Recording Mic For Guitar

[Little Voice]

The worst self promotion I've ever seen....

Just for the record, you are completely wrong! I am sure that there are good demo studios in and around Aberdeen, I just do not know the Aberdeen or even much about the Scottish studio scene. I just happen to have heard some good recordings from Unity and it is rather unfair on whoever runs that studio to accuse him or her of running around posting on forums.

I was merely pointing out the fact that most people, after spending huge sums of money on DIY-recording gear of doubtful quality, end up (if they are serious about music) going to a regualr studio.

[britheguy]

Just for the record' date=' you are completely wrong! I am sure that there are good demo studios in and around Aberdeen, I just do not know the Aberdeen or even much about the Scottish studio scene. I just happen to have heard some good recordings from Unity and it is rather unfair on whoever runs that studio to accuse him or her of running around posting on forums.

I was merely pointing out the fact that most people, after spending huge sums of money on DIY-recording gear of doubtful quality, end up (if they are serious about music) going to a regualr studio.[/quote']

I don't think he meant it like that. I could be wrong though.

[jalepeano death]

I hate to rain on your parade' date=' but I think that most people that attempt home recording are wasting their money. Scotland has two good tracking studios (The Byre and Castle Sound) and I don't know how many demo rooms that do a good job. (Try Unity near Nairn!)

For the price of that mic that you are thinking of buying, you could make a really good demo and the people making it would be experienced engineers.[/quote']

Making noise is brilliant.

Fucking about with microphones and speakers n shit can be as much fun as playing the music.

Can you put a price on the Black art that is learning mic technique?

I like the sound of ripping speakers touching mic diaphrams.

[HairyScaryMark]

I hate to rain on your parade' date=' but I think that most people that attempt home recording are wasting their money ........For the price of that mic that you are thinking of buying, you could make a really good demo and the people making it would be experienced engineers.[/quote']

I sort of agree with you up until a point although admittedly I have heard a fair amount of terrible recordings from local studios also.

The point of a home studio is generally not to save money when recording a CD.

It is due to the shere amount of time you can spend mixing the recordings and keep changing it as you notice more imbalances etc. If you hire a studio for a set number of hours or days. You are more or less restricted with your mix down time by this. Your engineer will generally be able to do a much better job than you in that time.

However, if you are quite clued up with sound engineering, know enough to mix your own CD, If you have your own studio you can keep re-analysing your recordings and change stuff for weeks on end before releasing it.

Another reason to get your own recording gear is to record your ideas in your house and be able to experiment with recorded riffs etc.

To get a very serious studio in your house you generally need to spend quantities of money which would get you the best part of a week (or two) at many studios.

you are talking something like

300 for a reasonable ad/da converer and quite possibly a lot more

800 on drum mics (if you are happy enough with live mics)

300 for a pair of reasonably high quality condensor mics

50 on cables or more

300 for a large diaphram mic

Of course you can get away with a SM57 and your current soundcard but if you want to achieve recordings on par with high quality studios, you really are looking at spending a lot of money. You can achieve reasonable results with far less than I listed above but that is roughly the amount of money I think you would end up spending for average 'studio quality'

I would say there is 3 things on a recording which determine the quality of your recorded sound (discarding engineering)

source signal (instrument, amplifiers etc.), microphones and ad converter board.

The higher quality each of these are, the better your recording will sound.

[soundian]

800 on drum mics (if you are happy enough with live mics)

300 for a pair of reasonably high quality condensor mics

I've seen plenty of drum mic sets for sub 200 (3 tom mics, kick mic, snare mic and two condensors typically) and I used a set the other day which was surprisingly not shit (apart from the snare mic, which was good for the snare bottom but pants on the top). Certainly worth investigating if anyone wants to save themselves nearly a grand.

[Little Voice]

Well HairyScarey, what can I say?

I had better state from the outset that I am a former freelance engineer - and no, I am not touting for trade, before you even ask! But I do have a reasonable range of experience working in various studios around the World, working with hip-hop, rock and (mostly) classical and jazz. I also spent some time doing music recording for television. So much for my creds such as they are.

