By Jeannie Deva
Vocal recording is an art unto itself. Singing in a studio--surrounded by sound equipment, with no audience hearing you--is quite different from stage performance. The following expert tips are a distillation of over 20 years of the author's experience as a recording studio vocal specialist.
1. Get Hold of a Rough Mix. Most musicians can't afford to waste recording studio time. If you want your recording to turn some heads and get you noticed, don't rush into the studio before you're ready. If the instrumental tracks are recorded days before the vocal recording begins, get a rough mix to practice with during preproduction.
2. Have a Grip on General Vocal Technique. Your vocal technique should be good enough for you to expressively sing your songs on-pitch with good tone and stamina without straining or blowing out. If you can't do that, you'll waste time in the studio with endless takes and lots of auto-tuning. Before going in the studio, establish the right key, know the melody and lyrics, smooth out pitch and range difficulties and lock in the rhythm.
3. Focus on the Message and Emotion. Once the technical details are covered, focus on the message and emotion(s) of the song. Your phrasing decisions relate to emotion and message and should be believable within the feel and style of the music. Your own unique style comes from making the lyrics your communication. Mean what you say when you sing.
4. Imagine an Audience. Your voice must reach through this electronic recording to emotionally affect the eventual listener. Sing in the studio with the same energy and believability of a live performance. Even though you may be in a small vocal booth, don't sing to yourself or to mental pictures of past audiences. Imagine someone or an audience out in front of your microphone in the here and now and sing to them with vitality and feeling.
5. Be Well Rested. If your vocal session is scheduled when you're tired and you're pushing past fatigue, you risk strain, blow-out and a general poor result. Some studios offer reduced rates for recording late at night. If you're trying to save money that way, take a nap and arrive once the rhythm section is recorded. You need to be at your physical best for your voice to respond well.
6. Get The Right Mic. Your voice is unique and so is each microphone. Match the personality of the mic to your voice. If possible, test the vocal mics prior to booking the studio. If they don't have one you're happy with go elsewhere or bring your own mic. You may unwittingly alter the way you sing if a microphone mismatch distorts the basic qualities of your voice. The complications are too numerous to list.
7. Adjust the Headset Mix: Headset mix makes a big difference in how you sing and perform. You can change volume levels of instruments, other voices, effects—like reverb—or eliminate them altogether. Adjust it at the beginning of the session until you can perform undistracted. It doesn't matter if you sound good to the engineer and what you hear in the headset is not what is being recorded. If needed, sing with one ear off.” You'll get similar complications to a mic mismatch when not comfortable with your headset mix.
8. Be Careful When Punching-in.” When re-recording a single line or word (called punching-in”), sing along with the earlier line or section and then continue singing past it. This maintains smoothness of phrasing and helps the engineer pick the best punch-in point. Part of recording studio technique is maintaining a constant distance between your mouth and the mic even if you move your body and especially during punch-ins.
9. Focus on Vowels vs. Consonants. Pops and hisses on a track created by overemphasis of consonants can spoil the recording. Think of the consonant as using the same amount of air as its neighboring vowel. Focus your energy on vowel sounds and let the consonants take a secondary role. Vowels are the sounds of your voice, not consonants.
10. Evaluate Your Tracks. Knowing what to look for in evaluating your tracks and how to fix errors makes the difference between a good or great recording.
Rhythm and Phrasing: Are there any places where the phrases go off rhythmically from the music or sound rushed? Consistent phrasing that is appropriate for the style sells” the song and helps you touch your audience.
Pitch: Are any words sung off-pitch? If you were able to sing on-pitch outside the studio possible reasons for pitch problems during recording can be incorrect headset mix or the wrong mic or its placement. The relative volume of your voice to the other instruments can hinder your pitch awareness. A wrong type of reverb or having too much of it, can confuse you by pulling your attention to the reflection of your voice rather than your primary sound.
Vocal Tone: In the context of this song and style, does the voice sound too choked, strained, or weak for pro standards? Sometimes too much compression on the vocal during recording can make a singer push and strain. If you've recorded the song in sections or line by line, ensure your vocal tone matches throughout the song. Variance of mic to mouth distance can result in unwanted tonal changes.
Overall Performance: Does the song sound alive? Do you believe the singer? Does it move you or leave you feeling untouched? There is a balance between achieving a great performance versus having technical details to correct. Once you have a great performance, fix anything that would distract the listener. Your objective: Recording a performance that keeps the listener immersed in the song.
© Copyrighted and reprinted by permission of Music Connection Magazine.
Showing posts with label studio. Show all posts
Showing posts with label studio. Show all posts
Friday, 13 January 2017
Friday, 9 December 2016
Vintage Studio Gear What Was Used 1960s And 70s
I've been having a hell of a time trying to find any info on vintage recording gear commonly used. Maybe some knowledgeable folks here can offer some insight....
In particular I'm curious about the equipment used and the engineering behind the rock recordings of the 60's and 70's.
I'm particularly fond of the sound of groups like the Allman Brothers, Hendrix, Neil Young (any album of his from the late 60's to late 70's sounds magnificent to my ears), CSN, etc.
As far as WHAT was used, in those days, there wasnt a lot of specialty console builders....a lot of consoles were custom built using mic pres and parts availble. Bill Putnam, the founder and genius responsible for Universal Audio, was one of these builders of parts. Capricorn Sound Studios in Macon Georgia had a custom built console that had UA 610 modules in it.
The Allman Bros as well as a WHOLE bunch of artists you and the rest of the world have heard a WHOLE lot, recorded there.
This same story will be true for most of the artists of these times. Isnt it funny how these recordings have held up sonically throughout all this time.
Its directly related to real engineering.
Like I said, all the pres were in a custom-built console configuation be it UA, MCI, Helios, Neve...etc. And yes, everyone these days wants to get that sound....
Yeah but that was only part of it.
The Ampex 300-1/-2/-3 utilized metal envelope tubes like 12SJ7's which were relatively noisy Pentodes. The one for the playback head had to be specially hand selected for lowest noise.
After that the much improved Ampex 351 came along with its small glass envelope dual triodes the popular 12AX/T/U/7/ECC83, etc.. This is by far the best sounding most sought after tube Ampex ever made. The predecessor to this one the 350 looked virtually identical on the faceplate. The distinguishing difference was that the 350 had a rounded edge meter and the 351 had squared corner meters. The difference inside the chassis was substantial. The transports for both were identical with manual tape head lifters. They were generally delivered at speeds of 7 1/2 & 15 IPS. 3 3/4 & 30 IPS were available on special order configurations. If you can find a 351 electronic package in good working condition, it makes a fabulous microphone preamp.
A little after that came 3M with their revolutionary iso-loop transport for all of the M series recorders. That included the M24/56/79. Some of those utilized a new type of noise reduction/headroom extension circuit that was called " Dyna-Track". What this did required twice the amount of audio tracks than required. If you're going to make a two track stereo recording, you'd need a four track machine. It would record levels at different reference settings. That would then automatically switch between each track which would in turn both extend headroom and lower noise. It was a novel system that actually worked at everything was tweaked exactly right. It really wasn't popular and wasn't used much.
Another contender was Larry Scully's machine. Scully was already well-known for his record cutting lathes. But then he jumped on the bandwagon of producing magnetic recorders and introduced the model 260. This was his answer to the Ampex AG 350 which unlike its tube brother was an early germanium transistor model.
Scully's machines had a rather unique " Linearizer" circuit. What this novel little circuit did included merely a couple of diodes. One could attain 2 DB better signal-to-noise ratio or headroom utilizing standard scotch 111 recording tape. He accomplished this by realizing that the nonlinear saturation distortion from overload could be reproduced, mildly, with a couple of diodes. With the signal inverted and combined with the actual taped signal could ever so slightly cancel a small amount of distortion.
It was difficult and confusing to adjust and could actually do more harm than good. Later with the higher output tape's, the circuit was no longer needed. After the 260 was introduced, the new and improved 280 with automatic tape lifters were introduced.
This machine like the previous machine utilized germanium transistors and had a wonderful microphone preamp input as well. This particular model of machine was available from the early mid sixties in configurations of from 1 to 16 tracks. Larry retired in the mid-seventies and Dictaphone Corp. purchased Scully and carried on the tradition, substituting silicon transistors in place of the germanium's.
Just not quite as warm sounding. This continued until early 1980, after having recently introduced their "improved" version of another electrical engineers machine the 280B, with different electronics. This new machine also included a digital transport control system.
At that time it was purchased by AMPRO broadcast products of Pennsylvania. They faded from existence in about 1984/5. They never offered more than a 16 track machine, the last being the first low-cost 2 inch 16 track machine. They made it cheaper by not including a playback head! Yup, the model 100-16. It was fine for a studio who utilized a single brand and type of tape as alignment for recording was not really an option. It was a lot of record rewind, playback, adjust, record, rewind, playback, adjust, etc.. Eeewwwww. I never want to see one of those again! Thankfully the B series machines were never offered as anything more than 8 tracks. A 16 and a 24 weren't even considered.
MCI hit the scene in the mid-1970s. A spinoff of a music store called Music Centers Inc. in Fort Lauderdale. He started making imitation clone Ampex 440 transistor recording channel electronics. He went on to clone their 8/16 & 24 track machine as well. Such an exact copy of the electronics that you can swap record, playback & bias cards between Ampex 440AB&C/MM 1000/MM 1100/MM 1200 with the MCI JH 10-8, 16&24 & JH 16-8, 16 & 24. The later MCI machines were original designs starting with the JH 110 & JH 114 series, in the early 1980s.
In particular I'm curious about the equipment used and the engineering behind the rock recordings of the 60's and 70's.
I'm particularly fond of the sound of groups like the Allman Brothers, Hendrix, Neil Young (any album of his from the late 60's to late 70's sounds magnificent to my ears), CSN, etc.
As far as WHAT was used, in those days, there wasnt a lot of specialty console builders....a lot of consoles were custom built using mic pres and parts availble. Bill Putnam, the founder and genius responsible for Universal Audio, was one of these builders of parts. Capricorn Sound Studios in Macon Georgia had a custom built console that had UA 610 modules in it.
The Allman Bros as well as a WHOLE bunch of artists you and the rest of the world have heard a WHOLE lot, recorded there.
This same story will be true for most of the artists of these times. Isnt it funny how these recordings have held up sonically throughout all this time.
Its directly related to real engineering.
Like I said, all the pres were in a custom-built console configuation be it UA, MCI, Helios, Neve...etc. And yes, everyone these days wants to get that sound....
Yeah but that was only part of it.
The Ampex 300-1/-2/-3 utilized metal envelope tubes like 12SJ7's which were relatively noisy Pentodes. The one for the playback head had to be specially hand selected for lowest noise.
After that the much improved Ampex 351 came along with its small glass envelope dual triodes the popular 12AX/T/U/7/ECC83, etc.. This is by far the best sounding most sought after tube Ampex ever made. The predecessor to this one the 350 looked virtually identical on the faceplate. The distinguishing difference was that the 350 had a rounded edge meter and the 351 had squared corner meters. The difference inside the chassis was substantial. The transports for both were identical with manual tape head lifters. They were generally delivered at speeds of 7 1/2 & 15 IPS. 3 3/4 & 30 IPS were available on special order configurations. If you can find a 351 electronic package in good working condition, it makes a fabulous microphone preamp.
A little after that came 3M with their revolutionary iso-loop transport for all of the M series recorders. That included the M24/56/79. Some of those utilized a new type of noise reduction/headroom extension circuit that was called " Dyna-Track". What this did required twice the amount of audio tracks than required. If you're going to make a two track stereo recording, you'd need a four track machine. It would record levels at different reference settings. That would then automatically switch between each track which would in turn both extend headroom and lower noise. It was a novel system that actually worked at everything was tweaked exactly right. It really wasn't popular and wasn't used much.
Another contender was Larry Scully's machine. Scully was already well-known for his record cutting lathes. But then he jumped on the bandwagon of producing magnetic recorders and introduced the model 260. This was his answer to the Ampex AG 350 which unlike its tube brother was an early germanium transistor model.
