|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 20, 2020 14:48:24 GMT -6
How do you decide in removing resonances wolf tones by instruments?
Resonances are so obvious with one of my acoustics it made me revisiting files/mixes which were taken in pro places, with some of my more expensive guitars as well as some which my guitar store gave me for tracking.
I can't find a single acoustic guitar without resonances.
On the more expensive ones they may sound nicer that's it. Seems to be pretty much the same case as with room acoustics - you can't have it perfect.
Removing resonances often removes the character of the instrument as well.
Very often I remove them switch on and of the EQ and I decide to go with the resonances.
Choice of mic, choice of instrument and (I know some of you are getting tired of me saying this) avoiding close micing. Close micing exaggerates weird resonances, fingering/string noises and squeaks, sensitivity to small movements in position by the player, all that good annoying stuff. Most of it goes away or is greatly diminshed when you pull the mic back.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Apr 20, 2020 14:54:00 GMT -6
How do you decide in removing resonances wolf tones by instruments?
Resonances are so obvious with one of my acoustics it made me revisiting files/mixes which were taken in pro places, with some of my more expensive guitars as well as some which my guitar store gave me for tracking.
I can't find a single acoustic guitar without resonances.
On the more expensive ones they may sound nicer that's it. Seems to be pretty much the same case as with room acoustics - you can't have it perfect.
Removing resonances often removes the character of the instrument as well.
Very often I remove them switch on and of the EQ and I decide to go with the resonances.
Choice of mic, choice of instrument and (I know some of you are getting tired of me saying this) avoiding close micing. Close micing exaggerates weird resonances, fingering/string noises and squeaks, sensitivity to small movements in position by the player, all that good annoying stuff. Most of it goes away or is greatly diminshed when you pull the mic back.
Yes, but that's old news and what if you want the sound of close micing.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 20, 2020 14:56:13 GMT -6
Guitars that sound great and guitars that record great are often two different things. If you close mic, yes. If you keep the mic a couple of feet away you get the balance of the total instrument, as it sounds in the room. Something that many people dont understand is that, not ecen including direct radiation from the strings (which is also a factor), guitars radiate different parts of the frequency spectrum from different parts of the body and some of that can be quite directional when you get too close up.
When you pull the mic back a couple feet the guitar should sound like it does in the room. If it doesn't it's probably a sign that you're using the wrong mic.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 20, 2020 15:01:31 GMT -6
Choice of mic, choice of instrument and (I know some of you are getting tired of me saying this) avoiding close micing. Close micing exaggerates weird resonances, fingering/string noises and squeaks, sensitivity to small movements in position by the player, all that good annoying stuff. Most of it goes away or is greatly diminshed when you pull the mic back.
Yes, but that's old news and what if you want the sound of close micing.
Well, the sound of close micing includes, by its very nature, those weird resonances you're trying to get rid of.
As my father used to say (about many things) "You pays your money and you takes your choice". (I think he got it from some old movie, from the way he used to say it.)
You know, sometimes "old news" is the best advice. It took me decades to learn that.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 20, 2020 15:33:19 GMT -6
IME, cardioids can accentuate the boom of a dreadnaught. Omnis are better in this application to eliminate the boom due to the omni's lack of proximity effect. Again, just my experience. -09 That's because cardioids have proximity effect (so do Figure 8s), while omnis don't. This also goes to reasons to avoid close micing, especially with dirtectional microphones.
