x
achase4u 28 September 2009

I went from a pg57 mic, into Behringer mixer pres, into my PC's creative sound blaster audigy -

then upgraded to an sm 57/cascade fathead, going into an m-audio dmp-3 preamp, into an m-audio audiophile 192 on my pc.

I heard some improvement, but not much. My sound, to me, is still way worse than a lot of guys recordings I hear - not even pro.

Im just trying to find out which part I should upgrade. Is there good converters/interfaces for 400 out there?

What part do I need to upgrade to get a significantly better sound?

To me, my sound gets kind of lost in the mix, the more tracks I put on.

Its also just kind of plasticy sounding - not enough detail...

Thank in advance...

Tags

Comments

Guitarfreak Mon, 09/28/2009 - 19:56

Hey, welcome to the forums :D

Your mics are solid, no need for upgrade there, but I would take a second look at the m-audio audiophile interface. Not that it's bad mind you, but it is the weakest link in the chain. i.e. your mics are a 6-7 and the interface is a 3, not good. A good mic interface needs knobs... and at least an XLR input? which I don't see on the product's description.

Before you go putting money down (save it for a last resort) can you explain how you get the sound to disc and what, if anything, you do to it afterwards?

achase4u Mon, 09/28/2009 - 20:11

Thanks for the welcome message!

Well, basically I have the m-audio dmp-3 preamp for my mics - the xlr's go into it, and it has line out, which goes into the line in of the interface. So the interface really is just there for the AD/DA conversion, and to playback audio on the pc as its a PCI card.

Basically, I just set the preamp level so it almost peaks, but doesnt - and I record in my DAW(reaper) using the audiophile 192 as the interface.

BTW most of the time Im recording my Fender deluxe reverb reissue amp.

So - once its in the daw, I just listen back that way.

Sometimes I add a little bit of compression, maybe a little reverb. Thats really it. Hardly ever EQ

Ive EQ'd, comp'd, reverb'd myself to death, and I just cant get the sound I want...

Then I mixdown to 192bit mp3 or wav.

Guitarfreak Mon, 09/28/2009 - 20:29

achase4u wrote:

Thats one of the ok sounding ones.

Thats got eq and reverb and all kinds of stuff going on - everything except the bass was recorded with the method I mentioned.">http://soundclick.c…]

Thats one of the ok sounding ones.

Thats got eq and reverb and all kinds of stuff going on - everything except the bass was recorded with the method I mentioned.

I love the LR echo, very well done. Now what dissatisfies you about the tone? Is it the clean tone, the lead tone or the slightly edgier fuzz tone?

achase4u Mon, 09/28/2009 - 20:35

Tons of different spots - I usually mess with that alot before I start recording any given track.

Sometimes its angled in, sometimes angled out, sometimes straight in but between the center and edge... sometimes backed off a couple feet. Ive even gone from behind the cab, and side - tried lots of different ones.

achase4u Mon, 09/28/2009 - 20:44

Cant remember what tubes were in it when I recorded the tele, but about 3 months ago I put in tung sol 12ax7s and loved the change. Just still not in love with the recorded tones.

Do you know what it is that makes Jack's recordings sound better? I guess hes probably got better gear, save for the sm57... they just have so much depth and detail. They stick out on the track without being too loud...

Guitarfreak Mon, 09/28/2009 - 20:51

Tung-Sol's are great tubes, a bit bitey though, lots of gain. I didn't expect you to like them for this style of music though. I would have recommended Mullard 12ax7's for you, it's got the same open presence as the Tung-Sol except a little less bite and about 25% less gain.

From listening to his sound clips it sounds like he recorded the guitar track with the amp a good deal louder. You can tell that when he digs in it gets fuzzy and when he backs off it cleans up. Try getting your amp settings to that *sweet spot* and then recording it.

Guitarfreak Mon, 09/28/2009 - 21:28

Nothing in your style. My cab needs an upgrade big time, sounds cheap and plastic, but my wallet is tight at the moment.

I am going to re-record this hopefully soon
http://soundclick.com/share?songid=7935867

Here is a nice clean number, again not finished
http://soundclick.com/share?songid=7739957

And my myspace has a bunch of fun stuff :D
http://www.myspace.com/chrysalisct

jg49 Tue, 09/29/2009 - 01:58

Gf "Your mics are solid, no need for upgrade there, but I would take a second look at the m-audio audiophile interface. Not that it's bad mind you, but it is the weakest link in the chain. i.e. your mics are a 6-7 and the interface is a 3, not good. A good mic interface needs knobs... and at least an XLR input? which I don't see on the product's description."

These two units IMO are as good as any mid range interface on the market. The audiophile is basically an A/D/A converter and the preamp has the "knobs" GF is talking about as well as XLR inputs. You should be able to get reasonable results with these units.

