|
|
Post by dok on Feb 18, 2024 10:51:21 GMT -6
So my white whale, my holy grail of recorded acoustic guitar sounds, is found on the home recording demos from Tom Petty's Wildflowers reissue. It just hits all of my buttons. Some examples:
But try as I might, I can't even come close to it. My equipment and recording budget is limited, of course, and I'm trying to imagine the gear he would have had in his garage in that early/mid 90s period. Some of my other thoughts, and I'd love to hear anybody else's, are thus:
1). The footage from that time shows him playing mostly a Gibson SJ-200 and a Martin HD-45. The guitars on these recordings seems very mid focused, so I keep wanting to think it's the SJ-200 on these demos as those guitars can be pretty tight-sounding. I have a J-100 in mahogany and while it's the same body shape and size, it has different back and side wood of course and just doesn't touch this sound. If it's the HD-45 I might be able to get closer with a more affordable HD-28, but I do think the instrument itself is going to be the most difficult part to replicate and there's just no getting around it.
2). Tape and tape. There also seems to be quite a bit of high end rolloff that I am attributing to tape, but it's probably also a combination of the instrument, dead strings, and EQ. I'm not smart enough to figure out this formula either.
3). Whatever compression is happening, it really works, and I'm not someone who usually loves to be able to hear a bunch of compression on acoustic guitar. Again there's probably some tape magic here.
4). Doubling and pick attack - most of these are doubled and panned L and R. What's interesting is that the pick attack isn't super bright or up front but it's still very full and does a ton of rhythmic heavy lifting and it's very tight. I've tried all kinds of picks and edges and fingernails and whatnot. Some get a little closer but nothing significant.
And all of that adds up into a very pleasing package. And of course I'm not even considering the microphone(s) used, pres, console, or the real pro who mixed these demos (Ryan Ulyate maybe?). I keep coming back to the idea that it's really in the instrument and performance but I'll be damned if I can figure out how to replicate either without undertaking some very expensive experiments.
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 18, 2024 13:49:13 GMT -6
#1 - how close are you mic-ing your guitars? These recordings seem to be pulled back pretty far.....
|
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 19, 2024 1:02:45 GMT -6
#1 - how close are you mic-ing your guitars? These recordings seem to be pulled back pretty far..... Usually about 14-18 inches. Usually using an SDC in cardioid. Have also tried pretty much every other kind of mic too.  Farther back still? |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 19, 2024 9:23:55 GMT -6
Further back. That's what it sounds like to me. Among other things, but they really don't sound close mic'd.
|
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Feb 19, 2024 14:15:30 GMT -6
Without knowing how your recording differs from his, I'd just be giving blind advice. If you choose to post your own clip I think you'd get a lot of good feedback.
And, FWIW, the nature of his acoustic tracks doesn't seem to be down to just a specific guitar model. You can get that exact model and not get his sound. I own a lot of nice acoustics so don't take it as me dismissing how important the guitars are. But, if you do acoustic guitar comparisons with the same mic position, they usually function in the same way. Changing the mic positions is what really alters the presentation.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 19, 2024 14:49:31 GMT -6
These don’t sound particularly far off the mic to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 19, 2024 18:42:21 GMT -6
