Recording Guitar Ain't So Easy

[CowboyBillyBob1]

I have a Tascam DP-008 which is a small 8 track digital recorder with quite a few features to be able to make a decent recording. Unless of course you are me. Dang this ain't easy. I've done stuff before but I am struggling now because I think my ear is a lot more discriminating than before.

I tried what I thought was the easy way and used a direct line out from a Fender G-Dec3. A pretty cool amp for what it is. I thing my main problem is EQ. You can't just make the track you are recording fill up the track because there is no room for anything else and it sounds like mud when you over dub.

 

I am not giving up and want to post something, even a simple blues pattern, where everything sit's in it's own space. I guess I will have to do Drums and Bass first and then find a space for the rhythm guitar and a different space for the lead and vocals. The LP takes up so much space. I think my tele might be better for the rhythm and the LP or another Humbucker guita for the lead.

 

I guessI just don't know what I am doing ere.

 

Any comments or tips would be greatly appreciated. I have condenser mics and stuff and maybe that would be the best way to go. But then mike placement becomes a big issue.

 

Wow this is overwhelming me!!

[Izzy]

I have a Tascam DP-008 which is a small 8 track digital recorder with quite a few features to be able to make a decent recording. Unless of course you are me. Dang this ain't easy. I tried what I thought was the easy way and used a direct line out from a Fender G-Dec3. A pretty cool amp for what it is. I thing my main problem is EQ. You can't just make the track you are recording fill up the track because there is no room for anything else and it sounds like mud when you over dub.

 

I am not giving up

I guessI just don't know what I am doing ere.

 

Any comments or tips would be greatly appreciated. I have condenser mics and stuff and maybe that would be the best way to go. But then mike placement becomes a big issue.

 

Wow this is overwhelming me!!

 

When you mic an amp, I read "off center of the cone" (to one side) is better than dead center. Also, what are you using besides the tascam, what is the setup and what DAW are you using? I'm a novice and would like to follow the responces that are posted. You say you main problem is EQ as in mixer EQ or DAW EQ? Sorry if these are dumb questions.

[CowboyBillyBob1]

When you mic an amp, I read "off center of the cone" (to one side) is better than dead center. Also, what are you using besides the tascam, what is the setup and what DAW are you using? I'm a novice and would like to follow the responces that are posted. You say you main problem is EQ as in mixer EQ or DAW EQ? Sorry if these are dumb questions.

 

 

There are no dumb questions, you know that!

 

I am not using or need a DAW because the Tascam is a digital 8 track recorder with no computer needed. It's a stand alone unit. Here is a link:

 

DP 008

 

The only thing I am using besides the Tascam is my guitar rig. The Fender DEC30 is an amp that has line outs for direct recording but... it's not the best and/or I am not the best at it.

The Tascam is like a mini studio no DAW needed...thank you.

I have a few inexpensive condenser mikes by Sterling and they work well. At least I have not gone beyond what they can do. I would use them to mike my other amps like a '65 Deluxe Reverb or a Marshall MKII. Placeing them and EQ seems to give me a hard time. I just want it to sound like what I hear and have it sit in the mix without overpowering everything.

I may be asking too much for this forum but any tips are a big help.

[kidblast]

hey Cowboy..

 

So, since like 2001, or there abouts - I've been in an entirely originals project.

 

We've written and recorded about 25 songs. All but three were DIY projects. Most of the were done on Roland VS workstations. Probably very similar to your tascam. You're observation about not being easy is dead on. It's double hard when you are doing all the recording/mixing as well as composing and tracking. It is a science in trial and error.

 

One comment about line out - to the deck: This is really only going to work when you are in a situation where you are trying to avoid any mike bleed from other instruments (like a drum-kit that is also miced up) the quality of your guitars tone is going to just not be pleasing to you. Micing a guitar for the final tracks is the only way to go. you can spend a trillion dollars on mics, or you can just use an SM57. The key is finding the speakers sweet spot, and making note of it.

Mic placement however does not appear to be your problem.

 

"You can't just make the track you are recording fill up the track because there is no room for anything else and it sounds like mud when you over dub."

 

Seems where you're getting wrapped up is in the mixing of a few tracks to get the space/dynamics you're looking for, (each track has it's own place in the mix.) Is that what you seem to be struggling with?

