Micing Acoustical Guitar discussion

[Plendakor]

[...]

 

[BLUElightCory]

Today I asked if we could get those guitar stands that you use to put your guitar on so it does not move.

I think you're referring to a Gracie stand?

My young colleage who knows it all asked why and I said it was to mic my guitar.
He said well just sit before the mic, if you know how to play it will be good.
So I said I wanted to mic at the nut and not move.

Looked at me like I was an alienated noob who does random stuff.

I said I mic at the nut, the 12th fret and try stuff around the soundhole and blend those tracks. I was judged for doing this. LOL

How do you guys go about micing and stuff, if you don't have a condenser microphone ?

I usually just start with one mic around the area where the body and the guitar meet and go from there. Condenser, dynamic, or ribbon, it doesn't really matter - it just depends what type of sound I'm going for. I will sometimes put a second mic over the guitarist's shoulder or further away in the room and blend to taste.

I usually tape the floor and use string or measuring tape to help the guitarist keep their position/placement consistent from take to take.

He told me I was weird because I wanted a 64 bands EQ and that it was too much because a 8 bands EQ had the frequencies for a guitar but that a 64 bands was way beyond the guitar and is pointless... I tried to tell him it was only more subdivided..

arrogant Kids these days

Honestly, you shouldn't need a 64 band EQ (unless you're referring to a graphic EQ, where all bands are fixed). Most recording consoles only have 4-6 bands of EQ.

A 6-10 band EQ with selectable filter types (peak/shelf/high pass/low pass) should be more than sufficient for any normal tonal shaping.

If you are referring to a graphic EQ, then yes, more bands just means more subdivision among the frequencies.

 

[Loki Laufeyiarson]

I take a ribbon mic, set it 30cm away from the guitar at the 12th fret, pointing towards the soundhole as a starting point, move to taste. Haven't been messing around with more than one mic yet, though.

 

[C_F_H_13]

I've done every combination of mic(s) on acoustics and I feel I finally found something I like.

-LDC in Figure 8 (my case a 414).

-Aimed so one side is facing the sound hole, the other the headstock (so parallel to the fret board) and sitting roughly at the 12th rough.

-Then it's simple: Too bassy? move it more towards the headstock. Not enough body? more towards the soundhole. It's also great cause I find I'm not getting alot of the "direct" sound, so I'm less prone to wierd rings.

If I only had a dynamic mic, I'd probably just do the 12th fret thing. I might actually try the over the right shoulder trick too.....

 

[Clark Kent]

IMO "acoustical" (lol) guitars are very simple to record. A proper mic in front of the guitar in a good room. If it's too close to the hole your guitars will be boomy and you need to EQ it out.

 

[mburton21]

I find acoustic guitars to be the easiest thing to record and get a nice tone. Might be the room/preamps, but I almost always use:

1) A mic at or around the soundhole, more towards the headstock usually (SM7B)
2) A DI signal from the internal pickup
3) A nice condensor room mic (Rhodes NT2-A)


Just mix and match to see what volumes work the best on each channel. I usually keep the DI signal pretty low since it's pretty much all brightness and attack. Never have much trouble with these and I always love the acoustic tone I get

 

[egan.]

@CFH, that's a really interesting idea. I've typically just done the LDC in cardioid around the 12th fred aimed slightly towards the body and then moved it around to taste. The last couple of days I laid a bunch of tracks with an omni in similar position at the house engineers recommendation and the tracks turned out amazing. Obviously omni is a no-go in bad rooms but this worked really well, avoids proximity effect issues and generally minimizes the problems of guitarists who move some while they play.

 

[kev]

Sorry for going slightly off topic here, but i've always LOVED this track from Bjorn Gelotte. I have no idea how one would get such a lovely acoustic sound though. Check it out:



I found that plectrum choice on acoustics is absolutely paramount, but im not sure what to go for. A thin pick gives you a nice bright tone for strumming with, but single notes become a bit too bodyless. A thick pick ends up nice on single notes, but dulls the sound a bit for chordal work sometimes. What are you guys using?

 

[luismars]

A good trick is to dual close mic it, use one to capture the darkest tone from the hole and the other to get the treble from the strings in the bridge. Also add room(s) mic(s) and mix to taste.

 

[Clark Kent]

Sorry for going slightly off topic here, but i've always LOVED this track from Bjorn Gelotte. I have no idea how one would get such a lovely acoustic sound though. Check it out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGZ1_ouh2sw

I found that plectrum choice on acoustics is absolutely paramount, but im not sure what to go for. A thin pick gives you a nice bright tone for strumming with, but single notes become a bit too bodyless. A thick pick ends up nice on single notes, but dulls the sound a bit for chordal work sometimes. What are you guys using?

That actually sounds like the strings are buzzing. So a very low action should get you there. Also the strings sound thin. I can't really hear any room in that so maybe they used the pickup inside the acoustic guitar or piezo? Or a dead room.

 

[Uros]

If you're going for more of an intimate, warm sound, and have a decent room, you can try to record it in M-S, but instead your typical use of cardioid as the mid mic, try using a mic with omni polar pattern. That way you can create an illusion of more depth.
Also, really interesting tip from CFH13

 

[kev]

That actually sounds like the strings are buzzing. So a very low action should get you there. Also the strings sound thin. I can't really hear any room in that so maybe they used the pickup inside the acoustic guitar or piezo? Or a dead room.

Theres definitely a far chunk of room in there as well dude. Actually if you listen at the end in particuar you can hear it.But yeh, dig that buzz for sure!

 

[Wisheraser]

One of my bands is tracking an acoustic album right now. After trying a number of different mic combinations, positions, picks, etc, I ended up with a pair of Beyer MC930's in XY about 9-10" away centered around the 15th fret. It's a similar setup to what CFH13 suggested, with the mic facing the body getting more bass and the one facing the neck getting more highs. Then you can balance them as you see fit for each song. Only problem with a stereo setup this close is that you have to stay completely still so you don't change the phase relationship between the mics.

For picks, we're using a range of Dunlop Tortex's from 0.5 to 0.73 (0.6 for most parts, 0.5 for softer parts or background things, and 0.73 for more aggressively strummed parts). The unfortunate thing about the 0.6 pick with my acoustic is that it seems to accentuate some nasallyness in the 550-600 area, but I'd rather deal with that and have the right pick attack than a less nasally sound with too hard or soft of an attack.

 

[guitarguru777]

For me its Rode NT1 near where the neck meets the body (12th - 17th fret depending on the guitar) AT2020 on the body on the lower bout for some "BOOM", an SM7 near the sound hole and an my MXL990 for "room".

Then I blend it all till i find what I like.

 

[Scott Horner]

http://homerecording.com/bbs/genera...iques/acoustic-guitar-recording-101-a-290919/

This page is a good guide for getting a nice, smooth sound. I've yet to try it but it seems like a good starting point for experimentation and I like the sound he was able to get. Interesting how he swaps the mics from side-to-side. May not work in all applications though.