Question re Two Mics on An Acoustic..

[oceantracks]

Sometimes I'll read where an engineer used a couple of mics at once on acoustic guitar, and I often wonder (especially after hearing the track) whether these two mics are going to TWO tracks, or being combined into one track. I realize it depends on the song, but for songs where the acoustic is not out front, and just adding some drive to things, I imagine the two track approach isn't necessary. Which leads me to the question of...how do you make sure you don't have phase problems between the mics?

Thanks (another musician turned engineer with beginner questions)

TH

[Rep]

Originally Posted by oceantracks

Sometimes I'll read where an engineer used a couple of mics at once on acoustic guitar, and I often wonder (especially after hearing the track) whether these two mics are going to TWO tracks, or being combined into one track. I realize it depends on the song, but for songs where the acoustic is not out front, and just adding some drive to things, I imagine the two track approach isn't necessary. Which leads me to the question of...how do you make sure you don't have phase problems between the mics?

Thanks (another musician turned engineer with beginner questions)

TH

When stereo tracks go to mono,
the result can sound different from the original tracks.
especially with certain stereo techniques ...
X-Y technique are less prone to phase problems.


.

[RCM - Ronan]

M-S (mid side) Stereo pairs.

[Andreas G]

As a starting point for monokompatible stereo-trackings you may read and try these technics.

Good luck... Andreas

[paterno]

Originally Posted by oceantracks

Sometimes I'll read where an engineer used a couple of mics at once on acoustic guitar, and I often wonder (especially after hearing the track) whether these two mics are going to TWO tracks, or being combined into one track. I realize it depends on the song, but for songs where the acoustic is not out front, and just adding some drive to things, I imagine the two track approach isn't necessary. Which leads me to the question of...how do you make sure you don't have phase problems between the mics?

Thanks (another musician turned engineer with beginner questions)

TH

I always combine them to one track, regardless of the situation.

You make sure you don't have phase problems by listening to the mics individually and combined to make sure you are getting what you want. If you are not happy, then you need to move one or both of the mics, or try using a device like the Little Labs IBP to get it to sound the way you want it to.

John

[Knox]

if it's strumming track, I never record stereo (one mic mono) . . .only finger picking, James Taylor style in and open and sparse track is stereo for me.

[Dave Martin]

Two tracks here. Sounds fuller even when the guitar is buried in the mix. And it's a lot easer to decide later to just use one of the two tracks than it is to redo the part with two mics going to two tracks.

[MichaelT]

Something cool I've been doing for strumming stuff is one mic close and one mic anywhere from 4 to 8 feet away (make sure to check phase). The close mic is placed where it would sound best if all alone in the mix. The far mic is directly in front of the guitar pointed at the soundhole.

I really like this approach because it allows me to "soften" up the sound with the natural room reverb as I bring volume up on the far mic. It's not a sound for every track, but it works really well to give some space to the guitar (try panning the mics opposite each other until it sounds good). I realize many people already do stuff like this with many different instruments (drums of course). I just wanted to point out, for someone who might not have thought to try it, that it can also work very well on acoustic guitar.

-Mike

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by Andreas G

As a starting point for monokompatible stereo-trackings you may read and try these technics.

I read the article but I dunno. There are some questionable claims made IMO:

They talk about 'cardioid mics being less prone to proximity effect'? Less prone than what? It's also stated that a KM184 is a good way to prevent boom. That's just not true, I like my 184s but I don't often use them on acoustic guitar because they can very easily lead to boom/low-midrange mud.

It's also stated that you should always use condensers on acoustic guitar. Personally I often use dynamics like the Beyer 201, Shure SM7 or even 57. You can go pretty close with these and there's way less bass-buildup despite the hyper-cardioid nature of these mics. An additional bonus is the good rejection, so dynamics will work much better in a less-than-stellar room. The preamp will be important though as the gain will be very low (especially with the SM7)

I would just forget about the 3-1 rule. That's BS, maybe good on paper but remember that a lot of the sound of the guitar will be reflections from the floor and walls, these sure will gonna mess with any 3-1 rules.

I also would seriously question the claim made that mono-compatibitility isn't so important these days. Sure it still is, radio will often be broadcast in mono, if only temporarily so. There are still plenty of situations where the playback medium will be mono, an obvious one being speakers placed too far apart. (Very common as we all know).

If it needs to be stereo, I would monitor in mono (while tracking) and A/B a one mic setup against a stereo one to hear if it really is better, especially when it's a part in a dense arrangement.

As others have suggested, the Little Lab IBP can be very convenient too but if you're new to this, wouldn't get a IBP as a first step. It's a great tool but it's not so easy to get a handle on. (Talk about option anxiety )

[Andreas G]

Andi,
of course you are right about the "...less prone to proximity effect" and that one should always use condensers on acoustic guitar... that is simply nonsense! I wraped this, sorry for that, my bad. Actually I meant more these three stereo technics, which I think are very usable if one wants to start with stereo trackings and looking for a good mono compatibility. You are also right about the "3 in 1 rule", I once tracked acoustic guitars where I ended up in a total uncommen technic, because the sweetspots of the guitar and room were so odd. But then again when someone is a beginner it's good to have a starting point IMO. Btw I have had good results with a pair of km184 the have a bass rool off that begins at around 200Hz, of course when you put them to close there will be still a proximity effect.

Andreas

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by Andreas G

Btw I have had good results with a pair of km184 the have a bass rool off that begins at around 200Hz, of course when you put them to close there will be still a proximity effect.

Hi Andreas,

yes, I got a pair of 184s that I use mainly on OHs. I became 'obsessed' with 57s and SM7s on acoustic guitars lately, I had really good results for Ameriana-type sounds.

But as my new UA 2192 converter is on the way, I'm really looking forward trying it with a pair of 184s for acoustic guitar. I wasn't so successful with stereo acoustic guitars so far but that doesn't mean that I give up!

[mltamisin]

The other night I used a Manley Reference around the hole area. A little behind and above it but angled at the hole area. I also used a km184 where the neck meets the body. Sounded good to me. I did use separate tracks. I also panned the tracks off each other about 75% for a little stereo spread. Sounded cool for a quick setup. Ran them through my Portico's on silk and RNC's barely hittin. Next time I may switch the mics just to see how it sounds.