 

What do you mean by "fill up the track"? Are you talking about how "busy" the track is?

 

Are you working the panning? you don't want everything in the middle, right?

 

What are you actually using for Bass and Drums? in the recording process, the rythm tracks (bass/drums) are going to make or break your project.

[quapman]

This is not encouraging.. lol

I am waiting for a little multitrack recorder myself. I have a Zoom R8 on order.

So I get to share the pain lol.

 

I also have the little g-dec3 amp. Mine is the 15w.

And you're right, it's a very cool little amp. At first I thought it was cheesy but I bought it just to have something

to jam along with and it's fun as hell. But as kidblast has already mentioned, I don't think I would use the direct line out. At most I would do is mic it. But, as fun as that amp is, I wouldn't even use it.

Not to knock it but I don't find the sound quality real great on it. And some of the "mud" sound you're talking about may be coming from the source. It's a little amp loaded with presets of digital amp modeling. And I'm guessing for how cheap this little amp was, the modeling isn't the best quality. Lots of fun sounds, but even out of the amp I find them a little muddy.

 

The Zoom has it's own amp modeling ability. I don't know how good it is but I will give it a try.

For the most part though, I suspect I will just find the sounds I like on my regular amp and mic it.

I have a little Mesa Boogie Studio 22.

I sold a Marshall stack years ago cuz I didn't want to carry it around. This little boogie ain't no Marshall but it can hold it's own and sounds real nice. Way better than the g-dec.

 

You signature indicates you have other amps. I would give them a try with a mic.

 

Good luck..

[martinh]

I tried what I thought was the easy way and used a direct line out from a Fender G-Dec3. A pretty cool amp for what it is. I thing my main problem is EQ. You can't just make the track you are recording fill up the track because there is no room for anything else and it sounds like mud when you over dub.

 

I

 

 

I've had quite good results coming out of the direct line an a G-DEC. I think the problem is more , as you said, in the fact that "You can't just make the track you are recording fill up the track because there is no room for anything else and it sounds like mud when you over dub."

 

The probelm with a lot of the presets on these type of amps is that they are designed to sound good when played in isolation, and to make them sound good that way, they are often "over thickened" with chorus, delay, and EQ boost at the extreme bass and treble ends etc. etc. When I ran a small studio in the 90's I would have epic battles with some guitar players who thought that a band recording was actually a piece of solo guitar, and would spend hours trying to get the biggest possible guitar sound when you listened to it in isolation. By the time the bass, another guitar, and a lead overdub were added, the same sound that was big and full on its own sounded like a muddy mess.

 

What matters, of course, is not how an individual track sounds, but how it sounds in the context of the other instruments. this is very difficult to guage if you're laying tracks down one at a time. I'd try reducing the amount of each effect on the G-dec presets you're using, gound for a sound that seems thinner or smaller , and see what it sounds like when you get the rest of the tracks on it.

[Markini]

I have the same recorder tascam DP 8 track.

 

It records very well, but I had to buy a decent monitor to hear how the recording really sounds. Sometimes headphones are not quite true when listening to playback or while playing. Best results are pluggin the guitar, jeyboards, drums etc.. directly into the recorder.

 

When i record from an amp I use the Aux out or headphones jack and go into the recorder. Volume is the hardest process to control across the tracks, but that is the beauty of an 8 track you can adjust each tracks volume seperately. But for instance when recording you may need to do an acoustic guitar at higher volume and an electric guitar at lower volume.

 

The Tascam DP 08 can only record two tracks at the same time. 1/4" jack and a microphone jack. It takes trial and error to dial in the right sound, for example it took a couple of hours to record 3 tracks last Sunday to get the right levels. To get crisp clean sounds I plug directly into the recorder. To get a bluesy tone I use a "Green Rhino" in line with the recorder. To get a crunchy distort I use a over driven amp, then plug into the recorder. On the recorder always keep master volume down and turn up slowly.

 

There are free music editors online that will take care of equalization, compression, normalization etc.. Also the Tascam has equalizer and I think compression for the final mix down.

 

A decent pair of monitor speakers is a must, you can substitute an acoustic amp in place of purpose built monitors if the old budget is hurting.