The one exception to this rule is the Electro-Voice line of Variable D "RE" model cardioids - RE10/11/15/16. Also the RE-20 of course, but that's a bit big for close micing guitars. Variable D mics use a tricky ducting system to get rid of the proximity effect. I still don't like close micing, but if you must a Variable D E-V can help a lot.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Apr 20, 2020 15:54:50 GMT -6
I haven't used a directional mic close to an acoustic in.....decades? Ok, there's a case or two of using a ribbon a couple feet out, which can be close for some ribbons. I like an omni 'closer', that might be a foot out at times, sometimes right in there. Directional at distance for an ambient amount. The distant might be the main, with the omni tucked in for more detail.
|
|
|
Post by Omicron9 on Apr 21, 2020 8:39:33 GMT -6
Choice of mic, choice of instrument and (I know some of you are getting tired of me saying this) avoiding close micing. Close micing exaggerates weird resonances, fingering/string noises and squeaks, sensitivity to small movements in position by the player, all that good annoying stuff. Most of it goes away or is greatly diminshed when you pull the mic back. Yes, but that's old news and what if you want the sound of close micing. In my previous post on this thread, I suggested using an omni. I didn't mention specific placement, but I always close-mic acoustic guitars. An omni does wonders on a dreadnaught or a darker classical guitar and just fixes so many problems. Of course this assumes that you're in a good-sounding space, as an omni will tell you right away if you're not. -09
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Apr 21, 2020 10:34:09 GMT -6
You can put small LDC condenser right up to the 12th fret very close, aim slightly away from the body or perpendicular to the fretboard. Normally this gets you some detail where you can gently blend it in to the distant mic if you want a big full acoustic sound. If you want a percussive rhythm acoustic then this close mic is your main one. Compress it with drum settings slow attack quick release.. high pass heavily.. 300Hz is a fav for me.. put a limiter on the master bus. EQ to taste, blend a little distant mics if you want. Or not.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Apr 21, 2020 12:52:18 GMT -6
You can put small LDC condenser right up to the 12th fret very close, aim slightly away from the body or perpendicular to the fretboard. Normally this gets you some detail where you can gently blend it in to the distant mic if you want a big full acoustic sound. If you want a percussive rhythm acoustic then this close mic is your main one. Compress it with drum settings slow attack quick release.. high pass heavily.. 300Hz is a fav for me.. put a limiter on the master bus. EQ to taste, blend a little distant mics if you want. Or not.
Thanks for all answers....
MH
I think the best compromise -tracking in my home studio- for pop strumming is a Beta 57 + Triton FET @ 14 fret into 1073, not hitting the input hard. The 57 is slightly off axis to the left, about nine inches away from the neck joint point.
Not removing resonances and EQ and compression to taste.
Seems to work best in my room.
|
|
|
Post by nnajar on May 8, 2020 16:19:52 GMT -6
How do you decide in removing resonances wolf tones by instruments?
Resonances are so obvious with one of my acoustics it made me revisiting files/mixes which were taken in pro places, with some of my more expensive guitars as well as some which my guitar store gave me for tracking.
I can't find a single acoustic guitar without resonances.
On the more expensive ones they may sound nicer that's it. Seems to be pretty much the same case as with room acoustics - you can't have it perfect.
Removing resonances often removes the character of the instrument as well.
Very often I remove them switch on and of the EQ and I decide to go with the resonances.
Before tracking, move the microphone or change the microphone. Pulling it back further can really help with this. dealing with resonances after you've already tracked, try the TDR slick eq GE and the "deresonate" function. you have to be gentle with it, don't be heavy handed, and it can do wonders VERY naturally.
|
|
|
Post by nudwig on May 8, 2020 16:56:22 GMT -6
This thread got me wondering about my own methods for taming resonance. When using RX to clean up some acoustic tracks yesterday I experimented with using attenuate in the Spectral Repair module to tame some of the more offensive resonances. Wouldn't want to make this a habit but works fairly well when you go lightly.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on May 8, 2020 17:33:39 GMT -6
How do you decide in removing resonances wolf tones by instruments?
Resonances are so obvious with one of my acoustics it made me revisiting files/mixes which were taken in pro places, with some of my more expensive guitars as well as some which my guitar store gave me for tracking.
I can't find a single acoustic guitar without resonances.
On the more expensive ones they may sound nicer that's it. Seems to be pretty much the same case as with room acoustics - you can't have it perfect.
Removing resonances often removes the character of the instrument as well.
