I like your rock 'n roll recordings much better than any of your acoustic stuff. Really that acoustic stuff needs a lot of work. The rock 'n roll, not bad, not great, not horrible. Your engineering sounds a little more accomplished there. So what the equipment you utilized, good job with what you had. You got that virus that wiped out your previous project because you are using cracked software. That or surfing too many por-no sites with import material still on your computer now no longer. Not professional, not smart, eight years? But then you're in New Jersey so I understand. You're in Caldwell New Jersey. Too bad I didn't record Bobby Caldwell in Caldwell New Jersey?

What you won't do for love... you've tried everything but you won't give up. You do for me what I could not do.
Mx. Remy Ann David

" Really that acoustic stuff needs a lot of work."

That's the main reason I joined this site, to get opinions and advice. I wish there was some actual advice instead of just "that needs work". What plugin can I get? What program can I get? What outboard gear can I get? If I can't get any gear, how should I remix that?

" You got that virus that wiped out your previous project because you are using cracked software. That or surfing too many por-no sites with import material still on your computer now no longer. Not professional, not smart, eight years?"

Yes I am using a cracked version of Audition 3. My family comes first before anything else and we are not fortunate enough to be able to spend 400 dollars on a piece of software because of bills. That version of Audition has been working perfectly. I got the virus if you must know from playing poker on facebook. My anti virus flashed the screen, next thing you know my entire music library is gone. I don't surf ****. I have a fiance to get off.

I said I had 8 years of experience working with audio not 8 years of recording. Strictly recording, maybe 3 years. Everything else was radio production.

Also, what does being from New Jersey have to do with any of this? Local bands are from all corners of the globe.

Sorry Brainy, only joking about New Jersey. OK about that acoustic stuff... plug-in? Plug-in ain't the problem & it ain't the solution. When you have garbage going in, you're going to have garbage going out. That's a simple equation of basic audio, basic anything. You want to turn a pig's ear into a silk purse. So what you are talking about is alchemy. There is no one plug-in I could recommend. Adobe Audition 3 is an extremely powerful and versatile piece of software. Sure, having extra direct X & VST plug-ins by third-party companies is great. However it does cost money and as you indicated, that's not an option. Of course you can use all of the cracked software you want to learn from. Actually though, Audition 3 has enough power and features to still improve upon what you already have. There is no single setting nor button one can tell you to press or select. You have to listen. Then you have to evaluate. Then you have to experiment. But you already knew that. When you have obtained a whacked recording, it will require a mindset of rescue and recovery. It will never be what you want it to be because that's not possible. Instruments are missing. Microphones are not on the proper places they should be. Balances between instruments are totally screwed. The most you can hope for is to compress the holy crap out of everything utilizing some equalization before and after the crunching. And then maybe some more compression and more equalization. It will still end up being a piece of crap. Maybe more enjoyable but still crap nevertheless such as New Jersey. So New Jersey is equivalent to the toilet bowl of New York. And so are your acoustic recordings. You might want to try a plunger?

Presto Drano!
Mx. Remy Ann David

Another lengthy post, and still no true advice, only more "its crap" and more insults about my home state. You just couldn't simply say "mix in the multivand compressor this way instead" or "the low ends sound off, try this". That's all I was looking for instead of "it sucks, its crap and your state is a shit hole".

I used 2 SM57S. One about 4 inches away from the center, the other one about 2 feet away. Also used a direct plugin. I mixed the 3 tracks and 4 takes in total and panned them. Obviously according to you that was wrong. I read various message boards and tips from engineers around the web and they said do just what I did.

For a person with as much experience as you have, I'd think you would point a noob like me in a direction that will help me out. Instead your coming off as a "know it all" egotistical jackass. But that's the beauty of the internet. Say whatever you want and not have any consequences of your words.

