Acoustic Guitar -> Mic -> Melodyne Editor -> Acoustic Guitar library?

I wonder if anyone's had any success with the above workflow. I've been really enjoying my experiments with miking guitar, and the results have been OK, but I'm still not satisfied. I could upgrade my mic of course but most of all I think it's a room issue. I've tried many different mic positions, I've even tried the old "duvet over the mic stand" which made for a deader sound but also seemed to screw with the highs. Everything I do seems to result in endless EQ twiddling and a result which would sound out of place in a commercial mix, especially when the rest of the instruments are either synth or sample based and therefore "pristine." 
 
So while I'm going to continue along this path of experimentation and learning, I need some pristine sounding guitar for a couple of songs and am considering the purchase of a decent quality guitar library. I'm thinking that I could take my existing guitar parts and convert them to MIDI using the polyphonic Melodyne algorithm (I have Editor) and then - admittedly with a lot of tweaking and editing - have that MIDI drive the samples. I've done various guitar-to-MIDI things in the past with varying levels of success, but have used the MIDI to drive synths in the past. 
 
Has anyone tried this? What were the results like? And does anyone have a recommendation for a guitar library? I've been looking at Acoustic Legends HD which seems like pretty good value considering the number of instrument comes with - including both nylon and steel (I need both). But I've heard others rave about libraries like OrangeTree and Ilya Efimov so I'm wondering if the general consensus is that Acoustic Legends falls behind newer libraries. I've been listening to some demos and they all sound pretty good but of course that doesn't really tell me how easy they are to use and how versatile they are in terms of articulations etc. 

Hmm that's an idea, I didn't think of that. 

mixmkr
With your RME and killer recording rig...don't know what you're using for mics, but you should be able to get a great sound that imo, would trump any guitar library, especially if there's going to be any solo context of the guitar, or parts where it will really stand out.
You mention your room...go for something not so ambient to begin with and add it in later with a great verb.  In fact, I'd think that the route unless you feel your "room" has something really to offer.  Try a kitchen then if you want "lively"...or a carpeted living room for more dead sounding.
However, I'd back up a couple steps and start at the source and make sure you're using a quality sounding guitar, new or new-ish strings and a playing technique that will take advantage of those elements.  You're not going to get an old campfire beater to sound pristine...  unless you want that "campfire beater" sound!!....    and NOT to say that's what your guitar might be either !!

To summarize... good guitar and take the room out of the equation during tracking... unless your walk-in shower sounds lovely and you won't get wet!
 

This is what I ideally want, to be able to take as much of the room out as possible, but I'm limited in what I can do in the way of treatment. I've looked mic isolation attachments like the Auralex Mudguard (and more expensive ones) but having never used one I wouldn't know what to expect in terms of an improvement. 
 
My Spanish guitar actually sounds very nice in person and the strings are quite new. Anyway here's a short clip I recorded while trying out different mic positions, it sounds about the best of the bunch although obviously there's a lot of room for improvement. 
 
https://www.dropbox.com/s...c%20%28193%29.wav?dl=0

I would put the mic about 12-18 inches away from the guitar at about the 12th-14th fret. But I would angle the mic slightly toward the sound hole to capture some of that beautiful low end.

Thanks for having a listen guys. The link seems to be working now timidi.
 
The mic was about 12 inches away from the 12th fret, angled slightly up the neck. I'm finding that I have to whack a shelf on it to attenuate the low end a bit to fit in the mix otherwise it's getting in the way of the vocal. But perhaps I can notch some frequencies out instead of using a shelf. Really though I was hoping to get a little more sparkle and detail out of it. 
 
Perhaps what I need to do is switch to a steel string. Problem is I don't have one....actually I have a beautiful hand made steel string that sounds out of this world, but it's sitting in the closet and needs some repairs. Maybe it's time to get that baby up and running. 
 
The mic I'm using is a reasonably low priced affair but not bad at all - an AKG Perception 220. I have the bass cut switch activated. 
 

sharke
 
https://www.dropbox.com/s...c%20%28193%29.wav?dl=0

Well, that sounds really quite nice to me. Sure, there is a sense of room, but are you sure it really takes away from your production? Used right it might even add a bit of life and grit that may do good to a largely synth and sample based production... But then I am maybe not enough of an audiophile...
Maybe do try to borrow one of these mic isolation shields and see what it does for you. Or try a matched pair of small diaphragm condensers. Do you have a music store that will trust you with borrowing stuff to try out?
 

Hi Sharke,
 
Personally, if I can be honest with you....I think you are being overly anal and over-thinking things. :)
 
I like the sound of this track as it is. What I would do here.....it needs a little eq for some sparkle...high pass 200 and below...see how it sounds. If you need a little more low end "girth" try high passing at 180 or 150 Hz.
 
