x
anonymous 9 February 2002


Mic choices for recording an acoustic guitar? Maybe your top 2 favorites

Tags

Comments

Guest Sun, 02/10/2002 - 04:57

I'm afraid this whole idea is quite ridiculous... as it doens't take the player, the instrument, the song, nor the environment into account. Without those elements included (as well as they myriad of transduction devices that have been omitted from the survey), I would have to say that this is at best a 'popularity contest', and at worst a 'marketing referendum'.

Fletcher

anonymous Sun, 02/10/2002 - 05:21

whoa man, thats a little harsh really, surely this represents votes on kit that has produced good results for us in the past. I think it is safe to assume that we are all big enough and ugly enough to take the poll with a pinch of salt and use it in the way it was intended. After all, there is no such thing as too much information, the art is in the weight applied to each idea.

anonymous Sun, 02/10/2002 - 08:56

I have found that this combination works the best.
1. AT 4051 small diaaphram mic. Calrac pre/eq with 10 db 12k, 4 db at 8 k, 1 db at 160, :w: roll off 60 htz. Red 3 compressor set to fast attack. and release.
2. BK small diaphram mic . 1272 Neve pre with red 3 comression set on medium attact and medium release.
Set the mic's at 90 degrees use the AT to get you accack and the BK to get your tone. You can reverse the mics and compressors also, I've found different acc. gtrs. to speek in either setup.

anonymous Sun, 02/10/2002 - 09:01

I had nice results in a live amplifed recording situation simply using a Tram mic. This mic, used with the PZM adapter close to the neck and hanging slightly over the body opening, gave consistent signal to noise without the variable proximity effect of microphones mounted on stands away from the guitar.

Mad John Sun, 02/10/2002 - 09:47

I have a very sterile Taylor acoustic (510 series) that I have hated for 9 years now!

Funny thing is that at times it can be captured on tape quite nicely.

Dont laugh , but the only mic that seems to give the proper ballence and depth is a CAD E-200!

Go figure!?!

Oh , the Universal 2-610 isn't too shabby ither!

Mad John
Zythum Studios

"The present day Composer refuses to die!"
Edgar Varese - 1921

glitchless Sun, 02/10/2002 - 12:44

Originally posted by Dan Schwartz:
I voted for a KM254, my fave for pop-style acoustics, and other. The other is a pair of EAR mics in a Blumlein setup - most people who have heard this will have heard it on the Ry Cooder/Vishwa Mohan Bhatt collaboration "A Meeting By The River."

DS

I was playing this album last night for dinner guests with ecclectic tastes. This is a fine recording. I don't have the mics you mentioned so I use what I have which works fine as long as I match the guitar and pre to the style and mic etc....
I have AKG 541's AT4041's and Marshall 603's and a Octava MC012 with all three caps.
The cardioid on the Octava and the Marshall's up close add a lot of low mid from the proximity effect. The AT's and the Omni cap on the Octava produce a very natural sound. The 451's and a bit more present and agressive.
I'd say currently I go with the 451 and the omni Octava for my two favourite flavours of the month.

Ted Nightshade Sun, 02/10/2002 - 15:03

I have to go with Fletcher a bit on this one, although maybe not quite as far. Why not just the Best Mic For Acoustic Guitar instead of the Top 2?
It's the reductive nature of this that is missing the whole point. It's evident from reading this and the top 10 thread that a lot of people get the best results by doing completely different things, and as their situations are rather different this is not such a big suprise, perhaps.
Still I think that the big insight of all this is: "Every situation is different, and there IS no best mic or even 25 best mics for acoustic guitar."
This I think is news well worth repeating. Even a list of all the contenders, all though bulky, can be instructive, if only to show how very many routes may be the best for a given situation.
Ted

audiokid Sun, 02/10/2002 - 15:27

The top 2 was meant as "what top 2 (two) do you use". Earlier this week while gathering mic names for this "poll" I also learned that alot of us use "2 (two)" different mics when recording an acoustic. It only came to my realization from this poll in the first place.
Can we keep this positive :D

audiokid Sun, 02/10/2002 - 22:24

Hey audiokid - I have two mics that I use all the time for acoustic - I do mostly acoustic work in my studio. I use a pair of Sony ECM 81's - one at the hole, one at the 11th fret. I put an AT 4050 in the center set to figure-8. AT panned center, 2 81's panned hard right hard left. Its a big sound that produces a very accurate 'image' of the guitar. mix down to 2 track and place in the mix with S-1.....

Matt Zeiner

Thank you Matt, this is what this is all about! :tu:

audiokid Mon, 02/11/2002 - 14:32

Originally posted by Jeff Roberts:
I voted twice and still couldn't view the "results".

Delete one vote for 451's to fix that. I'm really a 452 guy but I figured 451 was close enough.

Hi Jeff, How's your slides doing?. looking forward to hearing more about them one day! send me a banner and I'll add it to the rotation.

If you can't see the results your vote was one of the 20 I losts, see the first post of this thread.
Vote again.

anonymous Mon, 02/11/2002 - 16:33

Sorry, audiokid, actually there's 1 of my fave in there: DPA 4011. Some of my other favs are Schoeps CMC+MK4 combo, Neumann SM-2, modded and stock U67's, Beyer M-201 and hell, even a lowly Beta 57! Of course KM-84 and 184 are not bad either

But it depends so much on the instrument/player, the room and the song style and part .

