5th Law: before you hit record, make sure you have practiced the song like you're gonna play it live... You have it down so well you can play it blind folded. When you know the song that well, you're relaxed & smooth & that feeling is communicated in the performance.
My 5th law: Be fearless in experimentation and be careful of limiting your approach to a single way of doing things. You both learn from mistakes and from accidents that work great.
This is awesome advice, I love it. As someone who has done a lot of recording of acoustic guitar, and learned through trial and error :-) the only other rule I was add to your list is: Don't play with a heavy touch (hard strumming/picking). You're going to get a better tone, and stay in the groove better, by playing with a lighter touch. Let the acoustic guitar body produce the tone, don't try to bang it out of the guitar by playing harder. Adjust your headphone mix so that you can hear yourself comfortably in the mix, while playing with a light touch and you will get a better tone and intonation as you play through the track. Also, be aware of dynamics in your song and use your acoustic guitar to accent those dynamics and pauses. This will help your track to add to the dynamics of the track overall. As you layer different acoustic guitar tracks, they will all add to the song dynamics and "organic" sound if they're all working together to accent the song dynamics. In addition, have a few different types of picks try on your track to get the tone you want. A heavier pick is going to give you a fuller/rounder sound and a thiner pick is going to give you a thiner tone. Depending on the role of your track, you may decide to use one type of pick or the other.
@@ronbooth1382 yeah that's another really good tip, especially for guitars! Personally for my acoustic guitar I use the peterson strobe tuner, it's expensive for a clip tuner but so insanely good!
I agree, Graham. Over the course of 50 years I have recorded acoustic guitars in every conceivable way. After the smoke clears, it comes down to where I realize how easy it is to complicate a simple thing, and that making it more complex doesnt make it better. One good mic positioned well is the best bet, and it becomes more a question of what mic to use for the specific application.
Mid side works like a charm for me when I want to record a solo acoustic guitar performance. I love the wideness you get with 2 mics. For the rest of the situations I stick with mono recording.
1.) Determine the roll of the acoustic guitar before planning recording set up. 2.) Don't record through a DI box. 3.) Back the mic away from the guitar (unless it's an SM57, let's be real here). 4.) Don't record in stereo using two mics. I just saved you 11:32, *YOU'RE WELCOME!*
@super broly No, I meant tune your guitar "again" whenever you'll play using the capo, because as you put a capo on, it actually alters the tuning, so you have to tune it again. Got me?
Thank you so much Graham. This was very helpful. You are so right about not recording acoustic guitar directly because I find that when I use a mic, I like my guitar recordings better.
Totally agree. People who record acoustic guitar in stereo almost always do it out of habit and because of some long forgotten dictum they were told was the "proper way to do it," without realizing how much mono guitar works as well or better, and usually better.
All that being said, it's essentially free to go ahead and track your pickup through a DI (get the guitar's onboard tone controls right) in ADDITION to your main mic. You may not use the track, but it's there. I've used it many times to compress, distort, chorus, phaser or EQ the crap out of and set 15-25 DB (or more or less) down behind the main mic. It might sound like garbage by itself but you'll be amazed at the tones you can pull out that are not available using the main mic track itself.
my 2 cents..I have been following you for years and in fact it was you who taught me to record using pro tools; but I strongly disagree with your saying using 2 mics is difficult and unnecessary...engineers having been using 2 mics on acoustic for years because it imparts a wonderful sonic quality and quite frankly it's not that difficult to fix phasing issues by hitting the phase button on the channel strip or eq etc or blowing up the wav files and matching them up ...the same thing happens when you use a top and bottom snare mic, or 2 room mics for drums, yet they are used constantly and issues are dealt with...that being said, everything else you said was spot on...and yes it is easier as far as mixing goes to use one mic. Then you could use a tool like microshift to thicken or even double it. I really appreciate your continued support and education of us out here in mixing land...Doc
I agree and was thinking the same thing. I use both methods mentioned(using 1 or 2 mics). Normally 1 mic when acoustic will be used just for accompanying on the side or in the background in the song and 2 mics when the acoustic will be more predominant or of course the main instrument in the song and there are times when I use more than just one or two mics(room mics). It's really all about capturing the right sound for the song at hand.
@@HuffwareStudio I think his main point there was that it isn't necessary. You can do it if you like but it's not technically necessary. In other words, do whatever floats your boat.
I've often captured the DI from an acoustic when I'm micing it up, because I always think "Well why not capture it anyway" - But I almost always end up muting the track when mixing. I will use multiple mics for acoustic when the acoustic is the main focal point, but if I'm using it as one of many layers, I'll switch to just one.
Saw I guy mixing acoustic with squeaks from finger movements on strings n I listened last time I played n heard a lot of me doing the same so they have string lube I think that eliminates the squeaks pretty sure.
@@danielrains2055 Good tip. On the other hand, sometimes just the right amount of finger squeak is tasty, as it provides a clue as to the performer's effort, or "struggle".
I typically give strings at least a few days to a week to break in before recording. You still get the brightness without all of the finger noise as you're moving around the fretboard. 100% agree on pick selection. It is a quick and effective step that any artist can take to help shape their sound - would say it is as important as mic placement.
Agree with #2 with one caveat: some interesting effects can be had by combining a DI from an acoustic along with a mic on the same guitar, or just taking the DI signal and running it through some modulation effects for a "acoustic + electric" vibe. This would be where it would be somewhat in the background of the mix and just adds a touch of something unique to the song.
Makes sense, you just saved my next recording Graham! lmao this is so true about plugging in the guitar, I've recorded guitar parts over and over on songs and just couldn't figure out how to make it sound natural in the mix, Now after watching this, I'm never plugging in my guitar, plus fewer cables to deal with. I just started your Jumpstart Series. A lot of good knowledge, the whole series is a Goldmine! Thank you for making it for us and sharing your knowledge and experience
#2 is a soothing balm on my damaged soul. I can't believe how many high end pros still believe there is a place for that horrendous piezo sound in recording. Thank you! As for #4, it hurts to follow that one, but I guess I'll try. My "excuses" for recording stereo have been the following: a) I love the combination of a LDC mic and a SDC mic on acoustic guitar. (LDC toward the bottom of the body, SDC at the 12th fret, angled away from the sound hole). If I already have two signals, why not pan them a little, if I can avoid phase problems? because b) I was always telling myself the most natural singer/songwriter setup would be to have the vocal in the center, and "bracket" the two guitar tracks left and right of it, creating more space for the voice to be clearly audible. Are those really just excuses? Am I deluding myself? (This is for a stripped down, acoustic guitar plus vocal setup, maybe with a bass added.)
Great tips. I do alot of solo singer songwriter stuff, so stereo setup works best for me in those situations. But with full instrumentation, one Mic is always the way to go.