Scully's machines had a rather unique " Linearizer" circuit. What this novel little circuit did included merely a couple of diodes. One could attain 2 DB better signal-to-noise ratio or headroom utilizing standard scotch 111 recording tape. He accomplished this by realizing that the nonlinear saturation distortion from overload could be reproduced, mildly, with a couple of diodes. With the signal inverted and combined with the actual taped signal could ever so slightly cancel a small amount of distortion.
It was difficult and confusing to adjust and could actually do more harm than good. Later with the higher output tape's, the circuit was no longer needed. After the 260 was introduced, the new and improved 280 with automatic tape lifters were introduced.
This machine like the previous machine utilized germanium transistors and had a wonderful microphone preamp input as well. This particular model of machine was available from the early mid sixties in configurations of from 1 to 16 tracks. Larry retired in the mid-seventies and Dictaphone Corp. purchased Scully and carried on the tradition, substituting silicon transistors in place of the germanium's.
Just not quite as warm sounding. This continued until early 1980, after having recently introduced their "improved" version of another electrical engineers machine the 280B, with different electronics. This new machine also included a digital transport control system.
At that time it was purchased by AMPRO broadcast products of Pennsylvania. They faded from existence in about 1984/5. They never offered more than a 16 track machine, the last being the first low-cost 2 inch 16 track machine. They made it cheaper by not including a playback head! Yup, the model 100-16. It was fine for a studio who utilized a single brand and type of tape as alignment for recording was not really an option. It was a lot of record rewind, playback, adjust, record, rewind, playback, adjust, etc.. Eeewwwww. I never want to see one of those again! Thankfully the B series machines were never offered as anything more than 8 tracks. A 16 and a 24 weren't even considered.
MCI hit the scene in the mid-1970s. A spinoff of a music store called Music Centers Inc. in Fort Lauderdale. He started making imitation clone Ampex 440 transistor recording channel electronics. He went on to clone their 8/16 & 24 track machine as well. Such an exact copy of the electronics that you can swap record, playback & bias cards between Ampex 440AB&C/MM 1000/MM 1100/MM 1200 with the MCI JH 10-8, 16&24 & JH 16-8, 16 & 24. The later MCI machines were original designs starting with the JH 110 & JH 114 series, in the early 1980s.
Sunday, 27 November 2016
Recording Studio Tips
Q) What are the sonic characteristics that define the pop recordings made in the late Sixties? When we hear a classic song by the Beatles or the Byrds or the Zombies, we immediately know they were recorded in the Sixties, whether we are familiar with the song or not. What is it that tips out ears off?
Is there something about the EQ? Is it a matter of compression? Is it in recording techniques? -Kevin
All of the above. To understand this, go from the source to the final product. The bands then were influenced by earlier sounds, and so their playing had a characteristic based on those influences. Their instruments were constructed in such a way as to produce certain tones. This is why many vintage instruments are so valued. Their very construction altered the tone. For instance, a 54 Stratocaster had individual cuttaways made closely fitted to each pickup. In new models, one large "swimming pool" hole is where all three pickups sit. It sounds different!
Next, when the artists were in the studios, all of those vintage Neumann mics were nearly brand new! All tube electronics (very slow slew rate) and bulldozer-solid construction was used in very minimal circuit consoles. Crude (by today's standards) monitor speakers were the "lens" that the engineers "looked through", so a whole eq curve was the model - far different from today's listening systems.
The studios themselves were designed differently, and had a sound. The tape of yesteryear had a sound, and the machines were made like tanks.
The attitudes were different then too. It was rare for the musicians to make production decisions, especially at mix time. Engineers were more a quirky, conservative breed, with mostly a classical recording background. Mastering engineers were mysterious scientists with glasses, shirt-and-ties and thinning hair, who rarely even met the artists.
Think of the clients they had in those days - the big bands, the one-day-a-song recordings made by everyone playing at once, and very little multitracking.
In those days, there weren't samplers and loops and presets and Pro Tools. The players had to PLAY it correctly, or it didn't make vinyl. They had to be creative with physical objects, vs. computer-driven mass-marketed synths.
The singers knew that they would have to sing every chorus, not just one... and then the rest would be flown in via sampling or digital cloning. So they had a whole different intent when they rehearsed and recorded. The engineers didn't have 48 tracks to take a zillion different versions and then patch together the best take. The take was the take.
So there was a different flavor, a different context.
I know consideration had to be made for bass levels so that the stylus wouldn't jump on record-players.
Bass peaks and phase content, to be more exact. Many mastering engineers had equipment that made the signal mono from 60hz-down, and a total roll-off at 20hz. But since many consumer speaker systems and turntable systems were colored in their response, it didn't matter as much as it does today, with our super-duper-boom-a-mudo hyper Jogman listening systems.
It's become a bit of a personal quest for me to record a song that sounds like an AUTHENTIC Sixties
Sounds like fun to me!
I realized how hard it is to actually pull off.
I think what's hard is getting people to turn off their auto-tune gizmos and be called to sing each chorus, sing it in tune and in the pocket. People don't realize how much training the engineers of yesteryear gave to musicians. Nowadays, recording at home robs artists of the invaluable feedback they'd get from an experienced expert who knows in a heartbeat when the track isn't grooving, the arrangement is cluttered, or the part is being overplayed.
I understand that, in comparison to modern music, the recordings I'm talking about are probably seriously technically flawed.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. From where I sit, I don't think we have to buy rules. We buy results. Music in the 60's was special, if not magical. Record companies had many more musically sophisticated people in places of power, and far less lawyers calling the shots. Entertainment had a certain excitement from the newness, and some extent the shock value, but it wasn't as disturbing as some of today's styles. There was more hand-holding and fewer jagged little pills.
But I'm interested in embracing and duplicating those flaws.
Start with tight drum booths and deadened drum heads. Classic mics, consoles, amps, instruments, and arrangements based on minimalist overdubs. Add in analog tape, great miking methods, natural room reverbs, leakage, basic passive eq.. and musicians who want to give peace a chance instead of gunning down their enemies in the hood.. and you'll have a great start!
I think that making magic, whether it's musical or otherwise is what life's all about. Your own touch is part of making heard that which is yet unheard.... and mixing differences together can have cool results. Drum loops are a great example where an old groove gets shaped into a new technological hook.
Even in our daily lives, we can co-mingle our differences if we have an open mind to greater possibilities. It's just a bonus way to create something original. Now, I do have to acknowledge that in the past our spiritual differences have lead to some serious issues.....but there's good news even about that...
Principles of quantum physics are setting new foundations for scientific stuff that explains the previously unexplainable. (Thousands of years ago a television would have been unexplainable, right?) Today's new discoveries are so fantastic that the distinctions will start to fade between what is called "normal" and what is called "holy." That could mean that our spiritual differences can start to hold unified ground, where before, we perceived great oceans between us all. Woah, that was heavy! Far out man! So like musical differences can blend into a new groove, life differences of all people can hold a new tone of harmony and love for one another. Now there's a '60's concept for ya! Peace!
Is there something about the EQ? Is it a matter of compression? Is it in recording techniques? -Kevin
All of the above. To understand this, go from the source to the final product. The bands then were influenced by earlier sounds, and so their playing had a characteristic based on those influences. Their instruments were constructed in such a way as to produce certain tones. This is why many vintage instruments are so valued. Their very construction altered the tone. For instance, a 54 Stratocaster had individual cuttaways made closely fitted to each pickup. In new models, one large "swimming pool" hole is where all three pickups sit. It sounds different!
Next, when the artists were in the studios, all of those vintage Neumann mics were nearly brand new! All tube electronics (very slow slew rate) and bulldozer-solid construction was used in very minimal circuit consoles. Crude (by today's standards) monitor speakers were the "lens" that the engineers "looked through", so a whole eq curve was the model - far different from today's listening systems.
The studios themselves were designed differently, and had a sound. The tape of yesteryear had a sound, and the machines were made like tanks.
The attitudes were different then too. It was rare for the musicians to make production decisions, especially at mix time. Engineers were more a quirky, conservative breed, with mostly a classical recording background. Mastering engineers were mysterious scientists with glasses, shirt-and-ties and thinning hair, who rarely even met the artists.
Think of the clients they had in those days - the big bands, the one-day-a-song recordings made by everyone playing at once, and very little multitracking.
In those days, there weren't samplers and loops and presets and Pro Tools. The players had to PLAY it correctly, or it didn't make vinyl. They had to be creative with physical objects, vs. computer-driven mass-marketed synths.
The singers knew that they would have to sing every chorus, not just one... and then the rest would be flown in via sampling or digital cloning. So they had a whole different intent when they rehearsed and recorded. The engineers didn't have 48 tracks to take a zillion different versions and then patch together the best take. The take was the take.
So there was a different flavor, a different context.
I know consideration had to be made for bass levels so that the stylus wouldn't jump on record-players.
Bass peaks and phase content, to be more exact. Many mastering engineers had equipment that made the signal mono from 60hz-down, and a total roll-off at 20hz. But since many consumer speaker systems and turntable systems were colored in their response, it didn't matter as much as it does today, with our super-duper-boom-a-mudo hyper Jogman listening systems.
It's become a bit of a personal quest for me to record a song that sounds like an AUTHENTIC Sixties
Sounds like fun to me!
I realized how hard it is to actually pull off.
I think what's hard is getting people to turn off their auto-tune gizmos and be called to sing each chorus, sing it in tune and in the pocket. People don't realize how much training the engineers of yesteryear gave to musicians. Nowadays, recording at home robs artists of the invaluable feedback they'd get from an experienced expert who knows in a heartbeat when the track isn't grooving, the arrangement is cluttered, or the part is being overplayed.
I understand that, in comparison to modern music, the recordings I'm talking about are probably seriously technically flawed.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. From where I sit, I don't think we have to buy rules. We buy results. Music in the 60's was special, if not magical. Record companies had many more musically sophisticated people in places of power, and far less lawyers calling the shots. Entertainment had a certain excitement from the newness, and some extent the shock value, but it wasn't as disturbing as some of today's styles. There was more hand-holding and fewer jagged little pills.
But I'm interested in embracing and duplicating those flaws.
Start with tight drum booths and deadened drum heads. Classic mics, consoles, amps, instruments, and arrangements based on minimalist overdubs. Add in analog tape, great miking methods, natural room reverbs, leakage, basic passive eq.. and musicians who want to give peace a chance instead of gunning down their enemies in the hood.. and you'll have a great start!
I think that making magic, whether it's musical or otherwise is what life's all about. Your own touch is part of making heard that which is yet unheard.... and mixing differences together can have cool results. Drum loops are a great example where an old groove gets shaped into a new technological hook.
Even in our daily lives, we can co-mingle our differences if we have an open mind to greater possibilities. It's just a bonus way to create something original. Now, I do have to acknowledge that in the past our spiritual differences have lead to some serious issues.....but there's good news even about that...
Principles of quantum physics are setting new foundations for scientific stuff that explains the previously unexplainable. (Thousands of years ago a television would have been unexplainable, right?) Today's new discoveries are so fantastic that the distinctions will start to fade between what is called "normal" and what is called "holy." That could mean that our spiritual differences can start to hold unified ground, where before, we perceived great oceans between us all. Woah, that was heavy! Far out man! So like musical differences can blend into a new groove, life differences of all people can hold a new tone of harmony and love for one another. Now there's a '60's concept for ya! Peace!
Sunday, 16 October 2016
Miking The Drumset In Your Home Recording Studio
If you're like most musicians, getting great-sounding drum recordings seems like one of the world's great mysteries. You can hear big, fat drums on great albums, but when you try to record your drums, they always end up sounding more like cardboard boxes than drums. Fret not — here are some solutions for you.
The room
The room influences the drums' sound more than it influences other instruments'. If you're looking for a big drum sound, you need a fairly live room (one with lots of reflection).
You may be thinking, "But I just have a bedroom for a studio and it's carpeted." No worries, you can work with that. Remember, you have a home studio, so you potentially have your whole home to work with. Here are a couple of ideas to spark your imagination:
Buy three or four 4-x-8-foot sheets of plywood and lean them up against the walls of your room. Also place one on the floor just in front of the kick drum. This adds some reflective surfaces to the room.