Very often I remove them switch on and of the EQ and I decide to go with the resonances.
Before tracking, move the microphone or change the microphone. Pulling it back further can really help with this. dealing with resonances after you've already tracked, try the TDR slick eq GE and the "deresonate" function. you have to be gentle with it, don't be heavy handed, and it can do wonders VERY naturally.
Thanks for the slick EQ tip because removing them by hand is time-consuming. I also realized that I had lesser body / port resonances using KM184 in close. It seems to me that some mics emphasize resonances where others make the picture more smooth.
My two 184 got stolen lucky me that I get a new one soon. Damn COVID-19 makes delivery a looooong wait.
|
|
|
Post by bluegrassdan on May 10, 2020 23:13:20 GMT -6
You usually don't have control over what instrument a person shows up with to a session. Don't be afraid to use EQ to get rid of resonances. Your ears will know when its right.
|
|
|
Post by tkaitkai on May 11, 2020 1:33:12 GMT -6
I just checked out the new DSEQ from TBProAudio as an alternative to soothe, and it seems to work really well on acoustic guitars, especially for this particular issue. Definitely worth checking out.
But in general, here’s an approach that seems to work pretty consistently for me:
- One or two narrow cuts between 100 - 300Hz, at specific resonant frequencies, usually 7 - 10dB
- One wider cut in the same range, about 3 - 5dB, just to de-emphasize the LF/LMF a bit
- One narrow cut at the most annoying upper midrange peak, usually around 4kHz, again about 7 - 10dB
I try to think of this as my starting point, and then keep it very simple from there (compress/distort to taste, brighten or darken, etc). I’ve definitely had to learn NOT to obsessively hunt down problem frequencies. The less I chase after spectral perfection, the more natural my guitars sound.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 11, 2020 1:38:46 GMT -6
You usually don't have control over what instrument a person shows up with to a session. Don't be afraid to use EQ to get rid of resonances. Your ears will know when its right. You really shouldn't need to worry about it if you're intelligent with your mic choice and placement.
Distance smoothes out body resonances. Therefore it's best to use a mic that's good at a distance (around 2ft, give or take) and has superior off-axis response.
Closeness exaggerates body resonances. Distance diminishes them.
|
|
|
Post by reddirt on May 11, 2020 2:24:21 GMT -6
You usually don't have control over what instrument a person shows up with to a session. Don't be afraid to use EQ to get rid of resonances. Your ears will know when its right. You really shouldn't need to worry about it if you're intelligent with your mic choice and placement.
Distance smoothes out body resonances. Therefore it's best to use a mic that's good at a distance (around 2ft, give or take) and has superior off-axis response.
Closeness exaggerates body resonances. Distance diminishes them.
Totally agree and the other one someone already mentioned is omni if you have the mic (and possibly the room) Cheers, Ross
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on May 11, 2020 3:02:12 GMT -6
I just checked out the new DSEQ from TBProAudio as an alternative to soothe, and it seems to work really well on acoustic guitars, especially for this particular issue. Definitely worth checking out. But in general, here’s an approach that seems to work pretty consistently for me: - One or two narrow cuts between 100 - 300Hz, at specific resonant frequencies, usually 7 - 10dB - One wider cut in the same range, about 3 - 5dB, just to de-emphasize the LF/LMF a bit - One narrow cut at the most annoying upper midrange peak, usually around 4kHz, again about 7 - 10dB I try to think of this as my starting point, and then keep it very simple from there (compress/distort to taste, brighten or darken, etc). I’ve definitely had to learn NOT to obsessively hunt down problem frequencies. The less I chase after spectral perfection, the more natural my guitars sound.
It's an interesting topic because guitars are based on resonances. There are also papers about it and for all my guitars I can confirm that there is always some more or some lesser low-end air around 100Hz / 200Hz. Depending on the playing the region around 1 kHz can be pretty annoying with not so great microphones.
I find compression pretty hard to do on acoustics. It can sound great or it can ruin everything - IMO two extremes.
|
|