I was motivated to post (I feel that most forums are a waste of time) because I just had a daughter of a friend who asked me for advice. She spent several thousand Pounds (of her VERY hard-earned money as a teacher!) building up a home recording system based around a Mac and an M-Box and had got absolutely nowhere. She played some songs (piano and vocal, bar-style stuff, but really nice) to me and asked if I could help. She needed 100 demo CDs for a showcase gig in London in ten days time. Would I record her?

Her piano was a nasty Japanese upright, the mics were just an SM57 and something else and so I just told her No. If she has an important showcase for her music (she wanted to sell her tunes) then she should go to a local studio. I told her that I would keep an eye on things and we went round to have a look at a studio. I wont tell you where, when and how, but everything was dead standard - Good Concert Grand, good desk, the usual collection of Neumanns and AKGs, etc. and good outboard. For under 600 she recorded her 12-song demo and got 100 CDs nicely printed and looking very professional within a week. The guy who ran the place did a good job and used a C12 and a valve compressor on her voice that sounded perfect as a result.

She told him about the Mac and the gear she had wasted all that good money on and he told us that he gets that over and over again. Usually they waste much more money, according to him. Up to 30,000, before they realise that theres more to this game than just being a mouse-jockey.

I understand your frustration with some studios and yes, many demo studios are just home recording under another name and the results are poor. So it is a good idea to ask around and listen to what sort of stuff they have done that is similar to your music. But you must understand that the hit-in-your-bedroom is a complete myth.

I once said all this to an engineer - musician friend of mine (his credits include the music for some of the biggest films made in the UK) and he told me that a really successful CD (was number one in the LP charts for some time) had been recorded in a living room. He knew because he had recorded it. They spent over 10,000 in equipment rental fees and converted a bedroom into a control room (32 IOs of PT HD3, Audient desk, video links, etc., etc.) and the whole thing was mixed and mastered at Abbey. So much for home recording.

As I said, I know absolutely nothing about the Aberdeen music scene, so I cannot comment on any of the local studios. Nor would I want to! But please remember, a recording is only as good as the music. A truly great band in a crap studio will still sound great (though perhaps a little strange!) But a crap band in a great studio will still sound like crap!

[Guest lime ruined my life]

Asking a bunch of music enthusiasts NOT to record at home is an extremely niave way of thinking.

1)recording your own demos comes with the territory when your in a band, are you seriously suggesting that every idea should be paid for in order to capture it?

2)the majority of music/guitar enthusiasts are also gear and/or diy enthusiasts. Aquiring recording equipment and learning how to use it is part of the hobby, it also provides an emence degree of flexibility in recording if you can actually do it yourself. There is an extremely large gratification in seeing a song from composition to mastering that just isn't present if you pay some semi-proffesional X hundreds of pounds, who doesnt care about your band, to give you a tight schedule and almost invariably a half assed mix.

Note that i am speaking about the music enthusiast, and not an aspiring big shot band. But everyone starts out as an enthusiast, right?

p.s a 12 song demo??? jesus...

and by the way, a lot of semi big bands actually self-record quite succesfully, to my knowledge the dismemberment plan recorded all of their stuff themselves. I'm not surprised that some people with more money than brains waste heaps of money on music gear and then don't bother to learn how to use it properly. How many people do you know that own guitars , played wonderwall a few times and put the guitar in the back of the cupboard for the last 3 years? Should they just of popped down to the local guitar hire shop instead? Afterall, they could of played the top of the range gibsons and fenders that way!

the hit in the bedroom is not a myth, look at all the electronic based stuff:aphex twin, chris clark, squarepusher, almost all drum and bass artists. Then there's a whole load of indie/rock bands like fugazi, pavement, etc.

[threeornothing]

I knew a guy who used to throw away loads of money to the Mill to record his music, it was truley awful (his music, not the production) and would have been just as well being recorded on a 1960's grundig hifi with a single mic.

The guys now in jail...what a waste of money

Back on topic: if you're struggling to record at home...try this free VST plugin amp sim instead...

http://www.simulanalog.org/guitarsuite.htm

[HairyScaryMark]

My view on recording is. Save up your money, be 98% confident with the music you play before entering a studio. Produce a recording you can be proud of. Go to a good studio..... I believe the Mill to be the best studio within 10? miles of Aberdeen (don't take this personally please). If you plan to do lots of backing vocal overdubs or extra guitar overdubs, make sure the rest of the band know this. Don't get drunk or stoned on the day or the night before. (sounds obvious but a large percentage of bands get this wrong)

I've seen plenty of drum mic sets for sub £200 (3 tom mics' date=' kick mic, snare mic and two condensors typically) and I used a set the other day which was surprisingly not shit (apart from the snare mic, which was good for the snare bottom but pants on the top). Certainly worth investigating if anyone wants to save themselves nearly a grand.[/quote']

You get away with much lesser quality drum mics in small live venues. I have heard one dynamic mic as an overheard produce a better drum sound than an 8 mic setup. It is all about how you use it.