Put the drums in your garage (or living room, or any other room with a reverberating sound) and run long mic cords to your mixer. If you have a studio-in-a-box system, you can just throw it under your arm and move everything into your garage or, better yet, take all this stuff to a really great-sounding room and record.
Set up your drums in a nice-sounding room and place an additional mic just outside the door to catch an additional ambient sound. You can then mix this in with the other drum tracks to add a different quality of reverberation to the drums.
Kick (bass) drum
The mic of choice for most recording engineers when recording a kick drum is a dynamic mic. In fact, you can find some large diaphragm dynamic mics specifically designed to record kick drums.
No matter where you place the mic, you can reduce the amount of boominess that you get from the drum by placing a pillow or blanket inside the drum. Some people choose to let the pillow or blanket touch the inside head.
That said, you can place your mic in several ways (all conveniently illustrated in Figure 1):
Near the inside head: If you take off the outside head or cut a hole in it, you can stick the mic inside the drum. Place the mic 2 to 3 inches away from the inside head and a couple of inches off center. This is the standard way to mic a kick drum if you have the outside head off or if a hole is cut in it. This placement gives you a sharp attack from the beater hitting the head.
Halfway inside the drum: You can modify the preceding miking technique by moving the mic back so that it's about halfway inside the drum. In this case, place the mic right in the middle, pointing where the beater strikes the drum. This placement gives you less of the attack of the beater striking the head and more of the body of the drum's sound.
Near the outside head: If you have both heads on the drum, you can place the mic a few inches from the outside head. If you want a more open, boomy sound (and you have the drum's pitch set fairly high), point the mic directly at the center of the head. If you want less boom, offset the mic a little and point it about two-thirds of the way toward the center.
The kick drum responds quite well to a compressor when tracking. For the most part, you can get by with settings that allow the initial attack to get through and that tame the boom a little. A sample setting looks like this:
Threshold: -6dB
Attack: Between 40 ms and 50 ms
Release: Between 200 ms and 300 ms
Gain: Adjust so that the output level matches the input level. You don't need much added gain.
Snare drum
The snare drum is probably the most important drum in popular music. The bass guitar can cover the kick drum's rhythm, and the rest of the drums aren't part of the main groove. A good, punchy snare drum can make a track, whereas a weak, thin one can eliminate the drive that most popular music needs.
Because the snare drum is located so close to the other drums, especially the hi-hats, a cardioid pattern mic is a must. The most common mic for a snare drum is the trusty Shure SM57. The mic is generally placed between the hi-hats and the small tom-tom about 1 or 2 inches from the snare drum head (see Figure 2). Point the diaphragm directly at the head.
You may need to make some minor adjustments to eliminate any bleed from the hi-hats. This position gives you a nice punchy sound.
Adding compression to the snare drum is crucial if you want a tight, punchy sound. There are a lot of ways to go with the snare. The following settings are common and versatile:
Threshold: -4dB
Attack: Between 5 ms and 10 ms
Release: Between 125 ms and 175 ms
Gain: Adjust so that the output level matches the input level. You don't need much added gain.
Tom-toms
The tom-toms sound best when using a dynamic mic. For the mounted toms (the ones above the kick drum), you can use one or two mics. If you use one mic, place it between the two drums about 4 to 6 inches away from the heads (Figure 3 shows this placement option). If you use two mics, place one above each drum about 1 to 3 inches above the head.
Floor toms are miked the same way as the mounted tom-toms:
Place a single mic a couple of inches away from the head near the rim.
If you have more than one floor tom, you can place one mic between them or mic them individually.
If you want to apply compression to the tom-toms, you can start with the settings that for the snare drum in the preceding section.
Hi-hats
The hi-hats are generally part of the main groove and, as such, you want to spend time getting a good sound. You'll probably have problems with a few other mics on the drumset picking up the hi-hats, particularly the snare drum mic and overhead mics. Some people don't bother miking the hi-hats for this reason.
Hi-hats often sound too trashy through the snare drum mic. If you mic hi-hats, make sure that the snare drum mic is picking up as little of the hi-hats as possible by placing it properly and/or using a noise gate (a dynamic processor use to filter unwanted noise).
You can use either a dynamic mic or, better yet, a small diaphragm condenser mic for the hi-hats. The dynamic mic gives you a trashier sound and the small diaphragm condenser mic produces a bright sound. You can work with either by adjusting the EQ. Try adding just a little bit (4dB or so) of a shelf EQ set at 10 kHz to add just a little sheen to the hi-hats.
Place the mic about 3 to 4 inches above the hi-hats and point it down. The exact placement of the mic is less important than the placement of the other instrument mics because of the hi-hats' tone. Just make sure your mic isn't so close that you hit it.
Compression isn't usually necessary when tracking the hi-hats unless you have a drummer whose volume level is inconsistent. In this case, try using the same snare drum settings.
Cymbals
You want to know one secret to the huge drum sound of Led Zeppelin's drummer, John Bonham? Finesse. He understood that the drums sound louder and bigger in a mix if the cymbals are quieter in comparison. So he played his cymbals softly and hit the drums pretty hard. This allowed the engineer to raise up the levels of the drums without having the
cymbals drown everything else out. Absolutely brilliant.
Because the drums bleeding into the overhead mics is inevitable and the overhead mics are responsible for providing much of the drums' presence in a mix, playing the cymbals softly allows you to get more of the drums in these mics. This helps the drums sound bigger.
Ask (no, demand) that your drummer play the cymbals quieter. Also use smaller cymbals with a fast attack and a short decay. Doing these things creates a better balance between the drums and cymbals and makes the drums stand out more in comparison.
Small diaphragm condenser mics capture the cymbals' high frequencies well. You can mic the cymbals by placing mics about 6 inches above each cymbal or by using overhead mics set 1 to 3 feet above the cymbals.
The whole kit
Most of the time, you want to have at least one (but preferably two) ambient mics on the drums if for no other reason than to pick up the cymbals. These (assuming you use two mics) are called overhead mics and, as the name implies, they are placed above the drumset. The most common types of mics to use for overheads are large and small diaphragm condenser mics because they pick up the high frequencies in the cymbals and give the drumset's sound a nice sheen (brightness). You also may want to try a pair of ribbon mics to pick up a nice, sweet sound on the overheads.
To mic the drumset with overhead mics, you can use either the X-Y coincident technique or spaced stereo pairs. Place them 1 to 2 feet above the cymbals, just forward of the drummer's head. Place X-Y mics in the center and set up spaced stereo pairs so that they follow the 3:1 rule (the mics should be set up 3 to 6 feet apart if they are 1 to 2 feet above the cymbals). This counters any phase problems. Point the mic down toward theFigure 4: Overhead mics capture the cymbals and the drums. drums and you're ready to record.
The room
The room influences the drums' sound more than it influences other instruments'. If you're looking for a big drum sound, you need a fairly live room (one with lots of reflection).
You may be thinking, "But I just have a bedroom for a studio and it's carpeted." No worries, you can work with that. Remember, you have a home studio, so you potentially have your whole home to work with. Here are a couple of ideas to spark your imagination:
Buy three or four 4-x-8-foot sheets of plywood and lean them up against the walls of your room. Also place one on the floor just in front of the kick drum. This adds some reflective surfaces to the room.
Put the drums in your garage (or living room, or any other room with a reverberating sound) and run long mic cords to your mixer. If you have a studio-in-a-box system, you can just throw it under your arm and move everything into your garage or, better yet, take all this stuff to a really great-sounding room and record.
Set up your drums in a nice-sounding room and place an additional mic just outside the door to catch an additional ambient sound. You can then mix this in with the other drum tracks to add a different quality of reverberation to the drums.
Kick (bass) drum
The mic of choice for most recording engineers when recording a kick drum is a dynamic mic. In fact, you can find some large diaphragm dynamic mics specifically designed to record kick drums.
No matter where you place the mic, you can reduce the amount of boominess that you get from the drum by placing a pillow or blanket inside the drum. Some people choose to let the pillow or blanket touch the inside head.
That said, you can place your mic in several ways (all conveniently illustrated in Figure 1):
Near the inside head: If you take off the outside head or cut a hole in it, you can stick the mic inside the drum. Place the mic 2 to 3 inches away from the inside head and a couple of inches off center. This is the standard way to mic a kick drum if you have the outside head off or if a hole is cut in it. This placement gives you a sharp attack from the beater hitting the head.
Halfway inside the drum: You can modify the preceding miking technique by moving the mic back so that it's about halfway inside the drum. In this case, place the mic right in the middle, pointing where the beater strikes the drum. This placement gives you less of the attack of the beater striking the head and more of the body of the drum's sound.
Near the outside head: If you have both heads on the drum, you can place the mic a few inches from the outside head. If you want a more open, boomy sound (and you have the drum's pitch set fairly high), point the mic directly at the center of the head. If you want less boom, offset the mic a little and point it about two-thirds of the way toward the center.
The kick drum responds quite well to a compressor when tracking. For the most part, you can get by with settings that allow the initial attack to get through and that tame the boom a little. A sample setting looks like this:
Threshold: -6dB
Attack: Between 40 ms and 50 ms
Release: Between 200 ms and 300 ms
Gain: Adjust so that the output level matches the input level. You don't need much added gain.
Snare drum
The snare drum is probably the most important drum in popular music. The bass guitar can cover the kick drum's rhythm, and the rest of the drums aren't part of the main groove. A good, punchy snare drum can make a track, whereas a weak, thin one can eliminate the drive that most popular music needs.
Because the snare drum is located so close to the other drums, especially the hi-hats, a cardioid pattern mic is a must. The most common mic for a snare drum is the trusty Shure SM57. The mic is generally placed between the hi-hats and the small tom-tom about 1 or 2 inches from the snare drum head (see Figure 2). Point the diaphragm directly at the head.
You may need to make some minor adjustments to eliminate any bleed from the hi-hats. This position gives you a nice punchy sound.
Adding compression to the snare drum is crucial if you want a tight, punchy sound. There are a lot of ways to go with the snare. The following settings are common and versatile:
Threshold: -4dB
Attack: Between 5 ms and 10 ms
Release: Between 125 ms and 175 ms
Gain: Adjust so that the output level matches the input level. You don't need much added gain.
Tom-toms
The tom-toms sound best when using a dynamic mic. For the mounted toms (the ones above the kick drum), you can use one or two mics. If you use one mic, place it between the two drums about 4 to 6 inches away from the heads (Figure 3 shows this placement option). If you use two mics, place one above each drum about 1 to 3 inches above the head.
Floor toms are miked the same way as the mounted tom-toms:
Place a single mic a couple of inches away from the head near the rim.
If you have more than one floor tom, you can place one mic between them or mic them individually.
If you want to apply compression to the tom-toms, you can start with the settings that for the snare drum in the preceding section.
Hi-hats
The hi-hats are generally part of the main groove and, as such, you want to spend time getting a good sound. You'll probably have problems with a few other mics on the drumset picking up the hi-hats, particularly the snare drum mic and overhead mics. Some people don't bother miking the hi-hats for this reason.
Hi-hats often sound too trashy through the snare drum mic. If you mic hi-hats, make sure that the snare drum mic is picking up as little of the hi-hats as possible by placing it properly and/or using a noise gate (a dynamic processor use to filter unwanted noise).
You can use either a dynamic mic or, better yet, a small diaphragm condenser mic for the hi-hats. The dynamic mic gives you a trashier sound and the small diaphragm condenser mic produces a bright sound. You can work with either by adjusting the EQ. Try adding just a little bit (4dB or so) of a shelf EQ set at 10 kHz to add just a little sheen to the hi-hats.
Place the mic about 3 to 4 inches above the hi-hats and point it down. The exact placement of the mic is less important than the placement of the other instrument mics because of the hi-hats' tone. Just make sure your mic isn't so close that you hit it.
