hmmm... not my experience. i think the palmer delivers a great amp sound. i use mine with a D*-style amp and a Z-Wreck into a GAMA and i like what i'm hearing for clean/crunch/raunch. i'm not a metal guy, so i can't comment on that.
maybe you can do a smidge better micing a cab, but look how many people don't do that well. add the ability to do it at zero volume and at a moment's notice, seems like a no-brainer to me. and with the splitter/reamping concept, you have lots of options.
Would you care to share your exact signal path? (ie. splitter if you use one, re-amping if you do, preamp if you use one from the PDI before the DAW etc)
hmmm... not my experience. i think the palmer delivers a great amp sound. i use mine with a D*-style amp and a Z-Wreck into a GAMA and i like what i'm hearing for clean/crunch/raunch. i'm not a metal guy, so i can't comment on that.
maybe you can do a smidge better micing a cab, but look how many people don't do that well. add the ability to do it at zero volume and at a moment's notice, seems like a no-brainer to me. and with the splitter/reamping concept, you have lots of options.
Well everyone has different tastes. In the end if it sounds good to you and you're making good music it doesn't matter what you use.
For me though I didn't think the Palmer sounded like a cab at all. For my taste anyway. I'm really not into DI guitar. I never record that way unless as an effect.
You have to do what you can with the environment you're in. I used to use the reamp box with success. Radial owns them now.
Would you care to share your exact signal path? (ie. splitter if you use one, re-amping if you do, preamp if you use one from the PDI before the DAW etc)
Thanks!!!
pretty simple path -
amp du jour -> palmer -> shadow hills GAMA pre (iron or steel transformer) -> aurora (96k) -> mac mini -> presonus studio one 2.
i use the 'filter' out, not the line outs, from the palmer - i didn't much dig the tone i was getting with the line out. the filter out needs to go into a preamp to work. i mess with the front panel switches to taste to fit what the guitar and amp are doing with each other. i've tried to make it work with the chandler little devil pre, but haven't yet spent enough time chasing that to nail it down. it should kill, though.
when/if i do split with the intent to reamp, i send the direct guitar signal in via a rupert neve design 517 pre because the DI has a 'thru' i can send to the amp. then the radial x-amp for send/return.
i just leave the palmer wired directly to the GAMA channel so that when inspiration/desperation strike, i just grab an amp, plug in the power and speaker cable, arm a channel, and i'm good to go at a moment's notice. since i don't have the luxury of leaving a cab mic'ed (nor of blasting the volume), this has made it a far nicer workflow for just laying down parts and experimenting. i know if i stumble across something good, the track will be usable as-is.
did i understand correctly that you are taking the effects loop send on the matchless and then running out of that to get some amp mojo without the volume? for what its worth, I've found that most of the "magic" on the Matchless is on the back end, not the front - so if you are trying to use an effects loop to send signal out from your matchless, you really aren't getting the "sweet spot" of the matchless sound imho. In fact, I've found it harder to get a good sound that way than just going direct and letting a modeler do the work.
When i need to go direct for whatever reason, I typically go in through a neve style DI, give it just a little taste of FATSO, and then let my software modelers have at it. I got great feedback on the amazing tones from my last project doing it this way.
however, my favorite setup is simply this: Great guitar ---> a favorite pedal perhaps ---> great amp ----> 1 or 2 mic setup depending on specific goals.
the 57 is ok, but I can always seem to find better for the job. i5, ATM650 is surprisingly good, FATHEAD II, MD421, etc.
__________________
--------------------------------- Digital Precision,Analog Soul www.driftwoodtidemusic.com
I agree. A close mic and room mic, fine. Usually just one or the other for me.
As far as splitting the signal into all of those pieces, I think you would be better recording separate tracks with each of your different input approaches. Even if it is doubling the original part with no variation, the slight imperfections that come with playing from one take to the next will give the tracks character and fullness. Like any approach though, this is just what works for me.
Yup, exactly.
& to take it a bit further, use a different amp/guitar/pickup/mic/preamp for the second track. it will sound huge and mor defined when you start panning them out awayfrom eacch other.
I am looking to get a decent electric guitar recording set up in the studio ...
Personally I am a 'keep it simple' kinda guy. I have good guitars, good amps, and a pile of great microphones. Most often I'll pick one and stick it in front of the speaker about an inch from the grille, off axis along the angle line of the cone. Depending on the project, a room mic may come into play, too.
Micheal Wagener (and who could argue with his guitar micing choices???) showed me his technique, which uses Royer ribbons dead on the dust covers, again about an inch off the grille cloth. He carefully places the first one,, then puts a second one on another speaker, carefully matching them up for sound.