These laws are well crafted and so useful! I agree with all of them. For those of us who don't record every day this video should be in our favorites list.
These were great tips. The biggest insight I got was thinking about how we normally don't hear the acoustic guitar right next to the sound hole, so we should back up the mic. Thanks, Graham!
Rule # 5 before you hit record if you have any other acoustic guitars hanging up take them down and lay them sound hole down on carpet, couch or get them out of the room all together, nothing will destroy a recording faster. Great tutorial and thank you for this. -Drew
I usually use a mic to capture the low end and DI to capture the air. Blending both gives me best of both worlds. The natural lows and low mids from the mic and the air from the DI. Matching the phase is crucial for this though.
How timely. I just recorded a couple of guitar tracks today for my band. We're working up a version of the Beatles "If I Needed Someone" and I wanted to lay down the basic rhythm tracks - two acoustic parts; one open A and another capo 7 in the D position. I've slowly been moving the mics away from my guitar to minimize the proximity effect and with your advise, I moved a bit further - about 2 feet away, above the upper bout and visualized the cone of cardioid reception to encompass the whole guitar. Best acoustic capture I think I've ever had. Full disclosure I recently purchased a mic preamp which I'm sure helps. But I'm quite pleased. Thanks for your help!
Graham, I understand your point about not recording acoustic guitar in stereo (mostly to avoid phase issues). I agree that double tracking is the better option, and it comes with the added benefit of extra texture, richness, and a bit of chorus... provided 1) the guitar player is competent enough to deliver a second performance that tracks closely to the first in terms of tempo, groove, and tone. This point isn't self-deprecation or a dig at guitar players, we are all limited by a technical threshold. 2) the song consists of more than guitar and vocals I think Vincent Black Lightning (live) by Richard Thompson is a good example. If anyone is unfamiliar with this song, it's easy to find on RUclips. This specific interpretation of the song is my current Everest, and when I conquer it I fully intend to record it. A mono recording would sound extremely narrow and there would be very little opportunity to create movement in the mixing process. Assailing it with a bunch of plugins to artificially add width and depth would sound... well artificial. I imagine I will reach a point where I can consistently play the song well, but I question if I will be able to play it exactly the same twice for recording purposes. The alternative of recording a ridiculous number of takes followed by many hours of comping and massaging doesn't seem very efficient. This was a long way of saying I think most of us would agree that mono is the way to go for 90%+ of musical styles and recording applications. However, unlike your point of "never plug and record directly into a DI", I don't think an absolute law is fitting for the question of mono/stereo. I think stereo is the better approach for the fingerstyle singer-songwriter genre.
Thank God, somebody said this: “Do not record acoustic guitar D.I.” It just sounds awful. I guess if I had to add a 5th note, I’d probably be “make sure the performance is good. i.e, no watches or bracelets hitting the bridge of the guitar, no half played notes (fretbuzz), no fans or AC Units on in the background - stuff like that matters just as much as the rest of what he said.
Thats because you're trying to make a piezo sound like wood. However, if you put a preamp built for that between the guitar and DI box / desk then it will sound great.
I broke the law, and the law won. I have tried all of the things that you describe as don't do this. And your right they do not work. So thank you this video was great. Not saying this is a fith law for guitars without a traditional sound hole but here ya go. I have an Ovation (Applause Elite) acoustic / electric so no traditional sound hole. What I did on my last recording (the guitars role was both melody in the verse which moves into a three part harmony in the chorus, and the main rhythm part in a song with Piano, Synth pad, Bass, and drums) was to put an SM 57 two inches below the bridge and two inches off of the body while playing the strings just below the neck. This gave me the best tone I have recorded yet. It also gave me plenty of string scrapes to edit out. I have to try a single SM57 or a single SM58 three feet back. I have a cloud lifter for the mic through a steinberg UR-RT4. My main problem is this guitar just is not very loud. I am looking to get a good acoustic/electric, soon I hope. Thanks again, David
I disagree with some of them. 2) I use DI because I need to get bass sound using octaver (Boss OC3- poly mode). This gives me both a sub and a woody sound. 4) Two or even three microphones can add volume. Because when someone is playing the guitar, they don't just hear mono. the sound of your fingers, the sound of accidentally hitting the body, the sound of the guitar bouncing from behind. You can think of it like photography because they don't use a single light.
You’re about the only engineer I’ve heard advocating mono recording but make a great case, def gonna try that out! I’d love to hear advice on FRET SQUEAK though, it seems very few people address the issue. I hear pro recordings with little or zero fret squeak but it always causes me problems 😖
I’ve retrained the way I play when I record. Instead of sliding, I jump over to where I need to go. I intentionally do a fret squeak here and there to make the recording a bit more interesting
@5:55 Wait, what..? One foot equals 1.5 meters now..? When did that happen? Also, here's a reason you may want to (additionally) record the piezo; low pass @110Hz or 220 or whatever, compress the poop out of it, blend to taste with mic signal -> solid/consistent low end.
I feel so lucky to have found your channel. I've avoided looking up videos like these (especially on mixing!) because it seemed both overwhelming, and there's so many different opinions from different people on the internet. Your approach to teaching is so easy to understand, you explain so well and so simply. I liked the flashlight metaphor in particular, that really helped me understand and visualize WHY we need that distance from the mic (that's totally been my problem)! I appreciate your channel and your videos so much, thank you thank you!
I agree with your 4 Laws of Acoustic Guitar Recording. My 5th rule would be: Use fresh guitar strings. My 6th rule: Don't always use a click track. I'd like to know your approach to recording guitar and vocals in a live performance, for a video for example. I recently did a recording with a single condenser mic (AKG 2000B) and I'm quite impressed with it. Took a bit to get the position right. Some simple eq, compression, reverb, and limiter in the mix.
Tons of great acoustic guitar recordings were made with old strings on purpose. New strings are only really good for real bright and articulate sounds, which a lot of time isn’t appropriate.
"And that is because it sounds like poop." Epic. I hate the DI sound, though the k&k body pickups are actually pretty good when you are live and have no other choice to both perform and record. I don't record studio acoustic much, but I almost always wish it was better when I do. Thanks for sharing!
Definitely learn about phase cancelling and learn to start looking for it when you mic up any source with multiple mics. It's invaluable and part of the essence of a multi-mic session. It's also worth mentioning that his caution against phases issues is nearly unfounded for x/y and mid/side techniques here. Only for spaced pair techniques.
I can confirm this. Had students this week laying down vocals and I quickly wanted to show them something on acoustic guitar while the vocal mic was still on with their recording earphones on them. I was actually very far from the recording mic and when I played, because I only wanted to show something and not record the guitar. One student mentioned that it sounds great. So yes... back off with mic when recording acoustic guitar.
I heard in Nashville they have a method for getting better recordings from 12-string by splitting the 12-string set to 2 regular 6-string acoustic guitars. Then record two separate tracks.