Compression isn't usually necessary when tracking the hi-hats unless you have a drummer whose volume level is inconsistent. In this case, try using the same snare drum settings.
Cymbals
You want to know one secret to the huge drum sound of Led Zeppelin's drummer, John Bonham? Finesse. He understood that the drums sound louder and bigger in a mix if the cymbals are quieter in comparison. So he played his cymbals softly and hit the drums pretty hard. This allowed the engineer to raise up the levels of the drums without having the
cymbals drown everything else out. Absolutely brilliant.
Because the drums bleeding into the overhead mics is inevitable and the overhead mics are responsible for providing much of the drums' presence in a mix, playing the cymbals softly allows you to get more of the drums in these mics. This helps the drums sound bigger.
Ask (no, demand) that your drummer play the cymbals quieter. Also use smaller cymbals with a fast attack and a short decay. Doing these things creates a better balance between the drums and cymbals and makes the drums stand out more in comparison.
Small diaphragm condenser mics capture the cymbals' high frequencies well. You can mic the cymbals by placing mics about 6 inches above each cymbal or by using overhead mics set 1 to 3 feet above the cymbals.
The whole kit
Most of the time, you want to have at least one (but preferably two) ambient mics on the drums if for no other reason than to pick up the cymbals. These (assuming you use two mics) are called overhead mics and, as the name implies, they are placed above the drumset. The most common types of mics to use for overheads are large and small diaphragm condenser mics because they pick up the high frequencies in the cymbals and give the drumset's sound a nice sheen (brightness). You also may want to try a pair of ribbon mics to pick up a nice, sweet sound on the overheads.
To mic the drumset with overhead mics, you can use either the X-Y coincident technique or spaced stereo pairs. Place them 1 to 2 feet above the cymbals, just forward of the drummer's head. Place X-Y mics in the center and set up spaced stereo pairs so that they follow the 3:1 rule (the mics should be set up 3 to 6 feet apart if they are 1 to 2 feet above the cymbals). This counters any phase problems. Point the mic down toward theFigure 4: Overhead mics capture the cymbals and the drums. drums and you're ready to record.
Wednesday, 7 September 2016
Recording Studio Tips Project
Q) Could you please tell me how to get that creamy/silky vocal sound? I use a SM57, or an E-100 patched into an all-tube pre w/eq, then into a compressor direct to my hard disk. Sometimes I use my Mackie"D" to utilize it's EQ, then into the hard disk. Is rolling off the top end the key or is it boosting the bottom? -Nesz
A) When you listen to an outstanding CD with that silky vocal sound, chances are that there was red carpet treatment at many levels, starting with the expertise of the engineer and producer. Let's go from the top to see what could be different, and what you can do in your case.
Level One: The source. The sound of a persons voice (technique and tone) has much to do with the sound, not to mention using the correct distance to the mic (6" to 1' in studio, up to 4' live), how warmed up the person is, how consistent they are from take to take. (More how-to's here. ) In my 20 years of studio engineering, I often used eq. Once when recording a live big band, the singer, and older gentleman, quietly agreed when I showed him where to stand next to the mic. When they ran down the song, I was astounded at the sound of this man's voice. It was huge. It was smooth. It was clear. It was bright. It was warm. It was... perfect. A classic voice that didn't need a shred of eq! His master tape could have been a cassette and it would have sounded amazing.
Start at the source. Your singer should be committed to producing their very best in the studio and on stage. Tons of Grammy-winning artists use the Seth Riggs technique, so finding someone in your area that teaches his method can be a good idea. Key: Don't kid yourself into thinking that 5 or 6 lessons will get you sounding like Celine Dion. Singing is an art - it takes time. I learned this technique from Andrew Boettner, here in Southern California, and my full-voice range increased an octave-and-a-half. Increasing your skill increases your opportunity.
Level two: The mic. Top engineers on the best sounding CDs are probably using a vintage AKG C12, Neumann U47, Telefunken, or some other super-exotic mic. There are times when lessor mics are used, but the majority of the time there is a priceless piece at this point. Your budget is the determining factor here. If your artist is trying to get signed, this isn't a key point. Their performance is. If you are trying to get hired by the majors as an engineer/producer, this is essential. If you are in the studio business, the importance of a priceless mic depends on what your clientele can afford. Sometimes studios rent their prize pieces so that their basic rate is affordable.
Level three: The mic pre's, eq, & compressor. Again, the top engineers are probably using vintage gear like Neve, Teletronix, UREI, DBX 160's, or newer discrete or tube units like Avalon, Prism, Millennia, GT, API or Manley. Some engineers ride automated faders and don't use a compressor at all. That's good old school for ya!
Level three: The monitoring system. Yep. If you don't hear it right, how do you expect to eq it right, much less pick the best sounding gear? Check my article on Studio Monitor Madness and Mixing Solutions , otherwise I'll be writing another page here!
Level four: The multitrack storage device. While analog is highly prized, digital audio workstation systems are improving, especially with better A to D converters. Roger Nichols says he's never going back to analog, and Roy Thomas Baker aligned his machines at +12. What can I say. Experts all have something different to say. That's why we suggest Rule #1 - "There are no rules."
Level five: The mixing stage. There was a time when Bernie Grundman stated, "Analog is the choice of most high-end mix formats." But that's been changing - particularly when the mastering will be done using Separations.
Does it make a difference to use vintage gear? I think it makes more of a difference to sing in-tune, but the real vintage gear sounds great - otherwise there wouldn't be so many pluggins out there that are imitating it! If it's cost-effective for you, go for it. If not, compare your vocals with the vocal sound on commercial CDs and use your best judgment to get what you like. Great monitors (and/or a great mixing engineer) always help you make the right choices.
You can adjust the enhancement frequencies of vocal eq so that the voice sits in a "pocket" left vacant by the way you have eq'd and panned the instruments. Don't let common frequencies build up - a sweepable eq is important so that you're not adding the same frequency to everything in the mix. I don't recommend rolling off the top at all. That's where the upper harmonics are. I usually added some high end at around 10-15K, and some mids at 2.5K, and some bottom around 100hz, and sometimes rolled off 50hz.... but it varied from voice to voice. When in doubt, SIMPLIFY. Less is more.
Level six: The mastering stage. Separation Mastering is the most ideal way to take your vocal sound to the next level. No question about it. Much optimization is available here. But check this out - here's a quote from a respected professional in the July 2006 issue of a major recording industry magazine about vocal sound in mastering:
I believe that mastering can really do quite a lot to enhance the vocal portion of a mix. Of course, the client must keep in mind that manipulating the frequencies that directly affect the vocal will also affect any other instrument in that frequency range."
NOT SO with Separation Mastering.
For example, a difficult problem to fix would be that of isolating a sharply sibilant vocal while enhancing the snap of a snare drum... mastering engineers may choose to de-ess an entire stereo mix in an effort to de-ess a vocal. Although.. this technique can instantly destroy the snap and sizzle of the drum kit..."
There is NO RISK of loosing any drum snap with proper Separation Mastering.
Do multiple versions of your mix. Giving the mastering engineer more options to work with can ease your session tremendously."
Why spend time making multiple mixes when you can make Separations and have TOTAL control over your vocal sound in mastering?
Running your mix past a mastering engineer's ears before the scheduled session gives you an opportunity to get a fresh perspective and — if necessary — go back and fix some things.”
The excellent engineer quoted in this magazine article made good comments if you're stuck making a 2-track mix. Some mastering engineers, we hear, have told their clients to go back and remix when they didn't get the sound they wanted! Separation Mastering nearly eliminates the "go back and fix it" syndrome!
Doing something new takes a little willingness! We invite you to be willing to check out this format! It should take no additional equipment... just the tools you already are using!
A) When you listen to an outstanding CD with that silky vocal sound, chances are that there was red carpet treatment at many levels, starting with the expertise of the engineer and producer. Let's go from the top to see what could be different, and what you can do in your case.
Level One: The source. The sound of a persons voice (technique and tone) has much to do with the sound, not to mention using the correct distance to the mic (6" to 1' in studio, up to 4' live), how warmed up the person is, how consistent they are from take to take. (More how-to's here. ) In my 20 years of studio engineering, I often used eq. Once when recording a live big band, the singer, and older gentleman, quietly agreed when I showed him where to stand next to the mic. When they ran down the song, I was astounded at the sound of this man's voice. It was huge. It was smooth. It was clear. It was bright. It was warm. It was... perfect. A classic voice that didn't need a shred of eq! His master tape could have been a cassette and it would have sounded amazing.
Start at the source. Your singer should be committed to producing their very best in the studio and on stage. Tons of Grammy-winning artists use the Seth Riggs technique, so finding someone in your area that teaches his method can be a good idea. Key: Don't kid yourself into thinking that 5 or 6 lessons will get you sounding like Celine Dion. Singing is an art - it takes time. I learned this technique from Andrew Boettner, here in Southern California, and my full-voice range increased an octave-and-a-half. Increasing your skill increases your opportunity.
Level two: The mic. Top engineers on the best sounding CDs are probably using a vintage AKG C12, Neumann U47, Telefunken, or some other super-exotic mic. There are times when lessor mics are used, but the majority of the time there is a priceless piece at this point. Your budget is the determining factor here. If your artist is trying to get signed, this isn't a key point. Their performance is. If you are trying to get hired by the majors as an engineer/producer, this is essential. If you are in the studio business, the importance of a priceless mic depends on what your clientele can afford. Sometimes studios rent their prize pieces so that their basic rate is affordable.
Level three: The mic pre's, eq, & compressor. Again, the top engineers are probably using vintage gear like Neve, Teletronix, UREI, DBX 160's, or newer discrete or tube units like Avalon, Prism, Millennia, GT, API or Manley. Some engineers ride automated faders and don't use a compressor at all. That's good old school for ya!
Level three: The monitoring system. Yep. If you don't hear it right, how do you expect to eq it right, much less pick the best sounding gear? Check my article on Studio Monitor Madness and Mixing Solutions , otherwise I'll be writing another page here!
Level four: The multitrack storage device. While analog is highly prized, digital audio workstation systems are improving, especially with better A to D converters. Roger Nichols says he's never going back to analog, and Roy Thomas Baker aligned his machines at +12. What can I say. Experts all have something different to say. That's why we suggest Rule #1 - "There are no rules."
Level five: The mixing stage. There was a time when Bernie Grundman stated, "Analog is the choice of most high-end mix formats." But that's been changing - particularly when the mastering will be done using Separations.
Does it make a difference to use vintage gear? I think it makes more of a difference to sing in-tune, but the real vintage gear sounds great - otherwise there wouldn't be so many pluggins out there that are imitating it! If it's cost-effective for you, go for it. If not, compare your vocals with the vocal sound on commercial CDs and use your best judgment to get what you like. Great monitors (and/or a great mixing engineer) always help you make the right choices.
You can adjust the enhancement frequencies of vocal eq so that the voice sits in a "pocket" left vacant by the way you have eq'd and panned the instruments. Don't let common frequencies build up - a sweepable eq is important so that you're not adding the same frequency to everything in the mix. I don't recommend rolling off the top at all. That's where the upper harmonics are. I usually added some high end at around 10-15K, and some mids at 2.5K, and some bottom around 100hz, and sometimes rolled off 50hz.... but it varied from voice to voice. When in doubt, SIMPLIFY. Less is more.
Level six: The mastering stage. Separation Mastering is the most ideal way to take your vocal sound to the next level. No question about it. Much optimization is available here. But check this out - here's a quote from a respected professional in the July 2006 issue of a major recording industry magazine about vocal sound in mastering:
I believe that mastering can really do quite a lot to enhance the vocal portion of a mix. Of course, the client must keep in mind that manipulating the frequencies that directly affect the vocal will also affect any other instrument in that frequency range."
NOT SO with Separation Mastering.
For example, a difficult problem to fix would be that of isolating a sharply sibilant vocal while enhancing the snap of a snare drum... mastering engineers may choose to de-ess an entire stereo mix in an effort to de-ess a vocal. Although.. this technique can instantly destroy the snap and sizzle of the drum kit..."
There is NO RISK of loosing any drum snap with proper Separation Mastering.