Thanks for your comments, everyone! drive.google.com/drive/folders/1G61hY24-K0J7DFDoB8vb4XDHbaEgU9dl?usp=share_linkHere are my positions with these examples: 1). Mono mic 12" from 12th fret pointed a few degrees toward the soundhole - I often start here (or a few inches back) to get the best sound I can, then will add another mic on the stereo bar, about 13-14" to the right (toward the bridge), pointing at about 45 degrees toward the center of the soundhole. That's what the stereo 12" file is. 2). Same thing at 24". Mono then stereo. My room is treated but small and I think any further than about 18" gets more room sound than I'd like but I'll let you be the judge. These Tom Petty examples seem to be mono, panned and doubled (when they're not layered with other 12-string or Nashville tuned guitars). Rather than going to all that trouble I figure it's simplest to start with the above examples but am absolutely happy to try any suggestions. Mics are Oktava MK012 through an AEA RPQ2 patched into an API A2D for just a kiss of the transformers. This combo is a bit glassy with the RPQ2 alone in case you're wondering why I'm doing that. Strings are medium DR Rares put on a few days ago with about 2-3 hours of playing time. Thanks again! |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 19, 2024 19:51:41 GMT -6
A couple comments. Personally, I'd go mono and possibly doubled if you're after that. OLD strings - not new!!! At least that's my preference, and your examples (if I'm remembering right) didn't sound like bright shiny new strings. Try a dynamic or a ribbon. AEA into API is (again, IMO) not where you want to be pre-wise. Try Neve or maybe a tube pre if you have one. And again, I'm hearing room sound in those examples. As an experiment, forget how your room sounds - try more distance and see if that gives you the guitar tone you're after. If yes, then get your hands on a KM84 and pull it back - KM84's are the best mic I've used to dial in the exact amount of "room tone" without getting boxy, muddy and/or too present, or too aenemic. The 012's are definitely going to need a little LF rolloff at your positions - maybe some HF rolloff too. The KM84's are not as heavy on the bottom. The TP examples as I remember them are more tape-like and you're pretty digital sounding, and everywhere you are headed is pushing that - again IMO - the opposite direction. Close in, condenser mic with ample top, two bright pre's, new strings. Will listen to your example now....
[edit] : I only listened to your mono's. The 24" is better than the 12". I can hear the new strings. Sorry, myself and my favorite guitarist never change strings unless we break one or they won't stay in tune. That's just out preference, but I think it lines up with your TP clips.
My guess is that if you pulled back to 3' and put on old strings, you'd be 75% there. The right pre's and/or using a missing link to roll off the highs/lows would get you another 10%. Guitar / pick / playing style would take you the rest of the distance. Hope you get where you're hoping to get.
|
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 19, 2024 21:11:26 GMT -6
Thanks drbill ! I have some lows rolled off already starting at about 190Hz with the sweep on the RPQ2 - there's definitely room to go but I didn't want to overcook it for demonstration purposes here lest someone determined I reduced too much. No Neve or km84 on hand but I can give the UAD Neve a go. Things are even glassier with just the AEA alone - I actually have the API's 2:1 transformer option selected to soften things up as much as possible. What do you mean by missing link? Having a hard time figuring that one out via Google. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 19, 2024 22:35:16 GMT -6
Thanks drbill ! I have some lows rolled off already starting at about 190Hz with the sweep on the RPQ2 - there's definitely room to go but I didn't want to overcook it for demonstration purposes here lest someone determined I reduced too much. No Neve or km84 on hand but I can give the UAD Neve a go. Things are even glassier with just the AEA alone - I actually have the API's 2:1 transformer option selected to soften things up as much as possible. What do you mean by missing link? Having a hard time figuring that one out via Google. CAPI Hi/Low pass Filter = Missing Link. Any HPF will work. You gotta get rid of that digital zing. Mic / Pre / Filters / Whatever it takes. Now...the existing guitar is not bad. It's actually good, but it's not what you are looking for. The way to get rid of that is more room and less HF - IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by gwlee7 on Feb 19, 2024 22:36:24 GMT -6
“Missing Link” is a Capi VC528. It’s not really a mic pre so much as a “betterizer” that has both low and high pass filters as well as some gain staging options amongst other things. It’s other nickname is audio bacon I think. I have a pair and to say that they are cool doesn’t do them justice.