I can't provide you with any suggestions because there is no suggestions I can provide you with, with material of that which is so improperly recorded to begin with. I really don't give a damn about what amateur you got your information from. Yeah, I am a know it all and that's why there is nothing I can tell you to do to fix something up that was already in a total wreck. It's going to be a wreck no matter what is done to it. As you indicated, you are a newbie. Even your description of where your microphones were is a non sequitur. 4 inches from the center of what? 2 feet away from what? You have to have microphones on things otherwise they are not on things they are away from things that are not properly picking up things. You can Record whatever what you have put them on. But you haven't put them on anything. You have placed them for some general sound pickup from somewhere and not the right somewhere. How are you supposed to recover from that? You know sometimes people are in horrific auto accidents and as a result, it doesn't matter whether they are holding still, a fine makeup artist can't make them look normal again for an open casket viewing. So what are you supposed to do about that except get a better looking dead body? And then they would say aunt Gracie looks like a bus driver or construction worker she doesn't look like aunt Gracie. Because she was in a total wreck that killed her and it looks like it. You also can't bring her back to life no matter how much you try. Well kiddo, audio is the same way and you have to learn from your mistakes. You just don't like being told you did something wrong for which there is no recovery. But that's what you get from a professional when you ask them what's wrong. I helped a lot of people but you are not understanding nor getting the message. You want to press a couple of buttons on your total wreck and expect a Lamborghini. Well that doesn't happen in real life my friend. So I've told you. Now you can go out and do it right the next time or not. A deadly crash is a deadly crash at its over. And for which there is no recovery. Multiband compression, as I said, can help even out some of your atrocities. There is no setting anybody will give you as a suggestion for a piece that is that screwed up other than experimentation on your part. Get it? Maybe that's why people from NYC always laugh about people from New Jersey? And I'm from Detroit where we build cars and made hits. If you are from New Jersey where they make trouble. And you seem to be living up to your New Jersey background. So take a gamble and try it again. Maybe you should just go and get stoned with the pony? I rather like recording Max Weinberg at the Stone Pony in Asbury Park.

You're making a big splash here
Mx. Remy Ann David

By the way... also notice no one else here is providing you with any helpful information regarding your problems with your acoustic endeavor. Because once they listen to it, there is no repairs that will make this a viable. So they are not even wasting their time to try and help you like I am. I've been doing this for over 40 years and I don't need snotty nose kids complaining to me that I can't fix their lousy recordings. Did you complete high school? Well I didn't. I just went out and got that GED when I discovered I didn't need to have wasted my time through the 11th grade when I could've passed the GED after the seventh grade. How about you? I was already working in the damned industry at nine years of age and I'm now 56. I worked for NBC-TV for 20 years designed and built control rooms and operated the audio consoles on the air for some of the worlds greatest shows. I work at some of the big hit recording studios. The biggest advertising agencies. I know what I'm doing. You don't, take some advice get out of the business now while you still can. No don't do that. Just try and get this message down your multitrack machine? Will yeah please? You are a good engineer already. You're straight on rock 'n roll stuff already proves that. And I told you that. Your issue is microphone technique and recording technique. That's where you need improvement. Sorry we can't fix something that is irreparably broken. This kind of stuff has happened to everybody in the business at some point along the line. Chalk it up to experience. You can't save the planet not of us can. We can only learn from our errors.

56 red
Mx. Remy Ann David

The purpose of my joining this site and even continuing to talk to you is the simple fact that I am asking for advice. But instead the only thing I got from you is "yeah while your rock stuff is ok, the acoustic stuff is that of a car wreck. And you're from Jersey, so you're automatically trash". Do you not read what you're writing before you post? And you wonder why I got a little hostile? Is it because I'm not immediately kissing your ass that you continue to be a douchebag to me? All I asked for is advice, not "hey, rip apart my work and say it's horrendous and be done with it". I honestly appreciate a person of your level of experience even saying a recording I've done is "decent", because "decent" coming from you is a compliment to me. What I don't appreciate is completely trashing something I've done and not even giving one piece of constructive criticism. Unless saying multiple times my acoustic stuff is that of a car wreck is advice/criticism, you got a real funny opinion on what is advice/criticism. I've been told my recordings sucked before, so it's not that I'm a sensitive little boy. What I'm more annoyed with is you can't even provide ONE helpful piece of advice. Even when I described how I mic'd the acoustic guitar, you trashed how I typed it because I didn't word it correctly and you still continue to trash the recording, then say "oh it's just unrepairable anyway. Jersey sucks. I'm from Detroit where hits are made". Then you show off by throwing in people you've recorded in your post. You're coming off as a 4th grade bully picking on the little guy because he's not as good as you, and if anyone else reading this has any common sense, they will read this conversation and realize you're being a jackass to me for no good reason. I was told by my current boss (won a Platinum Award with Billy Joel), former boss (records Keith Richards and the Stones) and engineers who own their own studios in Manhattan that my recordings, while need work, are good for what they are and are pretty solid. I've also been told far worse than anything you've said. But unlike you, the people that ripped apart my audio at least gave me a few pointers and some sort of advice.