Do multiple versions of your mix. Giving the mastering engineer more options to work with can ease your session tremendously."
Why spend time making multiple mixes when you can make Separations and have TOTAL control over your vocal sound in mastering?
Running your mix past a mastering engineer's ears before the scheduled session gives you an opportunity to get a fresh perspective and — if necessary — go back and fix some things.”
The excellent engineer quoted in this magazine article made good comments if you're stuck making a 2-track mix. Some mastering engineers, we hear, have told their clients to go back and remix when they didn't get the sound they wanted! Separation Mastering nearly eliminates the "go back and fix it" syndrome!
Doing something new takes a little willingness! We invite you to be willing to check out this format! It should take no additional equipment... just the tools you already are using!
Wednesday, 31 August 2016
Recording Loud Bands In The Studio
Recording a rock band playing 'live' in the studio presents a unique set of challenges, but it is still possible to achieve a good result.
Most recording techniques are easy enough to put into practice when you're only faced with the task of working with one instrument or voice at a time, but life gets more complicated when you come to record a rock band playing 'live' in the studio. The main problem in this scenario is spill, specifically from the louder instruments to the mics used on quieter sound sources. In a typical guitar-based rock band, the most vulnerable mics are those used by vocalists and the drum overheads, but acoustic instruments such as acoustic guitars or hand percussion can also present challenges.
Spill can be reduced by the careful setting up of the microphones and sound sources, though in a small studio you'll never get rid of it entirely, not even if you put up acoustic screens.
There may also be other problems, such as snare drums resonating and buzzing along with the bass guitar part where, even though you can gate the close snare-mic to get rid of it there, some buzzing may still be audible in the overhead mics. Fortunately, some drum-kit rattle and buzz currently seems acceptable as part of the natural sound of the kit, whereas, for example, in the '80s it was fashionable to try to keep the kit sounding as clean and sterile as possible.
Let's assume that you have the entire band set up in a lounge-sized room. What can you do to cut down on spill? Guitar amplifiers are obvious culprits, and rock guitarists still seem to like to have big amps turned well up. For recording, though, a small amp cranked hard will often give you a much bigger sound than a stage amp used in a confined space. I'm currently using one of the little Vox AD30VTs for recording, as they sound good at just about any level, but small tube amps such as the Fender Blues Junior are also ideal: if all those early Led Zeppelin tracks were recorded using a 6W tube amp, small amps have to be OK! Where you must use a high-powered stage amplifier, particularly a tube model, I'd seriously recommend investing in a good power soak to plug between the power amp and speaker, so that you can run the power amp hard while attenuating the amount of power reaching the speaker. Even five watts can sound pretty loud in a small room, so choose a model with switchable attenuation settings, such as the THD Hot Plate (see SOS June 2006 for more about power soaks).
You don't need a large stage amp to get a big sound. If you can persuade the guitarist to use a cranked-up small tube amp, you will probably get a better tone and reduce unwanted spillage into other 're only going to put the mic in front of one speaker, so using a 4 x 12 cabinet isn't really necessary unless you're recording in a very large space, where you can also make use of a distant mic to augment the sound. In a typical project or home studio, it is pretty universally accepted wisdom that you put the mic fairly close in, in front of the best-sounding speaker — though using a smaller cabinet with a single speaker might give you just as good a sound, while also reducing spill. As regular readers will already know, the choice of mic and its position across the front of the speaker cone have a dramatic effect on the sound you ultimately capture, so try everything you have and make notes on what works. My personal favourites from my own mic collection are an SE ribbon mic and an Audio Technica AT4050 capacitor mic, though many engineers still swear by the Shure SM57 dynamic mic. There are no real rules and every combination will sound different, so please take the time to try a few different options. Getting the right sound at source is invariably better than struggling with EQ after you've made the recording.
There are various strategies that can really help reduce spill from guitar amplifiers, one of which is to point the guitar amplifiers (this is simpler with closed-back models) away from the drum kit and other vulnerable mics, and to place a thick sound-absorber a couple of feet in front of the amplifier to soak up some of the sound once it has gone past the microphone (which will usually be no more than six inches from the speaker grille cloth). We've tried mattresses, soft furnishing such as sofas, heavy folded blankets and, of course, folded duvets. They all help, but there'll still be some spill. With open-backed amplifiers, it is worth experimenting by pointing the side of the amplifier towards vulnerable mics, as open-backed cabinets have a modified dipole (figure-of-eight) polar pattern, which means that more sound comes out of the front and back than out of the sides. This time you may wish to improvise sound absorbers between the amp and the other vulnerable mics in the room, as well as behind the microphone.
If you think something might work, don't be afraid to give it a try: you might just stumble across something really effective. If you're recording in your living room, for example, try sticking the guitar amps behind the sofa to get more separation. For one project, I got the sound I was looking for by putting a 4 x 12 cabinet flat on its back, then draping blankets, sleeping bags and duvets directly over the cabinet and microphone stand.
If you must use a large tube amp, a power soak such as the THD Hot Plate pictured here will allow you to drive the amp harder without increasing the overall another approach, which has been used on many records, is to have the guitarists playing in the same room as the rest of the band, monitoring via headphones in the usual way, but with the amp miked up in a separate room, or even in a cupboard. Many a classic album has been recorded with the guitar amp in the studio toilet!
Because guitar amps are traditionally miked very close to the speaker grille, spill from other amplifiers or from drums should be at such a low level as not to be a problem. However, whenever you're recording multiple sources at once, using a separate mic for each source, you should always observe the 5:1 rule. That is, you should always ensure that the microphones are separated from each other by at least five times the distance between the microphones and the sources they are recording. This helps avoid phase-cancellation coloration, which is caused by the same source being picked up strongly by two or more microphones.
Where everyone is playing in the same room, a practical setup is to have the players arranged in a horseshoe shape, with the singer in the centre facing the drummer, and the amplifiers facing outwards, screened as well as possible. Remember that using improvised sound absorbers to provide separation and to deaden room coloration is essential for optimum sound quality, so don't skimp in this vital area.
With the exception of the rattling snare drum problem mentioned earlier, close-miked drums don't suffer too much from spill, as drums are basically loud and the mic is usually very close to the drum head. The room acoustics also have little influence on either close-mic'd drums or close-mic'd electric guitar amplifiers, simply because of the proximity of the microphone to the sound source. The overheads are, however, rather more vulnerable, as they are further from the kit and consequently likely to pick up more spill and room ambience. A useful strategy here is to position the overheads slightly in front of the kit and lower them to just above cymbal level. Try to position them so they are not too close to or far away from any individual cymbal, and aim the mics down towards the snare drum, trying to keep them both the same distance from the snare drum if possible. Hanging a duvet or other acoustic absorber behind the kit can stop the overheads picking up reflections from the rear wall and, if at all possible, it is worth using foam collars (such as those made by Auralex) or SE's Instrument Reflexion Filters directly behind the mics, to reduce the impact of sound approaching from the rear and sides of the mics. Even cardioids are only 'deaf' to sound directly on the rear axis — sounds coming from the sides are picked up relatively strongly. If you can improvise more substantial acoustic absorbers between the overhead mics and the guitar amplifiers, so much the better. However, remember that eye contact is often an important part of a good performance, so make sure the drummer can still see the other band members.
As well as considering mic patterns, you should consider those of the sound sources. An open-backed amp, such as the one pictured here, for example, will emit sound to the rear. You should therefore consider how best to position the amp to avoid spill into the mics used elsewhere in the you're still suffering more spill than you'd like when you come to mix, you may need to rely a little more on the close mics, and a little less on the overheads. However, the overheads do need to be loud enough to provide a credible balance for the cymbals, so a useful compromise is to apply some low cut to the overheads at around 250Hz, to clean up the sound and focus on the cymbal component. When this signal is added to those from the close mics, you should still get all the punch you need, but without the muddying effect produced by all that low-frequency and lower-mid spill.
Because I've assumed that this recording is being made in a typical home studio environment, where the acoustics are unlikely to be conducive to a great drum sound, you will need to add in some artificial ambience using a reverb device or plug-in of some kind. Short ambience treatments work well to provide a sense of space without making the sound seem too muddy or washy. This approach can be very successful, providing you've used acoustic absorbers to reduce the amount of off-axis sound getting into the overhead mics, as adding artificial reverb to unpleasant room coloration rarely works. Also bear in mind that any compression you add to the overhead mics will also emphasise spill and room coloration, so if you need to create a punchier sound it may be safer to apply compression mainly to the close drum mics, rather than to the overheads or the overall drum mix. Overall EQ lift in the 12kHz region will add sparkle to the cymbals, and you may also find you need some lower-mid cut in the 200 to 400Hz range, to tame any boxiness that has crept into the sound due to the room acoustics.
The bass guitar itself is easy to record — either via microphone or DI — but it can cause problems elsewhere in the room, as low frequencies are not so easily contained as mid-range and high frequencies. Low bass also tends to cause snare-drum vibration problems. One compromise is to simply play the bass at a lower volume, which shouldn't affect the feel of the performance if everyone hears a decent headphone balance. Another useful tactic is to record the output of the bass amp, either via a mic or by DI'ing from the preamp, but at the same time to record a clean DI directly from the bass itself, using an active DI box to split the signal. You can then EQ out some of the low bass from the amplifier to reduce drum rattling, adding this back in when you mix from the direct (non-EQ'd) DI. The thinking behind this is that most of the character of a bass sound resides in the mid-range frequencies, so it shouldn't make the sound any less characterful if you exclude the deep bass from the amp and then replace it with the low-pass-filtered direct DI.
When it comes to live recording, DI boxes are your friends! For bass, you can filter out the lowest frequencies from the amp and add them back in from the DI signal when mixing. In this way you get the character of the amp during the recording, but minimise unwanted vibration of other instruments, such as drums, caused by the low course, you can lose the spill altogether by using a recording preamp such as Line 6's Bass Pod, which will give a good account of itself for just about any musical style, but don't forget that you need to have a good headphone mix set up to recreate the experience of playing at a realistic level.
As with acoustic guitar, the human voice versus a 100W Marshall stack is a no-contest scenario, so to have any chance of recording usable vocals at the same time as the other instruments, you need either to moderate the sound levels in the room or move the singer to an adjoining room. The latter is preferable from the separation point of view, but less than ideal from a performance perspective. Most often, the singer will record a guide vocal in the room with the band and then replace this later as an overdub but, where it is imperative that the performance be captured live, a substantial expanse of duvet behind the singer and an SE Reflexion filter or similar screen behind and to the sides of the mic will help a lot. Providing the amps are pointing away from the vocal mic, and that the singer works very close to the mic, as they would in live performance, you might just get away with it.
Working this close invariably means using either a stage dynamic mic, normally designed for hand-held use, or a stage hand-held capacitor mic, such as the Neumann KMS105 or the Rode S2. If you use a conventional side-address studio microphone you're unlikely to be able to get close enough to eliminate the worst of the spill without serious popping problems, as any effective pop screen needs to be located a couple of inches from the mic to be effective. Even using a stage mic you'll probably still need good mic technique to avoid popping and, if at all possible, you should get the singer to leave the mic on the stand rather than holding it, as the relative position of the mic and acoustic screens is important.
As with any recording session, remember to consult the singer as to what headphone monitor balance they need and how much reverb they'd like to hear on their own voice while performing.
Keyboards can usually be DI'd without causing any problems, unless you're miking a real rotary speaker cabinet — not a common occurrence in project studios, due to the large physical size of the things! In the event you do have an old Leslie lying around that you wish to use for the recording, there's no reason not to DI the keyboard dry, then feed the track back out through the Leslie prior to mixing, recording the result onto a new stereo track.
For vocal recordings, a studio side-address mic will usually pick up too much spill. If you need to record the vocals live, a stage mic is probably a better option. You don't have to settle for a dynamic mic, though, as there are now plenty of stage condensers around, such as the Neumann KMS105 (pictured) and the Rode S2.Brass and woodwind instruments are generally fairly loud, and a rock sax sound can be achieved by miking close to the bell, even though this doesn't give the most accurate representation of the instrument. Again, relative position of the mic to the instrument is important, and clip-on mics can be useful here if the player tends to move around a lot. In terms of separation, you can apply the same rules when recording quieter wind instruments as when recording vocals — that is, putting absorbers behind both the player and the mic.