I have another friend with a beautiful studio who records every guitar to four or more tracks through different amps and or digital simulator boxes, and makes his decisions at mixdown.
There are no rules, and a lot of people want to turn the recording process into some magic/voodoo process. Good on them, I'm sure that is how some of the coolest guitar sounds come to pass. I usually know what I want to hear in the final recording, and because I know what I want to hear I can mic for that sound and save a lot of time for my clients at mixdown. But this only works if you do a preproduction meeting, you and your client/producer are on the same page, and everybody knows what the final product is supposed to sound like. (Sorta the Producers job...) If everybody is just farting around hoping for the best and praying for some sort of recording magic to happen and nobody really wants to make a decision, like, ever, then maybe a dozen tracks of the same instrument through different amps and sims makes sense.
__________________
"I believe that entertainment can aspire to be art, and can become art, but if you set out to make art you're an idiot."
Steve Martin
Show business: we're all here because we're not all there.
Resistance is not futile. It is voltage divided by current.
In a rock mix, I have no use for a DI signal from a guitar in the finished mix. I record in my band's practice space which makes a decent size drum room, so I record guitars and bass through DI's so that the entire band can track together. But I never use the guitar DI signal for anything other than reamping later, the point of going direct is to keep from bleeding all over the drum tracks. I haven't done that many different bands, but some of the guitar players have gotten very nervous at first, which I understand because the amp/pedal are part of their sound.
One nice benefit of this approach is that I can back up the guitar amp mics off the amps without any bleed from other instruments in the room. I've been using a Beyer M201 about 7-8" back from the speaker pretty much straight on axis, close enough to sound present but capture a more complete image of the sound than a mic right on the grille cloth. I should also try an LDC at some point for this.
I am looking to get a decent electric guitar recording set up in the studio (im more a producer/synth player, but getting a decent guitar recording for my production needs is key).
I have a couple of guitars and a couple of amps, some good mics, and am looking to have a good set up for plug and play.
My thought is to go from Guitar to a splitter (thinking little labs Distro) and then send one clean signal DI through a Neve Pre into the DAW.
Then send the second signal to a pedal and then into a guitar amp. I would then mic the amp speaker cab. I would mic it with two different types of mics (57 and a Ribbon perhaps) and bring those back into the DAW through API type preamps. Then blend the 3 signals and perhaps use an AMP Farm on the DI'd signal if need be.
I have a few questions:
1. Is this a standard type common recording technique
2. For the second signal, would me going into a Preamp such as a Neve prior to hitting the pedals and then the guitar amp make a difference in tone or add a certain character?
3. Would having 3 mics on a 1x12 cabinet and then blending the 3 to get one sound and then mixing it with the DI signal work?
Would love to have some suggestions.
Thanks so much!
What genre are the guitars you are recording? Makes a difference if you are going for vibey lanois/edge sound or shredder/vai, or thick crunch/acdc, etc.
What genre are the guitars you are recording? Makes a difference if you are going for vibey lanois/edge sound or shredder/vai, or thick crunch/acdc, etc.
Thanks. Good question. Let's say pop music. I'd be super content if I could get anywhere close to the guitar tones on the following...
1. Thriller record by MJ
2. Any of Pinks rock/pop stuff
3. Bob Marley legends album
4. U2 Joshua Tree
5. Alanis Jagged Little Pill
i've been recording electric guitars via a palmer PDI-03, which has the other advantage of being silent - a blessing here at the Legendary Third Bedroom Studios. you can take a split signal from the palmer to a cab that you can then mic, but honestly? it sounds mighty fine all by itself thru a chandler little devil pre to the daw.
definitely a lot to be said for this type of signal path. also don't forget reamping. split the signal so that you always have a raw clean signal in the daw and you can always send it out to various amps/configs later.
I have the koch load box II (very versatile) and am happy with it, I'm eyeing up the webber's as they use speaker drivers.
Thanks. Good question. Let's say pop music. I'd be super content if I could get anywhere close to the guitar tones on the following...
1. Thriller record by MJ
2. Any of Pinks rock/pop stuff
3. Bob Marley legends album
4. U2 Joshua Tree
5. Alanis Jagged Little Pill
Love the Dire Straits sound too.
So I guess no shredding, metal, country etc.
Seems pretty clean stuff ha?
Seems to me, you could do well with an AC15 and a Fender Reverb of some variety. One close mic on the cab (57) and one mic at 2-3ft (LDC). Move the mics and blend to taste. Should do it.
That said - take a lot of notes when you hit a sweet spot. I don't know how many times I've stumbled onto a really great set up, didn't take notes and am kicking myself trying to recreate it. Sometimes when recording I think, "oh this is sucks, I'm not taking notes" only to find out in hindsight with fresh ears it was one of the best set-ups, signal chains I'd had... go figure.
