|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 13, 2014 17:59:52 GMT -6
Just wondering how you guys handle the stereo image...Do you collapse it a little in the mix? Just listening, I wonder sometimes if it's not too wide when panned to each side...it can almost be a little psychoacoustic...but maybe that's just phase issues I'm dealing with. I'm not totally adhering to the 3 to 1 rule - putting a condenser around head height looking down at the body and then the N22 on the 12th staring in...I guess when you record in stereo, you lose all ability to pan in the mix...or the stereo was just kind of for naught.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2014 18:36:17 GMT -6
I find XY less wide than a spaced pair. I've done both as well as double tracking single mics (my fav). I like it wide. You might try the XY. It seems more center focused to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Apr 13, 2014 20:13:00 GMT -6
Try delaying the closer 12th mic to the body mic. Just nudge it in PT, flip the phase and line it up by ear (until it cancels), or line up the waveform by sight. Then take a stab at playing with the panning.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Apr 13, 2014 20:42:52 GMT -6
Just wondering how you guys handle the stereo image...Do you collapse it a little in the mix? Just listening, I wonder sometimes if it's not too wide when panned to each side...it can almost be a little psychoacoustic...but maybe that's just phase issues I'm dealing with. I'm not totally adhering to the 3 to 1 rule - putting a condenser around head height looking down at the body and then the N22 on the 12th staring in...I guess when you record in stereo, you lose all ability to pan in the mix...or the stereo was just kind of for naught. you can move your R/L in a bit, i don't thinK any less than 60% translates well, also if you have a vocal in the center, hard L/R usually translate well. I also agree with heartfelt, xy always seems to have the most natural sound to me and is the easiest way to ensure phase coherency. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2014 3:03:22 GMT -6
John, what you're describing isn't exactly stereo micing (even though you can generate a stereo-ish signal). True stereo micing typically involves matched pairs. With directional mics, the "hot spot" of one mic is in the null of the other (and a close reading of polar patterns is revealing). For omnis, careful spacing (both from source and each other) is required. M/S is its own wonderful thing.
What you've described is multiple mics on the same source in an effort to get the most usable pickup of a large radiating body (a guitar in this case). Panning the mics a little apart might give you something pleasant, but wider panning is likely to cause the signal to wander because of the different characteristics of each mic. What Patrick Mulrooney suggests makes sense to me. Essentially you're trying to get the signal to line up temporally so that you can get a good mono combination. Once that's done you might be able to widen the pan a little, although you might get a more natural result by adding artificial ambience.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 14, 2014 7:00:41 GMT -6
I've never seen an acoustic artist sit absolutely still. They move around a good bit, even when they try their best to be still. That nullifies the need to have matched pairs and for absolute perfect positioning.
try for getting what you want to hear first rather than slaving to the popular opinion. I shoot one mic about 2 inches south of the bridge, facing sort of across the hole at the fretboard, and then the other mic around halfway up the fretboard shooting down towards the hole. Both sit around 8-10" back and I gain the preamps so both are the same output, but they won't be the same gain, but don't worry about that.
To me, that gets enough of the sound from both ends of the guitar and automatically giving you a nice wide stereo.
Nobody listens to anything in mono anymore. NOBODY. So don't worry yourself with such things.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 14, 2014 8:06:10 GMT -6
What if there's more than one acoustic part in the mix? Is there any point in stereo miking in that situation - if two parts will be panned opposite?
|
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Apr 14, 2014 8:15:12 GMT -6
You can record with two mics in a number of ways. You can also use them both panned to the exact same position. They are essentially mono at this point, just blend the two to taste. I have done that a lot with good results.
If I am doing a dense production then I keep it simple and just do 1 mic per acoustic. Km84, one of my 87's or one of my 67's.
If you do multiple mics in a dense production then I like to blend them and sum them to mono before they even see the DAW. It seems to really help the sound and my thought process.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 14, 2014 8:18:18 GMT -6
There should be some kind of box for that  |
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Apr 14, 2014 8:30:57 GMT -6
hmmmm, well, ummmmm, ah.....
