How To Record High-Gain Guitar As I Hear it Live?

Great Question - I am running out of the studio now, I will comment later - do a quick search and you'll find some of my other posts on the subject.

-D

There is the old adage "guitarists listen with the backs of their knees".
What you are hearing live is the sound after it has expanded in a room utilizing the characteristics of the room to enhance the sound. To accomplish this in a studio, you need to represent the room sound with multiple mic placements.
1. up close on the cone (but low in the mix)
2. maybe one 5 ft in front of the speaker.
3. maybe one behind the speaker
4. maybe one pointing away from the amp at about 8 ft.
5. one down the hall in the cupboard
6. etc.

use your imagination how to pick up the room variances (remember the story about zepplin recording the kick in "Levee" by miking down the hall in a castle... and placing speakers and mics under stairwells and in drawers, etc) and try different mixes of the mics you use.

Saxon,
Just for reference examples 16 & 17 were done by placing the SM57 and the MD421 on the voice coil perpenticular to the center of the amp and they then used an AT4050 in figure 8 mode with the null point of the figure 8 pattern facing the amp allowing the room sound to be mixed in. This mic was directly behind the other two mics. Example 16 had the SM57 @ 0db, MD421 @ -6 db and the AT4050@ -6 db. The SM57 was panned left, MD421 and AT4050 were panned halfway left.

Example 17 they added some distortion and the SM57 was @ 0 db, MD421 @ -6 db and
the AT 4050 was @ -3 db. Panning was the same as the previous example.

Edit: My typing stinks!

Rich

geez, where are you standing? where are you putting the mic?

I'm usually quite satisfied with a AKG 414 about 3 feet off the speaker into just about any preamp.

I generally shape my guitar tone in the "air".... what you hear is what you get. I don't play with it in post so much.

It sounds to me like you pumping your mic signal thru all kinds of "color" circuits... why? Who told you to do that? You already say you like what you hear in the room.

The outboard gear you're using all has a reputation for changing the sound... which I hope is why you bought it.

Why are you even tracking thru EQ?

Just stick your head down near the mic and make sure you like the way it sounds.

Electric guitar HAS to be the easiest intsrument to capture. What could be easier?

If that's not working you may want to look at that monitor system.

best,
mike


edit for spelling

Saxon1066,

Sounds like you have a sweet recording rig! Sorry you're not getting the sound YET.

Here's my idea: Look at the room acoustics. I know you said the amp sounds good in the room, however, our ears adjust and compensate for all kinds of audio anomolies - especially if the source is very loud, which you're cranked-up amp probably is.

You mentioned a "nasally" quality multiple times, and the room reverb can give you that. I've had to re-do guitar tracks that had that sound.

Try to create an ultra-dry space, and (re)experiment starting with close-miced positions. I usually use a 57 maybe 3 inches from the grille, positioned near the edge of the cone, and pointed toward the center; but try all your mic/position combos, including distant micing (positioned where your ear is - or wherever). Maybe a condenser with the roll-off engaged.

My main point was about the "nasally" rock-abilly guitar sound that the ROOM can give you (even when you don't want it).

Peace.
Rigel

couple general things I like to do when tracking high gain amp sounds:

Record on a hardwood surface if you can.

Try a condenser up close (or the 57). Very close. Pushing the grill close, or closer if you can remove the grill. Sometimes small diaphragm condensers work for this.

Take the royer and back it away, around 6', aim it at the hardwood, maybe 45 degrees as a starting point.

Mix the two to taste. The Royer's going to have a lot of low end information, and the close mic will have more definition. Though it sounds counter-intuitive, try engaging the low cut filter on both mic channels if things sound too murky.

Of course, it's also a good idea to listen individually to each of the 4 speakers in the cabinet to find the one that sounds best.

If you're losing too much body in the tone, I've often found it helpful to back off the input gain on the guitar amp, and kick up the master volume to compensate. This will allow more of the tone of the instrument through, and sound less fizzy to the mic. Remember that you're hearing the sound of the amp from a totally different perspective (and location) than the microphone.

