hard to know whats the problem without hearing any samples but I say focus on the midrange, you add too much highs and lows and the definition is lost, experiment with mic placement too ...

Maybe try a multi-band compressor? Also, you might be interested in gated white noise. I know there's a tutorial about that out there, but I tried looking it up on Google and I couldn't find anything. Any one know how to use gated white noise, or is it pink noise? Good luck!

If you're like most guitarists I have worked with you are using way too much distortion. Turn the gain down about 25%. Particularly if you are using multiple mic's and doubling part you don't need massive amounts of gain. It just destroys the pick attack and punch

Yep, turn that gain knob down. When doubling takes the distortion stacks on itself. Lately I've been doing about 3 or 4 tracks of about 70% gain (for the normal 100% gain sound) and then one or two at about 20% to add definition to the track.

Thirded! turn down that pre-amp gain!!! Its mostly the distortion/compression from the power valves that makes a good rock guitar sound IMO

If you're like most guitarists I have worked with you are using way too much distortion. Turn the gain down about 25%. Particularly if you are using multiple mic's and doubling part you don't need massive amounts of gain. It just destroys the pick attack and punch

Hehe I'm probably like most of the guitarists you've worked with ;) I'll give it a try. And white noisepink noise, I'll have to look it up, it doesn't sound like anything I'm (currently) familier with;)

I'm not familiar with it myself, but I heard on another thread here that adding white / pink noise adds to that 'wall of guitars' sound.

Sometimes what can work OK in these situations after the fact, and not always, is to duplicate the track and then pump the heck out of it and bring it back in just under the original guitars, but be careful not to accumulate too much low end or get too phasey. Here's an example of how I might compress, EQ, and process this for that application:
http://media.putfile.com/guitar90

That also sounds alot better thanx :)

I recorded some new sounds, with less distortion, and it sounds somewhat better, but not yet quite as I want it to be. Guess it has something to do with the sounds I pickedmics used.

How do you doubletrack your guitars? Do you play just 2 times exactly the same track? Do you add some variation? Do you record more than one track?

For doubling, you want to record the same guitar part exactly the same, twice. It's very common to then pan each track in opposite directions. It's also easier to hear if the parts are doubled close enough the more extreme in the opposite direction you pan each track.

If you are using software plug-ins to add distortion (say, in Reason, like I do), a way to cheat the doubled sound is to only record one track, duplicate it, and put slightly different distortion settings on one track while leaving the first track with the normal distortion. Watch out for phase cancellation, though. To test this, pan the tracks to center and see if it sounds any thinner. If it does, tweak the distortion on one of the tracks until it doesn't have any cancellation.

There's also the phase shift trick: with your one guitar recording, make a copy of it. Now zoom in as close as you can get on one guitar track, and move it left or right just a tiny bit. Now pan the two tracks in opposite directions, and you'll have a double.

Both the distortion, and phase shift methods are inferior methods to just recording the part twice, exactly the same. Real doubling is difficult to do, and takes a lot of practice to get good at it, but it will sound more natural in the end.

sander_8 wrote: Mixer is analog, IMG stageline, it says
Recording device is a soundblaster Audigy 2 ZS Pro
Software is Steinberg Nuendo 2

Now I realize this isn't very high end stuff.. And I'm on a very low budget (read: no budget) so I'm looking for tips essentially to make it sound better.

Actually, Nuendo is pretty high-end and high budget. Sell it and get some good monitors? :?

Anywho....lowering the gain is a good idea when doing this kind of multiple guitar layer thing. Also, be sure to tweak the Line 6 settings to get the best sound. I LOATHE recording this amp with a mic. Could be worse, but it just doesn't sound big to me no matter what. Make sure you have some midrange going, and not as much bass.
I wouldn't recommend adding pink noise to already fuzzy-sounding stuff; not sure why that was thrown out here.
Also, try using different amp settings, mics, placement, etc for you 2nd track of guitar. Two identical guitar sounds L & R are not always a good thing, especially for the rhythm tracks.
A good place to search for fuzz is in the 5-8kHz area. Just a narrow notch might help somewheres in there.

