(Log in to disable ads.)

Since joining the forum have found some new motivation to play/practice and also to record more of what I do. Working on a piece that has the guitar split into 2 different sounds. An overdrive/fuzz and an acoustic. Acoustic strumming along, and the overdrive/fuzz picking root/fith the whole time. Together they sound really cool ? The acoustic piece is however being played on the electric with a straight through acoustic sound. The problem I have is making that acoustic sound, sound warm. The sound is a little clinical/sharp, obviously the pickups and the metal strings creating that. What should I be looking at to make the sound a little warmer and fuller ? Have applied a really nice EQ, and a multi-band compressor set to Acoustic-Guitar and it does lift the sound some.

Last night I found my crappy hand-held mike, pulled out the nylon acoustic and recorded that by putting the mike really, really close to the guitar. The actual guitar sound is cool but there is too much room/ambient noise when you crank the gain up which I have to do to get the sound to any usable level. Clearly have to find another way to record the nylon acoustic, which will be another mission for another day. So for now I have my electric/acoustic piece that I would like to work on to refine that seeing as I already have that.... any ideas I can try ?
    An acoustics pick up will always be a bit too clean. The only way I found around it was to record the pickup and EQ the life out of it. But using you mic to augment the pickup might add some warmth to it. Also look at a Short reverb with a little bit of pre-delay, and EQ with a low pass filter, so the verb actualy only works on the lower part of the acoustic sound.

    You can also duplicate the acoustic track. On the new track EQ out some of the tops, put a HEAVY compressor on it, and mix that in lower than the origional. It can help to fill out the sound and also add a bit of 'thickness' to the sound..

    These two ideas have worked before, but on other situations they didnt work at all. So it's a bit of a trail and error mission.

      Neps wrote: You can also duplicate the acoustic track. On the new track EQ out some of the tops, put a HEAVY compressor on it, and mix that in lower than the origional. It can help to fill out the sound and also add a bit of 'thickness' to the sound..
      This sounds like a very do-able idea. Will definitely try it out, will let you know how it turns out. Thanks a lot ?
        JohnnyReggae wrote:
        Neps wrote: You can also duplicate the acoustic track. On the new track EQ out some of the tops, put a HEAVY compressor on it, and mix that in lower than the origional. It can help to fill out the sound and also add a bit of 'thickness' to the sound..
        This sounds like a very do-able idea. Will definitely try it out, will let you know how it turns out. Thanks a lot ?
        Some very quick playing around.... your idea worked like a charm. Duplicated the track, EQ'd out all the top, compressed the rest, and added it back into the mix. It definitely makes the acoustic sound a lot fuller. Will spend more time this evening tweaking things around this idea.

        Thanks again for the pointers and help ?
          Neps wrote: You can also duplicate the acoustic track. On the new track EQ out some of the tops, put a HEAVY compressor on it, and mix that in lower than the origional. It can help to fill out the sound and also add a bit of 'thickness' to the sound..
          Hey Neps..You have given me an idea to try out at church.

          We have a digital mixer and I can assign more than one channel to an input. I'm going to try out your method above live and see how that works. I will only send the "Normal" Acoustic sound to monitors to reduce the chance of feedback - But I can mix in the compressed low EQ sound back into the house mix.

          I'll let you know how it turns out....Could be interesting.
            JohnnyReggae wrote: any ideas I can try ?
            A pickup is always going to be a bit of a compromise, even when mixed with a bit of mic. My approach would be to get a better room sound that you can be happy recording acoustic instruments in. This has benefits for everything you do - from the monitoring, which affects everything you hear (I'm assuming you monitor in the same room you record in) to anything you use a mic for including acoustic guitars and especially vocals. Many of us are guilty of spending tens of thousands of rands on instruments and gear, but don't put any money into making the room we use them in sound decent.

