Menu
hello - it's always been my experience that to get the best clean guitar
sound while recording
you simply need to use the best mic you can afford. then no matter what
medium, analog tape or digital, you use it will sound good.
I've heard that the AKG 3000B condenser mics are supposed to be pretty good
ones, and not too expensive
james
At 09:07 PM 2/27/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>Well--I'm currently using an Audix D-3 for the close cab mic--which I
>prefer to the sm57, and an Oktava mc319 condenser mic for the ambient
>mic. I've heard many suggestions by people on the recording newslists
>who use the sm57. I just don't think its very hi-fi. My frustration at
>this point is that I have read a couple of books on recording
>techniques, followed the suggestions, and haven'tbeen able to get the
>recording to sound "live". Seems like most of the recording gear
>available out there today is digital, unless you locate some specialty
>outlets. I was thinking maybe the secret was a set of very specific
>microphones placed exactly in a specific configuration--I've been
>looking at AKG C3000B, Sennheiser md 421, and Blue Dragonfly mics--but
>they are expensive. I've moved combinations of microphones all over
>the place, and I'm making 24-bit recordings. Its apparently not as
>simple as the theory would suggest. But thanks for all your advice.
>
>
>--- In , DP <noetical1@y...> wrote:
> > ohsyrus:
> >
> > a decent "starter mic" is a shure sm57 or a shure sm58.
> > They are basic, sturdy mics...they have been around
> > forever,...and they can be used onstage too. There are way
> > more expensive mics, but the shure's are reasonable, sturdy
> > and sound good. Senheiser and Oberheim make super nice
> > high-end mics...but those begin at about $1000 and go up up
> > up from there. If you are super-budget econo-minded,
> > Realistic (radio shack) has some "Shure-like" mics for less
> > than $30. Don't forget, the pawnshops sometimes have cool
> > stuff.
> >
> > I like to use a "stereo" mic setup. Mic 1 is placed
> > up-close and personal to the guitar speaker, Mic 2 is
> > across the room in a corner or up high (ceiling)catching
> > sound reflection ambient style...it makes for a real nice
> > sound when combined. Experiment and see what works for you.
> >
> > check out www.musiciansfriend.com to find a mic....
> > you can also find the Line6 Guitarport that "cobalt" was
> > talkin about there....
> >
> > good luck
> > David P
> >
> >
> > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > Well, I'm not trying to record to my computer, but sort
> > > of, since its
> > > one of those stand alone direct disk recording
> > > workstations(Korg
> > > D-16). I've tried both DI and cab micing, but--nothing
> > > has overcome
> > > the problems I've described. You are right about not
> > > accepting a very
> > > strong input signal without digital clipping. A
> > > compressor might help.
> > > that's a good suggestion. But it sounds like an analog
> > > tape deck might
> > > be the solution. You mentioned some things I did not know
> > > about analog
> > > tape.(in this digital age). I have not liked the post
> > > recording
> > > manipulation stuff I have gotten as well as just putting
> > > the effects
> > > in the signal path, so your analog suggestion has more
> > > basic appeal.
> > > What mics would you use in an analog recording
> > > environment? How would
> > > you position them?
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , DP <noetical1@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > OHSYRUS:
> > > > it sort of depends on what you are after:
> > > >
> > > > if you are trying for that "warm drenched reverb
> > > vintage
> > > > sound" you need tube amps, tube reverb, big fat beefy
> > > > strings, a nice recording room, a decent mike...and
> > > RECORD
> > > > TO TAPE. A slightly "hotter" signal can be handled on
> > > tape,
> > > > and you will have bitchen overtones and harmonics and
> > > > crunch distortion without "tinny-ness" Think about Dick
> > > > Dale+Deltones on "Surfer's Choice"...live to
> > > > two-track...and it still sounds great 40 years later.
> > > You
> > > > can always mix down from analog tape to digital to make
> > > > your cd master.
> > > >
> > > > if you are trying for "modern-retro influenced surf"
> > > > forget about all the analog gear and get yourself a
> > > decent
> > > > computer and a load of cool onboard effects like reverb
> > > and
> > > > compression. You might want to keep your cool amp and
> > > > reverb tank...but then you'll need a mike to get the
> > > sound
> > > > into the computer. If you are going to do that, you
> > > might
> > > > as well stick with option 1 above (analog). You'll end
> > > up
> > > > pulling out your hair trying to figure out how to get a
> > > > "warm fat reverb analog sound" on your dinky computer
> > > > digital studio. If you choose this option, go into
> > > your
> > > > computer direct and clean, and then add all your
> > > effects
> > > > and ambiance "in post production"...that means your
> > > guitar
> > > > will sound like Mr. Rodgers piano all clean and
> > > un-affected
> > > > while you play your part, and then you can whip out the
> > > > digital reverb and compression during the mixdown.
> > > >
> > > > To answer your "why do low notes record better
> > > > digitally...etc." question:
> > > >
> > > > Simply put, analog tape is more forgiving than digital
> > > > recording. With analog, your signal gain can be greater
> > > > without annoying clipping, crunching and distortion
> > > > (tinny-ness).
> > > >
> > > > Some things to try: you might add a compression stage
> > > > before you hit the input for your computer. You also
> > > might
> > > > try using tube pre-amp before you hit the computer,
> > > > however, you will probably increase line noise and hiss
> > > > that way.
> > > >
> > > > dude, if it was me, I'd invest in a decent analog tape
> > > > recorder...set up a cool recording room, break out my
> > > cool
> > > > fender bassman amp and reverb out...and let it rip.
> > > > I'd worry about "going digital" once I had the bitchen
> > > surf
> > > > vibe captured on tape.
> > > >
> > > > good luck
> > > >
> > > > David P
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > I am curious to hear from people who have experience
> > > > > attempting to
> > > > > record surf guitar in a studio setting, home or pro,
> > > as
> > > > > opposed to
> > > > > live ambient recordings, and what techniques you use.
> > > Do
> > > > > you use D.I
> > > > > techniques? Close cab miking? if so, what mics do you
> > > > > favor, and how
> > > > > do you position them relative to the cab? Do you add
> > > > > effects after, or
> > > > > in the signal path?
> > > > >
> > > > > My own efforts have been "ok" but nothing close to
> > > the
> > > > > best examples
> > > > > of recordings I have heard on CD. I have searched the
> > > > > newslists for
> > > > > information about recording electric guitar--but
> > > other
> > > > > than the jazz
> > > > > lists, most of the comments are not about recording
> > > > > clean, with heavy
> > > > > reverb in the signal path. I have experimented
> > > > > extensively with mic
> > > > > placement, but still have not been able to match the
> > > live
> > > > > sound. My
> > > > > basic tone is very good. But the recordings I make
> > > are
> > > > > always a little
> > > > > on the "tinny" side, although the tones on the 5th
> > > and
> > > > > 6th strings
> > > > > always turn out terrific. Does anyone have any ideas
> > > why
> > > > > the low notes
> > > > > are recording better than the high notes?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > > >
> > > > > Visit
>
<>
> for
> > > > > archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > > <>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> > > > <>
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > >
> > > Visit
>
<>
> for
> > > archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > <>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> > <>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>ADVERTISEMENT
><>1482da.jpg
>148328.jpg
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>.
>Visit
><>
>for archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
><>Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I am curious to hear from people who have experience attempting to
record surf guitar in a studio setting, home or pro, as opposed to
live ambient recordings, and what techniques you use. Do you use D.I
techniques? Close cab miking? if so, what mics do you favor, and how
do you position them relative to the cab? Do you add effects after, or
in the signal path?
My own efforts have been "ok" but nothing close to the best examples
of recordings I have heard on CD. I have searched the newslists for
information about recording electric guitar--but other than the jazz
lists, most of the comments are not about recording clean, with heavy
reverb in the signal path. I have experimented extensively with mic
placement, but still have not been able to match the live sound. My
basic tone is very good. But the recordings I make are always a little
on the "tinny" side, although the tones on the 5th and 6th strings
always turn out terrific. Does anyone have any ideas why the low notes
are recording better than the high notes?
ohsyrus:
--- "ohsyrus <>" <>
wrote:
> I am curious to hear from people who have experience
> attempting to
> record surf guitar in a studio setting, home or pro, as
> opposed to
> live ambient recordings, and what techniques you use. Do
> you use D.I
> techniques? Close cab miking? if so, what mics do you
> favor, and how
> do you position them relative to the cab? Do you add
> effects after, or
> in the signal path?
