#1
My personal setup is in my room, however I am in school right now for recording. I have to record the guitars for a metalcore song this weekend, and the school has a full digital studio, however the first years get stuck in the old studio.

Here's the gear:

Source -> Mackie 8 channel mixer ---> Digi 003 -> Mac Pro Quad Core
|
Mackie 8 channel mixer ---> Behringer Truth 2023 Studio Monitors

My question is this.

What is it going to take to get a good guitar sound from my Randall RM100. We have a couple 57's in the studio as well as an AKG condenser.

I am looking to reproduce my amps sound as closely as possible without hiss or fizz or any of that....

Should I try and actually get good tone from my amp and that mixer, or just use my patches from POD Farm?

Thanks guys....

Oh, and I should mention...

I will be recording a dry as well as wet signal from the guitar, recording in 24 bit, so that the drys can be reamped if need be.
I've bought, sold, and traded more gear than I care to admit.
Last edited by Brendan.Clace at Nov 18, 2009,
#2
Aight.

For a start, forget trying to replicate what the amp sounds like in the room. Miced guitar amps and guitar amps in the room are totally different beasts.
Focus on getting the best possible sound under the mic. If it sounds good miced up but shit in the room, roll with it. Because what it sounds like in the room is of zero consequence when you've got a mic up.

Getting it sounding good in the room is a good starting point though, just expect to tweak the tone a bit/a lot.


Anyway. As for micing. Throw up a 57, 1 inch away, dead center. It'll probably sound pretty fizzy and pretty harsh, may sound good, who knows. Start slowly moving the mic from left to right, listening for changes in the sound.
Too centered and it'll be fizzy, but it'll be nice and in your face, up front and clear, which is the element you really can't afford to lose.
Too far to the edge and it'll start sounding like shit recorded by harmony central amp forum users, and that is definately something you don't want. It's like a honky, cardboard-y, almost roomy sort of sound. Like a really strange hollow sorta tone. You REALLY don't want that.

Right in the middle between center and edge will probably sound pretty cloudy, but still fairly up front, but far smoother than dead center. Far less definition though.

You'll probably find that the best compromise between smoothness and fizz is with the 57 placed where the dustcap (that little part in the middle) meets the cone (the rest.)

Once you've found your ideal position, play around with moving the mic back as far as 6 inches. Listen to how it affects the sound. Adam D from killswitch engage has been known to put mics back pretty far from the cab if you need some sort of testimony that it won't sound like ass. 6 inches is too far back for most people though. In less than ideal rooms for recording you'll start to get a lot of other shit infringing upon your guitar tone (basically just the room rearing its ugly face) so you'll probably want to maybe go 3 inches back at the most. Listen to your recorded tones in contrast to a mixed backing track of your song. No eq at all, maybe a high pass at 90 and a low pass at 10khz and thats it. If it doesn't sound like it could slot in near-perfectly with no more EQ than that, go back and move the mic some more.

Hope this helps man!
#3
Once you managed to untangle yourself and crawl out from under all those cables, check out this page and find out which DI suits you best:

http://www.franknitsch.com/speaker-sims/

At first glance, it would appear that either the Red Box Pro or the Red Box Classic should fit the bill.
Last edited by ColdGin at Nov 19, 2009,
#5
Quote by Dream Pin
Nearly all of those sounded terrible.


Agreed.....
I've bought, sold, and traded more gear than I care to admit.
#6
Quote by Dream Pin
Nearly all of those sounded terrible.


Quote by Brendan.Clace
Agreed.....


Perfect. At least, now you know you ain't going to get much more out of SM-57s.
#7
Quote by ColdGin
Perfect. At least, now you know you ain't going to get much more out of SM-57s.


Therefore suggesting i use POD Farm or just get say Catharsis or someone to reamp it?
I've bought, sold, and traded more gear than I care to admit.
#8
Quote by Brendan.Clace
Therefore suggesting i use POD Farm or just get say Catharsis or someone to reamp it?


Reamp ? Why not, shouldn't be expensive, right ?


Here's how I would decide ...

"Does my amp setup sound so good that it's worth spending $300 on mics, cables, stands, and 2 full weekends to get a fair approximation down the recording chain to hard disk ?"

If the answer is no ... go with the POD farm.
Last edited by ColdGin at Nov 19, 2009,
#9
You're a self professed musician offering audio engineering advice. Am I the only one who sees an OVERWHELMING flaw in the rationale behind this?!


$300 on mics, cables and stands? No. 1 SM57, 1 stand, 1 cable, that's all you need for supreme tone, anything else is like masturbation with lube. Not needed, but fun none the less.
And 2 full weekends? **** that. With the upcoming guitar micing tutorial, it shouldn't be a hassle for anyone on the forum to get a good, if not great miced guitar tone with relative ease.
I tend to spend half an hour at the very most ****ing with mic positions.
#10
Quote by Dream Pin
You're a self professed musician offering audio engineering advice. Am I the only one who sees an OVERWHELMING flaw in the rationale behind this?!