I want to learn and I want to get better. I never once claimed to know what I'm doing because I don't know what I'm doing. I'm learning this as I go along with every project and by reading message boards and emailing engineers. I don't know how to record the best acoustic guitar possible. You as a well trained and experienced professional who posts on a message board about audio had a choice: Either ignore my post and move on, give me some honest advice, or go the douche route and trash the recording with nothing constructive to provide. You chose the douche route. While that's fine, you can't blame me for getting annoyed at your choice. I have some good gear now with my current situation in New Brunswick, but my freelance stuff you heard was recorded on equipment you wouldn't use to make a podcast. I'm not a man of money, so I can't get the good stuff. I work with what I could get. I'm well aware my "best" is nowhere near as good as what the pros can make, but all I was asking for is a "try this instead", "mic the guitar this way", "mix the EQ like this", etc. If I'm not gonna get that, then I'm wasting my time on this site.

So I ask you one more time, in the future, how can I mic the guitars better? How can I mix it better? What kind of reverb can I use to make a great sound? What plugin can I get to put that nice final touch on it? What type of gear should I save up and get? Can you answer ANY of those questions?

Yes, I can answer all of your questions so here goes.

How can you put microphones on an acoustic guitar better? First off, you indicated you are using SM57's. Good, fine. Plenty of other folks here will start telling you you should be utilizing condenser microphones for acoustic guitar. Well screw that. There are plenty of times I've utilized 57/58's and gotten a beautiful tonality. But here's the rub. First, you have to decide what kind of the sound you want to go after? Here you have some options. For natural sound, you may want to utilize the microphones in XY or even ORTF up close. XY will have better phase coherency, less phase cancellation. It will also be a very modest stereo soundscape. ORTF on the other hand will have a greater, wider stereo soundscape at the cost of a little more phase cancellation. But the phase cancellation is really only a concern when the stereo signal is collapsed to Mono. Where the phase cancellation will be at frequencies that are not too objectionable sounding. Depending upon the situation, sometimes I'll space that even further apart such as one down near the body of the instrument pointed towards the F. hole. The other will be further up the neck toward the fingers. And if possible, should the acoustic guitar have a pickup, I'll take that also. With those three sources, you get a huge sound by mixing those three sources as LCR with the center being the direct input from the pickup. This will always be the predominant sound source since the microphones are picking up the sound mere microseconds later. So the LR portion of the 2 microphones will sound quite wide, in comparison to the center image because of the slight time delay. One does not necessarily need to utilize equalization of any sort at this point. Though I frequently do that. Simply because, I want it to sound the way I want it to sound and I'm not willing to wait until after the recording. So I track with some EQ. I do this probably because it's a hangover from working in the days of analog tape. I'm accustomed to working this way. And if I happen to have a limiter or two, I may include some light limiting also while tracking. Without the hardware to do that with, you'll just have to wait until after the recording and provide that ITB. Let me stress however that no radical equalization beyond a couple of DB should be tracked that way. LESS IS MORE. You can always add more after-the-fact by trying to undo something that was over the top is certainly more difficult to contend with. There are plenty of fine engineers I know that don't really give a hoot about some minor phase cancellation as they never bothered to collapse their sound to Mono since it's becoming nearly a thing of the past when it comes to playback devices other than a simple mono tabletop radio in the kitchen. But I come from the land of broadcast and mono compatibility is still important to me. Though plenty of phase anomalies can actually sound good these days given the MS style of matrix surround sound systems provide to stereo playbacks. Those playback pseudo-surround systems thrive on random phase variations. You may even be amazed at how awesome sounding it may sound. You don't have any figure of 8 bidirectional microphones so you cannot set up a MS stereo microphone technique. That is something I also love to do because it's unique sounding and completely Mono compatible since the Side signal electrically cancels out of phase in Mono. That technique is a subject for another day since you have no facility for providing that currently. Though some people have been confused slightly about the lopsided stereo from that technique on acoustic guitars. Nevertheless, it provides for an adjustable stereo width one cannot attain from XY or, ORTF. So it's cool sounding. And you don't want two microphones to be further than a foot away from the acoustic guitar. But of course, you weren't asking about the possibility if the acoustic guitar had a pickup. But that's OK too. You are just going for lots of body and fingerpickin' definition. And that's completely attainable even with 57's/58's.