>
> My own efforts have been "ok" but nothing close to the
> best examples
> of recordings I have heard on CD. I have searched the
> newslists for
> information about recording electric guitar--but other
> than the jazz
> lists, most of the comments are not about recording
> clean, with heavy
> reverb in the signal path. I have experimented
> extensively with mic
> placement, but still have not been able to match the live
> sound. My
> basic tone is very good. But the recordings I make are
> always a little
> on the "tinny" side, although the tones on the 5th and
> 6th strings
> always turn out terrific. Does anyone have any ideas why
> the low notes
> are recording better than the high notes?
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> .
> Visit for
> archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
"ohsyrus " wrote:
>
> I am curious to hear from people who have experience attempting to
> record surf guitar in a studio setting, home or pro, as opposed to
> live ambient recordings, and what techniques you use.
I'm using a Line6 Guitarport. Just plug my guitar into my reverb tank,
then the tank into the GuitarPort, as if plugging into an amp. The
Guitarport software emulates the accoustics of a number of selectable
"classic" amps and cabinets, so I can dial in a vintage Fender amp and
have at it.
I have my guitarport hooked up backwards fom what they suggest. They
suggest you run the sound-out from your soundcard into the guitarport
unit, and hook your speakers directly to the guitarport unit. The reason
for this is that sound enters the 'port thru the guitar jack, travels
down the USB cable, gets treated by the software, then sent back along
the USB to the unit. Therefore, plugging the sound-out into the 'port is
the only way to get your computer's sound output overlaid onto the
guitar sound, once you plug your speakers into it.
What I've done is make a quick trip to Radio Shack, and get myself a
patch cord - so I've plugged the speaker-out on the 'port to the input
jack on my soundcard. So sound now travels from the guitar, thru the
port, gets treated, comes back to the port, and immediately shunted off
to the soundcard, where it can be recored like any other sound-input.
Gives me a nice, clean sound. With the guitarport amp modeling plus
delay and reverb effects, I can make myself sound like I'm playing
practically anything, anywhere. Small rooms, large rooms, whatever. And
best yet, no overbleed or muffling of sound unless I explicitly want it there.
-c*
OHSYRUS:
it sort of depends on what you are after:
if you are trying for that "warm drenched reverb vintage
sound" you need tube amps, tube reverb, big fat beefy
strings, a nice recording room, a decent mike...and RECORD
TO TAPE. A slightly "hotter" signal can be handled on tape,
and you will have bitchen overtones and harmonics and
crunch distortion without "tinny-ness" Think about Dick
Dale+Deltones on "Surfer's Choice"...live to
two-track...and it still sounds great 40 years later. You
can always mix down from analog tape to digital to make
your cd master.
if you are trying for "modern-retro influenced surf"
forget about all the analog gear and get yourself a decent
computer and a load of cool onboard effects like reverb and
compression. You might want to keep your cool amp and
reverb tank...but then you'll need a mike to get the sound
into the computer. If you are going to do that, you might
as well stick with option 1 above (analog). You'll end up
pulling out your hair trying to figure out how to get a
"warm fat reverb analog sound" on your dinky computer
digital studio. If you choose this option, go into your
computer direct and clean, and then add all your effects
and ambiance "in post production"...that means your guitar
will sound like Mr. Rodgers piano all clean and un-affected
while you play your part, and then you can whip out the
digital reverb and compression during the mixdown.
To answer your "why do low notes record better
digitally...etc." question:
Simply put, analog tape is more forgiving than digital
recording. With analog, your signal gain can be greater
without annoying clipping, crunching and distortion
(tinny-ness).
Some things to try: you might add a compression stage
before you hit the input for your computer. You also might
try using tube pre-amp before you hit the computer,
however, you will probably increase line noise and hiss
that way.
dude, if it was me, I'd invest in a decent analog tape
recorder...set up a cool recording room, break out my cool
fender bassman amp and reverb out...and let it rip.
I'd worry about "going digital" once I had the bitchen surf
vibe captured on tape.
good luck
David P
--- "ohsyrus <>" <>
wrote:
> I am curious to hear from people who have experience
> attempting to
> record surf guitar in a studio setting, home or pro, as
> opposed to
> live ambient recordings, and what techniques you use. Do
> you use D.I
> techniques? Close cab miking? if so, what mics do you
> favor, and how
> do you position them relative to the cab? Do you add
> effects after, or
> in the signal path?
>
> My own efforts have been "ok" but nothing close to the
> best examples
> of recordings I have heard on CD. I have searched the
> newslists for
> information about recording electric guitar--but other
> than the jazz
> lists, most of the comments are not about recording
> clean, with heavy
> reverb in the signal path. I have experimented
> extensively with mic
> placement, but still have not been able to match the live
> sound. My
> basic tone is very good. But the recordings I make are
> always a little
> on the "tinny" side, although the tones on the 5th and
> 6th strings
> always turn out terrific. Does anyone have any ideas why
> the low notes
> are recording better than the high notes?
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> .
> Visit for
> archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
The Line6 Guitarport sounds like a cool idea...
I'm going to try it out...
thanks for the tip!
dave p
--- cobalt <> wrote:
>
>
> "ohsyrus " wrote:
> >
> > I am curious to hear from people who have experience
> attempting to
> > record surf guitar in a studio setting, home or pro, as
> opposed to
> > live ambient recordings, and what techniques you use.
>
> I'm using a Line6 Guitarport. Just plug my guitar into my
> reverb tank,
> then the tank into the GuitarPort, as if plugging into an
> amp. The
> Guitarport software emulates the accoustics of a number
> of selectable
> "classic" amps and cabinets, so I can dial in a vintage
> Fender amp and
> have at it.
>
> I have my guitarport hooked up backwards fom what they
> suggest. They
> suggest you run the sound-out from your soundcard into
> the guitarport
> unit, and hook your speakers directly to the guitarport
> unit. The reason
> for this is that sound enters the 'port thru the guitar
> jack, travels
> down the USB cable, gets treated by the software, then
> sent back along
> the USB to the unit. Therefore, plugging the sound-out
> into the 'port is
> the only way to get your computer's sound output overlaid
> onto the
> guitar sound, once you plug your speakers into it.
>
> What I've done is make a quick trip to Radio Shack, and
> get myself a
> patch cord - so I've plugged the speaker-out on the 'port
> to the input
> jack on my soundcard. So sound now travels from the
> guitar, thru the
> port, gets treated, comes back to the port, and
> immediately shunted off
> to the soundcard, where it can be recored like any other
> sound-input.
>
> Gives me a nice, clean sound. With the guitarport amp
> modeling plus
> delay and reverb effects, I can make myself sound like
> I'm playing
> practically anything, anywhere. Small rooms, large rooms,
> whatever. And
> best yet, no overbleed or muffling of sound unless I
> explicitly want it there.
>
> -c*
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> .
> Visit for
> archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
Well, I'm not trying to record to my computer, but sort of, since its
one of those stand alone direct disk recording workstations(Korg
D-16). I've tried both DI and cab micing, but--nothing has overcome
the problems I've described. You are right about not accepting a very
strong input signal without digital clipping. A compressor might help.
that's a good suggestion. But it sounds like an analog tape deck might
be the solution. You mentioned some things I did not know about analog
tape.(in this digital age). I have not liked the post recording
manipulation stuff I have gotten as well as just putting the effects
in the signal path, so your analog suggestion has more basic appeal.
What mics would you use in an analog recording environment? How would
you position them?
--- In , DP <noetical1@y...> wrote:
> OHSYRUS:
> it sort of depends on what you are after:
>
> if you are trying for that "warm drenched reverb vintage
> sound" you need tube amps, tube reverb, big fat beefy
> strings, a nice recording room, a decent mike...and RECORD
> TO TAPE. A slightly "hotter" signal can be handled on tape,
> and you will have bitchen overtones and harmonics and
> crunch distortion without "tinny-ness" Think about Dick
> Dale+Deltones on "Surfer's Choice"...live to
> two-track...and it still sounds great 40 years later. You
> can always mix down from analog tape to digital to make
> your cd master.
