Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jordanosaur]

Hi all -

I am a general lurker coming out of the darkness....

I'm going to be tracking a record in the next few weeks with some friends of mine that I have worked with before on a couple one-off demo sessions.  This time, we are working on a full length in a pretty decent room, and I want to take a new approach to recording their guitars (both acoustic and electric)and vocals.  I am used to recording heavier guitars, so the layering and division onto the console is usually pretty simple (if other than two tracks) for me.  With vocals, they tend to record with a lot of harmonies that will require 2-3 vocal tracks per song at least.

These guys are way into very ethereal and layered guitars alla Swervedriver/Radiohead, but they also have very strong moments where the guitars need to be loud and pervasive.  I am trying to strategize the most efficient way to commit so many different moods of guitar tracks while using the most efficient amount of track/board real estate.  Any general techniques when dealing with so much instrumentation?  I guess I'm just trying to get some foresight into how we will approach this in such a way that mixing won't be an unholy nightmare.

As for mixing, do you guys generally split the clean, heavily effected, and dirty guitars onto their own stereo pairs for seperate dynamic control during mixing?  I guess I'm just trying to get some foresight into how we will approach tracking this record efficiently without abusing the track allowance of the digital realm.

I should also mention that this will be recorded through an older MCI board using both tape an P.T. - The board isn't the most flexible, but bussing several signals to one track won't be an issue.

[Iain Graham]

I'm a PT only guy so I just use a new set of tracks for each part. My I/O setup has a lot of pre-made electric sub paths in it.

I'll usually have a Royer and an I5 on each amp and take a DI for Amp Farm if it's needed.

Send them to an aux for further processing as required.

I usually end of with lots of tracks, but I prefer working that way.

If I was mixing on a board or through a summing box, I'd just send the subgroups to an output and then have each part on a fader on the board.

Edit to add that's what i track, not necessarily what I use in the final mix.

[Fibes]

Layered?

Listen to Radiohead's The Bends closely and you'll find very few things being layered.

Sometimes a single guitar, amp and mix can be the ticket to huge also.

I had an elder ask me about my guitar tones the other day, I hadn't given it much thought until then but what I was told by my assistant is that it's second nature for me. Verbalizing this to an elder made me realise that it's all about the gut.

Keep it simple and no matter what it's the player, guitar and amp that are 99% of it. The other 1% is yours to screw up or become the hero.

[grantis]

Quote:

Keep it simple and no matter what it's the player, guitar and amp that are 99% of it. The other 1% is yours to screw up or become the hero.

perhaps, but from my experience.....i've recorded some great gear, great players, and as time has gone on, my techniques have gotten better, and so have the sounds i've been getting.  

if you stick a 57 randomly (or any other mic for that matter) in front of a dr.z, it will not sound as good as 2 very well placed mics.  

i usually start with one mic about 1" from the outside of the cone (on-axis) and 1" from the grill cloth.  the other is about 1" from the center (on-axis) and about 1" from the cloth.  in mixdown, you can blend the two sounds, and that usually gives you a whole world of guitar tones.

[pg666]

i played in a band who had a similar approach to recording guitars (2 tracks for rhythm, 2 for leads, 1 or 2 for clean, various weird overdubs like feedback intros, etc.) and... it was always a total pain to mix (don't even get me started on the vocal tracks, ugh). we would have been screwed without automation. i'm glad i played drums..

i don't see why it's so bad to do it mostly 'live' onto a couple of tracks. as long as you even out the levels between tones and don't have a switch that makes obnoxious click sounds, it should be ok. it may even make it *gasp* FUN to record!

[Jordanosaur]

Thanks for the replies -

Maybe Radiohead wasn't the best example - I was trying to think of another band who has many sonic layers based mostly in the guitar realm.  I should have stuck with Swervedriver

However, I totally get you Fibes, and I am used to working with minimal guitar tracks whenever possible. I just don't want to cramp their style as a band.  I really do want them to have the creative freedom to try what they have in their heads, but I don't want the clutter at the same time.  

[Fibes]

h

Jordanosaur wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 16:46

Thanks for the replies - Maybe Radiohead wasn't the best example - I was trying to think of another band who has many sonic layers based mostly in the guitar realm.  I should have stuck with Swervedriver However, I totally get you Fibes, and I am used to working with minimal guitar tracks whenever possible. I just don't want to cramp their style as a band.  I really do want them to have the creative freedom to try what they have in their heads, but I don't want the clutter at the same time.

Taking the time up front will eliminate the clutter. If you have to run quickly to get the performances fresh by all means do but my advice is to set up as many scenarios ahead of time, take a breather and roll through them.

Grant,

I understand using multi-mic setups and the importance of properly placed mics but I'm still 100% convinced that the further upstream you go the more important it is to the music.

So, while it may seem like heresy it's much more important to capture the moment, the idea, the passion and the player than it is to hone in on a Celestian Blue Dog for minutes which inspirationally can equate to hours.

That said, having been at the guitar sound thing for 20 years allows me to trust my instincts and see a few moves ahead in the game. No, I'm not pulling rank, just priorities, the older I get the less it's about me and the art is better for it.

Line 'em up.