Hope this gets you thinking at least.

I'll take it all in consideration ;) I agree partly with you on the Line6, it suits me for live performing however, but it lacks here and there in dynamics. Right now I'm building a simple tube-amp, and I'm hoping to get some cool sounds from it soon.

Reggie wrote: I wouldn't recommend adding pink noise to already fuzzy-sounding stuff; not sure why that was thrown out here.

I don't know anything about it, but here's why that was thrown out here:

http://recording.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=33535

What you really need to do here is go back to square one and work on getting rid of it at the amp and guitar level. Trying to fix it in the mix will never get the same high quality results.

Keep moving mics around, try different guitars/amps, and definitely different amp settings, since you've got a Line 6. Try something other than the obvious settings. I've noticed that I get a much better tone out of Line 6's if I get some space in there, instead of slamming the mic into the grill. Give it some air to work with.

On a related note. I was reading an interview with Ken Scott by Joe Chicharelli and they were discussing how a lot of the high end fuzzyness comes from the newer high-gain pickups people are using. Get something with some PAF's or 57's in it and you might have all your troubles go away.

BTW, saying you're low budget and having Nuendo 2 is a dead giveaway as to where you got it;)

On a related note. I was reading an interview with Ken Scott by Joe Chicharelli and they were discussing how a lot of the high end fuzzyness comes from the newer high-gain pickups people are using.

*Absolutely*. A great example are the stock pickups Ibanez puts into many of their RG line. They're OK-ish live but trying to get an articulate sound out of them in the studio is impossible *and* they add some fairly weird overtones at times IMO. I haven't had this problem with my Seymour Duncans FWIW.

McCheese wrote:

BTW, saying you're low budget and having Nuendo 2 is a dead giveaway as to where you got it;)

Don't worry, I gave the authorities a heads up and they are already tracking him down through his IP addresses. I think this $amount counts as a felony. Ha Ha! :P

Not necessarily, I got my copy of Nuendo by getting a design client to buy it for a project I was doing for them. In my experience people who are always accusing others hastily are often projecting. 8-)

Thanks for the advice. I'm having another guitar here with different pickups, I'll try to do some recording with it.

Oh and about Nuendo :oops: You're right. Unfortunately I'm not in the position to be able to spend those amounts of money on software, although I'm not proud of it. And as long as I'm not making any money out of it, and merely use it to gain some expierience, and do some hobbying, I feel its somehow more okay..

I am however on the lookout for a freelow cost program that offers some of the functionality of Nuendo (asio2, audio recordingedittingmixing, recording at 24bit/96kHz) to use it instead, because as a software developper myself, I'm against piracy. So if you have an alternative please let me know!

Oh and about Nuendo You're right. Unfortunately I'm not in the position to be able to spend those amounts of money on software, although I'm not proud of it. And as long as I'm not making any money out of it, and merely use it to gain some expierience, and do some hobbying, I feel its somehow more okay..

I am however on the lookout for a freelow cost program that offers some of the functionality of Nuendo (asio2, audio recordingedittingmixing, recording at 24bit/96kHz) to use it instead, because as a software developper myself, I'm against piracy. So if you have an alternative please let me know!

You aren't against piracy. You are a pirate. It is not "somehow more OK". It is what it is, you are pirating software and proud of it. Blaming Steinberg's pricing for your behavior is an absolute joke, truly bottom of the barrel. :roll:

Take it as you like. I'm not using it as an excuse, nor am I proud if it. Fact is that there seems to be no other program (I tried audacity, but it doesn't recognize my audigy, doesn't allow me to record even in stereo and keeps crashing) that does the trick for me. And no, not recording is not an alternative, and recording in the ms windows recorder isn't either.

I'm truly glad for you that you're in the position to work legally with the top-software that's around. But take my position in consideration, and ask yourself what you would do. And don't tell me that you wouldn't record anything for yourself or for that matter spend 1500 dollars (as a student) on software like nuendo. That's crap.