>
> if you are trying for "modern-retro influenced surf"
> forget about all the analog gear and get yourself a decent
> computer and a load of cool onboard effects like reverb and
> compression. You might want to keep your cool amp and
> reverb tank...but then you'll need a mike to get the sound
> into the computer. If you are going to do that, you might
> as well stick with option 1 above (analog). You'll end up
> pulling out your hair trying to figure out how to get a
> "warm fat reverb analog sound" on your dinky computer
> digital studio. If you choose this option, go into your
> computer direct and clean, and then add all your effects
> and ambiance "in post production"...that means your guitar
> will sound like Mr. Rodgers piano all clean and un-affected
> while you play your part, and then you can whip out the
> digital reverb and compression during the mixdown.
>
> To answer your "why do low notes record better
> digitally...etc." question:
>
> Simply put, analog tape is more forgiving than digital
> recording. With analog, your signal gain can be greater
> without annoying clipping, crunching and distortion
> (tinny-ness).
>
> Some things to try: you might add a compression stage
> before you hit the input for your computer. You also might
> try using tube pre-amp before you hit the computer,
> however, you will probably increase line noise and hiss
> that way.
>
> dude, if it was me, I'd invest in a decent analog tape
> recorder...set up a cool recording room, break out my cool
> fender bassman amp and reverb out...and let it rip.
> I'd worry about "going digital" once I had the bitchen surf
> vibe captured on tape.
>
> good luck
>
> David P
>
>
>
>
>
> --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> wrote:
> > I am curious to hear from people who have experience
> > attempting to
> > record surf guitar in a studio setting, home or pro, as
> > opposed to
> > live ambient recordings, and what techniques you use. Do
> > you use D.I
> > techniques? Close cab miking? if so, what mics do you
> > favor, and how
> > do you position them relative to the cab? Do you add
> > effects after, or
> > in the signal path?
> >
> > My own efforts have been "ok" but nothing close to the
> > best examples
> > of recordings I have heard on CD. I have searched the
> > newslists for
> > information about recording electric guitar--but other
> > than the jazz
> > lists, most of the comments are not about recording
> > clean, with heavy
> > reverb in the signal path. I have experimented
> > extensively with mic
> > placement, but still have not been able to match the live
> > sound. My
> > basic tone is very good. But the recordings I make are
> > always a little
> > on the "tinny" side, although the tones on the 5th and
> > 6th strings
> > always turn out terrific. Does anyone have any ideas why
> > the low notes
> > are recording better than the high notes?
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >
> > Visit for
> > archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
>
ohsyrus:
a decent "starter mic" is a shure sm57 or a shure sm58.
They are basic, sturdy mics...they have been around
forever,...and they can be used onstage too. There are way
more expensive mics, but the shure's are reasonable, sturdy
and sound good. Senheiser and Oberheim make super nice
high-end mics...but those begin at about $1000 and go up up
up from there. If you are super-budget econo-minded,
Realistic (radio shack) has some "Shure-like" mics for less
than $30. Don't forget, the pawnshops sometimes have cool
stuff.
I like to use a "stereo" mic setup. Mic 1 is placed
up-close and personal to the guitar speaker, Mic 2 is
across the room in a corner or up high (ceiling)catching
sound reflection ambient style...it makes for a real nice
sound when combined. Experiment and see what works for you.
check out www.musiciansfriend.com to find a mic....
you can also find the Line6 Guitarport that "cobalt" was
talkin about there....
good luck
David P
--- "ohsyrus <>" <>
wrote:
> Well, I'm not trying to record to my computer, but sort
> of, since its
> one of those stand alone direct disk recording
> workstations(Korg
> D-16). I've tried both DI and cab micing, but--nothing
> has overcome
> the problems I've described. You are right about not
> accepting a very
> strong input signal without digital clipping. A
> compressor might help.
> that's a good suggestion. But it sounds like an analog
> tape deck might
> be the solution. You mentioned some things I did not know
> about analog
> tape.(in this digital age). I have not liked the post
> recording
> manipulation stuff I have gotten as well as just putting
> the effects
> in the signal path, so your analog suggestion has more
> basic appeal.
> What mics would you use in an analog recording
> environment? How would
> you position them?
>
>
> --- In , DP <noetical1@y...>
> wrote:
> > OHSYRUS:
> > it sort of depends on what you are after:
> >
> > if you are trying for that "warm drenched reverb
> vintage
> > sound" you need tube amps, tube reverb, big fat beefy
> > strings, a nice recording room, a decent mike...and
> RECORD
> > TO TAPE. A slightly "hotter" signal can be handled on
> tape,
> > and you will have bitchen overtones and harmonics and
> > crunch distortion without "tinny-ness" Think about Dick
> > Dale+Deltones on "Surfer's Choice"...live to
> > two-track...and it still sounds great 40 years later.
> You
> > can always mix down from analog tape to digital to make
> > your cd master.
> >
> > if you are trying for "modern-retro influenced surf"
> > forget about all the analog gear and get yourself a
> decent
> > computer and a load of cool onboard effects like reverb
> and
> > compression. You might want to keep your cool amp and
> > reverb tank...but then you'll need a mike to get the
> sound
> > into the computer. If you are going to do that, you
> might
> > as well stick with option 1 above (analog). You'll end
> up
> > pulling out your hair trying to figure out how to get a
> > "warm fat reverb analog sound" on your dinky computer
> > digital studio. If you choose this option, go into
> your
> > computer direct and clean, and then add all your
> effects
> > and ambiance "in post production"...that means your
> guitar
> > will sound like Mr. Rodgers piano all clean and
> un-affected
> > while you play your part, and then you can whip out the
> > digital reverb and compression during the mixdown.
> >
> > To answer your "why do low notes record better
> > digitally...etc." question:
> >
> > Simply put, analog tape is more forgiving than digital
> > recording. With analog, your signal gain can be greater
> > without annoying clipping, crunching and distortion
> > (tinny-ness).
> >
> > Some things to try: you might add a compression stage
> > before you hit the input for your computer. You also
> might
> > try using tube pre-amp before you hit the computer,
> > however, you will probably increase line noise and hiss
> > that way.
> >
> > dude, if it was me, I'd invest in a decent analog tape
> > recorder...set up a cool recording room, break out my
> cool
> > fender bassman amp and reverb out...and let it rip.
> > I'd worry about "going digital" once I had the bitchen
> surf
> > vibe captured on tape.
> >
> > good luck
> >
> > David P
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > I am curious to hear from people who have experience
> > > attempting to
> > > record surf guitar in a studio setting, home or pro,
> as
> > > opposed to
> > > live ambient recordings, and what techniques you use.
> Do
> > > you use D.I
> > > techniques? Close cab miking? if so, what mics do you
> > > favor, and how
> > > do you position them relative to the cab? Do you add
> > > effects after, or
> > > in the signal path?
> > >
> > > My own efforts have been "ok" but nothing close to
> the
> > > best examples
> > > of recordings I have heard on CD. I have searched the
> > > newslists for
> > > information about recording electric guitar--but
> other
> > > than the jazz
> > > lists, most of the comments are not about recording
> > > clean, with heavy
> > > reverb in the signal path. I have experimented
> > > extensively with mic
> > > placement, but still have not been able to match the
> live
> > > sound. My
> > > basic tone is very good. But the recordings I make
> are
> > > always a little
> > > on the "tinny" side, although the tones on the 5th
> and
> > > 6th strings
> > > always turn out terrific. Does anyone have any ideas
> why
> > > the low notes
> > > are recording better than the high notes?
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > >
> > > Visit for
> > > archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> >
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> .