[M Carter]

From my experience, the biggest thing about recording guitars is to really get the sound you want AT THE AMP, including FX/Reverb/whatever.  Having the sound you want from the player/amp/guitar combo also makes it matter much less what you put in front of the amp as far as a mic / pre.

[Iain Graham]

The laset setup I did had a couple of amps side by side. One cleanish, one dirtyish.

Both miced with a 121 and an I5 each.

The guitar player was with me in the control room, and a DI was on the floor beside him.

Changing sounds meant turning one amp or the other on from standby and changing the inputs for the right set of mics.

For 1 or 2 really heavy parts, both amps were up and a pedal was put inline with the clean amp.

Getting sounds was quick, easy, and painless.

Inputs were setup in a dummy session and I imported session data and changed the routing to the right sub paths.

[rankus]

I agree with the sentiment of setting up several amps / scenes as possible before hand. If there are three amps and an acoustic guitar set em all up before hand so that the artists can switch back and forth on a whim.

Send em to as many tracks as you need rather than trying mult things while recording... this is so that you can "stay the heck outta the way" while tracking... nothing worse than an engineer stopping the session to diddle with something in the middle of an inspired moment .. it's about them ... try to remain invisisble.. deal with the track count later when theres more time.

Multiple mics:  It really depends on the genre for me.. But most of the time (rock) it looks like Fibes' setup.. One mic = one amp... (121 usually)  If it's metal (or Nu-Metal, "Modern Hard Rock") I will multi-mic and take DI's etc.

[Iain Graham]

I know my 121s and my I5s well enough that I can line em up side by side by sight now. I know where the diaphragms are in the body of each mic.

I use the 121 more often that not. Sometimes I like to have the extra top end that comes from the I5, but I'll rarely use that on it's own.

I do track each part to it's own set of tracks, but that's because I prefer things that way.

I hate writing automation during tracking for one thing, so having a quieter verse part on one fader and a louder verse part on another just works better for me. Even if it's the same settings.

[Jordanosaur]

Wow -

This is a lot of good information - exactly what i was looking for.  I will update shortly with my my pre-game plan.  

Thanks all!

[Fibes]

rankus wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 18:27

But most of the time (rock) it looks like Fibes' setup.. One mic = one amp... (121 usually)  If it's metal (or Nu-Metal, "Modern Hard Rock") I will multi-mic and take DI's etc.

The photo isn't reality as far as the amount of mics that are up.


There is another room mic up and for this particular take the 57 was "on the wood" behind the amp.

There are normally 4 mics up for one of these rolling sessions:

1. Some sort of traditional dynamic like a 57, 421, D12 (yeah meaty metal).
2. A ribbon like the 121 or another of that ilk.
3. LDC like a U87 or M269c
4. and of course an omni starting with a Bova Ball, LDC in omni or one of them thar Avensons.

Using cue mix I can turn them on or off and blend to my liking, arm the tracks required and we're ready to roll. If i have a console at my disposal this stuff gets printed together if it is be mono or on discrete mono tracks if it's gonna be stereo.

Whilst doubling i tend to shy away from the same mic, amp or distance almost exclusively.

Unless I'm going for some crazy panned/phasey room effect solos are by and large one mic which helps with editing takes and gives the up frontness required.

There are also usually (in addition to the combo open back speakers) two closed back cabinets of varying speaker wattage ready to go in the line. There is a 4x12 just out of the frame to the right in the photo.

Sometimes, when the amps brought in are of dubious nature I split from the STD(tm) and run my version simultaneously so as not to mess with the artist but give me options just in case I'm dealing with a dog. Sure, i could argue amps before the take but I've found it to be detrimental to the inspiration process.


And then there's the leslie in the iso ready to roll.

[TheViking]

Fibes wrote on Tue, 05 June 2007 17:10

I understand using multi-mic setups and the importance of properly placed mics but I'm still 100% convinced that the further upstream you go the more important it is to the music. So, while it may seem like heresy it's much more important to capture the moment, the idea, the passion and the player than it is to hone in on a Celestian Blue Dog for minutes which inspirationally can equate to hours. That said, having been at the guitar sound thing for 20 years allows me to trust my instincts and see a few moves ahead in the game. No, I'm not pulling rank, just priorities, the older I get the less it's about me and the art is better for it. Line 'em up.

It's funny you mention that Fibes...   recently, I've been listening to my older recordings and mixes and loving the guitar sounds wondering why it was so easy back then to get those kinds of sounds.   I realized it wasn't the sounds, it was the songs.

My first gigs were tracked on tape or ADAT's back in the day.   Usually a single 57.   No edits, no phase issues, no BS.   Before I got sucked into DAW's and the 'engineering' of it all, I used to love just the fact that I was recording bands and documenting performances.   I guess the deeper I've gone down the rabbit hole, the more I've sturggled with keeping focus on 'the song'.

Keeping the band's head on straight is the priority...   dicking around with mics can ruin the mood.

[WallyWest]

I Agree viking, Ive became way too obsessed with getting the killer 'get up kids' tone. I can't remember it ever being that hard to nail a sweet spot.

i recently ditched an awful Marshall 100w JCM2000 head for a Orange head and began recording band practice. One mic on the cab with next to no attention to placement and its the best tone i've ever had.

Stupid thing is I know I'll end up reverting back to multiple mics when its time to record properly. sigh.