So when mixing this, you then want to add some digitally generated acoustics utilizing a relatively short reverb algorithm. I've always loved the way an EMT plate sounds on acoustic guitars are very short decay. Most software will have some kind of plate like emulation of most every reverb program on the market. That reverb is generally fairly bright with a high frequency response clear out to 15 kHz and beyond. The reverb program may also offer a low frequency cutoff option which is quite desirable. So you may want to cut somewhere between 200 Hz-100 Hz. Sometimes I would even accentuate the high-frequency articulation by adding some additional high-frequency EQ boost to the reverb send. In software however, this may require a little finagling depending upon your multitrack program in use. So I don't have any way to actually instruct you how to do that not knowing what kind of program you are currently using. But I think you get the idea?

Then you proceed to ask me what type of gear should you save up to get? That's a loaded question. Many folks will tell you here who are all very passionate about numerous tasty pieces of equipment you should be saving up for. Well screw that also. This is completely attainable on stuff right down to basic inexpensive, entry-level stuff. Since I do a lot of this work for my friends on their own equipment, many folks don't have much of a budget. So I frequently find Beringer & Mackie stuff they use for their small PA systems and home recording setups. And that stuff can still yield quite a nice sound without getting into expensive esoteric equipment. The other pros know about that stuff's limitations which is generally a lack of headroom and freedom from overload distortion. Which means you have to be a little more conservative in your gain staging because pushing those pieces up to their headroom limit generally doesn't sound all that great. The difference between that equipment and the more pro-stuff can be greater than 10 DB of more headroom. Most of that equipment is only capable of +18 whereas the pro-stuff can frequently go beyond +24 to +30 which is what really separates the men from the toys. So if you first know that to begin with, not pushing that equipment and instead deferring to a little more noise to achieve more headroom will provide for a more professional sounding product. Because it's that headroom that distinguishes that difference from crappy equipment to the esoteric stuff. Since our software has become so powerful over the years, the noise is much more easily dealt with after-the-fact than ever before. Though noise reduction programs have to be carefully manipulated so as not to completely dull the sound. Again here, LESS IS MORE in that you should never try to go much beyond 10-20 DB of noise reduction should that be an issue. And there is really nothing all that noisy about even that entry-level equipment such as the Mackie's & Beringer's. So to get that extra headroom, while you see the fader on a console has what is known as the unity gain position where zero is approximately 2/3 up the fader. What I do there with the entry-level equipment is too cheat that. You cheat over extending the microphone preamp by bringing up the linear fader all the way to the top. This allows you to pull your gain trim down slightly. This means the microphone preamp will not be straining. At the same time, it's putting out less level which has to be made up for. So by pushing the linear slide fader up to the top of its excursion, you are making up some level at the summing/output amplifier. This may lower the signal to noise ratio by the same amount that you pushed the linear slide fader up by i.e. 10-12 DB or so. Meaning you will have an additional 10-12 DB of hiss. But you want that headroom in your sound otherwise it flattens out and becomes dull sounding. With a premium preamp costing $500 plus, one doesn't need to do that because of the additional headroom already built into that preamp. By the way that $500 figure is per preamp. Which I think is a little bit out of the scope of your budget currently? Again here, there are plenty of other folks that have lots of those kinds of preamps to recommend for you. I personally have and use the API & Neve stuff that utilizes all discrete transistor circuitry and no IC chips. Nothing wrong with IC chips but you can't push them even in the premium designed circuits because IC chips when pushed just kind of get crunchy sounding. Transistors however are designed specifically for the circuit and end up doing some pretty cool sounding acoustical tricks when you push discrete transistor circuitry. Even though folks like Allen Sides have indicated that they have a pretty sweet sounding IC chip Neve but even he knows you can't really push those like you can't be all discrete transistor circuitry can be pushed. For instance, sometimes with instruments like bass guitar, I'll frequently stick a limiter in since those guys that pick and pop the strings can cause some serious