Just my two Canadian cents! :w:

audiokid Mon, 02/11/2002 - 16:44

Hi, what makes you deside on a paticular mic? What do you hear/listen for and then think. Is it just a matter of needing brighter or warmer mics for different things like solo's, or rhythm or is it more than that? One would think the most natural mic would be the best.
I would really appreciate more detail if possible. I was hoping to really get this thread going on all these questions.

Nice to hear from a Canadian, crazy things happening in BC right now :eek:

anonymous Tue, 02/12/2002 - 06:28

Hey audiokid,

I have found that when you are tracking an acoustic guitar that is part of a multi-track wall-o-sound, "natural" mics are your enemy.

A natural kinda mic sound will bury itself in the mix. You want a mic that gives the "illusion" of sounding natural.

In a previous lifetime I recorded lots of solo acoustic guitar. There is not necessarily a lot of overlap between mics that are great for solo guitar and mics that excel at acoustic guitar for bigger productions. I prefer small diaphragm bright condensors for background acoustic guitars.

Ted Nightshade Tue, 02/12/2002 - 14:45

Sound like you are talking about the kind of production where the acoustic guitar is real bright and mixed so low that it's almost like a guiro- more of a percussion instrument almost, lots of zick zick zick. I like that.
Definitely a very different situation than a solo guitar or maybe guitar and piano or vibes!

Don't know what fletcher's transducer talk is about, but pickups are a big issue. I really like the Bband, an non piezo under the saddle ribbon thing that sounds way more natural than any other acoustic pickup I've ever heard. I use mine with no EQ at all! Try that with a piezo.
I find that a tube preamp is an absolute must for pickups, unless you really fancy that super dry in your face sound. I had zero luck getting anything I could stand, let alone mix with the more roomy mic sound, until I used a tube mic pre. Oh yes! Now everything blends so nicely, and the pickup is a treat to listen to on it's own.
Now I won't use the pickup without the tube pre. Spoiled I guess.
Transducers?
Ted

audiokid Tue, 02/12/2002 - 14:55

What about no pickup? Just a natural guitar. What mic and pre is best for that? I play well, pick above the hole for warmth, I have a wood studio,loft, hardwood floors with next to no standing wave. very live enviroment for acoustic recording. But I can go down to the foam room and track there too.

I prefer not to eq more than 3 db. Over the years I seem to do less and less eg-ing but I must admit I lift the top end a bit if not allot at times in the final mix?

If I can get the acoustic to sound like it does in my head I would start playing and recording my own stuff again lol. I've been away from music too long and it's calling me back with a vengence. I want to learn so much about recording acoustic music. I've spent years doing the midi/digital thing and now it's time to get back to where I started. Me and my guitar.

faganking Wed, 02/13/2002 - 15:37

Hey,
For a track with big drums, lots-o-guitars, ect. I have found mono the way to go. A Soundelux U95S, Neve 1073 into a Distressor is deadly cool. It puts a lot of 'fur' on the guitar and helps it to sit in the the track nicely. Often when an acoustic guitar sounds *too* good in this setting it's hard to mix. You find yourself constantly turning it up...turning it down... turning it up....
For nice I, too, prefer a KM84 at the 12th fret and something like an AT4050 or AKG414EB at the body.
Benjy

Ted Nightshade Sat, 02/16/2002 - 19:43

"What about no pickup? Just a natural guitar. What mic and pre is best for that? I play well, pick above the hole for warmth, I have a wood studio,loft, hardwood floors with next to no standing wave. very live enviroment for acoustic recording. But I can go down to the foam room and track there too."

This is just like my space, only i got no foam room. What kind of guitar did you say you wanted to record?
I use a rosewood Collings which fills that live wood space up with sound, so there is a tremendous room sound. A maple guitar would be less super rich this way. Maybe you don't play as loud as I do- few people do, really. So you might not excite the room so much.
One thing you'll find is playing to the mic is different from playing to yourself. The over the hole strumming might sound good in the room, but might or might not be right for the mic. What pick you use will change the sound dramatically, so try everything!
KM184 is a rather thin bright sounding mic. It's best application is probably acoustic guitar, as there is not too much high frequency on a guitar. The KM184 really focuses the picture, that's the strong point. Off axis is not great, which could be a problem in your lively room. It can be one in mine. A baffle or two could help here.
4011 is a big improvement on KM184. It gets the focused small diaphragm sound like KM184 but not thin like the KM184. And the off axis response is great- your room sound will pick up in a clear way, no mud.
Big diaphragm condenser is a different approach, to really fatten things up and give a lot of body to the tone.
Ted

audiokid Sat, 02/16/2002 - 21:11

Ted, I'm not quite as fortunate as you I'm finding, those collings must be really nice.

I'm using a Taylor 314 CE with the electronics in it. They're much better than a taks but I haven't used them to record :o , Do you guys mix the two? (mic and electronics)
The Taylor is loud and I think it would keep up to a calm piano player lol. I'll find out one day. It's a beautiful guitar for sure.

I'm beginning to see the whole concept here. We use different variations of mics because everyone, guitar/room/song etc. is completely different. The idea is to reproduce the moment with as little eq-ing as nessesary, get it as transparent and as natural as possible to fit the mix/song right? So (general speaking) if a song was heavy in bass freq we would (assuming we want the acoustic to stand out more) use a mic that naturally produced more upper mids?

This is why it's so hard to get an answer on a perfect setup. Duh. I've been sampling and using factory sounds for too long and never truly understood the actual art of recording. Respect to the recording engineer.
Thank you for the detailed feedback, most grateful! Am I learning now?

x

User login