Recording Singer w/ Accoustic Guitar - 1 mic? 2 mics?
Home > Home Recording Forum > Recording Techniques > Recording Singer w/ Accoustic Guitar - 1 mic? 2 mics?
Posted on Feb 01, 2011 11:24 am
Indellable
Music Afficionado
Member Since: Aug 12, 2008
I usually record vocalists only (have gotten pretty good at that) and when I do accoustic/instrumental recording - its either as a favor or just the instrument only. I have a client who is looking to record a decent accoustic demo and I'd like to give it a shot as recording vocals only has started getting a bit boring.
Would you reccomend:
Capturing both vocals and guitar on 1 mic at the same time? Seperate? I currently use a BLUE bluebird run through a Focusrite Voicemaster Platinum.
Or, should I mic the guitar and vox seperately and record at the same time? If so, can you please provide some pointers and/or point me to threads on here that I can read about doing this? I'm sure its been addressed before. The more I think about it, I suppose you would want 2 so you can apply different FX to each track. I'm assuming I would need to use gates, etc.? I have a DBX 266XL.
Also, any reccomendations for a decent guitar mic?
Lastly, based on your response above, would you reccomend the use of a click track?
Any other advice is appreciated as always. Thanks.
[ Back to Top ]
Feb 01, 2011 11:41 am Guitar mic? The Bluebird is a great mic for stringed instruments. Personally, I found it wanting on most vocal applications - Far too sensitive. But if this is a "folky" type thing, it might work.
Absolutely no effects on the input... Nothing on the preamp either. The VMP's preamp is okay - The rest of the circuitry is nice for live use but I wouldn't want to record through it when there are better options 'in the box' -- Bypass everything. You want head amp gain, bypassed EQ, dynamics, etc., and the output at unity (the output gain circuit on that thing drove me nuts).
If you only have the one mic and one preamp, it's up to you and the artist to figure out what you want to do... If he doesn't mind playing, then singing, that's obviously the route with the most flexibility during the mix.
I'd try to avoid the click track as well... It's going to bleed through somewhere - If you don't need it, leave it out. If you have a visual unit, ask him if he wants it.
Quincysanhttp://www.unitedmusicians.infoContributor
Since: Nov 11, 2007
Feb 01, 2011 11:47 am I like to do 2 mics on the guitar and 1 mic for the vocals. For guitar, I like an LDC like the MXL 990 or the AT3035 (because I have those, not because they are the best option) about 2 feet out and 1 foot back from the sound hole, facing the sound hole. The more important mic in my opinion is an SDC (I like the MXL991, sm57 might work nice) pointed at the 12'th fret, angled at the fretboard toward the sound hole. Keep the mic as close to the frets as you can without disrupting the performance and angle it so you have about a 30 degree angle between the SDC and the neck of the guitar.
For vocals, I like the Sm7b, but an sm57 might work ok in a pinch.
cruxTypo SzarMember
Since: Jul 04, 2002
Feb 01, 2011 11:54 am if their performing together there wouldn't be an imperative for a click track, but clicks always make later editing easier, but then artistic restrictions and all that
most would say two mics, it just makes sense, or a ton of mics, if u have them y not. Multiple mics on the guitar will give u more options for tone. i recommend pencil condensors for the guitar, like SM81s n such, or normal condensors would do. Common practice is Shure SM57, but i dont know, i like detail from my acoustic guitars.
now where i said many, i meant taht i personally would try the one mic route, or rather a stereo setup of two mics, but not specified to either singer or guitarist. If ur going for a very organic acoustic performance i just love getting performers into a good space and capturing wat they do the way someone in teh audience would hear it. Just look for those sweet spots in teh room where it sounds 'real', beats spending days mixing until it sounds reconstructed. Play with the spacing of ur musicians for levels and ambience, but in the end it might be cooler to go this route. IMHO
Tim NUh, at least one more time . . .Member
Since: Feb 07, 2007
Feb 03, 2011 09:18 pm I like the whole play first/then sing thing, for obvious reasons. I just recorded a friend who plays occasionally with us, and we re-recorded an old demo of his, originally from a Tascam 4 track cassette. Unfortunately, we recorded his vocals and guitar together, with one condenser on the git, and the other on the guitar. The three takes are good; one of them was very good, and that's the one I chose. However, I wanted him to play first, and then sing, and he felt he couldn't do it. All said and done, the simultaneous recording is limiting, in my opinion. I know that "the magic" might happen when both are together, but I would argue that the magic is just as likely to happen when everything's done separately. And frankly, shouldn't the performer have the song down cold to where she can then concentrate on the singing? I like the sound of a well-engineered song, constructed from the ground up in a studio, with professionals who have an artistic sense of what they want the thing to sound like.