$300 on mics, cables and stands? No. 1 SM57, 1 stand, 1 cable, that's all you need for supreme tone, anything else is like masturbation with lube. Not needed, but fun none the less.
And 2 full weekends? **** that. With the upcoming guitar micing tutorial, it shouldn't be a hassle for anyone on the forum to get a good, if not great miced guitar tone with relative ease.
I tend to spend half an hour at the very most ****ing with mic positions.


Thanks man, I really appreciate your input on this.
I've bought, sold, and traded more gear than I care to admit.
#12
Quote by Beefmo
Yes, 57's give you terrible guitar tone:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0K3eBuoZw8


If 57s gave any tone, Andy Sneap wouldn't need a 5150 and Triple Rectifier half-stacks.

Let's see the bill ... hmmm, nope, Amazon don't carry any 5150s or XXX.


Peavey 6505 half stack: $1799.99 (Musician's friend)
Mesa/Boogie Triple Rectifier: $1899.00 (Sweetwater)
Mesa/Boogie 4x12 Rectifier Standard Slant: $949 (sweetwater)


That's only $4548 worth of gear.

So frankly, whether recording with a $99 SM-57 or $119 Sennheiser 421 is quite irrelevant for the poor college student.


Quote by Dream Pin
You're a self professed musician offering audio engineering advice. Am I the only one who sees an OVERWHELMING flaw in the rationale behind this?!

$300 on mics, cables and stands? No. 1 SM57, 1 stand, 1 cable, that's all you need for supreme tone, anything else is like masturbation with lube. Not needed, but fun none the less.


Caught with both hands in mama's knickers.

Last edited by ColdGin at Nov 19, 2009,
#13
So you're telling us that to get good sound you also need good amps?

No shit sherlock.
#14
Quote by Beefmo
So you're telling us that to get good sound you also need good amps?

No shit sherlock.


Nope.
That trying to make a Randall sound like a combination of a 5150 and a XXX is gonna cost closer to $4500, rather than $99.

Come on, a poor college boy like you should spot the difference.
#15
Its over a grands worth of fairly well rated tube amp, if the OP can't get some sort of usable tone out of it with a 57 then something is wrong.

Rag on the 57 all you want, no microphone will turn shitty amp sound into decent amp sound, the 57 is great for its purpose, the OP has a fairly nice amp, he might as well have a run with this if he can and just experiment.

Oh, and talk to me a bit more informally, you assuming you know anything about me because of what you read on my profile is just a tad creepy.
Last edited by Beefmo at Nov 19, 2009,
#16
Quote by ColdGin
Nope.
That trying to make a Randall sound like a combination of a 5150 and a XXX is gonna cost closer to $4500, rather than $99.


Excuse me?

Have you ever played a Randall RM100 amplifier? Or any Randall MTS amp for that matter......now I'm seriously pissed, and I am asking you nicely to leave my thread and never comment in it again. For the record, a Rectified module of the Randall sounds pretty dang close to a triple rec running full bore. Also, a 1087 module from Pete Turley or a 1666 module from Salvation sounds exactly like a 5150. Do your research before bashing people's gear bud. Again....leave now and dont ever try to give me advice again.

Thank you
I've bought, sold, and traded more gear than I care to admit.
Last edited by Brendan.Clace at Nov 19, 2009,
#17
Quote by Beefmo
Its over a grands worth of fairly well rated tube amp, if the OP can't get some sort of usable tone out of it with a 57 then something is wrong.

I agree.

Rag on the 57 all you want,...

You are hallucinating.

I didn't rag on the 57. I use it all the time! But not exclusively.

Oh, by the way, you did notice you drifted off-topic ?


Oh, and talk to me a bit more informally, you assuming you know anything about me because of what you read on my profile is just a tad creepy.

Ooops, sorry, can't reply, this is way, way outside the thread's topic.
Last edited by ColdGin at Nov 20, 2009,
#18
Quote by Brendan.Clace
Excuse me?

Yes ?

Do your research before bashing people's gear bud.

Bashing ? ? ?

Dunno what you are talking about.
Didn't do no "bashing".
You been smoking those banana skins too ?

Again....leave now ...

Pooh-pooh.

and dont ever try to give me advice again.

That, I can do.
Last edited by ColdGin at Nov 20, 2009,
#19
Quote by ColdGin
I agree.


You are hallucinating.

I didn't rag on the 57. I use it all the time! But not exclusively.