Instead I choose to continue work with this program (until a suitable alternative appears), gain some expierience, be able to now and than record some stuff with the band, learn about different recording techniques, be able to help others out once in a while, and prepare for something I eventually would like to make a living out of it.

You can flamekickban me for it, and probably be right to, but you should know that most of the people that are determined to get somewhere in this industry are in a similar position as I am. And after education they'll choose to work in a professional studio with legal software, and probably choose NuendoCubase because their familiar with it, wich is profitable for Steinberg.

It's not people like me the companies are losing big bucks on, it is on the studio's who are using their software illegal to make profit out of recording with it.

Try [="http://www.mackie.com/products/tracktion2/index.html"]Tracktion[/]="http://www.mackie.c…"]Tracktion[/], its actually more powerful than Nuendo in some ways ;)

If thats still too expensive try [[url=http://="http://www.xt-hq.co…"]energyXT[/]="http://www.xt-hq.co…"]energyXT[/]

If you don't need MIDI try the free [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.kreative…"]Kristal Audio Engine[/]="http://www.kreative…"]Kristal Audio Engine[/]

There really is no excuse these days..

sander_8 wrote:

It's not people like me the companies are losing big bucks on, it is on the studio's who are using their software illegal to make profit out of recording with it.

What about the small software developers that sell their (often very powerful) apps at shareware prices? What chance do thay have of earning a living if people like you just use Nuendo for free?

Spare me your lame rationale and justifications sander. It's got nothing to do with "how I take it", stop trying to smear your crap around. This is your hat to wear and yours alone.

There are no mitigating factors, the cold fact is that you feel OK about using things which you have no right to be using that has nothing to do with anyone but yourself. That's how you are.

The infrastructure you openly support makes it increasingly difficult for media talent to make a living from artists to producers to programmers to retailers. Pirating hurts hard working people just as much as anyone else.

You got a point here. I'm not really into the different audio-recording software that exists today on the market (only just heard of audicity really) and I'll look into it and will switch if it suits me (and I'm even willing to do some concessions).

I will. I know some of you won't believe it but I don't use illegal software for the sake of it and really rather not use it at all.

@ Calgary: You seem to have made your mind up about me. That's alright. I really can't bother. Just something I thought you should know.. I did record a single with my band in a professional studio and payed $550 for it. Wich is quite supportive for producers if I might say so. I even was able to help out the folks in the studio with some issues with Nuendo, learned invaluable stuff about recording, lots of things I wouldn't have learned when I wouldn't be familiar with the program. Does it make me a bad person when I'm eager to learn and experiment with it? I guess you think it does.

You got a point here. I'm not really into the different audio-recording software that exists today on the market (only just heard of audicity really) and I'll look into it and will switch if it suits me (and I'm even willing to do some concessions).

I will. I know some of you won't believe it but I don't use illegal software for the sake of it and really rather not use it at all.

You're right, I don't believe you. Not even close.

All thieves babble constantly about how they really aren't stealing while they steal. That's a fact of life. Meanwhile honest people never say, "I know some of you won't believe it but..." or "I don't use illegal software for the sake of it". Ever. Period.

I'm done with this issue.

Check out the [="http://site.magix.net/english-uk/home/music/music-maker-11-deluxe/?version="]magix[/]="http://site.magix.n…"]magix[/] stuff too.
(I am very impressed with their Audio Cleaning Lab, though I've not had much need to use it so far)

If you need an audio editor I suggest [[url=http://="http://www.acondigi…"]Acoustica[/]="http://www.acondigi…"]Acoustica[/] which I still use daily even though I also have soundforge 8

I use ProTools, bought and paid for. Best of all, I use it on a Mac.

How much does pro-tools cost? I've heard alot about it and seems okay..

I looked on the tracktion site, looks very interesting, pricing seems to be reasonable for what's being offered. I've worked with magix musicmaker (a legal version, for those interested) but I felt it left too little to the artists imagination.

@ Calgary .. lol did you ever heard a thieve come out and say their doing something illegal? Oh well you probably have pletoria of experience to rely on, no doubt.