Next, for the sparkle....you get treble on a guitar from 3-6k. Experiment there to see how it sounds. If it literally sounds abrasive, try 8k to just add some presence. It may add a bit more of a "noise" type sound than a presence there, but try it just to see. If it's too hissy, drop down to 7k or even 6.5.
 
From there, try removing a little 640 Hz. This will take away some of the mids that may be adding to the masking or guitar congestion that you mentioned within the vocals.
 
Lastly, once you have everything where you want it, use Perfect Space and run a small room/medium room impulse. Eq the room using the PC eq or a Sonitus. High pass the low end until you no longer hear any low end "whoom" type artifacts. You may need to take the HP to 300 Hz. Leave mids alone and experiment where you want the high end in the impulse to be. Again....same set of rules as we had for the guitar eq. In this scenario though, you very well may need to use the upper end of the frequency band and may end up boosting or even cutting 7-10K depending on what type of impulse you used.
 
These things right here should give you great results. You have a strong recording.....like the frame of a house. Now it's up to you to "dress it up".
 
Now, the thing with "framing" to get a good sound depends on the mic, the placement of the mic (which I think you nailed pretty good) the guitar and the execution....how things are played. New strings is always super important as well.
 
That said, a better guitar is going to improve the sound 10-fold. Your playing is good enough do there are no issues there. A really good mic is going to make the sound more pristine unless the guitar is pure crap.
 
Most really good mic's accentuate what is presented to them. A great guitar with a great sound....the mic will make it sound that much better. Bad guitar with a so-so sound...sometimes the better mic can bring out the flaws more. It's a grey area really.
 
As far as rooms go....I'm probably one of the only recording guys that swears the room doesn't make a huge difference unless it is a horribly bad room. The reason I say this all the time is because I have recorded in some of the crappiest situations known to man and I have ALWAYS come out of them with an acceptable production. Do good rooms make it easier? It depends on what one calls a good room. The ones I have called good rooms were only good when we could utilize them and create some space with the mic's used. Even there...we had to be careful because the sound + the room (in that order of importance) is what I'm after. I never need the room to dominate the sound....so by the time I get done, there may not be that much room included in the print....even if the room is a good one.
 
When a room is bad, you use the right mic, you keep it close and after a successful print with the right execution, you manufacture a room that suits the sound. I say that because if you close mic, the room is not going to come into play unless it really reverberates or has rattles that can be heard even when you close mic. This is slim to none in a CM situation of no more than 4-6 inches. With the capabilities we have today, capturing a room sound is only as important as we want it to be. Seriously man. With the power of today with impulses and the ability to compress, eq and color a room, I'd bet all that I own that when done right...no one could tell the difference.
 
Is a room important? Only if you want it to be. See in my experience, I would only worry about a room in the case of looking for a specific sound. When we need drums to sound a certain way when using a real kit, we go to a studio that excels in drum production due to the room. That said, there aren't many bands today that are using big drum rooms....most drum sounds are in your face, hybrid sampled and the rooms are hybrid as well and half manufactured.
 
With instruments that we mic....we really need to cover all bases at all times so that we always have a safety net. If it's for yourself, you can experiment until the cows come home. When you have someone paying by the hour, you can't afford a bad take due to a room so you mix and match for the situation. Most times in my real life recording experience (based on genre of course) we wind up using LESS of the room and use more of the direct recording sounds at all times. In some instances, the client liked more room sound and wanted more synthetic added in as well. The reason being...some people don't like to be so up front and naked. They feel room or effects help to mask their flaws when in reality though some of that may be partly true, they are degrading the recording with washout.
 
So in my opinion brother, unless you get a new guitar and a super sensitive mic (or use a completely different set up) you got what you got....and I happen to think it's quite good. With a few little tweaks, I see no reason how this sound would not stack up against anything else out there. But that's just my opinion. :)
 
-Danny

Thanks for that Danny, that's some excellent advice. You're absolutely right about a cut at 640Hz making room for the vocal, and I quite liked the sound of a little 5.5K boost. It's definitely sounding better now.
 
I haven't been able to try running it through Perfect Space because wouldn't you know it, Sonar does not recognize my Perfect Space .dll! Ain't that a drag? In fact I have quite a few plugins that Sonar has just stopped acknowledging and I really need to get to the bottom of it. I've heard good things about that plugin though. 
 
You're right about me being too anal about this, of course. I get really fixated and obsessed with some things when I just need to learn to relax and leave well alone. Of course this is why I have 10+ projects that are forever in the "tinkering" phase and have been for ages. Sometimes I'll be just about to hit the hay and think "hmm, I think I'll have one last listen to that project I've been so happy with tonight" - and of course 2 hours later, it turns out I haven't gone to bed at all because I started tinkering again. LOL! And then the next day I have another listen and think why didn't I leave the hell alone? Thank God for Gobbler! 
 
