Want my mic'd sounds to be more "in your face", cab placement?

[The Shrink]

For our new album, I bought the i5 based on Andy’s cab test (Here), because I thought it sounded much better than the 57 on the V30s….boy was I wrong… the i5 was fizzy and lack of attack, not even close to the 57. (We used a Recto and 5150).

On the other hand, we used two 57s, a brand new one form the studio and another old beat up one I had for about 15 years. Once we tried them (A/B), we found out that the old piece of crap blew away the new 57. Why? I guess they used better components back then, and now they just use cheap stuff inside.

I believe Andy’s 57s are not the ones you can get now. I have made endless mic cab testings with high end equipment throughout the years, and I cannot get even close Andy’s guitar tone. He will make any amp sound great, and it must have something to do with the mic he uses. I refuse to believe he works with one of these new out of the box 57s.

I have uploaded a small pre-mix sample so you guys can check it out http://www.upload.celtiaproductions.co.uk/uploads/BNGsample.mp3

That is a single 57 on the dual recto and a single ADK51s on the 5150.

 

[everybody's x]

I believe Andy’s 57s are not the ones you can get now. I have made endless mic cab testings with high end equipment throughout the years, and I cannot get even close Andy’s guitar tone. He will make any amp sound great, and it must have something to do with the mic he uses. I refuse to believe he works with one of these new out of the box 57s.

It aint the hammer it's the carpenter.
Andy would make a killer album with a vs-880 and a couple of radio shack PZMs and probably has

 

[The Shrink]

Don’t get me wrong, I agree 100%. The man got the skill nailed, and I’ve never heard better metal guitar recording. But you can’t deny to the possibility that he might have a better mic. That’s the only part of signal chain I can think of, that could make such dramatic improvement on the final sound captured (under my experience at least). You can play and adjust the mic placement to a certain extent, but must of us know where the sweet spot on the speaker is, so the rest is the cable, preamp and A/D converter, that obviously contribute, but not so drastic as the mic.

If Andy says “I use a brand new 57 out of the box”, I will eat my words and keep struggling to improve it some other way.

 

[Genius Gone Insane]

.... waiting ....

 

[Kazrog]

yes why is the i5 better? its good but I wouldn't say better

I've never been able to get as good of results out of an SM57 as through an i5, even with a lot of trial and error. But I am not you, and I lack your jedi skills!

In general I find Audix mics are less position-sensetive than Shure - which can be good or bad depending on what you're looking for and what your approach is. As I stated, you've gotten amazing results with an SM57 countless times on countless albums, so in the end it really comes down to the engineer, as with anything else.

It takes more skill to produce great results from an SM57 is how I probably should have phrased it.

 

[JBroll]

I've found that as well - it also seems closer to the room sound than any 57 placement, with or without the transformer in, and it allows me to just dial in the sound from the room and not worry about how the mic will sculpt it before it hits the DAW. It's not perfect, and I still tinker a lot, but I'd be more confident throwing a single i5 around than a single 57 if I were trying to get a close representation of the sound in the room.

Jeff

 

[The Shrink]

Jeff

Did you try the transformer trick with the i5?

 

[nuclearass]

I've never liked how the low mids sound if I have recorded with an i5. They always sound a bit nasty and unnatural to me. There's this constant "low mid whistle" going on that I just can't even remove with an eq. I prefer a 57.

I personally think Andy uses just normal 57's. You just have to think about the whole recording chain he's mostly using. Excellent guitarists with really good guitars/pickups - > tubescreamer -> good amp (mostly 5150/mesa/krank) with good selected tubes -> good cab (almost always mesa or another v30 cab) -> 57 -> good pre -> good converters and also a good room....and the most important: He's got excellent ears and he can eq the amp so that the sound he gets doesn't need much tweaking afterwards.

 

[JBroll]

Jeff

Did you try the transformer trick with the i5?

I actually haven't taken the i5 apart yet. Haven't felt like I needed to, but I might get around to it sooner or later.

Jeff

 

[ApolloSpeed]

I think the "clayman" thread is an excellent read.....perhaps you should check it out.

 

[The Shrink]

Thanks man, but I already read that thread a couple of times, and also keep checking it every once in a while if something new comes up.

Anyway, the thread I’m after is “That Shovel Headed Killing Machine sound” or “That “Dead Heart in a Dead World sound”. Fredman is great, but he’s not even close to Andy’s work on guitars, especially the stuff coming from his new studio IMO.