[kidblast]

"The probelm with a lot of the presets on these type of amps is that they are designed to sound good when played in isolation"

 

I would say this is probably bang on. I am not familiar with a G-Dec.. so no idea what you're dealing with there. but, given it is a modeling amp, or so I gather, it's probably inclined to have the same overriding issue as any modeling device when recording. IMHO, they just don't "sit" well in the mix. The mic "hears" stuff we cannot.

 

During the thousands of hours I've spent doing this the process I would only use a line 6 pod direct as a way to get the rhythm guitar tracked while the Bass (always direct) and the drums (always recorded with individual drums close mic'd) were being tracked. This enabled us to get the drums recorded with ZERO bleed from anything else that was being recorded at the same time. This track was never used for the final mixing, we'd always close mic my marshal, with an SM57. I'm a Les Paul guy, so 85% of the time, I would be using one of them.

 

I would go after Martin's advice. I think he's on to it.

[CowboyBillyBob1]

Thank you to everyone for the fantastic tips and ideas. I am going to give another go for it today. I was able to record my Martin HD 28V with a pencil condenser mike pointed at the 12th fret and it sounded killer. I think it's hard not to get that guitar to sound good. At least that was a bit encouraging.

 

I'll give it another go with a simple tune and if it is at all not totally embarassing I will post it.

 

I have to think there are other forum members that would like to continue this discussion, I know I would. So keep the ideas comming it really helps a lot.

[rct]

Recording guitars or anything else isn't easy at all, that's why we used to pay a few thousand an hour to have it done in a place where it can be made easy by peoples that do it every day.

 

When I bought this house and retired from gigging and started considering actually recording stuff myself I was ready for how hard it is, and I have not been dissapointed.

 

Short story is to use the direct out mostly for reinforcement and layering of a mic'd guitar, prefferably mic'd clean and mic'd dirty. Pan and volume of each track helps to create the "size" you seek, putting the sounds left and right via pan and front and back via volume, but that is only if you record multiple tracks. So when I'm recording, I use a couple A/B/Y switches and send out three or four lines to various amps and digital devices, and take the dis off the amps as well, send them all to a mixer, and from there to the 2488 recorder, no computers in my music room.

 

For genuine width and depth, record the actual part multiple times, that is my preferred way to get good fat trax. I am the best guitar player in the world to double myself, so it is less painless than it sounds for you, you are the best at doubling you.

 

Good luck, have fun, and remember why you are doing this. If you think you are doing it to create hit records, or you think you have to record such that everything you make sounds just like whats on the radio, you are in for a tough, frustrating road, because trust me and many millions of others before you, you can't do that in yer house. At least, if you can, you ain't in here asking questions you are simply throwing gazillions at it. Mostly it is the doing of it that rocks, that's what I've found to be true. I don't really give a crap about a three hundred hz spike at the 6K freq or that the left pan was .7 degrees inboard of the right pan or that the phase issues of the two mics from two different sessions can almost be heard by a gnat. Do yourself a favor and do not ball yerself up in minutae that only recording nerds give as hit about. Once you start listening to your own work you truly appreciate just doing it.

 

But then, I have a decent job so I don't do this for money anymore. Your mileage, of course, may vary.

 

Have fun bro!

 

rct

[kidblast]

RCT you are no doubt the king of common sense, plain English get to the point replies

 

+1 to everything you just said.

[rct]

RCT you are no doubt the king of common sense, plain English get to the point replies

 

+1 to everything you just said.

 

I appreciate that!

 

I do miss the old days of usenet, when such point-getting-to and honesty would lead to literally hundreds of posts of arguing about what ana sshole I am. Whoever, isn't about me.

 

Today we can save people a lot of trouble with even just a little experience, so the innernetz is way better now.

 

rct

[kidblast]

so the innernetz is way better now.

rct

 

I support version control systems for a day gig,

a lot of it is opened source (linux servers, Git, Mercurial, SVN) Database Mysql..

without the Internet and Google, I'd have thrown myself down an elevator shaft along time ago.

[rct]

I support version control systems for a day gig,

a lot of it is opened source (linux servers, Git, Mercurial, SVN) Database Mysql..

without the Internet and Google, I'd have thrown myself down an elevator shaft along time ago.

 

Ackh! Didn't know anyone used vc anymore. We made our own long time ago, haven't looked back!