I think tomorrow I'm going to experiment with some closer mic positions. I like your advice about rooms man, I guess that was something I really wanted to hear. If it's possible to get a good recording in a not so good room then I will pursue that. I'll take it down from 12 inches to 6 and see what kind of difference that makes. If that takes a little more of the room out then I'll be very happy. 
 
I've done a lot of the guitar to MIDI Melodyne thing, but usually for converting guitar to synth. And yeah it can be a real pain - it takes a LOT of tidying up and sometimes I listen to the notes Melodyne has created and think "there's no way in the world I played that" - I'm not even talking about the ghost notes and overtones, but sometimes a note which is definitely part of the piece will show up before or after when I played it. So then I'm moving it back to where it should be, but that kind of defeats the whole point of converting guitar to MIDI, in that you want to retain the timing and feel of what you played. So what usually ends up happening is that in the course of all this fixing and editing, I end up with a totally new piece of music for the synth. And often that's worked out great, in fact I've ended up with some really lovely synth parts just from applying Melodyne to guitar and then sculpting something out of the resulting MIDI in the piano roll. I think if I was trying to recreate a realistic guitar performance with Melodyne and a guitar library, I would get very frustrated indeed. So I'll skip any sample purchases for the time being. 
 
I did try recording a double take of the part, and actually it wasn't that bad - I surprised myself with how accurately I could play the second part along with the first part. But there were still the odd notes which were slightly out and it starts to sound like a sort of slap back delay effect...which could work in another context I guess, just not this one. The vocal was very nicely recorded - lots of warmth and detail. I'm just trying to record a guitar part that'll do it justice. I'll get there in the end! Thanks once again for your advice man...excellent as usual!

sharke
 
 
I think tomorrow I'm going to experiment with some closer mic positions. I like your advice about rooms man, I guess that was something I really wanted to hear. If it's possible to get a good recording in a not so good room then I will pursue that. I'll take it down from 12 inches to 6 and see what kind of difference that makes. If that takes a little more of the room out then I'll be very happy. 
 
I did try recording a double take of the part, and actually it wasn't that bad - I surprised myself with how accurately I could play the second part along with the first part. But there were still the odd notes which were slightly out and it starts to sound like a sort of slap back delay effect...which could work in another context I guess, just not this one. The vocal was very nicely recorded - lots of warmth and detail. I'm just trying to record a guitar part that'll do it justice. I'll get there in the end! Thanks once again for your advice man...excellent as usual!

Play around with the mic positions. I find that on acoustic guitar 12 to 18 inches works well but on mandolin, I need it really close in to the sound hole.... maybe 6 inches or so. I've actually banged the mic a time or two recording mando.
 
On the doubling.... yep... that's always a cool thing and yes, you should be able to play it really, really close once you know the song...... NOW.....as far as the notes that are out of sync or time very slightly..... do not accept the out of sync/bad timing as "OK" .... fix it.
 
USE MELODYNE. This is an area where ME excels.
 
Melodyne will let you edit those notes on it's time line to move them very precisely to where they are close enough to sound as one.  I used it for this purpose just 2 days ago.  In a song I'm working on, the B3 took the second part of the solo to the guitar taking the first half. To my ear, it didn't sound right so I edited them to swap.... B3 first half and the guitar picked up the second half... Sounded better but, now the pickup notes to the guitar were not exactly right. Sounded like the player was hesitating. What worked in the original didn't work in the edited.  I simply opened melodyne, grabbed the first measure of the guitar pick up notes, adjusted the timing by the slightest amount and processed it. That resulted in the timing being dead on.
 
 
 
 
 

Ha yes that is one of my biggest problems - knowing when to stop tinkering, but not just that, making the best use of my tinkering addiction. It's so easy to spend a whole night trying endless combinations of endless parameters and at the end of it thinking "well, what have I learned?" Unless you're concentrating on WHY certain combinations of parameters sound the way they do, and making mental notes of the results, it's like you're just groping around in the dark hoping to fall on a great sound by accident. And of course sometimes it happens! But if you didn't keep track of what you were doing to make it happen, it's not going to be easy to repeat in different situations. I do this a lot with synths that I don't really understand, like Prism - I can spend whole evenings tinkering with that thing and come up with some pretty cool sounds, but I've never really isolated what each knob does and why. Which makes it virtually impossible to create a sound that's in your head from scratch.
 
Part of my problem is that I think I have a mild case of ADHD (or "look, a squirrel" syndrome as I like to call it). My whole life, my head has gone off on different tangents every five minutes. I learned to play guitar very haphazardly like this. I think it's just how my mind works, but you adapt to it and use it to your advantage when you can 

+1 on using Perfect Space. It works for me every time bar none. You really have to get that plug working again, it will give you so many real reverb spaces and give you a perfect sounding reverb every time. Try a reinstall if you can't get it sorted.