'm arranging my music.
|
|