Hi G&G
Thanks.
I currently have the following..
Guitars- 80s strat, 68 jazz master, 66 Coronado
Amp - matchless HC30 + 112 cab, Roland JazzChorus 77, Univox 45b
Mics - 57, m88, md421, m160, and a bunch of LDCs
How could I work with what I already have? I dont mind adding another guitar or other pieces of gear such as solitudes to the equation. Maybe not so much new amps. Thanks.
this is all palmer into the SH GAMA - no cabs or reamping at all -
the wide arpeggiated rhythms are a Dr Z Z-Wreck (one of the guitars is tuned nashville style);
the fat crunch bits and the solo tracks are a Dumble-clone.
some ITB sweetening - verb/delay/compression - just to be going on with until it's time to get more serious about mixing. so it's very much a work in progress, but putting it out there to give you an idea of what the palmer can do.
Hi G&G
Thanks.
I currently have the following..
Guitars- 80s strat, 68 jazz master, 66 Coronado
Amp - matchless HC30 + 112 cab, Roland JazzChorus 77, Univox 45b
Mics - 57, m88, md421, m160, and a bunch of LDCs
How could I work with what I already have? I dont mind adding another guitar or other pieces of gear such as solitudes to the equation. Maybe not so much new amps. Thanks.
Hi CJ -
Well, let me start off by saying I'm not an expert by any means so take anything I say with a grain of salt as one guys opinion/experience.
From the looks of it, I'd say you might do well to get a Les Paul in the mix as it seems you have the Fender family covered sans for a tele.
I'd say you should probably be able to cover the tones from the amps you have. I'm not really familiar with them to know how they compare to a standard Vox AC30 (UK/Brit) and Fender Reverb (US/Clean). That being said if you compare tubes/specs you should be able to get close.
I know you don't want another amp, but a relatively inexpensive amp head is the Egnater Rebel 20 which can be set to either 6V6's or EL84's, or blend them. I love mine, and I'm running it into a Orange 1x12. Very versatile.
- Vintage Fender Twin Reverb (the king of clean)
- Fender Pro Jr (great low watt, but loud, and nice break up)
- Vox AC4TV (low watt version for that "Vox" sound)
- Marshal Class 5 (Nice for Tonal change up and that "Marshall" creamy crunch)
- Epiphone Valve Jr (Very affordable low watt amp with "vintage"-ish kinda tone)
Again - I'm sure you are covered with what you have, but I'm not personally familiar. I bet that Matchless is pretty sweet!
I usually mike amplifiers with an SM57 and plug the SM57 straight into my Yamaha AW1600 recorder.
My electric guitars don't sound good plugged straight into the Yamaha recorder. When I don't feel like miking an amplifier I usually plug the guitar into a 1970s Barcus Berry Standard Preamp and plug the preamp into a Boss BX-60 mixer which goes into the Yamaha recorder. I use the Boss mixer's effects loop for modulation and delay effects when I want them. I use the Boss mixer because it can be overdriven by the Barcus Berry preamp.
Sometimes, when recording something that is mostly guitar I just use a Tascam 414 four track cassette recorder. I generally like how guitars sound when plugged directly into it.
Damn, you guys are completely off the deep end in terms of tone capture.
It all boils down to this: throw away your plugins and DI's and fancy pre's, it's all just
f-ing marketing. I always get the tone of the gods, using a very simple technique:
& it works every time.
All I do is find a base sound I want to record, could be a particular guitar/amp/setting/combo, could be a preset through a stack, a preset direct to disk, could be just a guitar in the room with a mic ...I edit the preset/mic the room/amp/cabinet whatever is the source, to get the exact tone I want in the room, Arm the recorder, and MONITOR the result.
With phones and monitors, full size; powered.
Once I have that same exact tone in the monitor, I make sure I dial out all the noise in the signal chain, gating, compressing,
whatever, and the track is cut.
That's it.
I've used and still use all kinds of multifx units by
Korg, Zoom, Digitech, ART, DoD and then some,
why bother doing all that work when most of it is already done for you. The programming capabilities of modern multifx/floor/rack units is nothing short of amazing, and with some good mics {I'm using Beta 57's currently, & Oktava M012's, that's it. Would love to get a couple E609's a couple I5's and a couple of E965's though...}
you can capture anything as well as ANY of the shit you here on radio or Itunes...
I'm basically able to get anything from the last 40 years of tone on record...
BTW, I do use alot of tube amps...nothing like the sound of 24bit96khz digital into a nice warm EL84...
Thanks. With the two mic signals, what do you recommend using to blend them before hitting a single channel Neve?