I was once at a session and the producer I was working with recorded an acoustic with 2 sm57s in xy. They were touching at the grill at a 90 degree angle 14 inches away parallel with the top of the guitar. This had one pointing at about the 12th fret and the other right behind the bridge and panned them 50 to each side. Having the mics so close kept and phase issues in check and he was able to control the natural eq with the level of neck or body mic. Have done this every time I’ve recorded an acoustic instrument since.
Good advice. I think a further consideration to attach to rule 1 is, think about how you're going to play the part that's needed for the song. Pick or fingers? Where you strike the strings - near the bridge or beyond the sound hole or somewhere in between? How many strings you want to use? Light strumming on top 4 strings beyond the sound hole can produce a shimmering, dulcimer like sound for instance. Strumming on only 2 or 3 of the low strings near the bridge can provide a clearer full sound than hitting all 6 strings. I like to get the mic at least 2 feet from the guitar, pointing at where the fretboard meets the body; off-axis always sounds sweeter to me. Top tip: 1 mic only!
I’ve started using two sp-1 microphones for stereo recordings and I’m pretty sold on doubling the performance. It feels better though I’ll still learn about sterio recording.
There is one reason to use a DI on acoustics. If you are using them for effects. The Supersuckers did that on the intro and outros for Sleepy Vampire and Tom Waits did for I don't want to Grow Up. They were mic'ed and distorted to great effect.
Great Advice! The role of the guitar is so important because it can change how you record it. DI makes sense with electric, but acoustic is not meant as much for that.
IMO, I agree with all points including point 4, IF the acoustic is not the spine. If the acoustic is the focus, absolutely rec on multiple mics. XY matched pair on the 12th, large condenser on the12th and a 57 at the body or, over the shoulder sounds good as an accompaniment part.
I have used a second mic but in an analog situation. But it was in an extremely bright sounding room along with an omnidirectional pointed toward a glass reflection. However, this was when you were lucky to have 8 tracks to work with and much of the "mastering" had to be done in the tracking process. Now you can duplicate the track, add space and pan it where ever you want it to be along with nearly unlimited tracks. The only time I will plug one in is if I want a separate feed for effects and even then it never gets to the master until it has been effected.
Agreed that two performances panned left and right sounds great. Even better if you change it up for the second performance with a capo or alternate tuning. Thanks!
Great vid, thanks. My suggested number 5: put new strings on the guitar before recording as they have a brighter and livelier sound - obviously allow for stretching time to ensure the guitar doesn't go out of tune mid song, and check your tuning every time before you press the red button!
I'm going to counter rule #2 in two ways: It's totally valid to record direct if you simply want a different kind of sound. In this case you would also probably be adding effects to achieve something unique. I've done this with good results. But you're right, straight signal with nothing on it playing a normal acoustic guitar part does sound like poo. The other counter-argument is that a direct signal can actually work really well as a blended sound, depending on the context. But I've found that dialing in just the right amount underneath mic tracks can add some spice or some weight to the overall sound. I pretty much always record a direct track in addition to using microphones and then decide later if and how much I want to use it.
Yeah, law #2 comes across as gate-keeping a bit. Ten Summoner's Tales is one of Sting's greatest albums, and it used a D.I.-d nylon-string guitar throughout, and you can tell by listening. But it works, because the guitar isn't trying too hard to be "truly acoustic" - the only way to get that kind of sound is to mic a guitar up. But it still works! There are no laws, only guidelines.
I agree - 1 microphone, placed where it can pickup complete sonic palette of the guitar and recognize the intention: single guitar, primary guitar, texture, etc. I agree with A.B.Martin - try to make sure the performance is good (click or drum track in headphones). Acoustic guitar is usually recorded early (unless it's just added texture) and can ruin a recording if the tempo is bad. Another tip would be to position the microphone to get the closest EQ to that you will need in the final mix - thin or full, etc. (if you know ahead of time).
Great video! This will help a lot of people I think, myself included. I personally record DI alongside a mic'd acoustic and leave it muted unless there's a specific problem I'm trying to solve in the mix that a DI blend can fix. Problems may include not enough low end or if the player moves around a lot creating an inconsistent sound. Honestly most of the time the DI stays muted in my mixes and eventually gets deleted, and most of the time when it does get used, it's heavily filtered to remove most frequencies.
Another tip - watch the placement of your forearm. You don't want it to rest on the top as it will dampen the resonance of the top and will alter your tone in a negative way.
Great tip. I had though of how u could keep the guitar suspended yet stationary as u play to get the full resonance. I know they have mounts for live performance.
I definitely agree with the first and second law. I feel those are good basics. The third law I'm not really sure about because we've recorded several times in a professional studio and they never make the acoustic guitar that far away it's always usually about eight inches away from the sound hole. I hadn't heard of the fourth law but that makes a lot of sense. I would appreciate it though if you would address the third law as to why you think professional studios do that, you would think out of all those pros, if moving the mic further away was best then they would be doing that?
Hey Graham, thanks for the tips. The DI one explains a lot and the distance from the mic comes with time and experience I guess. I always think new strings before the recording session brings out a crisper and clearer sound too. Cheers!
My BIGGEST problem with DI recording of acoustic guitars is not the inaccurate way the frequency range is affected or its inability to convey the scallops cut into the inner bracings of more professional instruments or not even the low decibel hums and buzzes that are just a part of electricy and its need to ground. All of these do suck, but depending on your ear and gear quality, may go unnoticed, especially if the post production is well done. My biggest problem of DI recording is the loss of the right hand as the percussive attack. In other words, a mic will pick up the percussive sound of the pick attacking the strings, an effect that is greater as the pic thins, but stops at .7mm. My favorite overall pic for lead work is a Clayton 1.52 tear drop. Its thickness lowers the percussive sound of the right hand attack while raising the perceived volume of the pitches being produced by the left hand. On the flip side, my favorite strumming pick is a Dunlap .88, which greatly increases the percussive sound of the RH strum while lowering the perceived volume of the left hand notes. For the most part the overall volume of the instrument is not affected, but the effect is huge. Either way, w/o external mics, the sound of the right and attack is always the same when DI. The percussive sound requires the light syllambnce sounds frequencies that are buried because the mic is under the bridge (its the same reason our own voice in our head sound lower to us than to someone else's ear). Brain experiment: if I could place a mic in someones head, would that be optional to accurately reproduce what I hear outside their head. And anyone who has heard themselves on audio knows, in our head we sound deep and big, but on recording its higher pitched and thinner. On the flip side, I usually do DI to a track, but only for special effects in a spot where I intentionally want to remove the attack of the pic w/o some type of slow attack compression. Either way, good video. I agree with most all of your rules.
I like to track the DI along with the mic. That way, I can use the DI to support the mic track, if needed. It’s better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.