The two mic combo sounds cool at some point, but I always end up with the single mic (per amp at least) setup, I totally agree with Andy on that.

 

[ApolloSpeed]

Fredman is great, but he’s not even close to Andy’s work on guitars, especially the stuff coming from his new studio IMO.

agreed... A really good single mic technique sounds much better than a good Clayman mic technique!

But they "clayman" technique seems to yeild a good result much faster for me than the single mic. It takes me FOREVER to get a good sound that way... but maybe that's just my luck.:Smug:

 

[The Shrink]

agreed... A really good single mic technique sounds much better than a good Clayman mic technique!

But they "clayman" technique seems to yeild a good result much faster for me than the single mic. It takes me FOREVER to get a good sound that way... but maybe that's just my luck.:Smug:

Man, that’s exactly the point I’m trying to get across here. I saw the photos of Andy’s micing setup (http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/andy-sneap/274717-sneap-micing-techniques.html) and it’s exactly as I expected it to be (I really hope they’re not fake), and probably is what everybody else in this forum uses, so it should not be that MUCH difference unless the mic…. Otherwise, how can it be possible that my 15 year old beat up 57 (that I’ve also used many times for snares and vocals), sound so much better than the new 57? Did the crust of saliva on the membrane improve the frequency response? …don’t think so.

One thing is for sure, I could not get a decent sound out of a “new” 57 or the i5 (believe me, I’ve tried very hard). On the other hand, I did get good results with the ADK51s and the AKG 414 (besides my old 57).

It would not surprise me if Andy uses an old 57 to work.

 

[Machinated]

Most of the time when I mic guitars, I'll mic with a 57 and i5 simultaneously (and seperately) and use the one that sounds best. The i5 has always sounded good, and although similar, I always prefer the 57's recorded tone. Just my experience, both will get you a good usable sound.

I will add that with the i5 I can get a usable sound faster, but spending a bit more time the 57 always sounds better

Just my thoughts....

 

[theblackmoon]

One thing that most people never consider is the room. I can hear bad room modes even if the mic was an inch from the source, I don´t know why people put that out of the equation all the time. Great studios are known by their rooms more than by their gear.

Change the room if you can and test it, I promise you will not regret.

 

[theblackmoon]

And BTW, cranking the amp will introduce more room. The source is louder, making the room sound louder, and amplificating the results of your room modes (determined by the design). So cranking your amp on a crappy room will make things event more dificult. *Problably* introducing low-mid unwanted reflections that mud your tone, make the amp seem far, undefined, it takes out all the articulation of the performance.

Well, that´s just MY opinion based on my experience as a AE, your experiences will help alot more than any advice/book/forum.

Good luck

 

[ApolloSpeed]

And BTW, cranking the amp will introduce more room. The source is louder, making the room sound louder

i see what your saying... you want it loud enough so the amp is juiced.....but not too loud that you get alot of room noise huh? So for a 5150, probably around 3 on volume??

 

[yarrick19]

I believe Andy’s 57s are not the ones you can get now. I have made endless mic cab testings with high end equipment throughout the years, and I cannot get even close Andy’s guitar tone. He will make any amp sound great, and it must have something to do with the mic he uses. I refuse to believe he works with one of these new out of the box 57s.

I'm curious about this as well. Andy, any info about your trusty 57?

 

[DevilJaw]

well it don't matter what mic you use or your recording environment, to get the best results out of any dynamic mic, especially the sm57, you need a decent preamp and the one in your firebox is..well it works, but you would be amazed at how well the sm57 is when used with a good preamp.

 

[The Shrink]

And BTW, cranking the amp will introduce more room. The source is louder, making the room sound louder, and amplificating the results of your room modes (determined by the design). So cranking your amp on a crappy room will make things event more dificult. *Problably* introducing low-mid unwanted reflections that mud your tone, make the amp seem far, undefined, it takes out all the articulation of the performance.

I see your point, and I've got better results on "dead" rooms, and know Andy thinks the same way:

"I never mic the room, just a 57 close in everytime. I have stopped building boxes, gobo's etc round the cabs though, as I was tending to hear close reflections (even when using a foam screen in front) so I just go with a deadish room now." (Taken from http://www.gearslutz.com/board/high...tars-how-much-room-you-micing.html#post273376)