I recorded my friend's band using a hired, borrowed and partially owned set of drums mics.

The mics were something similar to as follows.

AKG tri-power D4400 bass drum mic (nearer kick skin)

Behringer B1 large diaphram mic (towards the non-kick side) - yes this thing can take 20hz- 20khz and 150dB

4 AKG C418 on toms and top of snare

AKG C1000 on underside of snare (i would recommend 2 of these for snare if you have the mics)

AKG C1000 on hi-hat

2 AKG C 391 B for overheads - CK91 capsule and SE300B power module

The board was a Behringer digital mixing desk. Not the best but for the setup we use, it makes great sense and is good value for money.

The results were extremely good. I would also say that if you are concidering going for mics below the sort of quality level I used you might as well use SM57's on drums. The SM57s don't do a bad job but are far from ideal. It also

It may also be worth concidering triggering drum samples if you can't afford anything above £3 tandy mics or have a low quality drum kit. I am not bought by the C418 but the rest of the mics i would recommend.

The band will probably post the recordings when they finish re-doing mistakes etc.

[soundian]

I would also say that if you are concidering going for mics below the sort of quality level I used you might as well use SM57's on drums. The SM57s don't do a bad job but are far from ideal.

Which would work out dearer than these cheap drum mic sets which are going about for comparable quality.

For home recording, spending 1500 on mics instead of 200 is pissing (your money away) in the wind, imo.

[HairyScaryMark]

The SM57s are multi purpose, you will always find a use for them in the future. They also cost for around 60 each, meaning that to mic your kit up with these, it woudln't be much more than the 200 set of drum mics.

I am not implying that you wont get a reasonable recording unless you spend the sort of money little voice mentioned. I am putting across my view that if you buy gear which is worse quality than even some of the lowest costing studios, you must question whether it is worthwhile trying to record your entire band in your home studio. Maybe one mic into your soundcard is your best idea, so you can record your ideas on guitar.

Even if you tried recording everything with 2 SM57s (which I wouldn't recommend) that is 120 and probably wont be any higher quality than what you get from captain toms.

I recorded my friend's band with the mics, which i mentioned in my last post. I am impressed with the results. We also used a far above average quality drum kit and set of cymbals. If your drum kit dosen't sound good acousticly, it is unlikely to on the recording either. I didn't do a huge amount of editing in sonar as the source signal was strong. The only drum mic I used EQ on at all was the top of the snare. The fact I barely used any EQ shows that my source signal was strong. EQ is largely a desctructive process. You use it generally for two reasons.

There is something wrong with the source signal and you are trying to remove a harsh quality.

To build a particular instrumental tone (mainly done at guitar amp stage etc.).

I am sure soundian already knows this or has a different opinion or take on the situation. I was trying to offer my advice to others, from my relatively small amount of experience with recording. I am not critising anyone else or trying to preach what I say as the gospel.

[soundian]

The SM57s are multi purpose' date=' you will always find a use for them in the future. They also cost for around £60 each, meaning that to mic your kit up with these, it woudln't be much more than the £200 set of drum mics. [/quote']

These drum mic sets also come with a kick drum and 2 condensers, as I mentioned, therefore the saving is quite large (if they're usable). The mics will be multi-purpose too,I recently used a cheapo tom mic on a vocal which was decent, Tom mics on brass usually work, better than 57s on trumpets, I'e used them on guitars too, sometimes they work better than a 57 there as well.