 

rct

[Izzy]

Recording guitars or anything else isn't easy at all, that's why we used to pay a few thousand an hour to have it done in a place where it can be made easy by peoples that do it every day.

 

When I bought this house and retired from gigging and started considering actually recording stuff myself I was ready for how hard it is, and I have not been dissapointed.

 

Short story is to use the direct out mostly for reinforcement and layering of a mic'd guitar, prefferably mic'd clean and mic'd dirty. Pan and volume of each track helps to create the "size" you seek, putting the sounds left and right via pan and front and back via volume, but that is only if you record multiple tracks. So when I'm recording, I use a couple A/B/Y switches and send out three or four lines to various amps and digital devices, and take the dis off the amps as well, send them all to a mixer, and from there to the 2488 recorder, no computers in my music room.

 

For genuine width and depth, record the actual part multiple times, that is my preferred way to get good fat trax. I am the best guitar player in the world to double myself, so it is less painless than it sounds for you, you are the best at doubling you.

 

Good luck, have fun, and remember why you are doing this. If you think you are doing it to create hit records, or you think you have to record such that everything you make sounds just like whats on the radio, you are in for a tough, frustrating road, because trust me and many millions of others before you, you can't do that in yer house. [] Once you start listening to your own work you truly appreciate just doing it.

 

[]

 

Have fun bro!

 

rct

 

*takes notes and raises hand

 

Why no computers? Am I doing it all wrong?!

[crowdaddy]

Very difficult. I use macpro as the recorder, and I'm no whiz, old school, very. But, I learned that what you record with is personal, and what you like someone else will dislike. The mac, has become the easiest part. The mic, the switching from bass, to voice to drums. Yikes! It is tough. Then playback and edit. Then, oh no it sounds bad. Do it again. At least you can save the drum track unless that doesn't work for the song.

 

I'm still working on some things direct and some things not, microphone to tri-capture rollins, and too early to tell if it will work for me. I have eliminated the yamaha mixer because it adds too many more options and variables that waste time and cause problems that i can't deal with. Now I am just changing, manually the plug from the keyboard, or bass, or lead, or accoustic.

 

I'll let you know how it goes, if I can get some recording time.

[rct]

*takes notes and raises hand

 

Why no computers? Am I doing it all wrong?!

 

Well, probably not, not for you.

 

I'm from before computers were used for this stuff. Fostex and Tascam smalltrax as we called them, or 2, 4, sometimes 8 track boxes with outs to tape, sometimes even a casette!

Music remained an entirely ear and dance driven pursuit, professional or not, demo or next hit record. Ears. Remember that word.

 

Along came the damn internet and CarlF and the "post a clip if you can do better loser" mentality took over, from Harmony Central 15 years ago to today.

 

And then came the home recording stuff. And people in the 90's, with no business even playing a guitar much less recording it and putting it up on the internet, were sticking garbage up all over the place. So that's not to slag everyone or anyone that hangs stuff up on the interent. That is how it started, people just putting up "clips" to prove to people they could play the guitar. And along the way, home recording took off.

 

But I have been working on, in, and in front of, an intel/MS box for the last 20 odd years, b-tested the first versions of netscape here, so we got to see first usenet and then the "web" grow up. My employer has graciously allowed me to be a very active participant in the old usenet days and still today in whatever forums are left.

 

Computers are a vast distraction to making music, to me. Getting drivers, effing with this garbage ms "operating system" <gag>, all that stuff, I got no time for if I am not getting paid to do it. We have an intel/MS and a Mac and an iPad and a couple iPods or three at home, and except for the iPod and music including my own, I don't really do much with the computers when I am not here. To me, they are an enourmous time killer.

 

Ok, so there are the two main reasons I first stayed away from computers. I could be convinced otherwise maybe, over time, but my experience shows a third and final reason that can't be negotiated for me.

 

We used to have this guy that offered MoBile Recording. He'd come to yer rehearsal, yer gig, whatever, wherever, very unobtrusively record yer band. So we had him in quite a few times in 8 or nine years, demos, catch a gig we thought would be smokin hot, whenever we had the scratch to buy some time off him and save ourselves some headaches. Our early attempts at Boss BR-x stuff were ok, not bad for home, but a pain to set up, a bigger pain to bounce and stuff, even bigger pain to make a cd out of it for others.