I use a sm57 and mic it roughly within 6 inches of the sound hole (I play an ovation so the largest sound hole is actually pretty close to the neck so I can of kind of get that dual benefit that people stereo mic for) and then I send that signal to a separate track of dedicated reverb to give it a lot of atmosphere. I'm a noob, but I mostly write music for myself at the moment anyways and I enjoy the sound I get. I've been finding the imperfections of my production make it more intimate experience anyways. Eventually I'll get around to professional production.
True but the Mid/Side is a great way to go. One recording and you have control of stereo spread after recording without phase issues because of the technique of mic placement.
3:03 There are definitely interesting and helpful uses for going DI (but not without a mic option). It shouldn't be a law if you know what you're doing both live and studio.
Good advice. I do enjoy running my acoustic through my line6 dl4 delay pedal as a DI, strumming is a fail but single note leads through an amp plug-in can yield interesting results.
We had exactly one song where we tried stereo mic-ing. One of the mics we used gave really heavy mids, and the particular song needed it (weird, right?). We did a take and then we switched the positions of the two mics and did a second take. It came out sounding good, BUT... the overall takeaway is that the difference between that method and just doing one take panned hard left and another take panned hard right is imperceptible through anything but studio headphones. And let's face it, most of the people we want to hear our music aren't listening through studio headphones.
I agree with most of what you kindly share. A mic close to the sound hole is more vibrant, especially flamenco and classical guitar; but the disadvantage of close mic placement is noise, such as hammering and string squeel on bass strings above the 7th fret. Such artifact does not project, so distancing from the mic offers a cleaner sound. I compromise by placing the mic 2ft away. For me, filtering out all the mongrel traits sterilizes the instrument's voice. And yes, mono reduces the wow and flutter effect, inherent in acoustic guitar. A low tension nylon guitar is possibly the most difficult of all to record (Melodyne is essential).
I do disagree on not using the DI. Here's why: I did a session for a client and the DI saved the day. No, it didn't sound as good as mic'd track but he was happy as could be and I looked like a miracle worker because I saved what he considered to be the defining vocal/guitar performance of the song. He hit the acoustic mic and there was too much bleed to fix it. He also is a tremendous singer and not so much of a guitar player, no real way to punch or edit (long before DAW technology). There are also some very creative things you can do with the DI track to blend and/or trigger effects . I've used it to add just a touch of presence in a mic'd track and it worked nice without resorting to EQ. I can always delete it if I don't use it but I can't add it after the performance because it won't be exactly the same ever again.
I don't disagree with any of the laws. However, I DO use DI and Stereo Mic setup. At the same time actually. I have the DI down the middle, with two mics panned left and right. I roll the highs off the DI so it can just carry the bass frequencies, and let the mics carry the sparkle. I deal with the phase in the DAW by getting in close and nudging them in time. It's worked for me pretty well. Again, I don't disagree with these laws at all. In fact, I'm going to utilize them next time 👍
Great tips, Graham! I'd like to add that *sometimes* a DI sound can sound great in a mix, especially when it's a supporting role in a "wall of sound" of a dense pop/rock/metal mix. It just needs some tweaking! ;) It's of course preferred to go mic'd almost all the time, but sometimes you gotta work with what you have! :)
Law #5” “Go WEIRD!” Lindsey Buckingham found some great sounds by doing things that engineers would say: “hey DON’T do that!”. i.e.; hitting the phase inversion, etc. Record WITH the pickup. For the record, I also HATE the sound of ANY guitar pickup!! But, for some sounds, Coldplayish / Radioheadish sounds could be just the “weirdness” that the track needs. GREAT ADVISE and “Rules”! Thanks! G
Thank you Graham! as far as my experience goes , I totally agree with the four Laws of Acoustic recording. Best of all, neve record through a DI: while it may be good in a live band situation, in a studio it never does. And most of the time, an acoustic is there just to add texture and connect other instruments, so...
►► Create radio-worthy songs from your bedroom. Download my FREE Radio Ready Guide and learn my 6 step process → RadioReadyGuide.com
RadioReadyGuide.com can’t be found
5th Law: before you hit record, make sure you have practiced the song like you're gonna play it live... You have it down so well you can play it blind folded. When you know the song that well, you're relaxed & smooth & that feeling is communicated in the performance.
I got music contents check me out
My 5th law: Be fearless in experimentation and be careful of limiting your approach to a single way of doing things. You both learn from mistakes and from accidents that work great.
This is awesome advice, I love it. As someone who has done a lot of recording of acoustic guitar, and learned through trial and error :-) the only other rule I was add to your list is: Don't play with a heavy touch (hard strumming/picking). You're going to get a better tone, and stay in the groove better, by playing with a lighter touch. Let the acoustic guitar body produce the tone, don't try to bang it out of the guitar by playing harder. Adjust your headphone mix so that you can hear yourself comfortably in the mix, while playing with a light touch and you will get a better tone and intonation as you play through the track. Also, be aware of dynamics in your song and use your acoustic guitar to accent those dynamics and pauses. This will help your track to add to the dynamics of the track overall. As you layer different acoustic guitar tracks, they will all add to the song dynamics and "organic" sound if they're all working together to accent the song dynamics. In addition, have a few different types of picks try on your track to get the tone you want. A heavier pick is going to give you a fuller/rounder sound and a thiner pick is going to give you a thiner tone. Depending on the role of your track, you may decide to use one type of pick or the other.
Law Nr. 5, invest in a great tuner and tune your acoustic really rigorously, this can make or break your recording!
I literally had to detune all of my guitar tracks down 20 cents last week because of a bad tuning, definitely killed the vibe.
That's good advice. I always only use one and the same tuner for all instruments I record.
@@ronbooth1382 yeah that's another really good tip, especially for guitars! Personally for my acoustic guitar I use the peterson strobe tuner, it's expensive for a clip tuner but so insanely good!
Use your ears when tuning. I've a had a year violin lessons and tuning by ear was one of the most important things I learned.
Right on. Gotta tune
I agree, Graham. Over the course of 50 years I have recorded acoustic guitars in every conceivable way. After the smoke clears, it comes down to where I realize how easy it is to complicate a simple thing, and that making it more complex doesnt make it better. One good mic positioned well is the best bet, and it becomes more a question of what mic to use for the specific application.
I have a lot music content check me out
Mid side works like a charm for me when I want to record a solo acoustic guitar performance. I love the wideness you get with 2 mics. For the rest of the situations I stick with mono recording.
1.) Determine the roll of the acoustic guitar before planning recording set up.
2.) Don't record through a DI box.
3.) Back the mic away from the guitar (unless it's an SM57, let's be real here).
4.) Don't record in stereo using two mics.
