Best mic for recording guitar?

Jim Andrada · June 23rd, 2009, 03:29 PM

Well, I'm not a pro guitarist and not a sound engineer and not a luthier, but I did record a guitar (classical) with a Schoeps cardiod. Actually two in X-Y config moderately close - maybe about 18 inches to 2 feet and roughly centered between sound hole and bridge. Lots of different things I'd like to have tried, but we were really short on time so we had to do the best we could with the time (and room and guitarist and guitar and recordist) we had.

Anyhow, for what it's worth...

http://www.j-e-andrada.com/Sample.mp3

No post processing except a little de-squeaking in Izotope RX (before and after)

http://www.j-e-andrada.com/Squeak%20...o%20Squeak.mp3

Comments/suggestions more than welcome.

By the way, recording was into a Sound Devices 302/Sound Devices 702.

Battle Vaughan · June 23rd, 2009, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Thames

I also have a pair of MXL 993. I actually like these a lot (in my relatively small microphonic universe). However, one mic has developed a horrible loud static hum that is louder than what I recorded. I started to read some reviews of these mics on the web and found other people complaining about the same thing. I'm afraid after having ruined an hour long lecture on solar energy I did for a friend, to risk using them again.

Michael

I have several 993's, noticed that there was some noise. A good cleaning of the theads and contact on the capsule (screws off the end of the mike) with DeOxit (contact cleaner) on a q-tip cleared it up---there appears to be some black gunk on the threads that I guess but do not know interferes with the grounding or something....your mileage may vary, it worked in my case. BTW I am in awe of your work, the great sorrow of my life is I love guitar, always wanted to learn, and have absolutely no musical ability whatever -- but I appreciate a fine instrument. / Battle Vaughan/miamiherald.com video team

Jim Andrada · June 24th, 2009, 12:33 PM

By the way, I rmembered this article from B&H re recording guitar.

B&H Photo Video Pro Audio- Recording the Acoustic Guitar at Home

Mike Demmers · June 25th, 2009, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Andrada

Well, I'm not a pro guitarist and not a sound engineer and not a luthier, but I did record a guitar (classical) with a Schoeps cardiod.

And you did a very nice job of it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Andrada

No post processing except a little de-squeaking in Izotope RX (before and after)

You got them to a place where they are not annoying and sound natural.

Sometimes a diiferent choice of strings for recording helps. Usually this comes down to the player though. ;-)

-MD

Jim Andrada · June 25th, 2009, 12:44 AM

Thanks for the kind words.

I thought the guitar was a bit boomy in spots and wondered if a different mic location might have helped this, but maybe not - the guitar really did sound a bit boomy on a few notes when listening without earphones. On the other hand I didn't think it was bad enough to stay up all night worrying about it and applying the "First, do no harm" approach I decided to leave it as it was.

I'm really very impressed with Izotope RX which has a whole raft of neat tools for working in the spectral view. I've succeeded reasonably well with eliminating coughing audience members from concert band recordings and screaming kids from a series of concerts we did at a mall - right next to the kiddie play area! Had one where somebody sitting right next to my mics coughed just as the last note of a Euphonium solo was tailing off. Managed to salvage it.

I didn't really know enough about the package at the time I did the guitar CD, but was lucky enough to find the Izotope guys this year at NAB when there was nobody else at their booth and they gave me an hour-long crash course on the package.

Anyhow, I digress - seem to do it more and more as I creep up on the big Seven Zero.

Michael Thames · June 27th, 2009, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battle Vaughan

I have several 993's, noticed that there was some noise. A good cleaning of the theads and contact on the capsule (screws off the end of the mike) with DeOxit (contact cleaner) on a q-tip cleared it up---there appears to be some black gunk on the threads that I guess but do not know interferes with the grounding or something....your mileage may vary, it worked in my case. BTW I am in awe of your work, the great sorrow of my life is I love guitar, always wanted to learn, and have absolutely no musical ability whatever -- but I appreciate a fine instrument. / Battle Vaughan/miamiherald.com video team

Thanks for the tip! I actually read on a review of these mic's that one guy did that cleaning and said it solved the problem for a few weeks. I'll give your suggestion a try.

Thanks for the kind words about my work. have little natural musical ability either, at least compared to some musicians I know, but that never stopped me!

Michael

Michael Thames · June 27th, 2009, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Andrada

Well, I'm not a pro guitarist and not a sound engineer and not a luthier, but I did record a guitar (classical) with a Schoeps cardiod. Actually two in X-Y config moderately close - maybe about 18 inches to 2 feet and roughly centered between sound hole and bridge. Lots of different things I'd like to have tried, but we were really short on time so we had to do the best we could with the time (and room and guitarist and guitar and recordist) we had.

Anyhow, for what it's worth...

http://www.j-e-andrada.com/Sample.mp3

No post processing except a little de-squeaking in Izotope RX (before and after)

http://www.j-e-andrada.com/Squeak%20...o%20Squeak.mp3

Comments/suggestions more than welcome.

By the way, recording was into a Sound Devices 302/Sound Devices 702.