> Visit for
> archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
Well--I'm currently using an Audix D-3 for the close cab mic--which I
prefer to the sm57, and an Oktava mc319 condenser mic for the ambient
mic. I've heard many suggestions by people on the recording newslists
who use the sm57. I just don't think its very hi-fi. My frustration at
this point is that I have read a couple of books on recording
techniques, followed the suggestions, and haven'tbeen able to get the
recording to sound "live". Seems like most of the recording gear
available out there today is digital, unless you locate some specialty
outlets. I was thinking maybe the secret was a set of very specific
microphones placed exactly in a specific configuration--I've been
looking at AKG C3000B, Sennheiser md 421, and Blue Dragonfly mics--but
they are expensive. I've moved combinations of microphones all over
the place, and I'm making 24-bit recordings. Its apparently not as
simple as the theory would suggest. But thanks for all your advice.
--- In , DP <noetical1@y...> wrote:
> ohsyrus:
>
> a decent "starter mic" is a shure sm57 or a shure sm58.
> They are basic, sturdy mics...they have been around
> forever,...and they can be used onstage too. There are way
> more expensive mics, but the shure's are reasonable, sturdy
> and sound good. Senheiser and Oberheim make super nice
> high-end mics...but those begin at about $1000 and go up up
> up from there. If you are super-budget econo-minded,
> Realistic (radio shack) has some "Shure-like" mics for less
> than $30. Don't forget, the pawnshops sometimes have cool
> stuff.
>
> I like to use a "stereo" mic setup. Mic 1 is placed
> up-close and personal to the guitar speaker, Mic 2 is
> across the room in a corner or up high (ceiling)catching
> sound reflection ambient style...it makes for a real nice
> sound when combined. Experiment and see what works for you.
>
> check out www.musiciansfriend.com to find a mic....
> you can also find the Line6 Guitarport that "cobalt" was
> talkin about there....
>
> good luck
> David P
>
>
> --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> wrote:
> > Well, I'm not trying to record to my computer, but sort
> > of, since its
> > one of those stand alone direct disk recording
> > workstations(Korg
> > D-16). I've tried both DI and cab micing, but--nothing
> > has overcome
> > the problems I've described. You are right about not
> > accepting a very
> > strong input signal without digital clipping. A
> > compressor might help.
> > that's a good suggestion. But it sounds like an analog
> > tape deck might
> > be the solution. You mentioned some things I did not know
> > about analog
> > tape.(in this digital age). I have not liked the post
> > recording
> > manipulation stuff I have gotten as well as just putting
> > the effects
> > in the signal path, so your analog suggestion has more
> > basic appeal.
> > What mics would you use in an analog recording
> > environment? How would
> > you position them?
> >
> >
> > --- In , DP <noetical1@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > OHSYRUS:
> > > it sort of depends on what you are after:
> > >
> > > if you are trying for that "warm drenched reverb
> > vintage
> > > sound" you need tube amps, tube reverb, big fat beefy
> > > strings, a nice recording room, a decent mike...and
> > RECORD
> > > TO TAPE. A slightly "hotter" signal can be handled on
> > tape,
> > > and you will have bitchen overtones and harmonics and
> > > crunch distortion without "tinny-ness" Think about Dick
> > > Dale+Deltones on "Surfer's Choice"...live to
> > > two-track...and it still sounds great 40 years later.
> > You
> > > can always mix down from analog tape to digital to make
> > > your cd master.
> > >
> > > if you are trying for "modern-retro influenced surf"
> > > forget about all the analog gear and get yourself a
> > decent
> > > computer and a load of cool onboard effects like reverb
> > and
> > > compression. You might want to keep your cool amp and
> > > reverb tank...but then you'll need a mike to get the
> > sound
> > > into the computer. If you are going to do that, you
> > might
> > > as well stick with option 1 above (analog). You'll end
> > up
> > > pulling out your hair trying to figure out how to get a
> > > "warm fat reverb analog sound" on your dinky computer
> > > digital studio. If you choose this option, go into
> > your
> > > computer direct and clean, and then add all your
> > effects
> > > and ambiance "in post production"...that means your
> > guitar
> > > will sound like Mr. Rodgers piano all clean and
> > un-affected
> > > while you play your part, and then you can whip out the
> > > digital reverb and compression during the mixdown.
> > >
> > > To answer your "why do low notes record better
> > > digitally...etc." question:
> > >
> > > Simply put, analog tape is more forgiving than digital
> > > recording. With analog, your signal gain can be greater
> > > without annoying clipping, crunching and distortion
> > > (tinny-ness).
> > >
> > > Some things to try: you might add a compression stage
> > > before you hit the input for your computer. You also
> > might
> > > try using tube pre-amp before you hit the computer,
> > > however, you will probably increase line noise and hiss
> > > that way.
> > >
> > > dude, if it was me, I'd invest in a decent analog tape
> > > recorder...set up a cool recording room, break out my
> > cool
> > > fender bassman amp and reverb out...and let it rip.
> > > I'd worry about "going digital" once I had the bitchen
> > surf
> > > vibe captured on tape.
> > >
> > > good luck
> > >
> > > David P
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > I am curious to hear from people who have experience
> > > > attempting to
> > > > record surf guitar in a studio setting, home or pro,
> > as
> > > > opposed to
> > > > live ambient recordings, and what techniques you use.
> > Do
> > > > you use D.I
> > > > techniques? Close cab miking? if so, what mics do you
> > > > favor, and how
> > > > do you position them relative to the cab? Do you add
> > > > effects after, or
> > > > in the signal path?
> > > >
> > > > My own efforts have been "ok" but nothing close to
> > the
> > > > best examples
> > > > of recordings I have heard on CD. I have searched the
> > > > newslists for
> > > > information about recording electric guitar--but
> > other
> > > > than the jazz
> > > > lists, most of the comments are not about recording
> > > > clean, with heavy
> > > > reverb in the signal path. I have experimented
> > > > extensively with mic
> > > > placement, but still have not been able to match the
> > live
> > > > sound. My
> > > > basic tone is very good. But the recordings I make
> > are
> > > > always a little
> > > > on the "tinny" side, although the tones on the 5th
> > and
> > > > 6th strings
> > > > always turn out terrific. Does anyone have any ideas
> > why
> > > > the low notes
> > > > are recording better than the high notes?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > >
> > > > Visit for
> > > > archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
> > >
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >
> > Visit for
> > archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
>
ohsyrus:
what about your room?
is it accoustically "dead" or "alive"?
can you hear "echos" in headphones while recording?
You might try a "live" room...like a wooden floored kitchen
or a tiled bathroom. Sounds wierd, but I have heard of
people using showers and toilets as echo chambers...just
don't flush or turn on the water!
I have used a concrete basement and a glass windowed
factory loft...both places had outstanding sound reflective
properties. I have also used a little metal backyard
shed...it wasn't too bad.
Typically, bedrooms are the worst...too much sound
absorbing material...carpets, bed clothes etc.
Any spare room with no furniture usually sounds lively.
You might try a cardboard "echo-tube" about 3-6 feet long
placed over a mic...sounds weird...but, you can check it
out by playing music and holding up a x-mas paper roll to
your ear. A shipping tube would work...mount your mic
inside and see what's up.
good luck,
David P
--- "ohsyrus <>" <>
wrote:
> Well--I'm currently using an Audix D-3 for the close cab
> mic--which I
> prefer to the sm57, and an Oktava mc319 condenser mic for
> the ambient
> mic. I've heard many suggestions by people on the
> recording newslists
> who use the sm57. I just don't think its very hi-fi. My
> frustration at
> this point is that I have read a couple of books on
> recording
> techniques, followed the suggestions, and haven'tbeen
> able to get the
> recording to sound "live". Seems like most of the
> recording gear
> available out there today is digital, unless you locate
> some specialty
> outlets. I was thinking maybe the secret was a set of
> very specific
> microphones placed exactly in a specific
> configuration--I've been
> looking at AKG C3000B, Sennheiser md 421, and Blue
> Dragonfly mics--but
> they are expensive. I've moved combinations of
> microphones all over
> the place, and I'm making 24-bit recordings. Its
> apparently not as
> simple as the theory would suggest. But thanks for all
> your advice.
>
>
> --- In , DP <noetical1@y...>
> wrote:
> > ohsyrus:
> >
> > a decent "starter mic" is a shure sm57 or a shure sm58.