I am not implying that you wont get a reasonable recording unless you spend the sort of money little voice mentioned. I am putting across my view that if you buy gear which is worse quality than even some of the lowest costing studios' date=' you must question whether it is worthwhile trying to record your entire band in your home studio. Maybe one mic into your soundcard is your best idea, so you can record your ideas on guitar.[/quote']

That's the crux of the matter really. What purpose do you want the home recording set-up for? If it's a hobby, fill your boots, spend whatever you feel you need to, if it's to save on recording costs, go cheap and cheerful. Hopefully it'll be both so whatever money you spend won't be wasted

Even if you tried recording everything with 2 SM57s (which I wouldn't recommend) that is £120 and probably wont be any higher quality than what you get from captain toms.

I bet if you had unlimited access to Cpt Toms with the facility to go and mix down whenever the muse takes you' date=' you'd get much better results from Cpt Toms than 2 SM 57s.

I recorded my friend's band with the mics, which i mentioned in my last post. I am impressed with the results. We also used a far above average quality drum kit and set of cymbals. If your drum kit dosen't sound good acousticly, it is unlikely to on the recording either. I didn't do a huge amount of editing in sonar as the source signal was strong. The only drum mic I used EQ on at all was the top of the snare. The fact I barely used any EQ shows that my source signal was strong. EQ is largely a desctructive process. You use it generally for two reasons.

There is something wrong with the source signal and you are trying to remove a harsh quality.

To build a particular instrumental tone (mainly done at guitar amp stage etc.).

I'd suggest that the reason you didn't have to EQ much was more down to the source and placement than the mics used.

I am sure soundian already knows this or has a different opinion or take on the situation. I was trying to offer my advice to others' date=' from my relatively small amount of experience with recording. I am not critising anyone else or trying to preach what I say as the gospel.[/quote']

I'm just offering my opinion in case anyone does take what you say as gospel.

(this is just in general, not directed at HSM)

I can't really justify anyone spending money on a home reording set-up solely on the basis that it will save them money. I've priced it, and it doesn't work out any cheaper over 2-3 years (the average lifespan of a band?) even if bands take 3 days to record and mix each demo; which should give comparable quality to a good home recording with cheap gear. If I go down the "£50 quid a song" route and choose my budget studio carefully, the number of songs I would have to record with a similar quality to pay back the costs of the recording gear gets into silly numbers.

[HairyScaryMark]

I'd suggest that the reason you didn't have to EQ much was more down to the source and placement than the mics used.

Mics, placement and source; if used well shoudl mean you only need no or a tiny amount of EQ. The chances are, cheaper mics tend to offer less clarity or less smoothness on the upper-mid end (what some tube and condensor mics do) and you my have to compensate for this with EQ (which is destructive).

My remarks to do with cost were made after I heard a number of people express a view which said they could record their bands in a home recording setup to save money. This is usually not the case. It was also initally a direct response Little Voice's post.

[soundian]

Mics' date=' placement and source; if used well shoudl mean you only need no or a tiny amount of EQ. The chances are, cheaper mics tend to offer less clarity or less smoothness on the upper-mid end (what some tube and condensor mics do) and you my have to compensate for this with EQ (which is destructive).

My remarks to do with cost were made after I heard a number of people express a view which said they could record their bands in a home recording setup to save money. This is usually not the case. It was also initally a direct response Little Voice's post.[/quote']

EQ can also be constructive!

Cheap mics tend to over-emphasise the hi-mids, as you say, but they also tend to have really muddy bottom ends (oo-er missus) when you can actually hear them e.g AKG D112,

Anyway, we both had the same goal in mind, i.e. persuading people not to buy a home recording set-up if the only reason is they think it'll save them money.

[HairyScaryMark]

EQ can also be constructive!

Would you agree that EQ performed by the engineer is usually destructive and is mainly used simply because there is something wrong with the source signal or does not fit into the band mix?

My view is EQ is being used in this situation is taking apart the signal further. It is a bit like using radio therapy on cancer sufferers. It may destroy cancer sells but it will destroy a lot of healthy ones in addition, the alternative is much worse so being 'destructive' is the only sollution.

[soundian]

Would you agree that EQ performed by the engineer is usually destructive and is mainly used simply because there is something wrong with the source signal or does not fit into the band mix?

My view is EQ is being used in this situation is taking apart the signal further. It is a bit like using radio therapy on cancer sufferers. It may destroy cancer sells but it will destroy a lot of healthy ones in addition' date=' the alternative is much worse so being 'destructive' is the only sollution.[/quote']

I used the word contructive when perhaps, on reflection, creative might have been a better word.