overload transients when recording. So without a limiter, again you'll need to be conservative to retain the dynamic range and headroom necessary for a quality sounding reproduction of the bass guitar. Sometimes though, I haven't gotten the right sound for the bass guitar to sit properly in the mix. No amount of re-equalization nor 1176 UA limiter gets me the sound I'm looking for. When that happens, I'll simply take out the limiter, turn off the EQ, pull back my linear fader and turn the gain trim up on the preamp. That's when the magic happens on this all discrete transistor circuitry which is not tenable with IC chip stuff. So I can't get away with that on a Mackie or Beringer. That's when I'm simply locked in to some EQ with a limiter. So then you just do the best you can with the balance of the mix. Our recording and mixing is frequently fraught with some kinds of compromises. Other engineers purchase equipment that have no compromise. But when a Beringer is all that you've got, overload there is not an option. It's to be avoided at all costs and that's why you cannot always rely upon the instructions for level setting in those particular scenarios. So it's a balancing act for sure. Again in answer to your question about what equipment to purchase, if you are one of those pretty much ITB type of guy, the Pre-Sonus Fire Studio FireWire multitrack computer audio interface for around $500 US has 8 quality sounding microphone preamps touted as being class A. It is also bundled with their own Bitchin' bundled multitrack software package. So it's a great bang for the buck with ultra smooth sounding microphone preamps. Though you will need a FireWire port on whatever computer you are using. If that's not an option for you, there are couple of decent USB 2.0 multitrack audio interfaces also available today through numerous different manufacturers that too offer up to 8 simultaneous microphone inputs. With these particular devices, the settings for your computer within your operating system are also rather critical. There is the latency issue. Latency occurs because our digital technology cannot move at the speed of light like analog does. This can be frustrating for many. The goal here is that when you are tracking, you need to reduce your buffers, especially in the overdubbing process. This means you will not be able to run any equalization, compression, reverbs. After overdubbing, you can crank up the buffers again so as to be able to have full advantage of everything the software has to offer without glitching, skipping, dropouts that would happen if you tried to mix something with the load buffer too low as you were doing for the overdubbed session. Other settings within the computer are also important to make sure nothing is running in the background, no antivirus programs running, updates that happen automatically all have to be disabled, memory and CPU priorities have to be set differently as well. This setup information is available in some of the stickies here at this site, and others and from manufacturers in their equipment setup recommendation procedures. And this is where some folks get really frustrated. In that situation, some of the digital mixers with computer interfaces can certainly simplify this workflow. I happen to think the Pre-Sonus Studio Live digital mixers are very comprehensive in that respect. I even have my own eye on their nice and compact 24 input version which costs a little over 3000 bucks. Though Chris here who runs Recording.org was selling his recently for as little as $2250. He wanted the cash so he wasn't willing to swap out a couple of my Neve modules for his Pre-Sonus 24 input mixer. The Focusrite & Sound Craft devices are also very nice. Though I have a Digi/Avid M-Box 2, so I could have ProTools for when my clients wanted ProTools, I really don't like their hardware at all. Not that it isn't usable or relatively neutral sounding, it is, I just get rather PO' ed they feel their microphone preamp is too proprietary to include any schematics. There is nothing proprietary about an inferior micr
ophone preamp. They even recommend you could go to Black Lion Audio to have your unit modified to sound better.??? WTF? They didn't provide them any schematics so they had to trace everything out in order to improve upon a piece of crap. So I don't recommend any of their hardware but, if you want ProTools, you then only have 2 options. You can buy the same thing I have or even less and they will bundle and include ProTools 7-8 and a few decent plug-ins to boot. The M-Box 2 including the software was only $450 new. Whereas their latest iteration of ProTools 10, will set you back $600. The difference there is that ProTools used to be restricted in use to their own hardware. You couldn't use anybody else's hardware. With the introduction of ProTools 9, they finally wised up. From the introduction of 9, you can now use anybody and everybody's hardware. So you can now run ProTools with a Pre-Sonus Fire Studio and others.

