|
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 52
Location: PA | Anyone have any recommendations for an acoustic pickup that sounds very natural for recording and performs well for a live gig? Or, should I just break down and buy a nice mic and a cheapy p/u? I'm mostly concerned with a good recorded sound, playing live comes second for me. Alex mentioned a Lace p/u once, how does that work for tracking? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10583
Location: NJ | Tom I really like he lace sensor sound hole pickup it has a very natural tone. If I were to record though forget about the pickups and use a good mic such as a neuman km 184 or tlm 103 or an akg 414 or maybe a sennheiser 441 that way you will pick up the natural tone of the guitar and not the processed tone from the pickup. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Al's right, forget pickups if you want an accurate recorded sound. The mikes he suggested are superb but are very expensive & operate on phantom power only. Take a look at a Rode NT3. Fantastic sounding small diaphragm capacitor mike, ideal for recording acoustic guitar, which operates on phantom or an internal 9V.
Paul |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 52
Location: PA | I will likely get the mic's at some point, for the moment I have a borrowed KSM-32 which sounds nice. But some of the finger picking stuff I play lacks clarity in a mix... if I tight mic, I get way too much of that string squeek when I change positions. I was kind of hoping to find a nice pickup to use for recording, maybe blended with a mic while I have it... more attack, less squeek.
Lace makes a couple acoustic p/u's, what was the model you have?
Thanks! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10583
Location: NJ | the senneheiser is a dynamic mic no phantom power required
[ April 30, 2002: Message edited by: alpep ] |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Al, you're right, missed that one. Nevertheless, dynamics aren't a great idea for acoustic guitars. The best dynamics can just about compete with an average condenser in terms of frequency response, but the low sensitivity & low output of the moving-coil design means they need to be very close to the guitar to get an acceptable recording level. This encourages the proximity effect, resulting in a boomy, unnatural bass response. Plus the inherent presence peak of the design tends to acentuate finger/fret noise & make the top end overly harsh. There's lots of affordable condenser mikes ($150 & less, cheaper still if bought used on ebay) that will do a very respectable job of recording acoustic instruments.
Check out the cheaper Avlex & Superlux condensers, they're not Neumanns by any means, but they'll kick an SM57's ass.
Paul
[ April 30, 2002: Message edited by: Paul Templeman ] |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10583
Location: NJ | Paul
you are right but the 421 is a really nice sounding mic.
as for cheapie condensors let's just say you get what you pay for I will stick with my neumanns |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Al, I love 421's, but they're quite specialised & probably beyond the reach or needs of the hobbyist. I'm having a couple of Neumanns as a late 40th birthday present to myself, as long as my good lady doesn't find out.
Paul |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 10583
Location: NJ | Paul
I guess that for me I always search for the best sound etc and don;t really care about the cost if it means paying twice as much as for an sm58 that seems not too out of range for me |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 52
Location: PA | I'm real familiar with the 421, we had a 441 in the studio for awhile , but I'm not sure I ever used it. I found a guy who will sell me a pair of KSM-27's for $300, any opinions there?
Sounds like Paul is a studio owner (since you're buying a pair of Nuemanns) Do you have a Pro-Tools rig in your shop? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | No, I'm using hardware harddisk recorders & a combination of digital & analog desks/outboards. Protools is fantastic, but I don't trust Macs, I've had some bad experiences. I work in higher education, so I get to see & use a lot of cutting-edge recording kit, my personal preference is for hardware-based recording with software mixing/editing.
Paul
[ May 01, 2002: Message edited by: Paul Templeman ] |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 873
Location: puerto vallarta, mexico | i hope to see your toy room someday paul. my 'kit' would fit in a briefcase. little yamaha 4 track and a few effects. played through a small practice amp. the clubs always supply everything but the instruments here and some guys even bring more "stuff". my knowledge of what happens after the jack isn't even worth mentioning, but i'm learning here! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 29
Location: Maryland | I have a question for you Ovation experts.
Why did Ovation change the saddle on the newer
Adamas? The "older" saddles used were wider and
had compensation for intonation built in.