But we'll see. Instead of being helpfull like IIRs, providing me with some usefull information, you rather flame away instead of reading what is being said here and respond with some founded arguments instead of mentioning my lame justifications or call everything crap. If you have nothing interesting to say, except mention that you do not agree with me (wich was clear by now) just shut up.

You don't know me, and I certainly don't like to be called a liar by an unknown person. I'm for now done with you. And I'm sure you don't care.

sander_8 wrote: Instead of being helpfull like IIRs, providing me with some usefull information, you rather flame away

Its the classic "good cop, bad cop" routine ;)

I strongly suggest you check out Tracktion anyway, its more inspiring than Cubase & Nuendo, and has many useful features you won't find in either of them!

For now I think I'll stick to Kristal audio engine, wich seems to be providing some basic functionality, and the interface is somewhat familiar :) Seems to be working, didn't crashed at all until now..

Too bad the're only a little number of effects available, think that Tracktion will be the way to go eventually.

Isn't tracktion free? I didn't really like it, but it was only because I'm so used to PT, and I really flow in it.

You can get started in ProTools for about 450 with a 2-in, 2-out interface, up from that it's a little over a grand I think.

http://www.digidesign.com Remember PT requires it's own hardware.

McCheese wrote: Isn't tracktion free?

No. There was a limited period where NFR Tracktion 1 licences were being given away, but the offer stopped before Tracktion 2 was released.

Tracktion can take a little getting used to if you come from a more traditional DAW, but the learning curve is far shallower than any other sequencer I ever tried, and it has some unique features that I would miss badly if I switched.. ;)

sander_8 wrote:
Too bad the're only a little number of effects available, think that Tracktion will be the way to go eventually.

Don't forget, effects are another good to be bought and sold. Most programs just come with basic effects, but there are many 2nd party high-quality effects out there. I believe the free plugin sticky is still at the top of the digital audio forum.
Make sure whatever legit host you move to can use DirectX and VST plugins, at least by using a wrapper or something. It just makes things easier for me being able to use both.
BTW, Cubase has some lower priced versions that may give you the functionality you need. Nothing wrong with using Kristal though.

Bang for the buck, I've been satisfied with ProTools LE (with Mbox hardware). I has its quirks, and I am much more comfortable with the layout and editing of Cubase, but for my needs it works. I only need two inputs (for vocals and guitar) since I do the rest of my music on Reason. If you only need 2 inputs, Mbox is about $450...

i agree that double tracking gtrs has a learning curve-- but it's worth it! i disagree that the two parts have to be EXACTLY the same. you can get away with a surprising amount of difference with it still sounding good-- but it does have to be tight. actually two slightly different parts panned l/r can make it sound even bigger-- but ya gotta know when to quit or it can get messy. editing can also help if one part is too different. doubling gtrs used to be very difficult for me, but over time it has become second nature-- so keep up hope!

Oats wrote: i agree that double tracking gtrs has a learning curve-- but it's worth it! i disagree that the two parts have to be EXACTLY the same. you can get away with a surprising amount of difference with it still sounding good-- but it does have to be tight. actually two slightly different parts panned l/r can make it sound even bigger-- but ya gotta know when to quit or it can get messy. editing can also help if one part is too different. doubling gtrs used to be very difficult for me, but over time it has become second nature-- so keep up hope!

If you're only doubling you definitely have more leeway for playing. Once you start stacking 4+ takes though, they had better be tight, or you'll end up with mush.

I saw a session sheet for Enter Sandman once, 20something rhythm guitar tracks. That could get messy really quick.

agreed. i was thinking of "one" by U2 (among others) where the r and l parts are different but it adds to the song. you are quite right though-- it's gotta be tight or it'll become a mess real quick...

Thanks for all the replies so far (both on and off topic ;) ) Now that I begin to pay attention to it, I hear that a lot of songs have actually quite different guitarrifs panned L&R... I think I'm going to experiment somewhat with this, I like the effect it creates