Would you get better results with a Great River and possibly a better converter? Yes but with an investment of about $1500 or more. There are a lot of very good guitar recordings being done with equipment similar to what you have.

You may have gain staging issues, I don't know, what levels are you getting in the DAW during recording? I don't use Reaper but in Cubase you can check incoming levels. While setting the preamp to just below peaking is a beginning what you really want to set is the level that your DAW is recording at, good signal with plenty of headroom.

Some other suggestions are (and sorry but I can't listen to your samples on this computer.)

Set up a test recording session. Track the same musical passage in each test as if you were doubling the recording, each in a different track.
Start with the 57 just off center 3"-4" away. Then tweak the tone controls of the amp and listen to a/b/c etc. Try and identify what you like or dislike about the sound, remember in close mic recording the mic is "hearing" the speaker more than the room so the settings that sound good in the room may not be best for the recording. Play with the amp gain usually turning down can be helpful but if you are not getting a good sound from the amp then you need that first and foremost. Try recording with and without reverb. Are you using any pedals? Because they can be a major tone suck more evident during recording. Get the amp up off the floor. Once you have a tone that you think is best then try the same tests with mics and placements. You need to do this as scientifically as possible and come back to listening to the recordings again side by side (A/B) with fresh ears (another day) until you "dial in" the best sound. While this process is time consuming once you have found the right set up you will be able to recreate it at will.

I will try and listen to the recordings later today but that will be on a pair of computer speakers which brings up the issue of what is it that you are monitoring with?

achase4u Tue, 09/29/2009 - 18:21

I see I see. So I guess I need to learn how to use my stuff better.

Ive really exhausted myself with mic placement...

In my DAW - Im getting probably up to -2.0 db just before peaking basically.

Whats gain staging?

I dont use pedals most of the time. I usually tweak the amp so it sounds best on recording...

I have no monitors - Im listening with sennheiser hd497 headphones. Though they arent that good, I can hear the quality of other tracks that I feel is lacking in mine.

So what does one do with a guitar track normally? For a clean track, like on Jack Devines stuff.

Would you add mild comp, or alot? Would you add reverb? Multiple reverbs? Im just not sure, but I can hear every detail in his tracks, its fantastic sounding to me...

Guitarfreak Tue, 09/29/2009 - 19:28

achase4u wrote: In my DAW - Im getting probably up to -2.0 db just before peaking basically.

Whats gain staging?

You can do a search using the site's built in search function. It has been discussed here on a few occasions.

Hint: it has nothing to do with the gain knob on your amp :D

achase4u wrote: I dont use pedals most of the time. I usually tweak the amp so it sounds best on recording...

Don't try to do too many things at once. Get the amp sounding good from a guitarist's perspective, then figure out how best to capture that sound from an engineer's perspective.

achase4u wrote: I have no monitors - Im listening with sennheiser hd497 headphones. Though they arent that good, I can hear the quality of other tracks that I feel is lacking in mine.

Getting even a budget pair of monitors means you hear more clearly what is going on and you'll be able to mix it better. Better monitors = better mixes.

achase4u wrote: So what does one do with a guitar track normally? For a clean track, like on Jack Devines stuff.

Would you add mild comp, or alot? Would you add reverb? Multiple reverbs? Im just not sure, but I can hear every detail in his tracks, its fantastic sounding to me...

It is difficult nigh impossible to say what to do to a track once it's recorded. There are no hard and fast rules, just do what sounds right. If you don't know when to apply compression vs when not to then you'd probably do well to research what exactly it is that a compressor does and what it is used for, then you can decide if it is something that you think you need.

My best advice at this point is to get the capture sounding as good as possible because even a polished turd still sounds like crap. (Theoretically of course, I am not saying that your recordings are crap) Then once you've got a sound that you are satisfied with, learn EQ ranges and how to use a graphic/parametric EQ.

achase4u Tue, 09/29/2009 - 20:32

Thanks very much

Ok, so I think I understand the basics of gain staging. I may have been screwing up a little.

Heres the thing. I leave the m-audio interface "in" all the way up, and then just turn the preamp up before it clips.

So - are you guys saying I should be looking at the preamp clip - and turning the preamp up until as much as possible, then turn down the interfaces hardware in, until it doesnt clip the DAW?

Ive not been doing it that way...

Hmmmm

The problem is, in my audiophile mixer software, I turn down the fader of the input, and it makes no change???

jg49 Wed, 09/30/2009 - 01:05

I may be misunderstanding your terminology.
What I said about gainstaging I will try and restate. You should, by adjusting the preamp gain, be setting the incoming level by watching the DAW input level, not the meter on the preamp. Once you have a good level in the DAW then check the meter on the preamp to be certain it is not clipping in the preamp.