When it comes to what microphones to purchase, the sky is the limit. Having a couple of small capsule condenser is at a couple of large capsule condenser's is basically the other microphones in addition to your 57/58's should be In your collection. On a budget, the Rode 55's lots of folks recommend. Whereas for a LDC, on a budget, plenty of folks here are love the AudioTechnica Line. And they have plenty of LDC's to choose from. SHURE is also making some mighty fine LDC's. I don't have any of their LDC's but I do have their SDC, SM 81's which are a little more pricey but seem to work well on just about everything. And since I also love 57 & 58's, I wouldn't hesitate purchasing one of their LDC's even without ever listening to it first. There is also the option of looking into some ribbon microphones. Ribbon microphones are vastly different than any dynamic or condenser microphone. In fact, they are about the oldest technology microphone in studio use today. I've always been a big fan of ribbons. They all but disappeared from the face of the planet just a few years ago. With the huge onslaught of digital crap, they have recently burst back into popularity again. Lots of folks here have the same ones I have which are the Beyer M-160 cardioid M-130 bidirectional figure of 8 short geometry dual ribbon microphones. But those are about $700 each. Companies such as Cascades is offering a fine Chinese version for as little as around $160 US with a $100 option for a better transformer. I heard the $160 version and thought it quite nice sounding though a bit boxy. The boxy sound probably disappears by replacing their Chinese transformer with the $100 optional transformer? So for 260 bucks you get a ribbon microphone that sounds a lot more like the RCA 44 BX of the 1930s-40s era and those will set you back over $1000 and up. You have to be careful with ribbons though because they are so incredibly fragile. Don't ever think about using one out-of-doors and never, ever, let anyone blow into one. Otherwise, it will be completely trashed, and instantly, forever. Though there are plenty of folks who know how to repair the ribbon microphones, a repair of one of those inexpensive ones will probably out cost the price of replacement. If you have one of the expensive ones they are totally worthy of being re-ribboned. Chinese units that are bargain devices not so much so.

When you mix, you'll probably also want to include some dynamic range limiting and/or compression. Again your software will have plenty of compressor/limiter options to choose from. If you want plug-ins, plenty of people recommend Waves, IK multimedia T-Racks, IZOTOPE, lots of others. I like my T-Racks, just fine. It looks cool and is relatively easy to use but it's also extremely easy to overuse. And it offers a very nice tube like emulation and it has a very nice sounding multiband limiter. Though I don't use its saturation emulation much. Both standalone and VST plug-ins are available. PSP Master Comp is also rather nice. Almost too versatile. While it's designed primarily as a stereo bus Mastering plug-in, I've also used it on individual instruments on individual tracks. I generally prefer in the T-Racks as my stereo bus Mastering software. But you've got to go easy on that stuff because it can really put your stuff way over the top causing a fair amount of ear fatigue. And I think their presets generally suck. They might make for a good jumping off point to start with but they are generally all over fried. They also have a unique control to broaden or narrow the stereo image and/or to add or remove second-order harmonic distortion. That distortion control works a lot like an audio enhancer or, de-enhancer and a little goes a long way. Quite nice really because they are in fact trying to emulate tubes.

I hope this has satisfied some of your inquisitive nature and has provided you with some viable information you can utilize to improve your acoustic recording and mixing skills? Maybe now other folks might start jumping in to help?

Don't get frustrated so easily
Mx. Remy Ann David

BrainstuHammy, post: 384955 wrote: " Yes I am using a cracked version of Audition 3. My family comes first before anything else and we are not fortunate enough to be able to spend 400 dollars on a piece of software because of bills.

I empathize with you, your family and your hard times but that gives you no right to steal from someone. You are a piracy thief coming to an international pro audio site asking for support.

We have strict rules regarding piracy here.

Best wishes, however, Bye bye.