Acoustic pianos can be a problem, but in a rock band context you're unlikely to be trying to create a classical concert piano sound, so you can afford to use a pair of mics just a few inches from the strings. If there's enough room, you may even be able to close the piano lid to give you better isolation. This will produce a harder, more assertive sound than classical miking at a distance, but many pop and rock producers prefer this sound in any case, as it cuts through well in a mix. The simplest solution, of course, is to use a good electronic piano, but not every player is happy to make that compromise.
In my experience, a lot of bands try to play their studio set just as they would live, which often results in a guitar tone that is far too dirty to mix comfortably. A practical solution is to use an active DI box to split the guitar signal, so that the Thru signal feeds the amp and the buffered signal is recorded clean to a separate track. If you find the original mic'd amp sound isn't working in the mix, you then have the option of re-amping the clean DI'd track by feeding it out into a guitar amp that has been mic'd in the usual way, or using a plug-in amp simulator to turn the DI'd sound into a plausible rock sound. You may even be able to combine the processed DI'd sound with the original amp recording to achieve a satisfactory result. If you're not convinced the band has got it right, this is a very easy way to cover yourself.
On the subject of setting levels, you should remember to leave plenty of headroom, as sound levels invariably creep up as the players get into their stride during the session. If you are recording at 24-bit resolution, then you can easily afford to leave 12dB of headroom, which will normally give you a viable safety margin against 'level-creep'.
Most of what I've discussed here would seem, in hindsight, to be largely common sense, but it is surprising how many seemingly obvious factors can get overlooked when your prime concern is getting your music down. Moderating the level of guitar and bass amplifiers, either by choosing smaller amplifiers or using power soaks, not only reduces spill but often produces a better sound. Recording with less amplifier distortion than you use live is also a good thing to try if you can: you can always add more distortion or compression later, but you can't clean up a sound that has been over-distorted, which is why I suggested the 'safety' straight DI.
The other important factor is the use of acoustic screens (or mattresses, duvets, sleeping bags and so on). These make a huge difference in minimising spill and taming unwanted room reflections, and you should not under-estimate their importance. The new generation of screens designed to go behind mics are also very effective, and if you do a lot of recording as a band, these are well worth considering. However, you should always remember to balance the use of screens with the need for visual communication between the members of the band while performing.
Finally, the better your source sounds, and the less spill you have, the easier your song will be to mix. By now you will probably have learned that the phrase 'fix it in the mix' is somewhat over-optimistic and that a great mix starts with a great recording of a great performance.
SOS
Most recording techniques are easy enough to put into practice when you're only faced with the task of working with one instrument or voice at a time, but life gets more complicated when you come to record a rock band playing 'live' in the studio. The main problem in this scenario is spill, specifically from the louder instruments to the mics used on quieter sound sources. In a typical guitar-based rock band, the most vulnerable mics are those used by vocalists and the drum overheads, but acoustic instruments such as acoustic guitars or hand percussion can also present challenges.
Spill can be reduced by the careful setting up of the microphones and sound sources, though in a small studio you'll never get rid of it entirely, not even if you put up acoustic screens.
There may also be other problems, such as snare drums resonating and buzzing along with the bass guitar part where, even though you can gate the close snare-mic to get rid of it there, some buzzing may still be audible in the overhead mics. Fortunately, some drum-kit rattle and buzz currently seems acceptable as part of the natural sound of the kit, whereas, for example, in the '80s it was fashionable to try to keep the kit sounding as clean and sterile as possible.
Let's assume that you have the entire band set up in a lounge-sized room. What can you do to cut down on spill? Guitar amplifiers are obvious culprits, and rock guitarists still seem to like to have big amps turned well up. For recording, though, a small amp cranked hard will often give you a much bigger sound than a stage amp used in a confined space. I'm currently using one of the little Vox AD30VTs for recording, as they sound good at just about any level, but small tube amps such as the Fender Blues Junior are also ideal: if all those early Led Zeppelin tracks were recorded using a 6W tube amp, small amps have to be OK! Where you must use a high-powered stage amplifier, particularly a tube model, I'd seriously recommend investing in a good power soak to plug between the power amp and speaker, so that you can run the power amp hard while attenuating the amount of power reaching the speaker. Even five watts can sound pretty loud in a small room, so choose a model with switchable attenuation settings, such as the THD Hot Plate (see SOS June 2006 for more about power soaks).
You don't need a large stage amp to get a big sound. If you can persuade the guitarist to use a cranked-up small tube amp, you will probably get a better tone and reduce unwanted spillage into other 're only going to put the mic in front of one speaker, so using a 4 x 12 cabinet isn't really necessary unless you're recording in a very large space, where you can also make use of a distant mic to augment the sound. In a typical project or home studio, it is pretty universally accepted wisdom that you put the mic fairly close in, in front of the best-sounding speaker — though using a smaller cabinet with a single speaker might give you just as good a sound, while also reducing spill. As regular readers will already know, the choice of mic and its position across the front of the speaker cone have a dramatic effect on the sound you ultimately capture, so try everything you have and make notes on what works. My personal favourites from my own mic collection are an SE ribbon mic and an Audio Technica AT4050 capacitor mic, though many engineers still swear by the Shure SM57 dynamic mic. There are no real rules and every combination will sound different, so please take the time to try a few different options. Getting the right sound at source is invariably better than struggling with EQ after you've made the recording.
There are various strategies that can really help reduce spill from guitar amplifiers, one of which is to point the guitar amplifiers (this is simpler with closed-back models) away from the drum kit and other vulnerable mics, and to place a thick sound-absorber a couple of feet in front of the amplifier to soak up some of the sound once it has gone past the microphone (which will usually be no more than six inches from the speaker grille cloth). We've tried mattresses, soft furnishing such as sofas, heavy folded blankets and, of course, folded duvets. They all help, but there'll still be some spill. With open-backed amplifiers, it is worth experimenting by pointing the side of the amplifier towards vulnerable mics, as open-backed cabinets have a modified dipole (figure-of-eight) polar pattern, which means that more sound comes out of the front and back than out of the sides. This time you may wish to improvise sound absorbers between the amp and the other vulnerable mics in the room, as well as behind the microphone.
If you think something might work, don't be afraid to give it a try: you might just stumble across something really effective. If you're recording in your living room, for example, try sticking the guitar amps behind the sofa to get more separation. For one project, I got the sound I was looking for by putting a 4 x 12 cabinet flat on its back, then draping blankets, sleeping bags and duvets directly over the cabinet and microphone stand.
If you must use a large tube amp, a power soak such as the THD Hot Plate pictured here will allow you to drive the amp harder without increasing the overall another approach, which has been used on many records, is to have the guitarists playing in the same room as the rest of the band, monitoring via headphones in the usual way, but with the amp miked up in a separate room, or even in a cupboard. Many a classic album has been recorded with the guitar amp in the studio toilet!
Because guitar amps are traditionally miked very close to the speaker grille, spill from other amplifiers or from drums should be at such a low level as not to be a problem. However, whenever you're recording multiple sources at once, using a separate mic for each source, you should always observe the 5:1 rule. That is, you should always ensure that the microphones are separated from each other by at least five times the distance between the microphones and the sources they are recording. This helps avoid phase-cancellation coloration, which is caused by the same source being picked up strongly by two or more microphones.
Where everyone is playing in the same room, a practical setup is to have the players arranged in a horseshoe shape, with the singer in the centre facing the drummer, and the amplifiers facing outwards, screened as well as possible. Remember that using improvised sound absorbers to provide separation and to deaden room coloration is essential for optimum sound quality, so don't skimp in this vital area.
With the exception of the rattling snare drum problem mentioned earlier, close-miked drums don't suffer too much from spill, as drums are basically loud and the mic is usually very close to the drum head. The room acoustics also have little influence on either close-mic'd drums or close-mic'd electric guitar amplifiers, simply because of the proximity of the microphone to the sound source. The overheads are, however, rather more vulnerable, as they are further from the kit and consequently likely to pick up more spill and room ambience. A useful strategy here is to position the overheads slightly in front of the kit and lower them to just above cymbal level. Try to position them so they are not too close to or far away from any individual cymbal, and aim the mics down towards the snare drum, trying to keep them both the same distance from the snare drum if possible. Hanging a duvet or other acoustic absorber behind the kit can stop the overheads picking up reflections from the rear wall and, if at all possible, it is worth using foam collars (such as those made by Auralex) or SE's Instrument Reflexion Filters directly behind the mics, to reduce the impact of sound approaching from the rear and sides of the mics. Even cardioids are only 'deaf' to sound directly on the rear axis — sounds coming from the sides are picked up relatively strongly. If you can improvise more substantial acoustic absorbers between the overhead mics and the guitar amplifiers, so much the better. However, remember that eye contact is often an important part of a good performance, so make sure the drummer can still see the other band members.
As well as considering mic patterns, you should consider those of the sound sources. An open-backed amp, such as the one pictured here, for example, will emit sound to the rear. You should therefore consider how best to position the amp to avoid spill into the mics used elsewhere in the you're still suffering more spill than you'd like when you come to mix, you may need to rely a little more on the close mics, and a little less on the overheads. However, the overheads do need to be loud enough to provide a credible balance for the cymbals, so a useful compromise is to apply some low cut to the overheads at around 250Hz, to clean up the sound and focus on the cymbal component. When this signal is added to those from the close mics, you should still get all the punch you need, but without the muddying effect produced by all that low-frequency and lower-mid spill.
Because I've assumed that this recording is being made in a typical home studio environment, where the acoustics are unlikely to be conducive to a great drum sound, you will need to add in some artificial ambience using a reverb device or plug-in of some kind. Short ambience treatments work well to provide a sense of space without making the sound seem too muddy or washy. This approach can be very successful, providing you've used acoustic absorbers to reduce the amount of off-axis sound getting into the overhead mics, as adding artificial reverb to unpleasant room coloration rarely works. Also bear in mind that any compression you add to the overhead mics will also emphasise spill and room coloration, so if you need to create a punchier sound it may be safer to apply compression mainly to the close drum mics, rather than to the overheads or the overall drum mix. Overall EQ lift in the 12kHz region will add sparkle to the cymbals, and you may also find you need some lower-mid cut in the 200 to 400Hz range, to tame any boxiness that has crept into the sound due to the room acoustics.
The bass guitar itself is easy to record — either via microphone or DI — but it can cause problems elsewhere in the room, as low frequencies are not so easily contained as mid-range and high frequencies. Low bass also tends to cause snare-drum vibration problems. One compromise is to simply play the bass at a lower volume, which shouldn't affect the feel of the performance if everyone hears a decent headphone balance. Another useful tactic is to record the output of the bass amp, either via a mic or by DI'ing from the preamp, but at the same time to record a clean DI directly from the bass itself, using an active DI box to split the signal. You can then EQ out some of the low bass from the amplifier to reduce drum rattling, adding this back in when you mix from the direct (non-EQ'd) DI. The thinking behind this is that most of the character of a bass sound resides in the mid-range frequencies, so it shouldn't make the sound any less characterful if you exclude the deep bass from the amp and then replace it with the low-pass-filtered direct DI.
When it comes to live recording, DI boxes are your friends! For bass, you can filter out the lowest frequencies from the amp and add them back in from the DI signal when mixing. In this way you get the character of the amp during the recording, but minimise unwanted vibration of other instruments, such as drums, caused by the low course, you can lose the spill altogether by using a recording preamp such as Line 6's Bass Pod, which will give a good account of itself for just about any musical style, but don't forget that you need to have a good headphone mix set up to recreate the experience of playing at a realistic level.