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 14, 2014 8:42:29 GMT -6
What if there's more than one acoustic part in the mix? Is there any point in stereo miking in that situation - if two parts will be panned opposite? Be creative. Pan G1L hard left, G1R 1/4 left. Pan G2L 1/4 right and G2R Hard right. Or intertwine them, with G1L hard left, G1R 1/4 right, G2L 1/4 left and G2R hard right.. Etc. I just HATE mono guitars since they have no depth. Acoustic is all about depth and complexity. Electric guitars are all about grit and harmonics. Also, I hate centered guitars because bass and vocals already sit there. A well recorded acoustic has both bass and vocal frequencies and can really mask things, or be masked too easily and get lost in a mix. If the acoustic is NOT a main instrument, then do what you like with it. I also hate panned mono acoustic, mainly because the mix gets lopsided because the picking attack and upper frequencies draw your ear to them. If you have a pair of mono acoustics, either played as a stereo pair or as a complimentary pair, that's cool, but try to match their ranges well or else your ears will ping-pong back and forth and it gets really tiring to listen to. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 14, 2014 8:43:56 GMT -6
There should be some kind of box for that I may or may not be working on a design for something like this.. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 14, 2014 9:09:53 GMT -6
What if there's more than one acoustic part in the mix? Is there any point in stereo miking in that situation - if two parts will be panned opposite? Be creative. Pan G1L hard left, G1R 1/4 left. Pan G2L 1/4 right and G2R Hard right. Or intertwine them, with G1L hard left, G1R 1/4 right, G2L 1/4 left and G2R hard right.. Etc. I just HATE mono guitars since they have no depth. Acoustic is all about depth and complexity. Electric guitars are all about grit and harmonics. Also, I hate centered guitars because bass and vocals already sit there. A well recorded acoustic has both bass and vocal frequencies and can really mask things, or be masked too easily and get lost in a mix. If the acoustic is NOT a main instrument, then do what you like with it. I also hate panned mono acoustic, mainly because the mix gets lopsided because the picking attack and upper frequencies draw your ear to them. If you have a pair of mono acoustics, either played as a stereo pair or as a complimentary pair, that's cool, but try to match their ranges well or else your ears will ping-pong back and forth and it gets really tiring to listen to. When I get stereo pairs of acoustics I'll usually pan G1L hard left G1R straight up...and vice versa... |
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Apr 14, 2014 9:36:56 GMT -6
You can still get depth out of a stereo mic'd guitar but panned mono.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Apr 14, 2014 9:39:11 GMT -6
You can record with two mics in a number of ways. You can also use them both panned to the exact same position. They are essentially mono at this point, just blend the two to taste. I have done that a lot with good results. Yes. Currently doing this on my latest song, with 12-string on the left and 6-string on the right, each recorded using X-Yed MC930s. In PT I'm using the Waves Scheps 73 for L/R volume "balance," and collapsing the stereo signal pretty much to mono - although I am trying a few different mixes with varying amounts of stereo spread. Lots of fun. |
|
|
|
Post by jsteiger on Apr 14, 2014 9:57:07 GMT -6
There should be some kind of box for that Now that's a good idea JK  |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Apr 14, 2014 10:29:32 GMT -6
There should be some kind of box for that Now that's a good idea JK Isn't this called a "mixer"? |
|
kcatthedog
Temp
Super Helpful Dude
Posts: 16,042 
Member is Online
|
Post by kcatthedog on Apr 14, 2014 16:38:59 GMT -6
if you want control of the stereo width not certain why no one mentioned ms ?
the brainworx vid on the ua site is great and you can download the session to experiment
|
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Apr 15, 2014 9:20:06 GMT -6
I was playing around micing acoustic this past weekend using a Pearlman TM-1 about 9 inches off the 12th fret direct into my metric halo uln8 and then placing a new AEA R84 through a Retro powerstrip straight out down the middle about 18 inches aimed just at the top of the body of a McPherson acoustic. Panned hard L and R and was very happy how it came out. Really fun experimenting with different techniques and gear.
|
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Apr 18, 2014 19:23:08 GMT -6
Try midside, John. I love it for ballads, although I usually don't do it on acoustic that much with the projects I am doing. I space my matched pair of sdc's top and bottom (above and below) at 10-12th fret and have a Royer over the shoulder and blend to taste.
R
|
|
|
|
Post by formatcyes on Apr 19, 2014 5:13:41 GMT -6
Great thread thanks for all the great info. I have been struggling with exactly this problem. Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Randge on Apr 19, 2014 7:03:37 GMT -6
Right shoulder (right handed players). Wanted to be clear...
R
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 19, 2014 7:03:45 GMT -6
mikec, have you used other ribbons? I like the Cascade Vin-Jet, but would love to hear about experiences with other brands of ribbons compared the AEA R84.
For singer/songwriter style acoustic miking, my benchmark is Lyle Lovett's "Road to Ensenada". It was done with a U67 vocal mic, and a Telefunken C24 stereo mic on the guitar. Lyle plays and sings at the same time, and the three mics work together. I'd still like to find a way to get that kind of acoustic guitar sound on a lighter budget. I can borrow a pair of K84's. but I don't want to pull that favor every time I do tracks. The AEA seems interesting..
|
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Apr 19, 2014 7:46:49 GMT -6
mjb, this is my first exposure to using a ribbon mic on acoustics so I have not tried any others. I agonized for a while on picking up the R84 vs a Royer 121/122, but everything kept bringing me back to the R84. I had typically been micing acoustic with a stereo matched set of small condensors in the standard xy setup, but have been experimenting more and more using my Pearlman TM-1. Adding the R84 to the TM-1 just seemed to give me the crisp sound matched with a good fullness for the type of country rock I like to record.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 19, 2014 10:30:34 GMT -6
cool micec.
I often use my LDC for acoustic guitar and it sounds fine, but I'd like a few more flavors to avoid buildup at the same frequencies on all the tracks. My personal favorite so far was a mono Neumann K84. I had a pair available, but didn't care for the sound I got, so I used only one. I need to try some other stereo mic techniques, I'm sure it can be better than the sound I was getting
.
|
|
