So this summer I've been mostly recording acoustic guitar, I was wondering if I could get some suggestions regarding this. I don't know if it is our studio here (which me and my brother and dad built into our garage) but whenever i record acoustic guitar, the levels are only decent if i am strumming loudly, if I am picking quietly it is very quiet. I have to put the soundhole very close to the mic to pick up an ok level. Is this normal? I have recorded acoustic before, not at home here, and haven't really had this problem. One song I did I had to use compression on the acoustic guitar because of this, and the compression on garageband doesn't sound very good to me. Although without it it was clipping cause I couldnt get a good steady level. Anyway, what i want advice on, is should i leave the levels the way they are mostly when mixing, or should i bring up the quiet parts closer to the louder strumming parts? I'm thinking that I should leave it so its more natural.

quote:

Originally posted by Guayhumanperson:
Anyway, what i want advice on, is should i leave the levels the way they are mostly when mixing, or should i bring up the quiet parts closer to the louder strumming parts? I'm thinking that I should leave it so its more natural.

In your situation I would suggest that you record them naturally, low enough so they do not clip and then make volume adjustments when you mix.

What Ronan said.

Acoustic gtr can be a pretty dynamic instrument. If you're not doing any compression during tracking, then you can have some big swings in volume between strumming loudly and picking softly. I would say that's normal to a point. When you play it back, it should be fairly representative of how you played it. If not, you can play around a little with mic choice and placement.

If you don't like the compressor(s) you have, you can ride the faders depending on the mix and arrangement. Actually, you might like that better than putting a compressor on it in the first place. Another thought is to record the loud sections and the soft sections in two different passes, unless you actually want to retain the wide dynamics in the arrangement.

Steve

You might consider doing some room tests. You may have inadvertently created an anechoic chamber

If this is the case you might wish to use
"reflectors" such as wood paneling to get
some early reflections.

Another thought is to record the loud sections and the soft sections in two different passes, unless you actually want to retain the wide dynamics in the arrangement.

Steve[/QUOTE]

I was thinking of that actually. Although I generally like things to sound natural and not like I am just putting parts together. But I guess I could try that. We have only about 3 mics here, but I could try experimenting with each one. I think I'm gonna post some songs on this forum eventually to get some feedback.

I checked out your myspace page and it sounds like acoustic guitar to me. The problem is dynamics.

What kind of mics are you using? Try recording in stereo using a couple of omnis- one around the neck to get those transient sounds and one by the soundboard. The benefit of omni mics is they're very forgiving. if you move around when you play, the mics will still pick up what you're playing. And you get a bit of the room sound as well so it won't sound like an anechoic chamber.

Also, what kind of guitar are you playing? If it has a built-in pickup you can try running that direct and micing the guitar simultaneously. That would give you a nice stereo track to work with.

Or, just use your same set-up and play louder with more precision.

Jon

Sorry, that sounded kind of abrupt. What I mean is record the "soft" parts at normal volume so they'll be clear and then bring them down in the mix.

thanks for the advice, but I dont have any omni mics. Also I can only run one mic at a time right now into my computer, Im looking for a interface where I can run atleast two into it. I only have dynamic mics right now. Right now I am using this sennheiser 835e mic to record this current song im doing. I am just recording at 2 different times, doing a close stereo pair, about a foot away from the guitar each time. I have been trying to play louder, but I haven't done the quieter parts separate. I dont know it just seems like even if I brought them down it wouldnt be as natural sounding to me. Do you know if professionals record acoustic guitar this way or do they record parts separate as you suggest? Is it a matter of sound quality or taste?

You aren't recording stereo. What you are doing is called "doubling" -- a wonderful technique in itself.

Stereo is when you record the same performance with two different mics (at the same time).

I know what you mean bout sounding "natural" but the fact is, recording is an unnatural approach to trying to create a "natural" sound. It's very artificial, I mean think about it- you're in a room trying to create the sound of a "band" using digital technology. How can that be natural?

On the other hand, I think your recordings sound fine and the Sennheiser is a good mic. The problem is going from loud strumming to quiet parts. Since you're not using compression and are already doing multiple passes, I would do the opposite- double the quiet parts.

For example, listen to I've Just Seen a Face by the Beatles. There's a soft fingerpicked intro and then loud strumming on the verse and chorus. Here comes the Sun is the same. In both songs the quiet bits are recorded separately from the strumming but balanced in the mix. (A lot of Elliott Smith's stuff was recorded the same way.)

The difference is, they are using compression to boost the signal on the quiet parts and limit the sound on the loud parts. You can do the same thing by using some more tracks and judiciously blending them in the mix.

Recording is not the same as performing, although they do overlap. It's odd, but sometimes the more "artificial" you are in recording, the more "natural" it sounds.

Jon

thanks a lot. Yeah i can see what you mean. Thanks for the info about the beatles and elliot smith. Where did you read that? I'd like to read about how pros recorded their albums more so I can get that into my head. I actually have been recording the quiet parts and loud parts twice, since I think the doubling just sounds fuller to me. Although I did notice when I pan both tracks to center with for example the strumming parts, it has a weird sound to me, it sounds better when I pan them a little off center. Is this a normal thing? I just was experimenting since i usually pan them off center when I have been doubling acoustic parts. Also it seems more difficult to record them seperate and then bring them up because i always second guess myself like crazy about levels when mixing. But I might as well try it out.

Not to change get off track but is that the same technique Zeppelin did on early tunes like Babe i'm Gonna Leave You? Or even Over The Hills and Far Away?

I really don't know much about how LZ recorded- Jimmy Page was always kind of secretive about his studio techniques. They did a lot of tracks at Olympic Studios and also at Page's estate using Ronnie Lane's mobile studio but I haven't found anything detailing the particular gear that they used. It would be cool to know how they achieved some of those sounds.

The Beatles sessions are pretty well documented. There's a fantastic book called Recording the Beatles that came out last year. It goes through the history of Abbey Road studios, the consoles, outboard gear, instruments, and specific sessions in exhaustive detail. Geoff Emerick, who engineered most of the Beatles sessions, also published a book recently about his work with the Beatles. I forget the name of the book.

You might also check out the archives at the Tapeop website. They have tons of great interviews with legendary engineers and producers. You can also get a free subscription to the magazine when you visit the website. Larry Crane publishes Tapeop and runs Jackpot! Studios. He engineered many of Elliott Smith's records and is in charge of the Smith archives. I'm sure if you did a search you could find some good info on his recording techniques.

Happy hunting!

Jon

[off-track]
There are books on Led Zep songs as well, not entirely focussed on recording, but well worth the read.

Led Zeppelin: Dazed and Confused: The Stories Behind Every Song, by Chris Welch, ISBN 1-56025-818-7
The Complete Guide to the Music of Led Zeppelin, by Dave Lewis, ISBN 0-7119-3528-9
[/off-track]

Thanks for the LZ reading list- I'll track those down.