I just saved you 11:32, *YOU'RE WELCOME!*
I got audio music contents check me out
too late
u r a hero
5th law: Always tune your guitar when using a capo 🙂
Yes this is so true and a lot of people don't know that 12 tone equal temperament fret layout isn't exactly perfect
I had no idea you could do this. That explains why a lot of my songs have sounded better without a capo
Oh yeeeah. Definitely
@super broly No, I meant tune your guitar "again" whenever you'll play using the capo, because as you put a capo on, it actually alters the tuning, so you have to tune it again. Got me?
@super broly sure man! no problem! :)
Thank you so much Graham. This was very helpful. You are so right about not recording acoustic guitar directly because I find that when I use a mic, I like my guitar recordings better.
I got audio music contents check me out
Totally agree. People who record acoustic guitar in stereo almost always do it out of habit and because of some long forgotten dictum they were told was the "proper way to do it," without realizing how much mono guitar works as well or better, and usually better.
All that being said, it's essentially free to go ahead and track your pickup through a DI (get the guitar's onboard tone controls right) in ADDITION to your main mic. You may not use the track, but it's there. I've used it many times to compress, distort, chorus, phaser or EQ the crap out of and set 15-25 DB (or more or less) down behind the main mic. It might sound like garbage by itself but you'll be amazed at the tones you can pull out that are not available using the main mic track itself.
Exactly! That's thinking out of the box and it works. I've done that.
my 2 cents..I have been following you for years and in fact it was you who taught me to record using pro tools; but I strongly disagree with your saying using 2 mics is difficult and unnecessary...engineers having been using 2 mics on acoustic for years because it imparts a wonderful sonic quality and quite frankly it's not that difficult to fix phasing issues by hitting the phase button on the channel strip or eq etc or blowing up the wav files and matching them up ...the same thing happens when you use a top and bottom snare mic, or 2 room mics for drums, yet they are used constantly and issues are dealt with...that being said, everything else you said was spot on...and yes it is easier as far as mixing goes to use one mic. Then you could use a tool like microshift to thicken or even double it.
I really appreciate your continued support and education of us out here in mixing land...Doc
Yeah I like 2 mics on the acoustic too. Though I don't do much recording anymore ;)
I agree and was thinking the same thing. I use both methods mentioned(using 1 or 2 mics). Normally 1 mic when acoustic will be used just for accompanying on the side or in the background in the song and 2 mics when the acoustic will be more predominant or of course the main instrument in the song and there are times when I use more than just one or two mics(room mics). It's really all about capturing the right sound for the song at hand.
Agreed. Stereo-mic'd acoustic guitars are perfect for sparse arrangements. But in a denser one, there's no need to go that route.
@@HuffwareStudio I think his main point there was that it isn't necessary. You can do it if you like but it's not technically necessary. In other words, do whatever floats your boat.
@@jasonbodden8816 right..
I've often captured the DI from an acoustic when I'm micing it up, because I always think "Well why not capture it anyway" - But I almost always end up muting the track when mixing.
I will use multiple mics for acoustic when the acoustic is the main focal point, but if I'm using it as one of many layers, I'll switch to just one.
Fresh strings and try out different guitar picks. It's where the rubber meets the road. These have a huge impact on the sound.
Saw I guy mixing acoustic with squeaks from finger movements on strings n I listened last time I played n heard a lot of me doing the same so they have string lube I think that eliminates the squeaks pretty sure.
@@danielrains2055 Good tip. On the other hand, sometimes just the right amount of finger squeak is tasty, as it provides a clue as to the performer's effort, or "struggle".
@@jimbob3574 this recording must've been closed miked cause it was really loud. But yeah absolutely. I agree.
I typically give strings at least a few days to a week to break in before recording. You still get the brightness without all of the finger noise as you're moving around the fretboard.
100% agree on pick selection. It is a quick and effective step that any artist can take to help shape their sound - would say it is as important as mic placement.
@@augustleo7434 yeah, you definitely need to give the strings break in time.
Hey folks, this is one of the coolest cats on the entire platform. All of the expertise, without any of the arrogance. Hats off!
Thanks Graham! The recording revolution has helped me tremendously in my music productions. God bless you!
Agree with #2 with one caveat: some interesting effects can be had by combining a DI from an acoustic along with a mic on the same guitar, or just taking the DI signal and running it through some modulation effects for a "acoustic + electric" vibe. This would be where it would be somewhat in the background of the mix and just adds a touch of something unique to the song.
Good tip
Makes sense, you just saved my next recording Graham! lmao this is so true about plugging in the guitar, I've recorded guitar parts over and over on songs and just couldn't figure out how to make it sound natural in the mix, Now after watching this, I'm never plugging in my guitar, plus fewer cables to deal with. I just started your Jumpstart Series. A lot of good knowledge, the whole series is a Goldmine! Thank you for making it for us and sharing your knowledge and experience
I got audio music contents check me out
#2 is a soothing balm on my damaged soul. I can't believe how many high end pros still believe there is a place for that horrendous piezo sound in recording. Thank you!
As for #4, it hurts to follow that one, but I guess I'll try. My "excuses" for recording stereo have been the following:
a) I love the combination of a LDC mic and a SDC mic on acoustic guitar. (LDC toward the bottom of the body, SDC at the 12th fret, angled away from the sound hole). If I already have two signals, why not pan them a little, if I can avoid phase problems? because
b) I was always telling myself the most natural singer/songwriter setup would be to have the vocal in the center, and "bracket" the two guitar tracks left and right of it, creating more space for the voice to be clearly audible.
Are those really just excuses? Am I deluding myself? (This is for a stripped down, acoustic guitar plus vocal setup, maybe with a bass added.)
Great tips. I do alot of solo singer songwriter stuff, so stereo setup works best for me in those situations. But with full instrumentation, one Mic is always the way to go.
Dang! This is so helpful. I've been recording at my house for years and I always new there was something wrong. Now I know. Thank you!
These laws are well crafted and so useful! I agree with all of them. For those of us who don't record every day this video should be in our favorites list.
These were great tips. The biggest insight I got was thinking about how we normally don't hear the acoustic guitar right next to the sound hole, so we should back up the mic. Thanks, Graham!
Rule # 5 before you hit record if you have any other acoustic guitars hanging up take them down and lay them sound hole down on carpet, couch or get them out of the room all together, nothing will destroy a recording faster. Great tutorial and thank you for this.
-Drew
Your "how-to's" are good. But, this is some of the best advice I've heard.
I usually use a mic to capture the low end and DI to capture the air. Blending both gives me best of both worlds. The natural lows and low mids from the mic and the air from the DI. Matching the phase is crucial for this though.
Awesome video Graham, you've helped me so much with my acoustic music!!