> > They are basic, sturdy mics...they have been around
> > forever,...and they can be used onstage too. There are
> way
> > more expensive mics, but the shure's are reasonable,
> sturdy
> > and sound good. Senheiser and Oberheim make super nice
> > high-end mics...but those begin at about $1000 and go
> up up
> > up from there. If you are super-budget econo-minded,
> > Realistic (radio shack) has some "Shure-like" mics for
> less
> > than $30. Don't forget, the pawnshops sometimes have
> cool
> > stuff.
> >
> > I like to use a "stereo" mic setup. Mic 1 is placed
> > up-close and personal to the guitar speaker, Mic 2 is
> > across the room in a corner or up high
> (ceiling)catching
> > sound reflection ambient style...it makes for a real
> nice
> > sound when combined. Experiment and see what works for
> you.
> >
> > check out www.musiciansfriend.com to find a mic....
> > you can also find the Line6 Guitarport that "cobalt"
> was
> > talkin about there....
> >
> > good luck
> > David P
> >
> >
> > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > Well, I'm not trying to record to my computer, but
> sort
> > > of, since its
> > > one of those stand alone direct disk recording
> > > workstations(Korg
> > > D-16). I've tried both DI and cab micing,
> but--nothing
> > > has overcome
> > > the problems I've described. You are right about not
> > > accepting a very
> > > strong input signal without digital clipping. A
> > > compressor might help.
> > > that's a good suggestion. But it sounds like an
> analog
> > > tape deck might
> > > be the solution. You mentioned some things I did not
> know
> > > about analog
> > > tape.(in this digital age). I have not liked the post
> > > recording
> > > manipulation stuff I have gotten as well as just
> putting
> > > the effects
> > > in the signal path, so your analog suggestion has
> more
> > > basic appeal.
> > > What mics would you use in an analog recording
> > > environment? How would
> > > you position them?
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , DP
> <noetical1@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > OHSYRUS:
> > > > it sort of depends on what you are after:
> > > >
> > > > if you are trying for that "warm drenched reverb
> > > vintage
> > > > sound" you need tube amps, tube reverb, big fat
> beefy
> > > > strings, a nice recording room, a decent mike...and
> > > RECORD
> > > > TO TAPE. A slightly "hotter" signal can be handled
> on
> > > tape,
> > > > and you will have bitchen overtones and harmonics
> and
> > > > crunch distortion without "tinny-ness" Think about
> Dick
> > > > Dale+Deltones on "Surfer's Choice"...live to
> > > > two-track...and it still sounds great 40 years
> later.
> > > You
> > > > can always mix down from analog tape to digital to
> make
> > > > your cd master.
> > > >
> > > > if you are trying for "modern-retro influenced
> surf"
> > > > forget about all the analog gear and get yourself a
> > > decent
> > > > computer and a load of cool onboard effects like
> reverb
> > > and
> > > > compression. You might want to keep your cool amp
> and
> > > > reverb tank...but then you'll need a mike to get
> the
> > > sound
> > > > into the computer. If you are going to do that, you
> > > might
> > > > as well stick with option 1 above (analog). You'll
> end
> > > up
> > > > pulling out your hair trying to figure out how to
> get a
> > > > "warm fat reverb analog sound" on your dinky
> computer
> > > > digital studio. If you choose this option, go into
> > > your
> > > > computer direct and clean, and then add all your
> > > effects
> > > > and ambiance "in post production"...that means your
> > > guitar
> > > > will sound like Mr. Rodgers piano all clean and
> > > un-affected
> > > > while you play your part, and then you can whip out
> the
> > > > digital reverb and compression during the mixdown.
> > > >
> > > > To answer your "why do low notes record better
> > > > digitally...etc." question:
> > > >
> > > > Simply put, analog tape is more forgiving than
> digital
> > > > recording. With analog, your signal gain can be
> greater
> > > > without annoying clipping, crunching and distortion
> > > > (tinny-ness).
> > > >
> > > > Some things to try: you might add a compression
> stage
> > > > before you hit the input for your computer. You
> also
> > > might
> > > > try using tube pre-amp before you hit the computer,
> > > > however, you will probably increase line noise and
> hiss
> > > > that way.
> > > >
> > > > dude, if it was me, I'd invest in a decent analog
> tape
> > > > recorder...set up a cool recording room, break out
> my
> > > cool
> > > > fender bassman amp and reverb out...and let it rip.
> > > > I'd worry about "going digital" once I had the
> bitchen
> > > surf
> > > > vibe captured on tape.
> > > >
> > > > good luck
> > > >
> > > > David P
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
The Nebulas employed the use of the toilet bowl/guitar isolation booth
exclusively throughout the recording of Nebula One!
----- Original Message -----
From: DP
To:
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:48 PM
Subject: Re: [SurfGuitar101] Re: Surf Guitar Recording techniques
ohsyrus:
what about your room?
is it accoustically "dead" or "alive"?
can you hear "echos" in headphones while recording?
You might try a "live" room...like a wooden floored kitchen
or a tiled bathroom. Sounds wierd, but I have heard of
people using showers and toilets as echo chambers...just
don't flush or turn on the water!
I have used a concrete basement and a glass windowed
factory loft...both places had outstanding sound reflective
properties. I have also used a little metal backyard
shed...it wasn't too bad.
Typically, bedrooms are the worst...too much sound
absorbing material...carpets, bed clothes etc.
Any spare room with no furniture usually sounds lively.
You might try a cardboard "echo-tube" about 3-6 feet long
placed over a mic...sounds weird...but, you can check it
out by playing music and holding up a x-mas paper roll to
your ear. A shipping tube would work...mount your mic
inside and see what's up.
good luck,
David P
--- "ohsyrus <>" <>
wrote:
> Well--I'm currently using an Audix D-3 for the close cab
> mic--which I
> prefer to the sm57, and an Oktava mc319 condenser mic for
> the ambient
> mic. I've heard many suggestions by people on the
> recording newslists
> who use the sm57. I just don't think its very hi-fi. My
> frustration at
> this point is that I have read a couple of books on
> recording
> techniques, followed the suggestions, and haven'tbeen
> able to get the
> recording to sound "live". Seems like most of the
> recording gear
> available out there today is digital, unless you locate
> some specialty
> outlets. I was thinking maybe the secret was a set of
> very specific
> microphones placed exactly in a specific
> configuration--I've been
> looking at AKG C3000B, Sennheiser md 421, and Blue
> Dragonfly mics--but
> they are expensive. I've moved combinations of
> microphones all over
> the place, and I'm making 24-bit recordings. Its
> apparently not as
> simple as the theory would suggest. But thanks for all
> your advice.
>
>
> --- In , DP <noetical1@y...>
> wrote:
> > ohsyrus:
> >
> > a decent "starter mic" is a shure sm57 or a shure sm58.
> > They are basic, sturdy mics...they have been around
> > forever,...and they can be used onstage too. There are
> way
> > more expensive mics, but the shure's are reasonable,
> sturdy
> > and sound good. Senheiser and Oberheim make super nice
> > high-end mics...but those begin at about $1000 and go
> up up
> > up from there. If you are super-budget econo-minded,
> > Realistic (radio shack) has some "Shure-like" mics for
> less
> > than $30. Don't forget, the pawnshops sometimes have
> cool
> > stuff.
> >
> > I like to use a "stereo" mic setup. Mic 1 is placed
> > up-close and personal to the guitar speaker, Mic 2 is
> > across the room in a corner or up high
> (ceiling)catching
> > sound reflection ambient style...it makes for a real
> nice
> > sound when combined. Experiment and see what works for
> you.
> >
> > check out www.musiciansfriend.com to find a mic....
> > you can also find the Line6 Guitarport that "cobalt"
> was
> > talkin about there....
> >
> > good luck
> > David P
> >
> >
> > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > Well, I'm not trying to record to my computer, but
> sort
> > > of, since its
> > > one of those stand alone direct disk recording
> > > workstations(Korg
> > > D-16). I've tried both DI and cab micing,
> but--nothing
> > > has overcome
> > > the problems I've described. You are right about not
> > > accepting a very
> > > strong input signal without digital clipping. A
> > > compressor might help.