As with acoustic guitar, the human voice versus a 100W Marshall stack is a no-contest scenario, so to have any chance of recording usable vocals at the same time as the other instruments, you need either to moderate the sound levels in the room or move the singer to an adjoining room. The latter is preferable from the separation point of view, but less than ideal from a performance perspective. Most often, the singer will record a guide vocal in the room with the band and then replace this later as an overdub but, where it is imperative that the performance be captured live, a substantial expanse of duvet behind the singer and an SE Reflexion filter or similar screen behind and to the sides of the mic will help a lot. Providing the amps are pointing away from the vocal mic, and that the singer works very close to the mic, as they would in live performance, you might just get away with it.
Working this close invariably means using either a stage dynamic mic, normally designed for hand-held use, or a stage hand-held capacitor mic, such as the Neumann KMS105 or the Rode S2. If you use a conventional side-address studio microphone you're unlikely to be able to get close enough to eliminate the worst of the spill without serious popping problems, as any effective pop screen needs to be located a couple of inches from the mic to be effective. Even using a stage mic you'll probably still need good mic technique to avoid popping and, if at all possible, you should get the singer to leave the mic on the stand rather than holding it, as the relative position of the mic and acoustic screens is important.
As with any recording session, remember to consult the singer as to what headphone monitor balance they need and how much reverb they'd like to hear on their own voice while performing.
Keyboards can usually be DI'd without causing any problems, unless you're miking a real rotary speaker cabinet — not a common occurrence in project studios, due to the large physical size of the things! In the event you do have an old Leslie lying around that you wish to use for the recording, there's no reason not to DI the keyboard dry, then feed the track back out through the Leslie prior to mixing, recording the result onto a new stereo track.
For vocal recordings, a studio side-address mic will usually pick up too much spill. If you need to record the vocals live, a stage mic is probably a better option. You don't have to settle for a dynamic mic, though, as there are now plenty of stage condensers around, such as the Neumann KMS105 (pictured) and the Rode S2.Brass and woodwind instruments are generally fairly loud, and a rock sax sound can be achieved by miking close to the bell, even though this doesn't give the most accurate representation of the instrument. Again, relative position of the mic to the instrument is important, and clip-on mics can be useful here if the player tends to move around a lot. In terms of separation, you can apply the same rules when recording quieter wind instruments as when recording vocals — that is, putting absorbers behind both the player and the mic.
Acoustic pianos can be a problem, but in a rock band context you're unlikely to be trying to create a classical concert piano sound, so you can afford to use a pair of mics just a few inches from the strings. If there's enough room, you may even be able to close the piano lid to give you better isolation. This will produce a harder, more assertive sound than classical miking at a distance, but many pop and rock producers prefer this sound in any case, as it cuts through well in a mix. The simplest solution, of course, is to use a good electronic piano, but not every player is happy to make that compromise.
In my experience, a lot of bands try to play their studio set just as they would live, which often results in a guitar tone that is far too dirty to mix comfortably. A practical solution is to use an active DI box to split the guitar signal, so that the Thru signal feeds the amp and the buffered signal is recorded clean to a separate track. If you find the original mic'd amp sound isn't working in the mix, you then have the option of re-amping the clean DI'd track by feeding it out into a guitar amp that has been mic'd in the usual way, or using a plug-in amp simulator to turn the DI'd sound into a plausible rock sound. You may even be able to combine the processed DI'd sound with the original amp recording to achieve a satisfactory result. If you're not convinced the band has got it right, this is a very easy way to cover yourself.
On the subject of setting levels, you should remember to leave plenty of headroom, as sound levels invariably creep up as the players get into their stride during the session. If you are recording at 24-bit resolution, then you can easily afford to leave 12dB of headroom, which will normally give you a viable safety margin against 'level-creep'.
Most of what I've discussed here would seem, in hindsight, to be largely common sense, but it is surprising how many seemingly obvious factors can get overlooked when your prime concern is getting your music down. Moderating the level of guitar and bass amplifiers, either by choosing smaller amplifiers or using power soaks, not only reduces spill but often produces a better sound. Recording with less amplifier distortion than you use live is also a good thing to try if you can: you can always add more distortion or compression later, but you can't clean up a sound that has been over-distorted, which is why I suggested the 'safety' straight DI.
The other important factor is the use of acoustic screens (or mattresses, duvets, sleeping bags and so on). These make a huge difference in minimising spill and taming unwanted room reflections, and you should not under-estimate their importance. The new generation of screens designed to go behind mics are also very effective, and if you do a lot of recording as a band, these are well worth considering. However, you should always remember to balance the use of screens with the need for visual communication between the members of the band while performing.
Finally, the better your source sounds, and the less spill you have, the easier your song will be to mix. By now you will probably have learned that the phrase 'fix it in the mix' is somewhat over-optimistic and that a great mix starts with a great recording of a great performance.
SOS
Friday, 12 August 2016
Complete Guide To Recording Drums In Your Home Studio
For home studio owners, one of the hardest things to record is a drum set.
There are so many questions that come up. How many mics should I use? What kinds of mics are best? Where are the best places to put them?
The good news is this: if you already do some recording, you probably have what you need to get a good drum recording.
In this article, we're going to dive into detail on how to get a great drumset recording in your home studio. Whether you have 16 microphones or just one, after reading this you will have the tools you need to get started.
Remember, as with recording anything, recording drums takes practice. So the sooner you start practicing, the better!
Important Preparation
Before you set up a single microphone, you need to understand this fact:
You cannot get a good recording of a bad sounding drumset.
This isn't to say that you shouldn't bother recording if your drumset doesn't sound as good as you'd like.
But it does mean that you shouldn't expect to record your poor sounding drumset and then make it sound great later in the mix. It doesn't work that way.
So before you even touch a microphone, here are some important things you should do to get that drumset sounding as good as possible:
Use nice sounding drums and cymbals. Again, you're not going to be able to make them sound different when you're mixing. Sometimes you can replace them with samples, but the goal here should be to use the best sounding kit you can get your hands on.
Get good drum heads. Old heads eventually start to sound dull and lifeless. Getting some nice new heads can make a huge difference in the sound, even for a less-then-stellar drumset.
For heaven's sake, tune the drums! Drum heads do fall out of tune over time. Spend some time on getting the drums to sound good individually, and getting them to sound good relative to each other.
Another important part of getting the drums to sound good is choosing a good room to record them in.
In a home studio, this can be difficult. Your house almost certainly doesn't have a room that's designed to sound good, and probably the space you have available to you is pretty small.
If you do have some flexibility though, keep the following guidelines in mind:
Bigger is usually better. Drums often sound better in a bigger space. So if you have a larger room available to you, it might be more effective than a small bedroom.
Minimize noise. As with recording anything, if you're in a room with a lot of noise (HVAC system, lawn mower outside the window, etc.) you will quickly run into problems. Particularly in quieter parts of the song.
Treat the room. Bare walls can cause slapback, flutter echo, and comb filtering. If possible, put some acoustic treatment on the walls. Even hanging a few blankets will make a difference.
Get to the point where the drums sound good in the room, and you'll be all set to get a great recording.
Step 1: Overheads
Overheads mics are arguably the most important microphones on the kit. If you can get them to sound good, the rest will fall into place nicely.
In fact, if you need to record the drums with only one or two mics, your best bet is probably to use overheads.
The overheads tend to capture the natural sound of the kit. Think about how you listen to a drumset with your ears. You listen to the whole thing, not each drum individually.
Typically we use condenser mics for overheads. Condensers pick up the detail of the kit and the sparkle of the cymbals. There are no rules, of course, but they are at least a good starting point.
As for techniques, there are many ways to set up your overheads.
First of all, we normally use two microphones, because it allows you to capture the stereo image of the drumset.
However, you can get a great drum recording with a single mono overhead mic. Graham Cochrane from The Recording Revolution has often used a mono overhead.
In fact, Graham created a great video in his $300 Studio Challenge series demonstrating how to record a drumset with only a single microphone This microphone was strategically placed as a mono overhead mic. You should definitely check out that video if you haven't already.
As for techniques with two microphones, there are several patterns that you can use. In a previous article, I wrote about four common Stereo Microphone Techniques , all of which may be used for drum overheads:
A/B Pair (or Spaced Pair): Two microphones, spaced apart. Really good stereo width, but creates potential for phase issues.
X/Y Pair (or Coincident Pair): Two microphones at a 90-degree angle to each other with their pickup locations in the same place. The stereo width isn't as good, but there are no phase issues.
ORTF: A pattern that models how human ears are spaced apart.
Mid-Side: Another pattern which avoids phase issues. Uses one unidirectional and one bidirectional microphone.
A/B Overhead Mics
The most common of these techniques are A/B and X/Y. Feel free to check out the article linked above for more details.
However, there are two other popular overhead techniques worth mentioning. These were developed specifically for drum overheads. Both of these are variants of the A/B technique, but the two microphones are placed in specific locations.
The first is the Glyn Johns technique. This technique uses two microphones. One microphone is positioned directly above the snare drum. The other is positioned to the drummer's right (assuming a typical right-handed setup) past the floor tom.
The key is to ensure that both microphones are the same distance from the snare drum. This way, you avoid phase issues in the snare.
X/Y Overhead Mics
For a much deeper explanation, I'll defer again to Graham from The Recording Revolution. He wrote an in-depth article on The Glyn Johns Technique If you'd like to try it out, I would highly suggest reading his article.
The second technique is called the Recorderman Technique. It's very similar to Glyn Johns, but the difference is in the positioning of the second microphone.
Instead of positioning it to the right past the floor tom, instead it is positioned over the drummer's right shoulder (again, assuming a typical right-handed setup).
As with Glyn Johns, you want to be sure that both microphones are the same distance from the snare drum in order to avoid phase issues.
The idea of the Recorderman technique is that the over-the-shoulder microphone hears what the drummer is hearing, which should make the recording sound more natural.
If you want to try this out, once again, Graham has done a fantastic job describing how to do it. Check out his video on The Recorderman Technique
Mixing Guidelines
In the mix, stereo overheads are usually panned hard left and right. This isn't always the case, but it is typical of the A/B and X/Y setups.
When I started with recording drums, I didn't know which way I was supposed to pan them. Should they be panned so the floor tom is on the right, as the drummer hears it? Or should it be panned the other way, to model the perspective of the listener?
As it turns out, it doesn't matter. Different mix engineers prefer different panning methods. Pick the one that works for you.
Personally, I'm a drummer, so I like panning them the way I hear them as a drummer. That's a perfectly fine way to do it. But panning them the other way is perfectly fine too.
Step 2: Kick Drum
After the overheads, the kick drum is usually the most important drum to get a microphone in front of.
The kick drum (obviously) has a lot of low end. Often this low end is picked up better by a specific kick drum mic, rather than the overheads. Particularly if you use a microphone that's optimized for it.
If you can only use two microphones for your kit, you may want to consider opting for a mono overhead so that you can put a mic on the kick drum.
Typically we use a dynamic microphone for the kick drum. Kick drums are loud and move a lot of air. We need something that will handle it without clipping or being damaged.
There are a few places to try when micing a kick drum:
In front of the resonant head
This is the typical place to start. Try moving it around to find the optimal sound.
Different distances from the drum can have very different sounds. Further away from the drum may give you more low-end, as it takes some space for the low frequencies to develop.
If you do this, you may want to create a tunnel” from the kick drum to the microphone in order to reduce bleed from the rest of the kit.
Inside the drum
Placing the microphone inside the drum is also popular. This may be done through a hole in the resonant head.
Alternatively, the resonant head can be removed entirely. Just remember the very first rule: make sure the drumset sounds good. If the kit sounds better with that resonant head on, then don't remove it just to get the microphone in a good spot.
Putting the mic inside the drum will get you more attack from the beater. Often, engineers will use two microphones on the kick, one inside and one outside. Then the two recordings can be blended to get a good amount of attack and low end.
In front of the beater head
It may be worth trying to mic the drum on the beater head. You'll get lots of attack, and get closer to what the drummer is hearing. However, keep in mind that you'll probably get more bleed this way.
Step 3: Snare Drum
If you want to record with 4 microphones, a popular solution is to use two overheads, a kick drum mic, and a snare drum mic.