Quote by ColdGin
Perfect. At least, now you know you ain't going to get much more out of SM-57s.


The implication with the quoted comments in that post being that only terrible tones could be expected and not much more. Don't try to wriggle your way out of this one, I have eyes.

Ooops, sorry, can't reply


Good, lets keep it that way.
#20
Quote by Beefmo
The implication with the quoted comments in that post being that only terrible tones could be expected and not much more. Don't try to wriggle your way out of this one, I have eyes.

Gee, when are you going to step out of that extremist logic ?
Isn't there anything in your world in between "rocks" and "sucks" ?
#21
I tend to only talk about things that I either like or hate, things that I'm indifferent to are usually not interesting enough to be worth talking about.

Anyway, this isnt about what I said, it's about what you did. Your somewhat predictable by now rhetoric detracts from the point.
#22
Quote by ColdGin
Gee, when are you going to step out of that extremist logic ?
Isn't there anything in your world in between "rocks" and "sucks" ?


Are you really as stupid as we all believe you to be? Grammatically, by saying, "Perfect. At least, now you know you ain't going to get much more out of SM-57s" right after quoting "Nearly all of those sounded terrible" and "Agreed," you form a direct correlation between the direct object of your statement ("SM-57s") and the assertion being made in the other quotes (that something sounds terrible). You are relating the SM57 to something that sounds "terrible," i.e. you are saying that the SM57 sounds terrible. Beefmo didn't misinterpret you out of some extremist, "audio terrorist" -like logic. You tried to bend what you had said further than it could be bent.

Stop being such a condescending prick. You are far from the smartest person on this forum, and you are nowhere near as smart as you think you are.
#23
Quote by climhazzard
Are you really as stupid as we all believe you to be? Grammatically, by saying, "Perfect ...

"Perfect" never meant I agreed with their opinion, only that I acknowledged it.

"At least, now you know you ain't going to get much more out of SM-57s" right after quoting "Nearly all of those sounded terrible" and "Agreed," you form a direct correlation between the direct object of your statement ("SM-57s") and the assertion being made in the other quotes (that something sounds terrible).


It just happens that ALL of those DIs were modelled after what engineers heard coming from either open back Fender or closed back Marshall cabinets, industry standards, through a SM-57.

I trust these engineers to have done a pretty good job, myself owning and having recorded with 4 of the 5 DIs in the test, and the ADA MP-1 preamp used for the test, and I heard personally how close the modelling was compared to the real thing. Those engineers didn't spend just a few hours doing mic placement or 30 minutes like DreamPin. They spent weeks selecting cabinets, mics and analyzing mic placement.

So, if for some reason DreamPin's didn't like what he heard, considering his high esteem for the SM57 and assuming his lengthy experience and initimate familiarity with how these industry standards recorded through a SM57 should sound, I can only understand his carefully elaborated opinion can only describe the sound of the Preamp/Amp combination used.

Are you telling me that's not how I should have interpreted his feedback ? I didn't expect DreamPin to know about the ADA preamp, or care if he liked it or not. In fact, I didn't have to.

The conclusion I made only acknowledges the fact that despite the Audio Talibans' bashless devotion to the SM57, you can only get as much as you'll feed it. I meant nothing more, nothing less.

So eventually, if you're happy with your $$$ amp sound, getting a good rendering through the SM57 will still require a clean mic (you're not gonna use an old beat up mic not knowing if it works or sounds right), mic placement and eq experience, quality cables, a quality preamp, either a familiar reflective or a well isolating room, and some time setting it all up, to reach, ideally what you hear from you amp, and more practically, a sound close enough that you like. That's what I sum up to $300.

Or you can give one of those DIs a shot and try eq'ing a sound to your liking, still using your $$$ amp.

Or you can stow your $$$ amp and use some amp modelling software or hardware.

The problem with you chaps is that you're so full of early convictions and so obnoxious and adversary trying to cram them in peoples minds, or annihilate those who won't join your church and lick your priests ass, that it never comes to your clouded minds that someone just might take your word on what you claim to know and leverage on the assumptions that knowing implies.

Whether DreamPin listened or not to those samples, had he taken them seriously, he would have made himself the distinction between the DI's modelling of the SM57, the cab simulation, or the Preamp/Amp combination to say eactly what he qualifies as "Terrible". With no distinction in his opinion, it is obvious that it CAN NOT apply to the SM57 modelling itself, him knowing how the SM57 sounds, and I knowing how close the modelling is to the real thing.

Are you really as stupid as we all believe you to be?
...
Stop being such a condescending prick. You are far from the smartest person on this forum, and you are nowhere near as smart as you think you are.