If you know what you want to hear. Otherwise, you are mixing out of context. Will that mix fit into the whole mix? Some know what they want to hear, some do not. But it isn't hard to do it enough times to learn.
If you know what you want to hear. Otherwise, you are mixing out of context. Will that mix fit into the whole mix? Some know what they want to hear, some do not. But it isn't hard to do it enough times to learn.
Thanks. What I was looking to find out was actually what piece of gear is used to get a blend or mix? A small 2 channel mixer or you mic with one set of mics? Not sure if I'm understanding this aspect of the chain.
Thanks. What I was looking to find out was actually what piece of gear is used to get a blend or mix? A small 2 channel mixer or you mic with one set of mics? Not sure if I'm understanding this aspect of the chain.
Typically one would not run a pair of mics into a single mic pre. Usually you would have separate channels for each mic. It might not be unusual for all the channels in a multichannel console to end up on one track... after all, that is pretty much what happens on a club stage with the PA... the whole audience hears every mic blended into a mono signal. So there would be nothing wrong with doing that while recording, either.
I've never run a cheap 2 channel 'board' into a quality mic pre. My concerns would be along the lines of crappy sound, and making sure that I could pad the output of the small board so that it did not overload the mic-level input of the mic pre, and would I be better off just skipping the Daking altogether and sending the mixer directly into my audio interface. At the same time I see no real harm in trying.
From my own recording philosophy, I try to keep short clean uncluttered signal paths. I believe that the closer to the source that I can stay with as little circuitry between that source and playback, the better things sound, the more the natural tone of the instruments get to the ear of the listener. The more stuff in the path, the less it seems to matter what that stuff is... a 57 Les Paul starts to sound like any old electric, the detail of the amps blur out, and the mojo slips away. But this is my thing, it doesn't have to be yours.
Keep it simple
1 or 2 mics (I like an AKG414 TL at a distance and either a Beyer M69 or a Sennheiser 906 close)
I also use a Palmer PDI03 and think it is great. It allows me to crank stuff like my Laney Supergroup which is stupidly loud and fine tune the sound. Will be trying the Koch one too as I had a combo of theirs that sounded pretty decent over it speaker simulated output.
I would ignore the plug ins myself as I have yet to really hear one that got me the sound I want.
not sure this track or the guitars in it will do anything for you - but if any of it appeals to you I'll break down the signal path and post the stems.
As has already been stated, the key to getting a great recording of electric guitar starts with getting a great performance with great tone from the amp. Me thinks you can way overcomplicate capturing a great sound. I recently spent some time with an "A list" engineer/producer as he tracked a guitar player that I am going to be working with on another project. I quietly observed the simplicity of the session. I talked to him about his technique for recording electric guitar and it was the 121, along with a 57 or a AT AE3000.
He confirmed what I have always believed to be true about keeping it simple.
I suppose you can use whatever method works best for you as long as you are capturing the sound that you're looking for. I guess I may be lazy, but the above method seems to work great for me. My two cents...
I too will read the link.
I been recording personal guitar/bass for yonks and have come to the conclusion that the simplest approach works best for trying ideas out.
A set up that is ready to go at all hours into the night is a decent DI chain.
Using a sim to get an inspiring tone could be an oxymoron to most but I like the ease.
I used to have a control and a live room. I miss being able to crank an amp and get inspired.
Almost always the sound was dry and the mic distance, far in a big space.
If you are recording an actual song and the guitar parts are well rehearsed you will want the best tone.
Use the mic's cabs in a decent sounding space. You are committing to tone. In fact, your tone may only ever come from this approach, like a creamy overdriven valve amp feeding back is a combo of Guitar, Amp room and player. If it is you, you got to record a bit and move the mic and record that and move the mic until l you have what your hearing in the room. Do it with one mic.
The playing is influenced by the tone especially the feedback distortion and to DI it to reamp later is just wrong. Putting a mic on the guitar itself and adding that in the mix can be heavenly. Using that also as a room mic is getting technical and prone to phase issues, but if you can get it fast, great. If it works in the mix better but I generally go for just the mike at the strings with plane of rejection toward the amp.
Close mic'ing in an enclosure defeats the purpose but I have heard some great dry rythym metal tones this way.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------ A great mix is created at the source
A compressor is a "voltage turn it downer".
You can determine when it begins to turn it down and when it resumes from turning it down, even how quickly it does it's "turn it down" and by how much it turns it down so you can push more voltage into it to be turned down and then make up for gain lossed from turning it down.Bart Nettle
not sure this track or the guitars in it will do anything for you - but if any of it appeals to you I'll break down the signal path and post the stems.
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