How timely. I just recorded a couple of guitar tracks today for my band. We're working up a version of the Beatles "If I Needed Someone" and I wanted to lay down the basic rhythm tracks - two acoustic parts; one open A and another capo 7 in the D position. I've slowly been moving the mics away from my guitar to minimize the proximity effect and with your advise, I moved a bit further - about 2 feet away, above the upper bout and visualized the cone of cardioid reception to encompass the whole guitar. Best acoustic capture I think I've ever had. Full disclosure I recently purchased a mic preamp which I'm sure helps. But I'm quite pleased. Thanks for your help!
I got music contents check me out
Graham, I understand your point about not recording acoustic guitar in stereo (mostly to avoid phase issues). I agree that double tracking is the better option, and it comes with the added benefit of extra texture, richness, and a bit of chorus... provided
1) the guitar player is competent enough to deliver a second performance that tracks closely to the first in terms of tempo, groove, and tone. This point isn't self-deprecation or a dig at guitar players, we are all limited by a technical threshold.
2) the song consists of more than guitar and vocals
I think Vincent Black Lightning (live) by Richard Thompson is a good example. If anyone is unfamiliar with this song, it's easy to find on RUclips. This specific interpretation of the song is my current Everest, and when I conquer it I fully intend to record it. A mono recording would sound extremely narrow and there would be very little opportunity to create movement in the mixing process. Assailing it with a bunch of plugins to artificially add width and depth would sound... well artificial. I imagine I will reach a point where I can consistently play the song well, but I question if I will be able to play it exactly the same twice for recording purposes. The alternative of recording a ridiculous number of takes followed by many hours of comping and massaging doesn't seem very efficient.
This was a long way of saying I think most of us would agree that mono is the way to go for 90%+ of musical styles and recording applications. However, unlike your point of "never plug and record directly into a DI", I don't think an absolute law is fitting for the question of mono/stereo. I think stereo is the better approach for the fingerstyle singer-songwriter genre.
Thank God, somebody said this: “Do not record acoustic guitar D.I.”
It just sounds awful.
I guess if I had to add a 5th note, I’d probably be “make sure the performance is good. i.e, no watches or bracelets hitting the bridge of the guitar, no half played notes (fretbuzz), no fans or AC Units on in the background - stuff like that matters just as much as the rest of what he said.
Good addition!
If for some reason they did, put a small room reverb on it, then another reverb... and maybe another. LOL
Thats because you're trying to make a piezo sound like wood. However, if you put a preamp built for that between the guitar and DI box / desk then it will sound great.
Spot on. And not forgetting shirt buttons on your cuffs. Often you don't hear them until you listen back to your recording.
"It. Sounds. Like. Poop."
I broke the law, and the law won. I have tried all of the things that you describe as don't do this. And your right they do not work. So thank you this video was great.
Not saying this is a fith law for guitars without a traditional sound hole but here ya go. I have an Ovation (Applause Elite) acoustic / electric so no traditional sound hole. What I did on my last recording (the guitars role was both melody in the verse which moves into a three part harmony in the chorus, and the main rhythm part in a song with Piano, Synth pad, Bass, and drums) was to put an SM 57 two inches below the bridge and two inches off of the body while playing the strings just below the neck. This gave me the best tone I have recorded yet. It also gave me plenty of string scrapes to edit out. I have to try a single SM57 or a single SM58 three feet back. I have a cloud lifter for the mic through a steinberg UR-RT4. My main problem is this guitar just is not very loud. I am looking to get a good acoustic/electric, soon I hope.
Thanks again,
David
I got audio music contents check me out
Perfect, and very timely! I was just getting ready to record some guitar. Thanks!!
I disagree with some of them. 2) I use DI because I need to get bass sound using octaver (Boss OC3- poly mode). This gives me both a sub and a woody sound.
4) Two or even three microphones can add volume. Because when someone is playing the guitar, they don't just hear mono. the sound of your fingers, the sound of accidentally hitting the body, the sound of the guitar bouncing from behind. You can think of it like photography because they don't use a single light.
this is the perfect description of how to lean to listen to what is to be recorded.
I got music contents check me out
You’re about the only engineer I’ve heard advocating mono recording but make a great case, def gonna try that out! I’d love to hear advice on FRET SQUEAK though, it seems very few people address the issue. I hear pro recordings with little or zero fret squeak but it always causes me problems 😖
I’ve retrained the way I play when I record. Instead of sliding, I jump over to where I need to go. I intentionally do a fret squeak here and there to make the recording a bit more interesting
@5:55 Wait, what..? One foot equals 1.5 meters now..? When did that happen? Also, here's a reason you may want to (additionally) record the piezo; low pass @110Hz or 220 or whatever, compress the poop out of it, blend to taste with mic signal -> solid/consistent low end.
I feel so lucky to have found your channel. I've avoided looking up videos like these (especially on mixing!) because it seemed both overwhelming, and there's so many different opinions from different people on the internet. Your approach to teaching is so easy to understand, you explain so well and so simply. I liked the flashlight metaphor in particular, that really helped me understand and visualize WHY we need that distance from the mic (that's totally been my problem)! I appreciate your channel and your videos so much, thank you thank you!
I agree with your 4 Laws of Acoustic Guitar Recording. My 5th rule would be: Use fresh guitar strings. My 6th rule: Don't always use a click track.
I'd like to know your approach to recording guitar and vocals in a live performance, for a video for example. I recently did a recording with a single condenser mic (AKG 2000B) and I'm quite impressed with it. Took a bit to get the position right. Some simple eq, compression, reverb, and limiter in the mix.
I got audio music contents check me out
Tons of great acoustic guitar recordings were made with old strings on purpose. New strings are only really good for real bright and articulate sounds, which a lot of time isn’t appropriate.
"And that is because it sounds like poop." Epic. I hate the DI sound, though the k&k body pickups are actually pretty good when you are live and have no other choice to both perform and record.
I don't record studio acoustic much, but I almost always wish it was better when I do. Thanks for sharing!
I got audio music contents check me out
Thanks for the video - especially the phase cancelling part - new info to me!
Definitely learn about phase cancelling and learn to start looking for it when you mic up any source with multiple mics. It's invaluable and part of the essence of a multi-mic session. It's also worth mentioning that his caution against phases issues is nearly unfounded for x/y and mid/side techniques here. Only for spaced pair techniques.
@@Melvin7727 that's a bit more technical than I understand at this point, but I will keep it in mind.
I can confirm this. Had students this week laying down vocals and I quickly wanted to show them something on acoustic guitar while the vocal mic was still on with their recording earphones on them. I was actually very far from the recording mic and when I played, because I only wanted to show something and not record the guitar. One student mentioned that it sounds great. So yes... back off with mic when recording acoustic guitar.
I got music contents check me out
I heard in Nashville they have a method for getting better recordings from 12-string by splitting the 12-string set to 2 regular 6-string acoustic guitars. Then record two separate tracks.
