Nickelback's Heavy Guitar Sound... Yes.. Nickelback

[Bang]

I bought the new Nickelback album because my girl loves the song Someday like it were a Britney Spears tune. I was surprised that this album is not at all like its poppy mainstream single, its got some great rock tunes, lots of dropped tunings, and man the guitar tone is amazing. Sounds kinda Mesa like, but anyone know anything about the guitar chain for the heavy stuff?
Steve
www.bangrecording.com
www.blacklinerock.com

[eberrong]

Here is a clip from an article in Mix mag...

The engineer miked the guitarists' amps with SM57s. The amps included a Mesa Boogie Triple Rectifier with a 4/12 cabinet, Peavey Triple X amp with a 4/12 Peavey cabinet, Vox AC30 and Fender Twin. Moi used one mic per cabinet. “We had one performance on either side,” he says. “We would record one mono track and then record another mono track. It makes it really thick. We'd blend all of the amps down into one track and record two tracks: a left and a right. Then, when the chorus comes, you get them to do it four times and have two guitars on each side.”

Phase alignment of 4 amps must have been fun....

Here's the very informative article...

http://mixonline.com/recording/inter...io_nickelback/



One thing that blew my mind was the mic choice for lead vocals...

Vocals were recorded in the upstairs vocal booth with a simple setup of a RØDE NTK tube mic running through a Neve 1084 preamp, UREI 1176 compressor and Avalon 737 SP mic processor.

I am sure he could have access to any mic he wanted and he chose a NTK??

[Bang]

Hey man, thanks!! I just bought a Marshall DSP 100 and a 1960 cab and used it along with my JCM 800 and Dual Rectifier, and got a KICKASS sound, so its funny that I read that they too mixed amps. Works great, I kept the 800 pretty clean to get the gritty string definition to punch up the fizzish metal tone of the rectifiers. COOL STUFF. Can't believe thats an NTK, Randy Staub must have eq'd out all the 12k bullshit on the vocal track. Thanks again,
Steve
www.bangrecording.com
www.blacklinerock.com

[Drumsound]

[i]I am sure he could have access to any mic he wanted and he chose a NTK??

It must have worked best for that voice in that room for those songs.

[eberrong]

Bang - Did you use a splitter and run all 3 amps at the same time? If so, did you run into phase problems?

I recently tried miking a Mesa Rectoverb Combo with a SM57 on the grill and a SP B1 about 12" back. I thought I was following the 3-1 rule but the tracks were somewhat out of phase. I ended up dumping the B1 tracks at mixdown.

[hourglass]

Originally posted by eberrong
Bang - Did you use a splitter and run all 3 amps at the same time? If so, did you run into phase problems?

I recently tried miking a Mesa Rectoverb Combo with a SM57 on the grill and a SP B1 about 12" back. I thought I was following the 3-1 rule but the tracks were somewhat out of phase. I ended up dumping the B1 tracks at mixdown.

We played around with this when I did the Stryder - Lost in the Shadows of a Crowd CD.

We did the standard 57 on the grille for the first day of tracking and then the next day for some reason the engineer got a bug to try something new - so we put an SM-81 a few feet back in the room. I don't remember if it was pointed at a different speaker, the middle of the cab or what...

The trick is, we tried to find the point where it was perfectly out of phase.

Then we flipped phase on that mic.

The tone I heard when he got a good balance between the two was absolutely perfect for what we were going for on that CD - Kind of a more polished version of the first Motley Crue record, but still with that grunty growl to it. So - that meant all guitars got redone.


If you wanna hear the tone we got on the guitar, you can hit iTunes, Napster, or whatever else and grab a stream for free. (tho I think I actually get a big fat nickel each time one streams...)

This CD has been thru the wringer online - it's currently listed on All Music & damn near everything else as being by "The Stryder" which is a totally different band. I can't get anybody to fix the shit tho, and I probably don't want 'em to since idiots are still buying my CD thinking it's some NY Emo band... I gotta wonder what they think when they hear the neo-hair metal on it...

ryan

[shack jonz]

Originally posted by eberrong
Bang - Did you use a splitter and run all 3 amps at the same time? If so, did you run into phase problems?

I recently tried miking a Mesa Rectoverb Combo with a SM57 on the grill and a SP B1 about 12" back. I thought I was following the 3-1 rule but the tracks were somewhat out of phase. I ended up dumping the B1 tracks at mixdown.

What exactly is the "3-1 rule"? Thanks

[Bang]

Originally posted by eberrong
Bang - Did you use a splitter and run all 3 amps at the same time? If so, did you run into phase problems?

I recently tried miking a Mesa Rectoverb Combo with a SM57 on the grill and a SP B1 about 12" back. I thought I was following the 3-1 rule but the tracks were somewhat out of phase. I ended up dumping the B1 tracks at mixdown.