You've been sitting in your fart cloud for too long and it's been up to your head. Time to make your high horse take a step forward and move on.
Last edited by ColdGin at Nov 20, 2009,
#24
wow.. its happening again.

anyway.. If you want, you could splice a DI between your guitar and your amp in there as well. This way you can try to get a good sound out of the SM57, and if for some reason its not working out.. then you at least get your clean DI'd guitar sound for re-amping with amp farm and others.

hell.. you could blend the two if you want

Miking and DI for reamping are both great methods of recording.. with this way, theres no reason why you can't have both

good luck and have fun
Grammar and spelling omitted as an exercise for the reader.
#25
Whilst you're blaming us for having too much of a set opinion its become obvious you just can't make your own mind up and like to hide the lack of whats actually going on with a display of empty argumentative bombast.

You'll say black is white then turn round and say the opposite, focusing on making the argument as irrational as possible so that no one is actually sure what you're saying and in the confusion you'll attempt to make out that everyone has just not reached your level of understanding, if we are the 'audio talibans', as you so rediculously put it, then you are obviously the american forces who bomb afghan wedding parties then deny it ever happened, your game is manipulation and casual oneupmanship as opposed to really actually ever saying anything palpable, of merit, or useful.
#27
Quote by Kivarenn82
wow.. its happening again.

anyway.. If you want, you could splice a DI between your guitar and your amp in there as well. This way you can try to get a good sound out of the SM57, and if for some reason its not working out.. then you at least get your clean DI'd guitar sound for re-amping with amp farm and others.

hell.. you could blend the two if you want

Miking and DI for reamping are both great methods of recording.. with this way, theres no reason why you can't have both

good luck and have fun


Thanks for the great advice man! I think I may end up taking a lot of extra time on the mic placement and see what I can get. ANd heck, if that doesn't work, I'll just blend them.
I've bought, sold, and traded more gear than I care to admit.
#28
Quote by ColdGin
"Perfect" never meant I agreed with their opinion, only that I acknowledged it.


It just happens that ALL of those DIs were modelled after what engineers heard coming from either open back Fender or closed back Marshall cabinets, industry standards, through a SM-57.

I trust these engineers to have done a pretty good job, myself owning and having recorded with 4 of the 5 DIs in the test, and the ADA MP-1 preamp used for the test, and I heard personally how close the modelling was compared to the real thing. Those engineers didn't spend just a few hours doing mic placement or 30 minutes like DreamPin. They spent weeks selecting cabinets, mics and analyzing mic placement.

So, if for some reason DreamPin's didn't like what he heard, considering his high esteem for the SM57 and assuming his lengthy experience and initimate familiarity with how these industry standards recorded through a SM57 should sound, I can only understand his carefully elaborated opinion can only describe the sound of the Preamp/Amp combination used.

Are you telling me that's not how I should have interpreted his feedback ? I didn't expect DreamPin to know about the ADA preamp, or care if he liked it or not. In fact, I didn't have to.

The conclusion I made only acknowledges the fact that despite the Audio Talibans' bashless devotion to the SM57, you can only get as much as you'll feed it. I meant nothing more, nothing less.

So eventually, if you're happy with your $$$ amp sound, getting a good rendering through the SM57 will still require a clean mic (you're not gonna use an old beat up mic not knowing if it works or sounds right), mic placement and eq experience, quality cables, a quality preamp, either a familiar reflective or a well isolating room, and some time setting it all up, to reach, ideally what you hear from you amp, and more practically, a sound close enough that you like. That's what I sum up to $300.

Or you can give one of those DIs a shot and try eq'ing a sound to your liking, still using your $$$ amp.

Or you can stow your $$$ amp and use some amp modelling software or hardware.

The problem with you chaps is that you're so full of early convictions and so obnoxious and adversary trying to cram them in peoples minds, or annihilate those who won't join your church and lick your priests ass, that it never comes to your clouded minds that someone just might take your word on what you claim to know and leverage on the assumptions that knowing implies.

Whether DreamPin listened or not to those samples, had he taken them seriously, he would have made himself the distinction between the DI's modelling of the SM57, the cab simulation, or the Preamp/Amp combination to say eactly what he qualifies as "Terrible". With no distinction in his opinion, it is obvious that it CAN NOT apply to the SM57 modelling itself, him knowing how the SM57 sounds, and I knowing how close the modelling is to the real thing.

You've been sitting in your fart cloud for too long and it's been up to your head. Time to make your high horse take a step forward and move on.


why aren't you banned yet?
Guitars:
LTD Alexi-600 White & Black
LTD Alexi-200 Black(Death Adder pickup & Gold OFR)
Agile Interceptor Pro 727 7-string
Jackson JS30RR rhoads
Jackson DKMGT
Squire telecaster

amps:
Bugera 6262 212 loaded with WGS veteran 30's