> > > that's a good suggestion. But it sounds like an
> analog
> > > tape deck might
> > > be the solution. You mentioned some things I did not
> know
> > > about analog
> > > tape.(in this digital age). I have not liked the post
> > > recording
> > > manipulation stuff I have gotten as well as just
> putting
> > > the effects
> > > in the signal path, so your analog suggestion has
> more
> > > basic appeal.
> > > What mics would you use in an analog recording
> > > environment? How would
> > > you position them?
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In , DP
> <noetical1@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > OHSYRUS:
> > > > it sort of depends on what you are after:
> > > >
> > > > if you are trying for that "warm drenched reverb
> > > vintage
> > > > sound" you need tube amps, tube reverb, big fat
> beefy
> > > > strings, a nice recording room, a decent mike...and
> > > RECORD
> > > > TO TAPE. A slightly "hotter" signal can be handled
> on
> > > tape,
> > > > and you will have bitchen overtones and harmonics
> and
> > > > crunch distortion without "tinny-ness" Think about
> Dick
> > > > Dale+Deltones on "Surfer's Choice"...live to
> > > > two-track...and it still sounds great 40 years
> later.
> > > You
> > > > can always mix down from analog tape to digital to
> make
> > > > your cd master.
> > > >
> > > > if you are trying for "modern-retro influenced
> surf"
> > > > forget about all the analog gear and get yourself a
> > > decent
> > > > computer and a load of cool onboard effects like
> reverb
> > > and
> > > > compression. You might want to keep your cool amp
> and
> > > > reverb tank...but then you'll need a mike to get
> the
> > > sound
> > > > into the computer. If you are going to do that, you
> > > might
> > > > as well stick with option 1 above (analog). You'll
> end
> > > up
> > > > pulling out your hair trying to figure out how to
> get a
> > > > "warm fat reverb analog sound" on your dinky
> computer
> > > > digital studio. If you choose this option, go into
> > > your
> > > > computer direct and clean, and then add all your
> > > effects
> > > > and ambiance "in post production"...that means your
> > > guitar
> > > > will sound like Mr. Rodgers piano all clean and
> > > un-affected
> > > > while you play your part, and then you can whip out
> the
> > > > digital reverb and compression during the mixdown.
> > > >
> > > > To answer your "why do low notes record better
> > > > digitally...etc." question:
> > > >
> > > > Simply put, analog tape is more forgiving than
> digital
> > > > recording. With analog, your signal gain can be
> greater
> > > > without annoying clipping, crunching and distortion
> > > > (tinny-ness).
> > > >
> > > > Some things to try: you might add a compression
> stage
> > > > before you hit the input for your computer. You
> also
> > > might
> > > > try using tube pre-amp before you hit the computer,
> > > > however, you will probably increase line noise and
> hiss
> > > > that way.
> > > >
> > > > dude, if it was me, I'd invest in a decent analog
> tape
> > > > recorder...set up a cool recording room, break out
> my
> > > cool
> > > > fender bassman amp and reverb out...and let it rip.
> > > > I'd worry about "going digital" once I had the
> bitchen
> > > surf
> > > > vibe captured on tape.
> > > >
> > > > good luck
> > > >
> > > > David P
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:.
Visit for archived messages,
bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Those are some good suggestions. I will experiment and let you know
how it turns out. The room is not resonant, but I could move to a
bigger room with a lot more space. Thanks for the suggestions.
--- In , DP <noetical1@y...> wrote:
> ohsyrus:
>
> what about your room?
> is it accoustically "dead" or "alive"?
> can you hear "echos" in headphones while recording?
> You might try a "live" room...like a wooden floored kitchen
> or a tiled bathroom. Sounds wierd, but I have heard of
> people using showers and toilets as echo chambers...just
> don't flush or turn on the water!
> I have used a concrete basement and a glass windowed
> factory loft...both places had outstanding sound reflective
> properties. I have also used a little metal backyard
> shed...it wasn't too bad.
>
> Typically, bedrooms are the worst...too much sound
> absorbing material...carpets, bed clothes etc.
>
> Any spare room with no furniture usually sounds lively.
> You might try a cardboard "echo-tube" about 3-6 feet long
> placed over a mic...sounds weird...but, you can check it
> out by playing music and holding up a x-mas paper roll to
> your ear. A shipping tube would work...mount your mic
> inside and see what's up.
>
> good luck,
> David P
>
>
>
> --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> wrote:
> > Well--I'm currently using an Audix D-3 for the close cab
> > mic--which I
> > prefer to the sm57, and an Oktava mc319 condenser mic for
> > the ambient
> > mic. I've heard many suggestions by people on the
> > recording newslists
> > who use the sm57. I just don't think its very hi-fi. My
> > frustration at
> > this point is that I have read a couple of books on
> > recording
> > techniques, followed the suggestions, and haven'tbeen
> > able to get the
> > recording to sound "live". Seems like most of the
> > recording gear
> > available out there today is digital, unless you locate
> > some specialty
> > outlets. I was thinking maybe the secret was a set of
> > very specific
> > microphones placed exactly in a specific
> > configuration--I've been
> > looking at AKG C3000B, Sennheiser md 421, and Blue
> > Dragonfly mics--but
> > they are expensive. I've moved combinations of
> > microphones all over
> > the place, and I'm making 24-bit recordings. Its
> > apparently not as
> > simple as the theory would suggest. But thanks for all
> > your advice.
> >
> >
> > --- In , DP <noetical1@y...>
> > wrote:
> > > ohsyrus:
> > >
> > > a decent "starter mic" is a shure sm57 or a shure sm58.
> > > They are basic, sturdy mics...they have been around
> > > forever,...and they can be used onstage too. There are
> > way
> > > more expensive mics, but the shure's are reasonable,
> > sturdy
> > > and sound good. Senheiser and Oberheim make super nice
> > > high-end mics...but those begin at about $1000 and go
> > up up
> > > up from there. If you are super-budget econo-minded,
> > > Realistic (radio shack) has some "Shure-like" mics for
> > less
> > > than $30. Don't forget, the pawnshops sometimes have
> > cool
> > > stuff.
> > >
> > > I like to use a "stereo" mic setup. Mic 1 is placed
> > > up-close and personal to the guitar speaker, Mic 2 is
> > > across the room in a corner or up high
> > (ceiling)catching
> > > sound reflection ambient style...it makes for a real
> > nice
> > > sound when combined. Experiment and see what works for
> > you.
> > >
> > > check out www.musiciansfriend.com to find a mic....
> > > you can also find the Line6 Guitarport that "cobalt"
> > was
> > > talkin about there....
> > >
> > > good luck
> > > David P
> > >
> > >
> > > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Well, I'm not trying to record to my computer, but
> > sort
> > > > of, since its
> > > > one of those stand alone direct disk recording
> > > > workstations(Korg
> > > > D-16). I've tried both DI and cab micing,
> > but--nothing
> > > > has overcome
> > > > the problems I've described. You are right about not
> > > > accepting a very
> > > > strong input signal without digital clipping. A
> > > > compressor might help.
> > > > that's a good suggestion. But it sounds like an
> > analog
> > > > tape deck might
> > > > be the solution. You mentioned some things I did not
> > know
> > > > about analog
> > > > tape.(in this digital age). I have not liked the post
> > > > recording
> > > > manipulation stuff I have gotten as well as just
> > putting
> > > > the effects
> > > > in the signal path, so your analog suggestion has
> > more
> > > > basic appeal.
> > > > What mics would you use in an analog recording
> > > > environment? How would
> > > > you position them?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In , DP
> > <noetical1@y...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > OHSYRUS:
> > > > > it sort of depends on what you are after:
> > > > >
> > > > > if you are trying for that "warm drenched reverb
> > > > vintage
> > > > > sound" you need tube amps, tube reverb, big fat
> > beefy
> > > > > strings, a nice recording room, a decent mike...and
> > > > RECORD
> > > > > TO TAPE. A slightly "hotter" signal can be handled
> > on
> > > > tape,
> > > > > and you will have bitchen overtones and harmonics
> > and
> > > > > crunch distortion without "tinny-ness" Think about
> > Dick
> > > > > Dale+Deltones on "Surfer's Choice"...live to
> > > > > two-track...and it still sounds great 40 years
> > later.