Snare Drum Mic With Clip
The most common place to mic the snare is on top. This can be done with a clip that attaches to the drum (as shown in the image), or with a regular mic stand.
Distance and direction are the tools for tone shaping here. The mic can be placed a few inches away, or very close to the head. It can point very close to the edge of the drum, or right in the center. It's worth trying a few different placements.
It's also common to mic the bottom on the snare as an additional mic for blending. This mic tends to get more of the snare rattle. Keep in mind that you'll need to flip the polarity of one of the recorded tracks, since they will be 180-degrees out of phase.
Step 4: Room Mics
This is something I didn't do for a long time. But it's a technique that can give your drum recording a lot of energy and life.
Essentially, you just place a microphone in the room. You might want to point it at the kit, but often you may want to try pointing it at a wall or the ceiling. You could even place it outside the room in a hallway while leaving the door ajar.
The point of this mic is to capture some natural ambiance and reverb. In the mix, it is common to heavily compress this track and blend it in to give an energetic feel to the drums.
The sky is the limit here. You can use a single room mic, or you can use several. They can be different distances from the kit, different types of mics, different heights, cardioid, omnidirectional, etc.
If you're just starting out, I would recommend keeping it simple. A single room mic would be best. But feel free to experiment.
Step 5: Toms
If you have enough mics and inputs, it can be beneficial to mic the toms.
There's a wide variety of mics to choose from. Some engineers use dynamic mics, others use condensers.
For placement, it's the same idea as the snare drum. Distance and direction are what you want to play with. Typically they are placed consistently across the toms, i.e. the same distance from the edge or center of the drum. But there are no rules.
Mixing tips
Often the toms are panned across the stereo spectrum to give a sense of travel from the leftmost tom to the rightmost tom.
Really hard panning in some cases can sound unnatural. On the other hand, having them all too close together may sound boring. Try to strike a balance that sounds good to you.
Step 6: Hi-Hats
The hi-hats are often recorded with a condenser mic to pick up the detail and sparkle.
Many people use a hi-hat mic. I personally don't. I find that I get plenty of the hi-hat in the overhead mics.
But if you have enough mics and inputs, it's worth trying.
Conclusion
There are many different ways to mic a drumkit. And the only way to get good at it is practice.
You can get a good drum recording with a single microphone. You can also get a good drum recording with 16 microphones.
Remember: the most important thing is to make sure that the drumset sounds good in the room where it's being played. All the rest will follow from that.
There are so many questions that come up. How many mics should I use? What kinds of mics are best? Where are the best places to put them?
The good news is this: if you already do some recording, you probably have what you need to get a good drum recording.
In this article, we're going to dive into detail on how to get a great drumset recording in your home studio. Whether you have 16 microphones or just one, after reading this you will have the tools you need to get started.
Remember, as with recording anything, recording drums takes practice. So the sooner you start practicing, the better!
Important Preparation
Before you set up a single microphone, you need to understand this fact:
You cannot get a good recording of a bad sounding drumset.
This isn't to say that you shouldn't bother recording if your drumset doesn't sound as good as you'd like.
But it does mean that you shouldn't expect to record your poor sounding drumset and then make it sound great later in the mix. It doesn't work that way.
So before you even touch a microphone, here are some important things you should do to get that drumset sounding as good as possible:
Use nice sounding drums and cymbals. Again, you're not going to be able to make them sound different when you're mixing. Sometimes you can replace them with samples, but the goal here should be to use the best sounding kit you can get your hands on.
Get good drum heads. Old heads eventually start to sound dull and lifeless. Getting some nice new heads can make a huge difference in the sound, even for a less-then-stellar drumset.
For heaven's sake, tune the drums! Drum heads do fall out of tune over time. Spend some time on getting the drums to sound good individually, and getting them to sound good relative to each other.
Another important part of getting the drums to sound good is choosing a good room to record them in.
In a home studio, this can be difficult. Your house almost certainly doesn't have a room that's designed to sound good, and probably the space you have available to you is pretty small.
If you do have some flexibility though, keep the following guidelines in mind:
Bigger is usually better. Drums often sound better in a bigger space. So if you have a larger room available to you, it might be more effective than a small bedroom.
Minimize noise. As with recording anything, if you're in a room with a lot of noise (HVAC system, lawn mower outside the window, etc.) you will quickly run into problems. Particularly in quieter parts of the song.
Treat the room. Bare walls can cause slapback, flutter echo, and comb filtering. If possible, put some acoustic treatment on the walls. Even hanging a few blankets will make a difference.
Get to the point where the drums sound good in the room, and you'll be all set to get a great recording.
Step 1: Overheads
Overheads mics are arguably the most important microphones on the kit. If you can get them to sound good, the rest will fall into place nicely.
In fact, if you need to record the drums with only one or two mics, your best bet is probably to use overheads.
The overheads tend to capture the natural sound of the kit. Think about how you listen to a drumset with your ears. You listen to the whole thing, not each drum individually.
Typically we use condenser mics for overheads. Condensers pick up the detail of the kit and the sparkle of the cymbals. There are no rules, of course, but they are at least a good starting point.
As for techniques, there are many ways to set up your overheads.
First of all, we normally use two microphones, because it allows you to capture the stereo image of the drumset.
However, you can get a great drum recording with a single mono overhead mic. Graham Cochrane from The Recording Revolution has often used a mono overhead.
In fact, Graham created a great video in his $300 Studio Challenge series demonstrating how to record a drumset with only a single microphone This microphone was strategically placed as a mono overhead mic. You should definitely check out that video if you haven't already.
As for techniques with two microphones, there are several patterns that you can use. In a previous article, I wrote about four common Stereo Microphone Techniques , all of which may be used for drum overheads:
A/B Pair (or Spaced Pair): Two microphones, spaced apart. Really good stereo width, but creates potential for phase issues.
X/Y Pair (or Coincident Pair): Two microphones at a 90-degree angle to each other with their pickup locations in the same place. The stereo width isn't as good, but there are no phase issues.
ORTF: A pattern that models how human ears are spaced apart.
Mid-Side: Another pattern which avoids phase issues. Uses one unidirectional and one bidirectional microphone.
A/B Overhead Mics
The most common of these techniques are A/B and X/Y. Feel free to check out the article linked above for more details.
However, there are two other popular overhead techniques worth mentioning. These were developed specifically for drum overheads. Both of these are variants of the A/B technique, but the two microphones are placed in specific locations.
The first is the Glyn Johns technique. This technique uses two microphones. One microphone is positioned directly above the snare drum. The other is positioned to the drummer's right (assuming a typical right-handed setup) past the floor tom.
The key is to ensure that both microphones are the same distance from the snare drum. This way, you avoid phase issues in the snare.
X/Y Overhead Mics
For a much deeper explanation, I'll defer again to Graham from The Recording Revolution. He wrote an in-depth article on The Glyn Johns Technique If you'd like to try it out, I would highly suggest reading his article.
The second technique is called the Recorderman Technique. It's very similar to Glyn Johns, but the difference is in the positioning of the second microphone.
Instead of positioning it to the right past the floor tom, instead it is positioned over the drummer's right shoulder (again, assuming a typical right-handed setup).
As with Glyn Johns, you want to be sure that both microphones are the same distance from the snare drum in order to avoid phase issues.
The idea of the Recorderman technique is that the over-the-shoulder microphone hears what the drummer is hearing, which should make the recording sound more natural.
If you want to try this out, once again, Graham has done a fantastic job describing how to do it. Check out his video on The Recorderman Technique
Mixing Guidelines
In the mix, stereo overheads are usually panned hard left and right. This isn't always the case, but it is typical of the A/B and X/Y setups.
When I started with recording drums, I didn't know which way I was supposed to pan them. Should they be panned so the floor tom is on the right, as the drummer hears it? Or should it be panned the other way, to model the perspective of the listener?
As it turns out, it doesn't matter. Different mix engineers prefer different panning methods. Pick the one that works for you.
Personally, I'm a drummer, so I like panning them the way I hear them as a drummer. That's a perfectly fine way to do it. But panning them the other way is perfectly fine too.
Step 2: Kick Drum
After the overheads, the kick drum is usually the most important drum to get a microphone in front of.
The kick drum (obviously) has a lot of low end. Often this low end is picked up better by a specific kick drum mic, rather than the overheads. Particularly if you use a microphone that's optimized for it.
If you can only use two microphones for your kit, you may want to consider opting for a mono overhead so that you can put a mic on the kick drum.
Typically we use a dynamic microphone for the kick drum. Kick drums are loud and move a lot of air. We need something that will handle it without clipping or being damaged.
There are a few places to try when micing a kick drum:
In front of the resonant head
This is the typical place to start. Try moving it around to find the optimal sound.
Different distances from the drum can have very different sounds. Further away from the drum may give you more low-end, as it takes some space for the low frequencies to develop.
If you do this, you may want to create a tunnel” from the kick drum to the microphone in order to reduce bleed from the rest of the kit.
Inside the drum
Placing the microphone inside the drum is also popular. This may be done through a hole in the resonant head.
Alternatively, the resonant head can be removed entirely. Just remember the very first rule: make sure the drumset sounds good. If the kit sounds better with that resonant head on, then don't remove it just to get the microphone in a good spot.
Putting the mic inside the drum will get you more attack from the beater. Often, engineers will use two microphones on the kick, one inside and one outside. Then the two recordings can be blended to get a good amount of attack and low end.
In front of the beater head
It may be worth trying to mic the drum on the beater head. You'll get lots of attack, and get closer to what the drummer is hearing. However, keep in mind that you'll probably get more bleed this way.
Step 3: Snare Drum
If you want to record with 4 microphones, a popular solution is to use two overheads, a kick drum mic, and a snare drum mic.
Snare Drum Mic With Clip
The most common place to mic the snare is on top. This can be done with a clip that attaches to the drum (as shown in the image), or with a regular mic stand.
Distance and direction are the tools for tone shaping here. The mic can be placed a few inches away, or very close to the head. It can point very close to the edge of the drum, or right in the center. It's worth trying a few different placements.
It's also common to mic the bottom on the snare as an additional mic for blending. This mic tends to get more of the snare rattle. Keep in mind that you'll need to flip the polarity of one of the recorded tracks, since they will be 180-degrees out of phase.
Step 4: Room Mics
This is something I didn't do for a long time. But it's a technique that can give your drum recording a lot of energy and life.
Essentially, you just place a microphone in the room. You might want to point it at the kit, but often you may want to try pointing it at a wall or the ceiling. You could even place it outside the room in a hallway while leaving the door ajar.
The point of this mic is to capture some natural ambiance and reverb. In the mix, it is common to heavily compress this track and blend it in to give an energetic feel to the drums.
The sky is the limit here. You can use a single room mic, or you can use several. They can be different distances from the kit, different types of mics, different heights, cardioid, omnidirectional, etc.
If you're just starting out, I would recommend keeping it simple. A single room mic would be best. But feel free to experiment.
Step 5: Toms
If you have enough mics and inputs, it can be beneficial to mic the toms.
There's a wide variety of mics to choose from. Some engineers use dynamic mics, others use condensers.
For placement, it's the same idea as the snare drum. Distance and direction are what you want to play with. Typically they are placed consistently across the toms, i.e. the same distance from the edge or center of the drum. But there are no rules.
Mixing tips
Often the toms are panned across the stereo spectrum to give a sense of travel from the leftmost tom to the rightmost tom.
Really hard panning in some cases can sound unnatural. On the other hand, having them all too close together may sound boring. Try to strike a balance that sounds good to you.
Step 6: Hi-Hats
The hi-hats are often recorded with a condenser mic to pick up the detail and sparkle.
Many people use a hi-hat mic. I personally don't. I find that I get plenty of the hi-hat in the overhead mics.
But if you have enough mics and inputs, it's worth trying.
Conclusion
There are many different ways to mic a drumkit. And the only way to get good at it is practice.
You can get a good drum recording with a single microphone. You can also get a good drum recording with 16 microphones.
Remember: the most important thing is to make sure that the drumset sounds good in the room where it's being played. All the rest will follow from that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)