Lastly, google 'slipperman' and recording heavy guitars. He's got a really good podcast on his methods that might at a minimum give you some different ideas to try.

Oh...... the age old topic of recording loud rock guitar.

The best thing I can tell you is the 57. Been way to many recordings using it to say any different. If its not the sound your looking for, move it. The smallest amount of movement will effect the sound of the 57.
It is a proven fact that the 57 is one killer mic for guitar. Just about every recording you have listen to has used one, one place or another.

(As I hear it live)........Use a room mic, thats what your hearing is the room. I'm sure you don't have your ear right up next to the speaker, surely not.

Peace........Scoobie

Thanks, Gavin. Hardly any hiss on the Voodu Valve (or Velocity 500 amp)--another reason to love it. And I am recording with the amp volume way down, at about 2.

Maybe I'm asking for a silver bullet that doesn't exist, which is at the basis of my questions. I just want to know for sure that there is no mic/channel strip combination that will capture my sound as I hear it live. I am wondering if all microphones and preamps alter (not just color) the sound passing through them. There is just nothing like an ear, right?

I certainly will try turning the gain down (and maybe cutting some bass)--but that's not really what I am hoping for, since I will never quite record the exact sound. I don't want it thicker or brighter.

I dig my tone when I am sitting with my ear 2' away from a speaker (or 6' away or 12' away). It's clear that I'm no expert and have no training as a recording engineer--and maybe naive, but if this were paradise, I would think you could put a perfect mic where your ear is and just capture the sound.

newfuturevintage: Thanks. I hadn't quite moved the Royer 6' away, but didn't find it useful at 4 or 5' away. I will keep it moving. Actually, I am perplexed with the R-122. I am not liking it as much as the TLM 103 by itself. I don't find blending it with a 57 as "accurate" either.

I've encountered the Slipperman article. Wish he would have spared us the profanity and smartness. I can hardly get through it.

The problem: getting that sound recorded and coming through the monitors as I hear it live.

Hello,

This is a joke right? I mean you have all this equipment Marshall 4x12, Avalon, Royer ribbon, Apogee converters, and the whole nine yards. And you're wondering, "Why can't I get a good sound?" The question for me is why can't you? You certainly can't blame your gear.

Way before I had a chance to work with top pros I was recording guitar amps with SM57s. Not because the 57 was my mic of choice but because that was all I had. I put a 57 on a boom stand about 1" away from the grill, 1/2 way between the center and the edge. Then I would cover the amp and boom stand with a couple of movers' furniture pads. My reason for the furniture pads was to keep out street noise (my studio was in a New York City loft). (Note: on a Marshall 4x12 you place the head on top of the covered amp. On combo amps one must keep track of how long it is under a blanket because a tube amp will get as hot as you know where very quickly. So during those sessions we would break frequently to let the amp cool down. I might note that in the summer my top floor non-air conditioned space was about 110 degrees F to begin with.

However, years later working with top pro engineers, I found that they predominantly used 57s on guitar amps and a few of them even covered the amp with furniture pads, but not to keep ambient sound out but to improve the sound by blocking out all ambience. If they didn't use 57s for guitars the next mic of choice was a 421. Sometimes there might be a U87 in the distance to get some room. But mostly I saw guitar amps placed in vocal booths, and then cranked up to 11 (if that was the sound you were looking for) and a single 57 or occasionally a 421. I once saw a rather exotic setup used on one of my band's recording date and it is interesting to note that the engineer was not a top pro but a middling pro. The amp was a twin reverb on stool about 7 or 8 feet away from the control room window, facing the control room window. There was a 57 in the usual position in front of and facing the amp and then there was a U87 facing the control room glass about 12 inches from the glass. This mic (it was explained to me) was to get the amp's reflected sound from the glass. Then there was another U87 behind the amp about 7 or 8 feet in the center of the studio to get the room ambiance. I remember thinking, cut the cr*p, just use the 57 and record some guitar."