 

This guy did great, but the main problem, for me, whenever I had to go and do whatever my job might be for this gig we were recording, would be him sitting there in front of three displays, with charts and graphs, sine waves and spreads of frequency bands, instruments and their micrphones laid out horizontally above one another. Looking. Watching.

 

So I'm just there to make sure we like the mix, the vocals especially. I'm also there to ensure authenticity. I'm not saying yes to anything we can't or don't do in a bar or club or big venue or whatever. If we can't knock that off live, I'm not saying yes to the recording, and neither are the other three or four or however many we might be at the time.

 

And what does this guy absolutely kill hours and hours of my Thursday and Friday nights doing? Looking at the computer, telling me what's "wrong" with the music, or how he can make it "better" by moving this <mouses around some freq graph> over here <mouses over to another freq graph> and then delaying this <mouses around some time stretch app>.

 

Oh lord, where did my tele go? What the mother loving eff is this guy doing? Not a minute spent listening. Understanding. I like my guitar just the way it is, that's why I play it like that, I don't need a computer to show me what it looks like, I already know what it sounds like. Same for keys. Bass. Other Guitar Player. Whichever drummer at the time. All of us well in our forties, all of us from another time basically. We've been setting up the same for literally decades. Nobody has ever complained about our 423 hz spike at 6kmhz, or our off balance mids on the left side of the curve, or that our hihats and splashes aren't time synch'd to the back of the bar.

 

Don't misunderstand me, we do know these nuances of making music, there is nothing new and discovered because of computers, just a presentation of it to people that may or may not actually be qualified to do anything with that stuff, but feel they have to, because now that you can see it well, you should fix it, right?

 

naaahhh. It's music. Rock and Roll. It was never designed to be fawned over until all the life has been taken out of it. I didn't start playing so I could make strats and teles and les pauls sound perfect beyond human hearing, they are flawed, the amps are flawed, the pa is flawed, the room sucks, the band can only sound so good. And as long as we use our ears, we know we will sound as good as we can. You start staring ats hit?

You'll go nuts trying to achieve a level that just can't be achieved, and even if it could, just because yer Dell can make purty pitchers of it all doesn't make it right. The guy that wrote the song and the folks that played it, they should be the final arbiters of what's "right" for this performance, not some software written by a buncha dopes like, well, me!

 

So there it is, way too much information, but there it is.

 

rct

[Markini]

Even though I am 60 years old, I got in early on the PC revolution. In 1986 I was enrolled in Computer Science classes. I was fascinated with them. One of my certs is a Microsoft Professional, but I don't use PCs for recording my music. I do use them to edit the final product, but no cuts or splicing.

 

I agree with RTC your ears are the most important tool for recording music. I have heard my share of over produced songs done on for instance Pro Tools. (not knocking Pro Tools). I know of a band that took a year to record and produce about 6 songs (pro Tools). They were really anal, checking frequency response, Decible filters, etc.. ad nauseum. These guys are good players but the final productions sounded sterile and artificial. There was no presence to the music, it sounded canned. They didn't trust their ears.

 

Nothing wrong in using a computer, if you can still capture the essence of the song, but it is a time killer. People have different preferences but I like music to have some "live" sound to it. My friend Tom a guitar player extraordinare, also prefers what he calls "raw" music. Not necessarily poor sounds but music that hasn't been stepped on so much through editing that the original vibe of the song is lost.

 

In regard to music editing programs: a little bit goes a long way when doing the home recording scene. On the other hand if you feel your music needs to be out there, I would recommend a studio. I live in the Los Angeles area and recording in a studio to produce a CD

can cost anywhere from $150 an hour and up. That price is not out of line considering the end result will be commercial quality without being sterile sounding.

 

I use three recording methods: The Tascam DP 8 track, an H2 hand recorder, and a Line 6 spider jam amp with 23 minutes of recording capability across multiple tracks and looping. All done manually. My most important recording tool though is my ears.

 

If you got the time to spare and the focus you can go the PC recording route, but frankly I would try to keep it simple. I don't have that kind of

time. Remember if you use a recorder you can usually tell right off the bat if you have something worthwhile, then maybe down the road you can go with full blown editing.

 

 

[kidblast]

"Why no computers?"