A good gain setting should between -6 and -12, you should not be almost peaking in the red.

The faders in the M-Audio mixer or Reaper will not affect the incoming level. These faders only control the output, the level of the signal going to monitors or headphones.

Balanced cables are the preferred connection but mostly due to the fact that they insure a noise free signal. So if there is not a significant noise level occuring I doubt that changing to balanced connectors will suddenly give you better tone.

There is an old saying in the recording game that is garbage in = garbage out. When you say that your recordings lack great tone my first thought is that you are not achieving great tone for recording prior to hooking up a mic. While different mics and placements will affect the overall sound of a recording they can't create a "tone/sound" that is not occuring already.

I frequently record beginner/novice guitarists some as young as 12 years old (my son's friends.) They will usually say something like I want to sound like (insert fav. guitarist here.) My thought is always well come back when you do sound like that because unless we are talking about modelling software I can only capture what it is you do actually sound like. So generally I tweak the amp for them and they are usually much happier with the results. So my first thought when you say that you are not happy with your sound is to play with the amp, I may be off base here as I still have not had a chance to listen to your samples. But if you liked Guitarfreaks recordings his recording equipment is not significantly better than yours (he is using a Presonus Firebox.) If you read back through his posts you will see that he struggled with tone before achieving his present reults and did not change recording equipment, but did change his sound.

achase4u Wed, 09/30/2009 - 01:10

Very cool. I appreciate you taking the time to respond

I understand now. I also understand that the interface levels are fine - so Ive been doing it "right" so far

Well, I guess you may be right about the sound to begin with. I really do dig it when Im playing in the room - I guess I need to really tweak my tone before I even set up a mic. Then start with placement etc. I'll try that tomorrow...

The funny thing is, Im pretty darn happy with the sound I get from my acoustic guitar - just with an sm57 pointed at the sound hole...

jg49 Wed, 09/30/2009 - 01:20

See, if you are happy with the sound of your acoustic and a 57 then it is not your rec. gear. Try doing what I suggested with setting up a 57 and tracking your amp at diff. settings and review, you'll be suprised. Remember the amp settings I use live onstage are really quite different than what I use in the studio.

Guitarfreak Wed, 09/30/2009 - 09:55

achase4u wrote: isnt the signal going to be weaker sounding and not as rich if its only -12 to -6db in the daw?

Not a chance. There is a limit to how fast a converter can work, this is generally known as 0dB, but less capable models might even begin to add artifacts or drop signal data at a value lower than 0dB. It is good practice to record with a good amount of 'headroom' once you begin EQing and using compression and begin mixing different tracks together you will see the advantage of headroom. First you make the mix, then you make it loud. Try what jg said and then let us know what happens.

Guitarfreak Wed, 09/30/2009 - 21:12

achase4u wrote: I was afraid if they were softer, they wouldnt stick out like I wanted...

Think of it in terms of dynamic range. Hearing the pick attacks above the rhythm tracks is one thing, but when you can hear your fingers moving around on the fretboard inbetween phrases... it's too loud. lol.

Was this tracked with the Fathead mic? BTW Fathead I or Fathead II?

achase4u Wed, 09/30/2009 - 21:18

I see I see. lol

So you dont want to hear my fingers on the rosewood?!?!? lol

This was actually my 57. Didnt break out the fathead II - its actually alot easier to point at the amp and get a sound - its not quite as sensitive as the 57... but this track was all 57. The clean rhythm was about halfway from the speaker edge, straight in, 3 inches away.

The clean lead was similar, and the dirty lead was less than an inch from the grill, straight in, almost dead center of the speaker... if I remember all that correctly...

Guitarfreak Wed, 09/30/2009 - 21:38

Sounds excellent bro, BIG improvement from where you started. Don't be afraid to experiment with mic positions and distance and even using two mics on the same tone.

Actually I would have suggested that the rhythm parts be mic'd at the very edge of the speaker. The tonality of the speaker edge seems perfect for the part IMO, but you are the artist and it is your work, that is merely my interpretation.

achase4u Wed, 09/30/2009 - 21:45

Thats man!

I messed with a little blumlien stuff, with my two mics, and some room stuff(my room sounds awful most of the time)

I feel like right now, I should get back to basics and then maybe mess with two mics when I get better at this stuff.

I appreciate all the help, I really do!

Still a long way to go until I get the same sound as Jack Devine - but I'll be trying, dagummit!

achase4u Wed, 09/30/2009 - 23:15

Hey guys - check it out. Latest mixdown.

http://soundclick.com/share?songid=8164451

I read some tweakheadz stuff - I feel like some of it worked out well.

I rolled off bass on alot of tracks, increased a tad here and there. Did a left right pan of the rhythm guitar. I think the things I did helped create a little more space. What do you all think, compared to before?

x

User login