My 2000 Custom Legend had the "wide" saddle but
my new Adamas has the common "narrow", with no
compensation for intonation, except being
slanted. I played a new high end Martin a few
days ago that had the "wide" saddle.Why wouldn't
Adamas stay with the " better" saddle? They used
it for years...why change? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 7228
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest | One of the best ways to record acoustic is actually with TWO mics. I nice condensor pointed somewhere between where the neck hits the body and where you are picking, and the other a nice dynamic (like an sm57) up on the neck, pointing maybe around the 3rd fret. Record with good signals on both, then mix to taste afterwards.
If you are going to use a soundhole pickup, I like the Dean Markley little wood block. If you have the tracks, use it with the mics for recording. If you have an Ovation, use the preamp, and in this case, you may only need the dynamic up on the neck (it just adds a little brightness). |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | Miles, that's a good way to record an acoustic guitar. My favourite method is to use a coincident pair of condenser mikes. Take two identical mikes, place them about 8 inches from the guitar between the bridge & soundhole. Get the capsules as close together as possible with one mike pointing at the end-pin and one towards the end of the fingerboard. Play back with the channels panned hard left & right. This method produces a massive & very natural true-stereo recording, plus it's phase coherent.
Paul |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 52
Location: PA | That's why I think a pair of KSM 27's might be a steal for $300. A nice stereo pair is great for recording. As for a PT studio I'd have to say that so far as my experience goes, there isn't a PC based system that comes close to the reliability and quality I've gotten from a mac and pro-tools rig over the years. I'm really tired of the mac vs. pc debate though, this is only my opinion. I've worked with an old Do-re-mi labs DAWn system, Otari Radar, Cool Edit Pro and a few others. and though all are pretty good, I'm still more comfortable with my mac and protools rig. I'm not anti PC though, I'm actually a network admin on a win2000 network... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2001
Posts: 7228
Location: The Great Pacific Northwest | I've been a IT Manager for over 20 years.. I hate that mac vs PC debate too.. Another case of right tool for the job at hand. I started out with Cakewalk when it was a DOS program and I've tried ProTools but just can't seem to get into it. I use a PC mostly because of the availablitly of specialty gear and cards and cheaper upgrades for me. I think it helps that I have an IT background, because I have not run into most of the problems folks complain about. I can record 8 tracks straight to hard disk with effects running and no drops (I have 2 ADATS, but sometimes It's just easier to record direct to disk).
The software synth and effects tools that are available for download is unbelievable... and I don't see much for the Mac... but I'm sure it's out there... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | I think good PC's are now comparable to the Mac in terms of reliabilty & stability. The Mac rightly or wrongly is perceived as the Pro's choice. Many users prefer PC because of the staggering amount of crack/illegal software that is readily available.
Steinberg's Cubase is the software recorder/sequencer market leader in the UK & Europe & it's a fine system. They're all good, Sonar, Emagik, Logic. It's like guitars, it becomes a matter of taste & what you get used to.
The key to recording on PC is masses of RAM & a fast processor, especially if you intend to use lots of plug-ins. It also helps if your computer has nothing else but music software loaded, no games, no wordprocessors or spreadsheets, failing that a dual-boot system helps. While it is perfectly possible to do amazing work using a PC/Mac as the basis of a studio setup I still think a hardware recorder & a digital console is safer. In three years of using such a system I haven't had studio downtime, lost student work, or upset a client because of a system temper-tantrum. I know a few PC users who are now addicted to tranquilisers.
Paul
[ May 02, 2002: Message edited by: Paul Templeman ] |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2002
Posts: 5
Location: TX | I have a 1976 Balladeer. I needed a pickup that would fit the thick soundhole. a friend recommended a Seymour-Duncan Acoustic Tube soundhole pick-up. It's only about $70 so I got it. It fits great and is has adjustable distance from strings(more bass,less treble and vice versa).It has a volume control on the pick-up. I is rather like a humbucker. To me, I have heard other more expensive pick-ups etc, and this sounds great with my Ovation.It reduces feedback to a minimum and has a natural sound.Of course my bowl is deeper than most ovations today and that may make a difference.In my case, expensive doesn't always mean better. |
|
| |
Acoustic Pickups