> > > > You
> > > > > can always mix down from analog tape to digital to
> > make
> > > > > your cd master.
> > > > >
> > > > > if you are trying for "modern-retro influenced
> > surf"
> > > > > forget about all the analog gear and get yourself a
> > > > decent
> > > > > computer and a load of cool onboard effects like
> > reverb
> > > > and
> > > > > compression. You might want to keep your cool amp
> > and
> > > > > reverb tank...but then you'll need a mike to get
> > the
> > > > sound
> > > > > into the computer. If you are going to do that, you
> > > > might
> > > > > as well stick with option 1 above (analog). You'll
> > end
> > > > up
> > > > > pulling out your hair trying to figure out how to
> > get a
> > > > > "warm fat reverb analog sound" on your dinky
> > computer
> > > > > digital studio. If you choose this option, go into
> > > > your
> > > > > computer direct and clean, and then add all your
> > > > effects
> > > > > and ambiance "in post production"...that means your
> > > > guitar
> > > > > will sound like Mr. Rodgers piano all clean and
> > > > un-affected
> > > > > while you play your part, and then you can whip out
> > the
> > > > > digital reverb and compression during the mixdown.
> > > > >
> > > > > To answer your "why do low notes record better
> > > > > digitally...etc." question:
> > > > >
> > > > > Simply put, analog tape is more forgiving than
> > digital
> > > > > recording. With analog, your signal gain can be
> > greater
> > > > > without annoying clipping, crunching and distortion
> > > > > (tinny-ness).
> > > > >
> > > > > Some things to try: you might add a compression
> > stage
> > > > > before you hit the input for your computer. You
> > also
> > > > might
> > > > > try using tube pre-amp before you hit the computer,
> > > > > however, you will probably increase line noise and
> > hiss
> > > > > that way.
> > > > >
> > > > > dude, if it was me, I'd invest in a decent analog
> > tape
> > > > > recorder...set up a cool recording room, break out
> > my
> > > > cool
> > > > > fender bassman amp and reverb out...and let it rip.
> > > > > I'd worry about "going digital" once I had the
> > bitchen
> > > > surf
> > > > > vibe captured on tape.
> > > > >
> > > > > good luck
> > > > >
> > > > > David P
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
>
> The Line6 Guitarport sounds like a cool idea...
Be aware that that product has 2 stated requirements that are most unusual
and that will eliminate a huge number of PCs from using it.
1. You must be using a real Intel processor.
2. You must have a "legacy-free" PC (IOW, your PC is out if it has any ISA
slots; you must be all PCI.)
These are the weirdest things to demand/require. I huge number of PC
users/owners will have *NO IDEA* if they have an Intel processor. A still
larger number will say, "What are ISA slots?"
I can't imagine how Line 6 could've come up with such a product. I really
wonder how many people have bought the product and returned it. Or worse,
bought the product and _not_ returned it, figuring they were doing something
wrong, will figure it out eventually and be happy then (won't happen).
I have no idea what results when either or both of these arcane requirements
are not met (Line 6 gives no indication).
Bottom line: Before you go out and spend the money, know what hardware
you're running, either by checking yourself or by checking with a
knowledgeable person.
[I think this is my first post to the list (finally had something real to
contribute). My hat's off to all you guys; this is a great list. Probably
the most satisfying of all the lists I'm on.]
--
Malcolm <<-- not a signature
"They should know they're the Grateful Dead now." -- Phil
"It's never to late to be up-to-date" -- Dan Hicks
"My clock loses time like there's no tomorrow" -- Malcolm
james:
there's a lot of truth in that statement. Nothing is better
than a good mic.
dp
--- james <> wrote:
> hello - it's always been my experience that to get the
> best clean guitar
> sound while recording
> you simply need to use the best mic you can afford. then
> no matter what
> medium, analog tape or digital, you use it will sound
> good.
>
> I've heard that the AKG 3000B condenser mics are supposed
> to be pretty good
> ones, and not too expensive
>
> james
>
>
> At 09:07 PM 2/27/2003 +0000, you wrote:
> >Well--I'm currently using an Audix D-3 for the close cab
> mic--which I
> >prefer to the sm57, and an Oktava mc319 condenser mic
> for the ambient
> >mic. I've heard many suggestions by people on the
> recording newslists
> >who use the sm57. I just don't think its very hi-fi. My
> frustration at
> >this point is that I have read a couple of books on
> recording
> >techniques, followed the suggestions, and haven'tbeen
> able to get the
> >recording to sound "live". Seems like most of the
> recording gear
> >available out there today is digital, unless you locate
> some specialty
> >outlets. I was thinking maybe the secret was a set of
> very specific
> >microphones placed exactly in a specific
> configuration--I've been
> >looking at AKG C3000B, Sennheiser md 421, and Blue
> Dragonfly mics--but
> >they are expensive. I've moved combinations of
> microphones all over
> >the place, and I'm making 24-bit recordings. Its
> apparently not as
> >simple as the theory would suggest. But thanks for all
> your advice.
> >
> >
> >--- In , DP
> <noetical1@y...> wrote:
> > > ohsyrus:
> > >
> > > a decent "starter mic" is a shure sm57 or a shure
> sm58.
> > > They are basic, sturdy mics...they have been around
> > > forever,...and they can be used onstage too. There
> are way
> > > more expensive mics, but the shure's are reasonable,
> sturdy
> > > and sound good. Senheiser and Oberheim make super
> nice
> > > high-end mics...but those begin at about $1000 and go
> up up
> > > up from there. If you are super-budget econo-minded,
> > > Realistic (radio shack) has some "Shure-like" mics
> for less
> > > than $30. Don't forget, the pawnshops sometimes have
> cool
> > > stuff.
> > >
> > > I like to use a "stereo" mic setup. Mic 1 is placed
> > > up-close and personal to the guitar speaker, Mic 2 is
> > > across the room in a corner or up high
> (ceiling)catching
> > > sound reflection ambient style...it makes for a real
> nice
> > > sound when combined. Experiment and see what works
> for you.
> > >
> > > check out www.musiciansfriend.com to find a mic....
> > > you can also find the Line6 Guitarport that "cobalt"
> was
> > > talkin about there....
> > >
> > > good luck
> > > David P
> > >
> > >
> > > --- "ohsyrus <ohsyrus@y...>" <ohsyrus@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > > Well, I'm not trying to record to my computer, but
> sort
> > > > of, since its
> > > > one of those stand alone direct disk recording
> > > > workstations(Korg
> > > > D-16). I've tried both DI and cab micing,
> but--nothing
> > > > has overcome
> > > > the problems I've described. You are right about
> not
> > > > accepting a very
> > > > strong input signal without digital clipping. A
> > > > compressor might help.
> > > > that's a good suggestion. But it sounds like an
> analog
> > > > tape deck might
> > > > be the solution. You mentioned some things I did
> not know
> > > > about analog
> > > > tape.(in this digital age). I have not liked the
> post
> > > > recording
> > > > manipulation stuff I have gotten as well as just
> putting
> > > > the effects
> > > > in the signal path, so your analog suggestion has
> more
> > > > basic appeal.
> > > > What mics would you use in an analog recording
> > > > environment? How would
> > > > you position them?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In , DP
> <noetical1@y...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > OHSYRUS:
> > > > > it sort of depends on what you are after:
> > > > >
> > > > > if you are trying for that "warm drenched reverb
> > > > vintage
> > > > > sound" you need tube amps, tube reverb, big fat
> beefy
> > > > > strings, a nice recording room, a decent
> mike...and
> > > > RECORD
> > > > > TO TAPE. A slightly "hotter" signal can be
> handled on
> > > > tape,
> > > > > and you will have bitchen overtones and harmonics
> and
> > > > > crunch distortion without "tinny-ness" Think
> about Dick
> > > > > Dale+Deltones on "Surfer's Choice"...live to
> > > > > two-track...and it still sounds great 40 years
> later.
> > > > You
> > > > > can always mix down from analog tape to digital
> to make
> > > > > your cd master.
