Double/Quad Tracking Mic'd Guitar "phase issues"?

[MetalWorks]

I was trying to pull up some threads I remember reading about Andy using the Little Labs IPB for correcting phase issues on Mic'd guitars.

I have noticed that when doubling guitars on a mic'd setup, the tracks can sound phase like or colored in an undesirable way. Either track on its own sounds great.

I never had this problem when I used to double guitars direct with my Line 6 gear.

So I am wondering how common this issue is with doubling mic'd guitars and whether I need to use such a tool or move/change mics for doubling.

Its not a matter of Inverting the phase since that just makes it worse.

I can almost imagine taking a knob and sweeping the phase until it sounds right so I am curious if I need to try using a different mic position for the doubles.

Right now I want to say it has an ICY sound to it as opposed to a thick doubled sound.

Any feedback?

 

[MetalWorks]

Also just dawned on me that I should probably try using another head along side my 5150 such as the XXX.

 

[gorath23]

You must have a seriously tight player who can 'phase-out' themselves. If you just wanted to try it out, betabugs have a similar (free) plugin to the IBP: http://www.betabugsaudio.com/plugs.php

There are mono and stereo versions.

 

[Metaltastic]

The way I do it is to either reamp a guitar signal or have someone play through an amp, and sit with headphones on sweeping mic 1 (and only monitoring that mic) over the cone until it sounds good, then unmuting mic 2 and listening to them both simultaneously while moving mic 2 until the combined sound in your headphones sounds bitchin'. Naturally you'll want the volume on the amp to be low enough (and the volume in your phones to be high enough) that all you hear is the mics in your cans.

 

[MetalWorks]

You must have a seriously tight player who can 'phase-out' themselves.

I'll take that as a compliment. The plugin looks usefull except it appears to be PC based and I need it for MAC Pro Tools.


I think I will take Metaltastics approach to the 2nd Mic setup.

I have the 1st mic setup sounding good on its own. I just assumed I could use that again for doubling through the same amp but I dont think it's happy with that.

So I will see about the 2nd mic for the double and test that out.

 

[MetalWorks]

Also, any recommendations in terms of EQ'ing.

It would seem natural that the first concern with the phase issue is reinforcement of frequencies that become a problem.

How about EQ'ing? Normally I would do what sounds best individually. But how about introducing the double track? Do I want to sweep the frequencies of the EQ around as well to see what gells the best?

 

[MetalWorks]

Just found this:

http://www.americanmusical.com/Item--i-RAD-PHAZER

I could make 3 payments of $99.

Love American Musical Supply.

Easier on me than pulling out $350 for a Little Labs IBP Jr.

Looks the same except the Jr. has an extra button or 2.

 

[Aaron Smith]

I was actually just about to post about the Radial version, then I came back to the computer and you'd already found out about it! I don't own one, but I'll be picking one up within the next couple months, mostly because I'm going to be quad tracking guitars for my band's full length and I will need it for the exact reason that you need it.
As for Metaltastic's methodology, I think it likely would be considered a perfectly fine way to handle the problem...but the only possible concern I'm thinking is this: ideally, both mics should sound killer on their own (right?), so moving one of them around may result in causing it to sound worse. That may not even actually matter, if the only context you need to hear the mic in is with the other mic alongside it, but I'm just wondering if "killer mic sound 1 + killer mic sound 2 = killer tone" is considered equal to "killer mic sound 1 + not quite as killer mic sound 2 = killer tone". I suppose scenario two could even be better, if it perhaps is canceling some nasty or problem frequency area(s)...

I would love to hear Andy's input on the matter.

 

[MetalWorks]

Yeah, your point is pretty much the concern that is still in my mind.

Which is why I figured it best to leave the 1st mic in the same place and reuse it to double. Then having the problem I have, the memory of Andy mentioning the use of the IBP to fix phase issues came into play.

I also would like to hear Andy chime in.

 

[Keiffer]

I don't know what you're hearing but it's not phase from two different performances.

phase that can be modified only comes into play with a single source (correlated signal) tracked and the time relationship due to multiple micing distances or time based relationships, not from two independent performances (uncorrelated). the device you mention will not help you in this case.

 

[Allu83]

I don't know what you're hearing but it's not phase from two different performances.

phase that can be modified only comes into play with a single source (correlated signal) tracked and the time relationship due to multiple micing distances or time based relationships, not from two independent performances (uncorrelated). the device you mention will not help you in this case.