Jim, You did a great job that sounds fantastic! Once you hear the open pearly sparkle of the high end on the Scheops it's hard to go back. I think you did a great job with the mic placement as well!

I still haven't made up my mind yet. I'm holding out for the Scheops I think, because I will probably begin to record the guitar with something else through my computer eventually, and at least I'll have a pair of good mics.

You got me going on the sony, that would be a nice unit to have in difficult recording situations.

Michael

Jim Andrada · June 27th, 2009, 10:21 PM

I love everything about the Schoeps - except the price!

The other thing with Schoeps is that they offer a trememendous range of capsules. Choice is good - but it also presents a problem in deciding which capsules will work best for the things you want to record. It would be nice to have a couple of each, but that might be a bit of a financial challenge!

Re what to record into, a decent firewire interface into your PC would probably be fine so you could put the $$$ into the mics at first and record to the PC. As long as you're recording in more or less fixed locations this should work OK.

I guess another question would be whether mono recording would be adequate. I like the sense of spaciousness you get from a stereo recording, but for a small source, an exaggerated stereo image is not necessarily what you really want, and one mic is a lot less expensive than two.

One really good mic and something like a mic-port Pro XLR to USB interface recording into the PC might last you a long time and be quite satisfactory.

Mike Demmers · June 28th, 2009, 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Andrada

Thanks for the kind words.
I thought the guitar was a bit boomy in spots and wondered if a different mic location might have helped this, but maybe not - the guitar really did sound a bit boomy on a few notes when listening without earphones.

Well, I was listening in my living room, which is not perfect acoustics. On the other hand, the speakers were a pair of UREI 809s which I mixed on for over 25 years, so I am pretty familiar with them, and I was pretty close to the near field. Sounded fine to me.

As a rule I will tend to trust a good pair of headphones over a single speaker on such things, because they tend to be more accurate in the very low end than any speaker. Move a speaker in the room a few inches one way or another, and the peaks and dips in the lows change. You don't want to be EQing out the response of your speakers in your tracks.

I'd guess your "First, do no harm" was correct.

Izotope RX sounds interesting, I will have to take a look at that one. I used to do all sorts of crazy things to deal with guitar squeeks - from using de-essers, multiband limiters, to custom modifying the original Aphex 'Dominator' to function as a variable velocity limiter. A mod that Aphex incorporated into the next version of that device, though with less of the extreme range I used. Now...just push a software button... ;-)

-Mike

Jim Andrada · June 28th, 2009, 09:30 PM

At least with a guitar it's fairly easy to move around in the room to find a good spot. I'll guarantee that it isn't so easy horsing my wife's grand piano four inches this way and seven inches that way hunting for the sweet spot. Only to have to do it all over again if the dog rolls over (well, it's a BIG dog at 165 pounds - really sucks up those old reverberations - sort of like an animated duvet:)

Seriously, RX is really quite good. The best way to use it is to watch the spectral display scroll by as you listen and when you spot something that sounds bad stop it and look around - you'll often see some crud or other strangeness in the spectral display that looks dissimilar to the pattern before and after the noise. Having found it, they provide tools that let you lasso a region and then apply various types of correction up to and including removing the lasso'd contents and re-creating the region based on what's before and what's after. Quite nice.

Ty Ford · July 3rd, 2009, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Andrada

Michael,
If you're going direct to the camera, though, I think the $choeps might be overkill as I think the camera's audio capability would be the limiting hardware factor.

Then again, maybe not...Ty Ford - "Look Ma, I'm Flyin" on Vimeo

Schoeps>Sound Devices 442>Canon XL2.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Michael Thames · July 4th, 2009, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

Then again, maybe not...Ty Ford - "Look Ma, I'm Flyin" on Vimeo

Schoeps>Sound Devices 442>Canon XL2.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Ty, that is gorgeous! Nice piece! This restores faith in my XH-A1 now! I'm still holding out for a pair of Schoeps, once you hear these there is no going back.

Michael

Ty Ford · July 4th, 2009, 09:51 AM

Thanks Michael,

Two thoughts. The Canon XL2 is standard def. As such the audio is 16-bit, 48khz. (about 1500 kbps)

Your XH-A1 does standard def, per the above, but also HDV. HDV audio is only 384 kbps MPEG 1 layer 2. Stick with Standard Def and your audio will sound better.

I used only one mic for that recording and added effects later; two different reverbs, as I recall. They gave it the space.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Andy Balla · July 5th, 2009, 07:47 PM

That instrumental sounds nice, Ty, but with all due respect, I find the reverb to be distracting from the performance. That being said, I do tend to prefer a drier acoustic guitar sound in general. Nice work, though.
As to the OP, who can say what the "best" mic in any application is? Ears will decide, and if you think its the best, then it is. So if you liked the Schoeps, get one if you have the budget. It really can depend a lot on the actual instrument. My guitar player's Martin sounds best with an AT-4040 aimed around where the neck joins the body, in my room. As with everything audio, your mileage WILL vary. Way too many variables! Andy

Ty Ford · July 5th, 2009, 08:12 PM

Andy,

Tried a schoeps cmc641?