            It doesn't even have to cost a lot of money. A few strategically placed bits of absorptive material can work wonders in a room - a thick carpet or rug under the performer, a blanket hung on the wall behind them, sitting them on or standing in front of a plush couch. A big bookshelf loaded with books is one of the best diffusors you can get. Having two or three of the material covered office screens to the sides and/or behind them can make a big difference too. They can be picked up cheaply secondhand, and move very easily to any position (to cut side wall short delays when monitoring for instance) or store easily out of the way when not needed.
              TomCat wrote:
              Neps wrote: You can also duplicate the acoustic track. On the new track EQ out some of the tops, put a HEAVY compressor on it, and mix that in lower than the origional. It can help to fill out the sound and also add a bit of 'thickness' to the sound..
              Hey Neps..You have given me an idea to try out at church.

              We have a digital mixer and I can assign more than one channel to an input. I'm going to try out your method above live and see how that works. I will only send the "Normal" Acoustic sound to monitors to reduce the chance of feedback - But I can mix in the compressed low EQ sound back into the house mix.

              I'll let you know how it turns out....Could be interesting.
              Hi TomCat

              Would be very interested to hear how this will work!! Never actually thought about doing this live.. :-[
              I guess you're using a Yami digital desk? Or can it be a DiGi Co.?
                Alan Ratcliffe wrote:
                JohnnyReggae wrote: any ideas I can try ?
                A pickup is always going to be a bit of a compromise, even when mixed with a bit of mic. My approach would be to get a better room sound that you can be happy recording acoustic instruments in. This has benefits for everything you do - from the monitoring, which affects everything you hear (I'm assuming you monitor in the same room you record in) to anything you use a mic for including acoustic guitars and especially vocals. Many of us are guilty of spending tens of thousands of rands on instruments and gear, but don't put any money into making the room we use them in sound decent.

                It doesn't even have to cost a lot of money. A few strategically placed bits of absorptive material can work wonders in a room - a thick carpet or rug under the performer, a blanket hung on the wall behind them, sitting them on or standing in front of a plush couch. A big bookshelf loaded with books is one of the best diffusors you can get. Having two or three of the material covered office screens to the sides and/or behind them can make a big difference too. They can be picked up cheaply secondhand, and move very easily to any position (to cut side wall short delays when monitoring for instance) or store easily out of the way when not needed.
                I am trying to record in the same room I'm monitoring in, just is that way due to space (huge amount of space take up by an old out-of-tune piano that no-one plays, given to us by the in-laws so can't really get rid of it) and my very low-tech setup. Laptop, external USB sound card, guitar effects pedal, Cubase..... and then some old dodgy speakers. Mic'ing up the acoustic with a dodgy hand-held PC mic is never really going to get any great results, but wanted to try it anyway. Kinda expected the results I got out of that, so I'm concentrating on what I can achieve right now with the electric.

                I like the ideas you mentioned though. They are all very achievable. When I start doing things a little more seriously I'll look at changing the setup in my music room ?
                  LOL - I just moved the obligatory "piano belonging to someone else" (Yamaha Clavinova) out of the music room and into the entrance hall to make more space. I thought my wife would prefer it over the keyboards as she's classically trained, but it turns out she's fussy about the feel of a hammer action.

                  I can talk actually - I haven't any absorptive material up yet as the house is still not officially ours. My acoustic tiles (40m2 worth) are in boxes in the garage. I probably won't use them anyway - they are very ratty looking after being used in three different houses so far.

                  Something I think I'll get sometime is an SE Electronics Reflexion filter:



                  They do small ones for instrument mics too:

                    Nice, those SE's filters are definitely on my list. I have the Auralex pack with all the iso foam cuts. But I sometimes feel that my mic needs a little more isolation from the room.
                      16 days later
                      TomCat wrote:
                      Neps wrote: You can also duplicate the acoustic track. On the new track EQ out some of the tops, put a HEAVY compressor on it, and mix that in lower than the origional. It can help to fill out the sound and also add a bit of 'thickness' to the sound..
                      Hey Neps..You have given me an idea to try out at church.

                      We have a digital mixer and I can assign more than one channel to an input. I'm going to try out your method above live and see how that works. I will only send the "Normal" Acoustic sound to monitors to reduce the chance of feedback - But I can mix in the compressed low EQ sound back into the house mix.