Lets first establish the difference between multi micing an amp and micing several amps from the same guitar source. What I did was split the guitar signal using a Little Labs PCP that the guitarist had, then went into both amps, mic'd one with ONE 57 up on the girll and the other with an E609 on the grill. The cabs were a foot away from each other and the mics were in phase, I didn't have to flip anything. The fizz from the recto plus the midrange string definition from the Marshall was great. Oh yeah, I actually put an SM 58 on my new Marshall for some more crunch tone. So we had three tracks of one guitar and I bussed them to one track with all the three tracks up and then double tracked it with two Les Pauls with Seymour Duncan pickups. Works great.
I think Randy Staub put some chorusing on the Nickelback guitars, they sound GOOD.
Steve
www.bangrecording.com
www.blacklinerock.com

[bassmac]

Originally posted by shack jonz
What exactly is the "3-1 rule"?

For every 3k you spend on gear - your sound will improve by 1%.

[genericperson]

not sure on the nickelback sound in particular. but i can say with certainty that the paul reed smith guitar>>modern tube mesa stack is very popular among the heavy rock guitarists who buy good gear.

if you live near a guitar center, have the rock dude crank this setup and play some tuneage for you. you'll here "the sound".

this combination aint' cheap... $4k area.

[eberrong]

For every 3k you spend on gear - your sound will improve by 1%.

HA! So freakin' true!!!! What I meant was the general rule of multi-miking one source. The rule is to place the 2nd mic at least 3 times further from the source than the 1st mic. This is supposed to minimize phase problems.

[biggator6]

If you love the Mesa Recto sound (I'm going to give away a bit of a secret here) - try to find an old, used (and now discontinued) Rivera TBR series head.

I have a TBR1-SL, which is the hi-gain model - and it does that sound, and much more. It's an amazingly versatile amp and the tone just kills... and it's still found used for a LOT less than a recto. (I got mine for about 300 bucks - a heck of a deal)

(and yes, I play a PRS)
"-)

[bassmac]

Originally posted by eberrong
The rule is to place the 2nd mic at least 3 times further from the source than the 1st mic.

I never really got that - is it suppose to be "at least" or "exactly" 3x the distance?

[Beezoboy]

I thought the 3x rule was for omni's??

Isn't it for every foot back you go 3 times that apart? Like if miking a choir and your omni's are 10 feet back they would need to be 30 feet apart?

Beez

[eberrong]

loudist - Thanks for the clarification. I was just quoting something that I believe Charles Dye had posted. And in the post he didn't specify why it will help with phase problems. But what you're saying makes sense to me. If you can minimize bleed on the mic further away from the source you are effectively minimizing phase cancellation by default, right?

[oceantracks]

Hey guys...

I'm about to begin a personal project album which will have a lot of guitars on it.

How common is it for a single amp to be multi miked? One up close, one farther back, split to two separate tracks?

Often I hear records where even a simple rhythm guitar part sounds like it's been done like that...it's spread out over the stereo field and sounds way more open than if it had been done with one mike only, or even two mics to one track.

I'm in a small room with a couple of low wattage amps, a TG-2, an SM57, and a U99...most of the music will be way less heavy than a Nickelback type thing, more pop oriented with some overdriven rhythm parts.

Thanks for any tips!

[hourglass]

Originally posted by oceantracks
Hey guys...

I'm about to begin a personal project album which will have a lot of guitars on it.

How common is it for a single amp to be multi miked? One up close, one farther back, split to two separate tracks?

Often I hear records where even a simple rhythm guitar part sounds like it's been done like that...it's spread out over the stereo field and sounds way more open than if it had been done with one mike only, or even two mics to one track.

I'm in a small room with a couple of low wattage amps, a TG-2, an SM57, and a U99...most of the music will be way less heavy than a Nickelback type thing, more pop oriented with some overdriven rhythm parts.

Thanks for any tips!

I've never been happy with multiple mics on one guitar peformance panned around.

I find it better, for me at least, to always double the most basic part of the guitar track. So that the common, root-chord rhythm thing is wide & present in both speakers and then you can layer harmonies & lead parts over top of that - generally I like to experiment with different amps, mics, positioning, etc in this stage to further separate the "decoroations" from the foundation.

That said, if you wanna multi-mic to one track, or two or three tracks for EACH of these rhythm performances, more power to you. To do it on separate tracks is a resource hog, but sometimes it can give you a bit more control at mixdown. On the otherhand, if you're careful and trust you don't have any phase, eq, or balance problems then printing to one track should be just as wide & clear sonically.

ryan

[oceantracks]

Originally posted by hourglass
I've never been happy with multiple mics on one guitar peformance panned around.

I find it better, for me at least, to always double the most basic part of the guitar track. So that the common, root-chord rhythm thing is wide & present in both speakers and then you can layer harmonies & lead parts over top of that - generally I like to experiment with different amps, mics, positioning, etc in this stage to further separate the "decoroations" from the foundation.

That said, if you wanna multi-mic to one track, or two or three tracks for EACH of these rhythm performances, more power to you. To do it on separate tracks is a resource hog, but sometimes it can give you a bit more control at mixdown. On the otherhand, if you're careful and trust you don't have any phase, eq, or balance problems then printing to one track should be just as wide & clear sonically.

ryan

Ryan...and any others...could you take a minute and go to this site...

http://www.audioa.com/musicvideos.aspx

Click on the music video for "OCEAN FLOOR". Listen to the opening rhythm guitar lick...even though another guitar joins it after a couple of bars, those first chords are just too spread out for me to get that sound from one mic going to one track. Do you agree that this kind of sound is only gotten with two mics, to two tracks and panned? It doesn't sound doubled to me...