Ty

July 4th, 2009, 09:51 AM	#43
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	Thanks Michael, Two thoughts. The Canon XL2 is standard def. As such the audio is 16-bit, 48khz. (about 1500 kbps) Your XH-A1 does standard def, per the above, but also HDV. HDV audio is only 384 kbps MPEG 1 layer 2. Stick with Standard Def and your audio will sound better. I used only one mic for that recording and added effects later; two different reverbs, as I recall. They gave it the space. Regards, Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

July 5th, 2009, 08:12 PM	#45
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	Andy, Tried a schoeps cmc641? Ty __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

June 23rd, 2009, 03:29 PM	#31
Jim Andrada Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Tucson AZ Posts: 2,211	Well, I'm not a pro guitarist and not a sound engineer and not a luthier, but I did record a guitar (classical) with a Schoeps cardiod. Actually two in X-Y config moderately close - maybe about 18 inches to 2 feet and roughly centered between sound hole and bridge. Lots of different things I'd like to have tried, but we were really short on time so we had to do the best we could with the time (and room and guitarist and guitar and recordist) we had. Anyhow, for what it's worth... http://www.j-e-andrada.com/Sample.mp3 No post processing except a little de-squeaking in Izotope RX (before and after) http://www.j-e-andrada.com/Squeak%20...o%20Squeak.mp3 Comments/suggestions more than welcome. By the way, recording was into a Sound Devices 302/Sound Devices 702.

June 24th, 2009, 12:33 PM	#33
Jim Andrada Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Tucson AZ Posts: 2,211	By the way, I rmembered this article from B&H re recording guitar. B&H Photo Video Pro Audio- Recording the Acoustic Guitar at Home

June 25th, 2009, 12:44 AM	#35
Jim Andrada Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Tucson AZ Posts: 2,211	Thanks for the kind words. I thought the guitar was a bit boomy in spots and wondered if a different mic location might have helped this, but maybe not - the guitar really did sound a bit boomy on a few notes when listening without earphones. On the other hand I didn't think it was bad enough to stay up all night worrying about it and applying the "First, do no harm" approach I decided to leave it as it was. I'm really very impressed with Izotope RX which has a whole raft of neat tools for working in the spectral view. I've succeeded reasonably well with eliminating coughing audience members from concert band recordings and screaming kids from a series of concerts we did at a mall - right next to the kiddie play area! Had one where somebody sitting right next to my mics coughed just as the last note of a Euphonium solo was tailing off. Managed to salvage it. I didn't really know enough about the package at the time I did the guitar CD, but was lucky enough to find the Izotope guys this year at NAB when there was nobody else at their booth and they gave me an hour-long crash course on the package. Anyhow, I digress - seem to do it more and more as I creep up on the big Seven Zero.

June 27th, 2009, 10:21 PM	#38
Jim Andrada Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Tucson AZ Posts: 2,211	I love everything about the Schoeps - except the price! The other thing with Schoeps is that they offer a trememendous range of capsules. Choice is good - but it also presents a problem in deciding which capsules will work best for the things you want to record. It would be nice to have a couple of each, but that might be a bit of a financial challenge! Re what to record into, a decent firewire interface into your PC would probably be fine so you could put the $$$ into the mics at first and record to the PC. As long as you're recording in more or less fixed locations this should work OK. I guess another question would be whether mono recording would be adequate. I like the sense of spaciousness you get from a stereo recording, but for a small source, an exaggerated stereo image is not necessarily what you really want, and one mic is a lot less expensive than two. One really good mic and something like a mic-port Pro XLR to USB interface recording into the PC might last you a long time and be quite satisfactory.

June 28th, 2009, 09:30 PM	#40
Jim Andrada Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Tucson AZ Posts: 2,211	At least with a guitar it's fairly easy to move around in the room to find a good spot. I'll guarantee that it isn't so easy horsing my wife's grand piano four inches this way and seven inches that way hunting for the sweet spot. Only to have to do it all over again if the dog rolls over (well, it's a BIG dog at 165 pounds - really sucks up those old reverberations - sort of like an animated duvet:) Seriously, RX is really quite good. The best way to use it is to watch the spectral display scroll by as you listen and when you spot something that sounds bad stop it and look around - you'll often see some crud or other strangeness in the spectral display that looks dissimilar to the pattern before and after the noise. Having found it, they provide tools that let you lasso a region and then apply various types of correction up to and including removing the lasso'd contents and re-creating the region based on what's before and what's after. Quite nice.

July 5th, 2009, 07:47 PM	#44
Andy Balla Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Asheville NC Posts: 182	That instrumental sounds nice, Ty, but with all due respect, I find the reverb to be distracting from the performance. That being said, I do tend to prefer a drier acoustic guitar sound in general. Nice work, though. As to the OP, who can say what the "best" mic in any application is? Ears will decide, and if you think its the best, then it is. So if you liked the Schoeps, get one if you have the budget. It really can depend a lot on the actual instrument. My guitar player's Martin sounds best with an AT-4040 aimed around where the neck joins the body, in my room. As with everything audio, your mileage WILL vary. Way too many variables! Andy