> > > > >
> > > > > if you are trying for "modern-retro influenced
> surf"
> > > > > forget about all the analog gear and get yourself
> a
> > > > decent
> > > > > computer and a load of cool onboard effects like
> reverb
> > > > and
> > > > > compression. You might want to keep your cool amp
> and
> > > > > reverb tank...but then you'll need a mike to get
> the
> > > > sound
> > > > > into the computer. If you are going to do that,
> you
> > > > might
> > > > > as well stick with option 1 above (analog).
> You'll end
> > > > up
> > > > > pulling out your hair trying to figure out how to
> get a
> > > > > "warm fat reverb analog sound" on your dinky
> computer
> > > > > digital studio. If you choose this option, go
> into
> > > > your
> > > > > computer direct and clean, and then add all your
> > > > effects
> > > > > and ambiance "in post production"...that means
> your
> > > > guitar
> > > > > will sound like Mr. Rodgers piano all clean and
> > > > un-affected
> > > > > while you play your part, and then you can whip
> out the
> > > > > digital reverb and compression during the
> mixdown.
> > > > >
> > > > > To answer your "why do low notes record better
> > > > > digitally...etc." question:
> > > > >
> > > > > Simply put, analog tape is more forgiving than
> digital
> > > > > recording. With analog, your signal gain can be
> greater
> > > > > without annoying clipping, crunching and
> distortion
> > > > > (tinny-ness).
> > > > >
> > > > > Some things to try: you might add a compression
> stage
> > > > > before you hit the input for your computer. You
> also
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
Wow! thanks for that little tidbit...that problem could end
up being a real headache!
DP
--- MalcolmO <> wrote:
> > The Line6 Guitarport sounds like a cool idea...
>
> Be aware that that product has 2 stated requirements that
> are most unusual
> and that will eliminate a huge number of PCs from using
> it.
>
> 1. You must be using a real Intel processor.
> 2. You must have a "legacy-free" PC (IOW, your PC is out
> if it has any ISA
> slots; you must be all PCI.)
>
> These are the weirdest things to demand/require. I huge
> number of PC
> users/owners will have *NO IDEA* if they have an Intel
> processor. A still
> larger number will say, "What are ISA slots?"
>
> I can't imagine how Line 6 could've come up with such a
> product. I really
> wonder how many people have bought the product and
> returned it. Or worse,
> bought the product and _not_ returned it, figuring they
> were doing something
> wrong, will figure it out eventually and be happy then
> (won't happen).
>
> I have no idea what results when either or both of these
> arcane requirements
> are not met (Line 6 gives no indication).
>
> Bottom line: Before you go out and spend the money, know
> what hardware
> you're running, either by checking yourself or by
> checking with a
> knowledgeable person.
>
> [I think this is my first post to the list (finally had
> something real to
> contribute). My hat's off to all you guys; this is a
> great list. Probably
> the most satisfying of all the lists I'm on.]
> --
> Malcolm <<-- not a signature
> "They should know they're the Grateful Dead now." -- Phil
> "It's never to late to be up-to-date" -- Dan Hicks
> "My clock loses time like there's no tomorrow" -- Malcolm
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> .
> Visit for
> archived messages, bookmarks, files, polls, etc.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
--- In , MalcolmO <MalcolmO@c...> wrote:
> > The Line6 Guitarport sounds like a cool idea...
>
> Be aware that that product has 2 stated requirements that are most
unusual
> and that will eliminate a huge number of PCs from using it.
>
> 1. You must be using a real Intel processor.
> 2. You must have a "legacy-free" PC (IOW, your PC is out if it has
any ISA
> slots; you must be all PCI.)
>
Number 2 doesn't make sense to me. Why would it go "oh, your
computer has ISA slots, I can't run on this." If its not going to
use the ISA slot, why would it care if your computer had some?
Are you sure you just didn't misinterpret "requires a PCI slot" into
number 2?
In any event, ISA slots haven't been put into PC's in the last 5-7
years. Which is an eternity in computer time.
BN
"Brian " wrote:
> Number 2 doesn't make sense to me. Why would it go "oh, your
> computer has ISA slots, I can't run on this." If its not going to
> use the ISA slot, why would it care if your computer had some?
>
> Are you sure you just didn't misinterpret "requires a PCI slot" into
> number 2?
I don't think the unit even requires a PCI slot. It's just a USB
peripheral. The "drivers" CD loads a software front end which includes
the amp/cab modeling software, and accesses the 'port over the USB.
I can't see any reason this thing would even care what kind of slots you
had on your motherboard.
-c*
> Wow! thanks for that little tidbit...that problem could end
> up being a real headache!
Indeed it could! I forget if I got that from Line 6's site or off the
product box. No matter. I did not make this up, folks!
That said, the GuitarPort is probably the best reason to go out and get a
legacy-free Intel box.
--
Malcolm <<-- not a signature
"They should know they're the Grateful Dead now." -- Phil
"It's never to late to be up-to-date" -- Dan Hicks
"My clock loses time like there's no tomorrow" -- Malcolm
> If its not going to
> use the ISA slot, why would it care if your computer had some?
Bus speed. IIRC, ISA is 8MHz and PCI is 33? There may be support chip voodoo
to quadruple an ISA signal or to hold off the PCI bus when an ISA interrupt
occurs and requires a gear-down. Those are just guesses, but reasonable
ones, IMO.
> Are you sure you just didn't misinterpret "requires a PCI slot" into
> number 2?
Absolutely no way. Product uses no slots!
> In any event, ISA slots haven't been put into PC's in the last 5-7
> years. Which is an eternity in computer time.
Maybe so. But my current machine (which I built from parts and is about 5
years old) has a Duron processor and *one* ISA slot. I had originally
intended to buy a "legacy-free" ASUS mobo but I got a deal on a HomeFree
networking combo just days before I was going to buy. So I got a mobo with
the ISA slot for the wireless net. So I have 2 reasons why I don't have a
GuitarPort. Might've got one if I'd had the right system. Instead, I bought
a real amp :) (Fender Bullet 15 DSP).
I don't feel any need to upgrade my machine but sometime soon I _will_ get
another (older!) machine on which to run Linux.
OK! Found it. Here you go.... Go to
and click on System Requirements (note that this info is NOT in the FAQ,
despite the fact that "What's required?" _is_ one of the FAQs!!!!).
This is what you'll see:
============================
COMPUTER SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
The basic requirement for GuitarPort is a PC with Windows XP, Windows 98SE,
Windows ME or Windows 2000 installed, plus a Pentium II 400 MHz or better
processor (Cyrix and K6 processors will not work with GuitarPort), and at
least one available USB port (USB cable included). 128MB RAM is recommended.
Any USB hub used must have its own separate power supply connection rather
than receiving power from the computer only via USB. The PC must also
satisfy these technogeek requirements: USB 1.1 and AGP Graphics; PC must be
"legacy free" no ISA cards and all peripherals operating in DMA mode.
GuitarPort can work with other Windows audio applications that support
DirectSound or MME. GuitarPort requires DirectX 8a and Internet Explorer 5.5
or better and both are included on the GuitarPort CD-Rom.
============================
OK, so I note some other factors: I forgot to mention the AGP graphics. I
don't have that either (using a 4MB PCI card in hi-colour). I also forgot
the requirement for a PS on any USB hub. We'd have to presume that the GP is
sucking back most of whatever power is available on the USB bus. The
requirement for DirectX8a & IE can be forgiven cause they're in the box.
Finally, someone who only had 64MB might have a less than satisfying
experience (even though that amount admittedly has been customarily
surpassed for some time now). Bottom line: Some us have old machines! Some
spend more on music gear than computing gear. ;)
Finally, one quibble with the statement I made earlier. I had said no ISA
*slots* and this says no ISA *cards*. Big difference. I'll figure that I
have to stand corrected and that if someone with an Intel proc actually
pulls their old modem or net card or whatever they have in an ISA slot, the
thing will actually work. Certainly, there'd be no bus speed sluicing issues
involved with unpopulated slots!
No question, a product that would make you go out and buy a computer to match.
--
Malcolm <<-- not a signature
"They should know they're the Grateful Dead now." -- Phil
"It's never to late to be up-to-date" -- Dan Hicks
"My clock loses time like there's no tomorrow" -- Malcolm