+1

 

[Metaltastic]

As for Metaltastic's methodology, I think it likely would be considered a perfectly fine way to handle the problem...but the only possible concern I'm thinking is this: ideally, both mics should sound killer on their own (right?), so moving one of them around may result in causing it to sound worse. That may not even actually matter, if the only context you need to hear the mic in is with the other mic alongside it, but I'm just wondering if "killer mic sound 1 + killer mic sound 2 = killer tone" is considered equal to "killer mic sound 1 + not quite as killer mic sound 2 = killer tone". I suppose scenario two could even be better, if it perhaps is canceling some nasty or problem frequency area(s)...

Yeah, granted, you have to place mic 2 simply by where it sounds best in conjunction with mic 1, but I don't consider that much of an issue, cuz why use 2 mics if you're not gonna use 'em together, after all? And dude, I have to give credit where credit is due - I got the headphone mic-sweeping idea from you in a thread you posted awhile ago (I the one where you talked about recording a 5150 with the volume at like .5), and it's served me quite well, so thanks a ton!

 

[Aaron Smith]

And dude, I have to give credit where credit is due - I got the headphone mic-sweeping idea from you in a thread you posted awhile ago (I the one where you talked about recording a 5150 with the volume at like .5), and it's served me quite well, so thanks a ton!

Haha, awesome! I'm glad I actually offered up some helpful information on here! I am still amazed at how usable the 5150 tone sounds when the volume output is next to nothing...I have yet to encounter another amp that is capable of this in the same way that the 5150 is. I finally just reamped the guitars for the full length that I was hired to do, and after using my little trick to help place the mic (making a couple adjustments based on hearing a more cranked amp out of the monitors as well), and I ended up recording the amp back in with the post gain at about 3, and the pre gain at only about 2.5, with the Maxon OD808 filling the in tone quite a bit. I also took the advice of Jason Suecof's engineer buddy (I can't remember his forum name, axeman something) and turned the presence up to about 9 and the resonance all the way up, and the highs more around 5, and with the single SM57 in the right place...by FAR, the best guitar tone I have ever mic'd, completely free of EQing. I'm in Hawaii at the moment (free wi-fi in the room!), but when I get back, I will post a clip of the tone for everyone to judge

 

[Aaron Smith]

I don't know what you're hearing but it's not phase from two different performances.

phase that can be modified only comes into play with a single source (correlated signal) tracked and the time relationship due to multiple micing distances or time based relationships, not from two independent performances (uncorrelated). the device you mention will not help you in this case.

I understand your point, but I want to make sure I understand 100%... During reamping, are you saying that a phase adjustment device put on "performance B" will have no effect whatsoever on the tone achieved when putting it against "performance A"?

 

[mpigott]

Dont know if its been said yet, but you could always phase align the parts within your DAW. Just zoom in on the waveform and set sync points on the initial transients and spot them into place. Opens drums up like crazy too. I suppose there is no quick fix for a guitarist who isnt tight with him/herself, but for multi mic'd cabs its a godsend.

 

[abyssofdreams]

Metalworks, can't say anything about IBPs and such but the way I see it, a strange "sound" when doubling one side is due to untight playing 99% of the time.
Whilst in some cases it is nice to have the second track a lil off you should try to be as tight as possible, that is incredibly important for quad-tracking.
About the icy sound you mentioned, can you post a sample? I mean 2 tracks panned dead center at the same volume? Because actually I would say that phasey stuff is normal once you put the tracks on top of each other...

 

[Metaltastic]

Dont know if its been said yet, but you could always phase align the parts within your DAW. Just zoom in on the waveform and set sync points on the initial transients and spot them into place. Opens drums up like crazy too. I suppose there is no quick fix for a guitarist who isnt tight with him/herself, but for multi mic'd cabs its a godsend.

I've heard from somewhat reputable sources on here that this doesn't solve the problem, though if someone with more physics knowledge than I could chime in, that'd help, cuz it seems like it should work...

 

[mpigott]

This method works for sure. Its a great way to tighten anything up, especially drums as the mics will have time differences between them. Obviously they wont line up 100% as the audio signals themselves are still to a degree dissimilar. It just tightens things up that extra little bit after careful mic placement. In terms of quad tracking it will only help so much, as you really have four completely different sound sources. Basically its just up to the players will to get it perfect.

 

[Metaltastic]

Oh right, I guess that's what this thread is about - however, I was more referring to the comb-filtering that can occur when using two mics on one source, which is the situation where I've heard shifting the tracks doesn't remedy the problem...

 

[Keiffer]

I understand your point, but I want to make sure I understand 100%... During reamping, are you saying that a phase adjustment device put on "performance B" will have no effect whatsoever on the tone achieved when putting it against "performance A"?

no,that's not what I'm saying. The issue is that that phase problems only occur between the two signals have a level of correlation, such as a single source miced with two mics. two separate performances do not have such a correlation or are uncorrelated. the device may have some affect on the sound, but it's not fixing the issue as you described it.

posting a clip of the problem will help. separate performances and then the combination.