A huge amount of guitar through the ages has been recorded with 57s in places where they had just about every exotic mic available. This has been my experience.

In today's modern digital DAW world I strongly recommend ditching the hardware for Amplitube or Guitar Rig, etc. and spend your time creating your own pre-sets. Then you develop a library of setups with sounds that are easily repeatable. Also you are playing through your monitors from the get-go and you can formulate your sound to sound best in the monitors rather than in the room. I know you're a hardware guy and you got this nice Marshall bottom. I'm not entirely unsympathetic. I have a 23 year old Music Man HD130 amp with 4x12 bottom, a Fender Blues Deluxe, 62 Twin Reverb re-issue (belonged to Robert Quine) and a 1970 Ampeg B-15 bass amp. I luvs my tubes. But I did a little test. I created a set-up in Amplitube 2. I dialed up a twin reverb amp clean sound and then put the "fuzz ace" (Amplitube Fuzz Face simulator) in the line. Then I took my real 1970 Arbiter Fuzz Face and plugged it into the 62 Twin re-issue with the same clean sound. I had to smile because with my 5ms round trip latency playing through the computer really didn't feel (or sound) any different from the real thing. I was surprised but I really shouldn't have been. After all we have no problem using software reverbs, delays, compressors, EQs and every kind of softsyth. Why draw the line at software guitar amps? An advantage of a software guitar amp is that "nothing is etched in stone." You can go back and make adjustments to the amp rather than having to add EQ on top of the sound. For example I was about to bus an Amplitube track to a reverb and I realized I could go back to Amplitube and add spring reverb to the amp which is what I really wanted (make sure you unfreeze first). Or, more likely, the opposite: You realize at mixdown that you wish you hadn't used so much reverb but now you can't "turn it down." Things like that.

In the end it doesn’t really matter what kind of sound you have tweaked if you can’t really play or have nothing (musical) to say. I prefer the playing over the sound. Listen to Albert King and you’ll hear what someone can do with just a guitar and amp.

GK

Saxon, when Gavin mentioned turning the gain down, you fixated on the hiss comment.

When recording digitally, you need to get your live sound exactly as you like it, then leave everything the same, except turn the gain down about 25% or 30%. It'll sound very close to what you heard live with the full gain setting.

I also recommend doubling the parts on rhythms.

When recording digitally, you need to get your live sound exactly as you like it, then leave everything the same, except turn the gain down about 25% or 30%. It'll sound very close to what you heard live with the full gain setting.

+1 to that. Been fooling around with all sorts of upped gain on a heap of different sound settings for the last month, and I find that advice holds in just about any situation, and certainly if you want to go for a 'full' sound.

Also the doubling can be very useful, both for rhythm and lead, but works best with a slightly panned delay on at least one of them.

the current issue of Sound on Sound has a major feature on miking guitar amps, ain't timing a wonderful thing??

If you monitor at the same volume you play at, I bet the recorded sound is damn close. If you put an omnidirectional reference mic right next to your ear it will record pretty much exactly what you hear (e.g. earthworks or even an inexpensive behringer ecm).

I think the problem is that sound changes considerably with playback volume. Something that sounds huge and powerful and awesome at 90dB sounds fizzy and nasal and weak at 60dB. The art of illusion is at play when it comes to recording power guitars, and the most satisfying result might *not* be the most accurate representation of your live sound. It may be that the sound that works best when played on car speakers at conversational volumes is different from the sound that works best onstage at concert volumes.

Honestly, I think the mics are more truthful than you think they are. It is your *hearing* that has changed when you play back in the bedroom at monitor levels.

Cheers.

Avalons are well known as being "color" preamps. I like them quite a bit but they are not the best bet for strict transparency.

FWIW I am not talking about "quiet" in the sense of low recorded signal level, I mean turn up your playback speakers/monitors to the same volume as your amp and then compare the recorded sound with the live sound in the room. I bet they sound nearly identical.

Cheers.