                      I'll let you know how it turns out....Could be interesting.
                      Well I tried out the method described above at church this morning and the results were quite astounding. The whole acoustic sound just went so much bigger, thicker and I could fill the house mix nicely with the acoustic sound without the mix becoming boomy or "boxy".....The guitarist also had a Boss CH-1 chorus and the second channel prevented the guitar from sounding metallic as acoustics ofter do sound live with a digital chorus.

                      This is a technique I will certainly use for acoustics live from now on...... :dance:

                      EDIT: @ Neps...Karma to you for a great technique......
                        I don't know if you have the capability, but another trick I often use with electrified acoustic is to split the signal with a crossover at about 3-4KHz, then I compress only the top end and add some tremolo or chorus to it too. The compressed top end makes sure that the guitar is always present in the mix (or at least the more important high frequencies), even when the player is playing softly. I find adding the modulation just on the hi frequencies helps to give it some life and thickness without making it sound out of tune.
                          Alan Ratcliffe wrote: I don't know if you have the capability, but another trick I often use with electrified acoustic is to split the signal with a crossover at about 3-4KHz, then I compress only the top end and add some tremolo or chorus to it too. The compressed top end makes sure that the guitar is always present in the mix (or at least the more important high frequencies), even when the player is playing softly and the modulation helps to give it some life and thickness without making it sound out of tune.
                          An interesting thing to try. Will need to see how I could accomplish this. Been trying to figure out how to send the output of a single track into another track so that I can apply a different effect or compression onto the 2nd/copied version in a live recording situation. ie. busy recording a track as a mono input, send the output to another track, do a stereo swap and apply a delay or chorus and record that at the same time, effectively getting a stereo track that has some differences. This can all be done post recording, by duplicating etc... but wanted to see if I could do it live.
                            Depends on your mixer. Extra assignable busses with inserts are always the easiest for me, otherwise you can use a spare Aux send or even take the channel's insert to another input and process it there.
                              TomCat wrote:
                              Well I tried out the method described above at church this morning and the results were quite astounding. The whole acoustic sound just went so much bigger, thicker and I could fill the house mix nicely with the acoustic sound without the mix becoming boomy or "boxy".....The guitarist also had a Boss CH-1 chorus and the second channel prevented the guitar from sounding metallic as acoustics ofter do sound live with a digital chorus.

                              This is a technique I will certainly use for acoustics live from now on...... :dance:

                              EDIT: @ Neps...Karma to you for a great technique......
                              Glad the idea worked live.. I'll have to try that out ASAP!! I've been working on analog desks for so long with limited outboard gear, that I've never actually had the chance to try that out live. And when I was working on a digital desk (PM5D), I was in such a rush to get the soundcheck done that I never even thought about it.. :-[
                                @Neps - Don't you find that multing to compress the lower/mid frequencies of an acoustic sound creates a conflict with other instruments (specifically electric guitars)? So isn't it something you'd do when there is only an acoustic in play?

                                I often use the compressed/uncompressed mult trick on kick (and sometimes on bass). The compressed channel assures that you always get a good solid level for mixing, while the uncompressed channel keeps some of the dynamics.

                                What I do with my bass most of the time though, is split the bridge and neck pickups - I compress the hell out of the neck pickup and leave the bridge pickup dynamic (with a crunchy, edge-of-distortion amp). Play softer and the neck pickup comes through all thick and warm, but the more you lean into it the more the bright crunchy bridge pickup comes into play.
                                  Alan.. I found it really depended on what the acoustic was supposed to do in the mix.. If the bass is doing very little, and the song needs a bit of energy I'll beef up the acoustic that way and then fade out the acoustic double when the band gets a bit fuller.. I love automation FAAAARRRR too much.. As a mate of mine says 'ride those faders!'

                                    @ Neps.....This is what I play with at church at the moment.......



                                    Very nice toy......Yum Yum...
                                      TomCat

                                      That looks like a Tascam?! Or a Yami DM2000 in a new color scheme.. Not played on anything by Tascam in ages.. Loved their little 4 track tape recorders though.. The DM2000.. Now that is a beast with a lot of functionality.

                                      But toys are FUN!!!!!!