Thanks for any input...

[hourglass]

Originally posted by oceantracks
Ryan...and any others...could you take a minute and go to this site...

http://www.audioa.com/musicvideos.aspx

Click on the music video for "OCEAN FLOOR". Listen to the opening rhythm guitar lick...even though another guitar joins it after a couple of bars, those first chords are just too spread out for me to get that sound from one mic going to one track. Do you agree that this kind of sound is only gotten with two mics, to two tracks and panned? It doesn't sound doubled to me...

Thanks for any input...

It's hard to tell on a 64kbit audio stream, but it's got all the qualities of double-tracked guitars to me... It's pretty clear what one guitar sounds like when the lead thing comes in after the intro thing.

The rhythm tone & spread never changes thru the whole song. The acoustic is more obviously doubled - either thru processing, sticking it more up front, or something - it's got a bigger shimmer thru the (extremely tiny audio stream's) stereo field.

ryan

[ToddF]

Here's a funny Nickleback comparision that shows how a little too formula their songs are. Todd F.


[URL=http://www.nintendorks.com/brandon/temp/nickelbacksucks.mp3]

[Vatraxos]

Why does Nickleback suck?

It's pop music. So does pop music suck? No there's a time and a place for everything. I'd much rather listen to Nickleback on the radio anyday of the week over Britney Spears or Robbie Williams or something of THAT variety.

Someone mentioned something about a formula they use eariler up in the thread which I kinda understand what they're getting at. But if that makes Nickleback suck then ACDC must be the worst band in the world..

I'm not defending Nickleback. As a matter of fact I'm not that into them. But I don't think anyone can claim that it's not proffesionally done stuff and for the purpose pop music is supposed to serve I think they're one of the better bands/artists around.

Cheers,


V

[azaduffy]

i heard that for some songs they used a different amp for each frequency group (e.g. treble, mids, and lows...) - they use about 4 (or MORE) mono takes and just pan them..... high pass abit, keep the mids..... and avoid any "fuzz".

thats pretty much the standard golden way of going about creating fat, chunky rhythm guitars...

its the TINY differences between each take that thickens the texture in a way that no other process can...

[audiomichael]

Wow I was almost positive that the guitars were all re-amped with a modeler. They just have that sound. Don't get me wrong. It's totally working for what they're doing, and it's a fun and enjoyable album... but still, that sounds like speaker sim to me.

[Eric Greedy]

Originally Posted by eberrong

Bang - Did you use a splitter and run all 3 amps at the same time? If so, did you run into phase problems?

I recently tried miking a Mesa Rectoverb Combo with a SM57 on the grill and a SP B1 about 12" back. I thought I was following the 3-1 rule but the tracks were somewhat out of phase. I ended up dumping the B1 tracks at mixdown.

until you get really experienced with it.. use some headphones when placing mics.... amp hiss and flipping polarity can help in finding a very out-of-phase spot for consecutive mics in reference to a source mic. then flip polarity back.

[cortisol]

So this thread was originally posted in 2004 and it's now 2009. People are probably talking about different albums which involved different technology which may or maynot have been out at the time.

I'm not a fan of the bands songwriting or lyrics but over the years their recordings have been consistantly great sounding. Great for drums and guitar and vocals.

Peace,
Cortisol

[Slikjmuzik]

Get yourself a UAD card and buy the Little Labs IBP plug-in and you'll never have phase issues again.

[audiomichael]

Originally Posted by cortisol

So this thread was originally posted in 2004 and it's now 2009. People are probably talking about different albums which involved different technology which may or maynot have been out at the time.

I'm not a fan of the bands songwriting or lyrics but over the years their recordings have been consistantly great sounding. Great for drums and guitar and vocals.

Peace,
Cortisol

LOL! You're right!

"All The Right Reasons" guitars = excellent sounding
"Dark Horse" guitar = modeler (or at least Palmer speaker sim)
IMO.

[u b k]

Ah my old friend, the seriously misunderstood 3-to-1 rule.

What the 3-to-1 rule is NOT: when multi-mic'ing a single source, place the second mic 3 times the distance as the first to avoid phase issues. If this were the rule, most of the established stereo-mic'ing setups out there would be rendered invalid due to phase issues, when in fact they are generally the most phase coherent ways to multi-mic a source.

What the 3-to-1 rule IS: when multi-mic'ing multiple sources, make sure Mic A on Source A is at least 3x the distance from Source B as Mic B is from Source B.

In other words, if you've got an 87 2' from a cab, make sure any other mics on other sources are at least 6' away from that cab.

The concern is less about phase and more about bleed. Observing the 3-to-1 rule is handy in a live, multi-instrument tracking situation where you want to make sure that your kick mic doesn't give you more guitar than your guitar mic.

As with many rules in this game, best to remove the label 'law' and replace it with 'rule of thumb'.


Gregory Scott - ubk
.