5th Law Have 3 thicknesses of picks..1 soft 1medium 1 hard..And depending on the roll the guitar choose a pick sound to capture the best tone.
this is super helpful! Thanks for that! Your tips always helps us to do better sounding music! Cheers from Mexico
Yeah! He's a good dude :)
The type of pick you use makes a huge difference also. Their hardness and the type of material they are made of can change the tone totally.
I was once at a session and the producer I was working with recorded an acoustic with 2 sm57s in xy. They were touching at the grill at a 90 degree angle 14 inches away parallel with the top of the guitar. This had one pointing at about the 12th fret and the other right behind the bridge and panned them 50 to each side. Having the mics so close kept and phase issues in check and he was able to control the natural eq with the level of neck or body mic. Have done this every time I’ve recorded an acoustic instrument since.
I got music contents check me out
Great video as usual Graham!
Good advice. I think a further consideration to attach to rule 1 is, think about how you're going to play the part that's needed for the song. Pick or fingers? Where you strike the strings - near the bridge or beyond the sound hole or somewhere in between? How many strings you want to use? Light strumming on top 4 strings beyond the sound hole can produce a shimmering, dulcimer like sound for instance. Strumming on only 2 or 3 of the low strings near the bridge can provide a clearer full sound than hitting all 6 strings. I like to get the mic at least 2 feet from the guitar, pointing at where the fretboard meets the body; off-axis always sounds sweeter to me. Top tip: 1 mic only!
I have a lot music content check me out
Agree, specially law #2. An exception to law #4 would be if you're recording a solo performance for example.
I got audio music contents check me out
I’ve started using two sp-1 microphones for stereo recordings and I’m pretty sold on doubling the performance. It feels better though I’ll still learn about sterio recording.
I particularly love law N*2😍
100% with a mic👌
There is one reason to use a DI on acoustics. If you are using them for effects. The Supersuckers did that on the intro and outros for Sleepy Vampire and Tom Waits did for I don't want to Grow Up. They were mic'ed and distorted to great effect.
I agree with nearly everything theoretically. If I were to make a 5th rule, it would be to "know when to ignore the first four".
Great Advice! The role of the guitar is so important because it can change how you record it. DI makes sense with electric, but acoustic is not meant as much for that.
First of all, love your videos. Second of all, bro you look like anakin skywalker and i cant stop seeing it
Thank you so much for these excellent tips my friend 👊👍😎
IMO, I agree with all points including point 4, IF the acoustic is not the spine. If the acoustic is the focus, absolutely rec on multiple mics. XY matched pair on the 12th, large condenser on the12th and a 57 at the body or, over the shoulder sounds good as an accompaniment part.
I usually try for acoustic guitars like bad co. "Shooting star" left and right strumming .
I've always used mics and a DI and got a nice blend between them
Great Suggestions Graham! (especially the D.I. bit) Thank you!
Agree and the 5 law for me is the room sound , something to care , grat video grham 🤘
Speechless. Lovely video. Spoken from the heart. Thanks
I have used a second mic but in an analog situation. But it was in an extremely bright sounding room along with an omnidirectional pointed toward a glass reflection. However, this was when you were lucky to have 8 tracks to work with and much of the "mastering" had to be done in the tracking process. Now you can duplicate the track, add space and pan it where ever you want it to be along with nearly unlimited tracks.
The only time I will plug one in is if I want a separate feed for effects and even then it never gets to the master until it has been effected.
I got music contents check me out
Agreed that two performances panned left and right sounds great. Even better if you change it up for the second performance with a capo or alternate tuning. Thanks!
Check out the acoustic guitars left, right on bad company " shooting star"
Loved this. Thanks
Great vid, thanks. My suggested number 5: put new strings on the guitar before recording as they have a brighter and livelier sound - obviously allow for stretching time to ensure the guitar doesn't go out of tune mid song, and check your tuning every time before you press the red button!
I got audio music contents check me out
Great vid. Would love an “addendum” vid with actual sound examples.
I'm going to counter rule #2 in two ways: It's totally valid to record direct if you simply want a different kind of sound. In this case you would also probably be adding effects to achieve something unique. I've done this with good results. But you're right, straight signal with nothing on it playing a normal acoustic guitar part does sound like poo.
The other counter-argument is that a direct signal can actually work really well as a blended sound, depending on the context. But I've found that dialing in just the right amount underneath mic tracks can add some spice or some weight to the overall sound. I pretty much always record a direct track in addition to using microphones and then decide later if and how much I want to use it.
I got audio music contents check me out
Yeah, law #2 comes across as gate-keeping a bit. Ten Summoner's Tales is one of Sting's greatest albums, and it used a D.I.-d nylon-string guitar throughout, and you can tell by listening. But it works, because the guitar isn't trying too hard to be "truly acoustic" - the only way to get that kind of sound is to mic a guitar up. But it still works!
There are no laws, only guidelines.
Makes sense, and I''m now inspired to record some acoustic guitar tomorrow. thanks
I got audio music contents check me out
I agree - 1 microphone, placed where it can pickup complete sonic palette of the guitar and recognize the intention: single guitar, primary guitar, texture, etc. I agree with A.B.Martin - try to make sure the performance is good (click or drum track in headphones). Acoustic guitar is usually recorded early (unless it's just added texture) and can ruin a recording if the tempo is bad. Another tip would be to position the microphone to get the closest EQ to that you will need in the final mix - thin or full, etc. (if you know ahead of time).
I have a lot music content check me out
Great video! This will help a lot of people I think, myself included. I personally record DI alongside a mic'd acoustic and leave it muted unless there's a specific problem I'm trying to solve in the mix that a DI blend can fix. Problems may include not enough low end or if the player moves around a lot creating an inconsistent sound. Honestly most of the time the DI stays muted in my mixes and eventually gets deleted, and most of the time when it does get used, it's heavily filtered to remove most frequencies.
Another tip - watch the placement of your forearm. You don't want it to rest on the top as it will dampen the resonance of the top and will alter your tone in a negative way.
Great tip. I had though of how u could keep the guitar suspended yet stationary as u play to get the full resonance. I know they have mounts for live performance.
Interesting tip. Never thought about that before.
Awesome video as always, I was struggling getting a great acoustic sound, switched to mono and it was perfect and double tracked
I laughed at this one quite a bit, thanks for the tips!
Thanks man!!! Was planning to get another mic for guitar recording :)
I definitely agree with the first and second law. I feel those are good basics. The third law I'm not really sure about because we've recorded several times in a professional studio and they never make the acoustic guitar that far away it's always usually about eight inches away from the sound hole. I hadn't heard of the fourth law but that makes a lot of sense. I would appreciate it though if you would address the third law as to why you think professional studios do that, you would think out of all those pros, if moving the mic further away was best then they would be doing that?