 

I can tell you why I don't like using computers for recording. (just my experience of course) If my intent is to record something, I want to turn on a recording deck, hook up a mic, put in front of my amp, and press record.

 

I cannot do this on my PC with eventually getting some USB, or other screwed up error with some dorky plugin that sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, reboot, try again, wups, something else happened.. gotta reboot - ok, lets try again..

 

I've got an MBOX and a PC that dims street lights, and yet, I can't fire up pro tools with out it at some point giving me the finger.

 

By the time I get everything ready to record, I've either wasted all the good stuff on tracks that didn't work right, or I've TOTALLY forgotten what it was I was trying to record in the first place. !!!ARRRG!!!

 

Yet on my little ancient Roland VS880EX workstation, in no more 10 / 15 minutes I've accomplished what I set out to do. Sound quality and all that creative potential stuff aside, I'm not kidding myself, nothing I do is going to be involved in a contract discussion with Columbia,, I just want what ever idea, a lick a song or combination of all of the above, to be saved on a recording, and guess what, I know how to use this stuff, it's drop dead simple, and I can make it sound pretty freaking good.

 

then again, if I need to, I call my son who's a pro tools wizard, with an amazing setup, and he'll do what ever I ask of him... I couldn't learn in 5 years what he's forgotten about this stuff, I just don't care.. It NEEDS to be simple, reliable, predictable. I came to play/record, not fart around with a PC as part of the process.

I do that for work...

[rct]

 

...Yet on my little ancient Roland VS880EX workstation, in no more 10 / 15 minutes I've accomplished what I set out to do...

 

This. This right here. My studio is such that within 2 minutes of me closing the basement door I can be ready to record the Prosonic at pants flapping volumes at 3pm, or direct off the digital gizmos at Stupidthirty am. I'm nearly obsessive about it. Sure, I only work on one song at a time, and I take a long time to get one done, but the mechanics of it allow me to get down there and do something very very quickly. I am certain, because of my job, PC or Mac would just get in the way of that.

 

rct

[10K-DB]

You may try this: Drums recorded 1st{If using Drum machine software}Then a minimum of at least 3 rythm gtr tracks,then record bass. Then add vocals,,and add leads last to song. As far as EQ setting for gtr trks,,I have a 3 band EQ on every track on machine,,and the rythm gtr trks I set the EQ's with a bit of boost to lows,,and subtract about 20% of mid freq's,and 20% of high freq's, Trk one may be totally clean tone,,and trk 2 will be a moderate amout of "crunch" dist.And trk 3 would be maybe ,,lets say,,a clean 12 string ,,and have all the rythm tracks playing the same progression,,really fills up the mix. And Its always a good idea{IMHO}to invest in "accurate" headphones to record and mix with,,say,,,Sony 7506 are really good,,about 100$,,well worth it, All the best,,S

[CowboyBillyBob1]

I am making some progress here. To start out I needed to record drums and bass. I suddenly remembered that I have an M-Audio Black Box that I used to use a long time ago. It has drum tracks and loads of amp models including bass amps. I was able to put these two on two different tracks directly to the DP-008 and it sounds quite good for what it is. I was able to record acoustic guitars with a condenser pencil mike and that sounds awesome.

 

The next is the elctric guitars and I plan on miking an amp with a different condenser mike. This I think will take a while to get a good sound but I know its the way to go. Then comes vocals. I suck at that. Have to get a friend to help out on that one.

 

All in all I think I am getting better but not near to be abe to say I know what I'm doing.

 

Oh I have a keyboard that I just may use to add some spice. I'm no keyboard player but I can bang out a few chords.

 

I see that Guitar Center has these Alesis Elevate 3 Studio Monitors for only $100 bucks a pair. I know they are El Cheapos but it's got to be better than mixing with headphones. Ya think??

[quapman]

I know they are El Cheapos but it's got to be better than mixing with headphones. Ya think??

 

 

I'm no studio engineer but I am pretty sure that any monitor will be better for mixing than headphones.

 

I just got my recording unit today too.

So I will get to feel your pain and the learning curve of recording.

 

I did have a 4 track tascam cassette many years ago and had alot of fun with it.

But it was pure analog and pretty simple to operate. These new digital ones have alot of stuff going on.

I probably won't even use half of it..lol

 

No delusions of grandeur here though. I'm just a basement hack having some fun.