Hey Graham, thanks for the tips. The DI one explains a lot and the distance from the mic comes with time and experience I guess. I always think new strings before the recording session brings out a crisper and clearer sound too. Cheers!
My BIGGEST problem with DI recording of acoustic guitars is not the inaccurate way the frequency range is affected or its inability to convey the scallops cut into the inner bracings of more professional instruments or not even the low decibel hums and buzzes that are just a part of electricy and its need to ground. All of these do suck, but depending on your ear and gear quality, may go unnoticed, especially if the post production is well done. My biggest problem of DI recording is the loss of the right hand as the percussive attack. In other words, a mic will pick up the percussive sound of the pick attacking the strings, an effect that is greater as the pic thins, but stops at .7mm. My favorite overall pic for lead work is a Clayton 1.52 tear drop. Its thickness lowers the percussive sound of the right hand attack while raising the perceived volume of the pitches being produced by the left hand. On the flip side, my favorite strumming pick is a Dunlap .88, which greatly increases the percussive sound of the RH strum while lowering the perceived volume of the left hand notes. For the most part the overall volume of the instrument is not affected, but the effect is huge. Either way, w/o external mics, the sound of the right and attack is always the same when DI. The percussive sound requires the light syllambnce sounds frequencies that are buried because the mic is under the bridge (its the same reason our own voice in our head sound lower to us than to someone else's ear). Brain experiment: if I could place a mic in someones head, would that be optional to accurately reproduce what I hear outside their head. And anyone who has heard themselves on audio knows, in our head we sound deep and big, but on recording its higher pitched and thinner. On the flip side, I usually do DI to a track, but only for special effects in a spot where I intentionally want to remove the attack of the pic w/o some type of slow attack compression. Either way, good video. I agree with most all of your rules.
That was great advice and I have violated it many times and tried to EQ my way out. Thank you. I am going to follow this!
I got audio music contents check me out
I like to track the DI along with the mic. That way, I can use the DI to support the mic track, if needed. It’s better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.
I use a sm57 and mic it roughly within 6 inches of the sound hole (I play an ovation so the largest sound hole is actually pretty close to the neck so I can of kind of get that dual benefit that people stereo mic for) and then I send that signal to a separate track of dedicated reverb to give it a lot of atmosphere. I'm a noob, but I mostly write music for myself at the moment anyways and I enjoy the sound I get. I've been finding the imperfections of my production make it more intimate experience anyways. Eventually I'll get around to professional production.
Great info. Thanks for sharing. I'm gonna try all of this this week.
I got audio music contents check me out
Thank you very much. I'm just getting started so you've saved me a lot of experimenting. I'm going to stop recording my acoustic guitar in stereo.
True but the Mid/Side is a great way to go. One recording and you have control of stereo spread after recording without phase issues because of the technique of mic placement.
3:03 There are definitely interesting and helpful uses for going DI (but not without a mic option). It shouldn't be a law if you know what you're doing both live and studio.
I got audio music contents check me out
Good advice. I do enjoy running my acoustic through my line6 dl4 delay pedal as a DI, strumming is a fail but single note leads through an amp plug-in can yield interesting results.
Thanks Graham !! and my law #5 is to repeat law #2 with some more Never, Never, Nevers :)
We had exactly one song where we tried stereo mic-ing. One of the mics we used gave really heavy mids, and the particular song needed it (weird, right?). We did a take and then we switched the positions of the two mics and did a second take.
It came out sounding good, BUT...
the overall takeaway is that the difference between that method and just doing one take panned hard left and another take panned hard right is imperceptible through anything but studio headphones. And let's face it, most of the people we want to hear our music aren't listening through studio headphones.
I got audio music contents check me out
I agree with most of what you kindly share. A mic close to the sound hole is more vibrant, especially flamenco and classical guitar; but the disadvantage of close mic placement is noise, such as hammering and string squeel on bass strings above the 7th fret. Such artifact does not project, so distancing from the mic offers a cleaner sound. I compromise by placing the mic 2ft away. For me, filtering out all the mongrel traits sterilizes the instrument's voice. And yes, mono reduces the wow and flutter effect, inherent in acoustic guitar. A low tension nylon guitar is possibly the most difficult of all to record (Melodyne is essential).
Agree with on all 4 laws. I don't have a 5th law, yet. Thanks!!!
I got audio music contents check me out
Thank you so much... you've saved me hours and a ton of frustration!
great video full of excellent tips. thanks mate!
I do disagree on not using the DI. Here's why: I did a session for a client and the DI saved the day. No, it didn't sound as good as mic'd track but he was happy as could be and I looked like a miracle worker because I saved what he considered to be the defining vocal/guitar performance of the song. He hit the acoustic mic and there was too much bleed to fix it. He also is a tremendous singer and not so much of a guitar player, no real way to punch or edit (long before DAW technology). There are also some very creative things you can do with the DI track to blend and/or trigger effects . I've used it to add just a touch of presence in a mic'd track and it worked nice without resorting to EQ. I can always delete it if I don't use it but I can't add it after the performance because it won't be exactly the same ever again.
I got music contents check me out
I don't disagree with any of the laws. However, I DO use DI and Stereo Mic setup. At the same time actually. I have the DI down the middle, with two mics panned left and right. I roll the highs off the DI so it can just carry the bass frequencies, and let the mics carry the sparkle. I deal with the phase in the DAW by getting in close and nudging them in time. It's worked for me pretty well.
Again, I don't disagree with these laws at all. In fact, I'm going to utilize them next time 👍
I have a lot music content check me out
Great tips, Graham! I'd like to add that *sometimes* a DI sound can sound great in a mix, especially when it's a supporting role in a "wall of sound" of a dense pop/rock/metal mix. It just needs some tweaking! ;) It's of course preferred to go mic'd almost all the time, but sometimes you gotta work with what you have! :)
I got audio music contents check me out
This one came off a bit like a rant. I love it lol
Law #5” “Go WEIRD!” Lindsey Buckingham found some great sounds by doing things that engineers would say: “hey DON’T do that!”. i.e.; hitting the phase inversion, etc. Record WITH the pickup. For the record, I also HATE the sound of ANY guitar pickup!! But, for some sounds, Coldplayish / Radioheadish sounds could be just the “weirdness” that the track needs. GREAT ADVISE and “Rules”! Thanks! G
Good point Gordon. Weird is what often makes a recording special.
Have you tried Acoustic Guitar Impulse Responses? Haven't seen or heard enough of them to form an opinion, but it's a great idea for quick recordings
Keep rocking🤘🏻
Thank you Graham! as far as my experience goes , I totally agree with the four Laws of Acoustic recording.
Best of all, neve record through a DI: while it may be good in a live band situation, in a studio it never does. And most of the time, an acoustic is there just to add texture and connect other instruments, so...
I got audio music contents check me out