ETA: Bill just beat me to it.
|
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 19, 2024 22:48:02 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 20, 2024 0:00:18 GMT -6
I really think the champion here is the M201 through the 828es preamp with the Neve 1073 and 1176 plugins. Who'd have thunk? On its own when I A/B with the Crawling Back To You home recording and imagine it without what seems to be a nashville/12 string, or whatever other guitar is layered in there, that seems to be reasonably close. The top end isn't an exact match and it's a little bit throaty. MD421 or 441? Still open to suggestions!
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 20, 2024 8:57:39 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 20, 2024 9:01:21 GMT -6
CAPI Hi/Low pass Filter = Missing Link. Any HPF will work. Oops! Mistyped. Should have said LPF. But in reality, as you have found, you'll probably need both HPF AND LPF. |
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 20, 2024 9:57:24 GMT -6
Thank you! There's a Daking Mic Pre EQ with both for sale here locally that I might take a chance on. Although it'd be nicer if a cheap 421 would do the job, but I wonder if that one may have a bit more room sound than the others.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 20, 2024 10:25:28 GMT -6
Thank you! There's a Daking Mic Pre EQ with both for sale here locally that I might take a chance on. Although it'd be nicer if a cheap 421 would do the job, but I wonder if that one may have a bit more room sound than the others. I think the 421 is going to have more mid/upper mid bite than you want. The 441 is smooooth, the 421 has some gnarl to it. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 20, 2024 11:14:05 GMT -6
Thank you! There's a Daking Mic Pre EQ with both for sale here locally that I might take a chance on. Although it'd be nicer if a cheap 421 would do the job, but I wonder if that one may have a bit more room sound than the others. I know for sure I don't like the off axis bleed of the 421 on toms. Guessing I wouldn't like it pulled back on guitar either - although I've never tried it. I agree with ragan on the upper mid bite. |
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 20, 2024 12:46:46 GMT -6
A couple of notches down on the Neve high shelf really seems to do the trick on the top end.
|
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Feb 20, 2024 13:32:08 GMT -6
sounding good dok. i would also try a sm57, why not. although my guess is it could have been a km84 with (at least) a 1 mm pick. the firm and clear lowmids in petty’s demos, the oktava sounds to soft for that sound. and old strings and compression. the guitar you have sounds close enough.
i have an old ibanez dreadnought with old strings on it. i think i could get pretty close with that one too.
|
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 20, 2024 14:47:36 GMT -6
Alright, I think I'm getting to a point where I can move forward with this. Of course it's not EXACT but the vibe is close enough for me, and I'm not trying to produce a covers record or anything. drive.google.com/file/d/1PfEsmskjBA2lsb42EwurD7ZKs9tTgo4Y/view?usp=share_linkM201 about 24" away, through 828es pre then cascading into two API pres, each with the 2:1 transformer option to soften things up a bit. Might be a little too much saturation this way. Then UADx with two and a half notches taken out of the high shelf and HPF at 60. Then a bit more surgical cutting at 174 and 535Hz. UADx 1176AE with medium attack and release, 20:1 reducing about 5dB max. Then finished off with UADx Studer A800 - this one's not strictly necessary but fun to play around with. So just like drbill said - dynamic mic into a Neve and then back it up a bit. I think there's a bit too much room tone in this one that you can hear particularly on the bass notes but that's getting real nitpicking. It sounds good. Now, if only we could really determine which dynamic Tom favored in his home studio then I'd be REALLY chuffed. BRB going to try to track down Ryan Ulyate. My future plans include a Heritage 1073 and a Sennheiser 441 rental. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 20, 2024 15:13:07 GMT -6
Sounds cool. Your sound is more mid forward. The TP demos are more scooped. You’re also mellower now than the TP demos.
The TP guitars also sound like they might be mic’d from above a little bit, firing down toward the guitar. Maybe even over and in front of your right shoulder as you’re playing.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Feb 20, 2024 15:23:21 GMT -6
Alright, I think I'm getting to a point where I can move forward with this. Of course it's not EXACT but the vibe is close enough for me, and I'm not trying to produce a covers record or anything. drive.google.com/file/d/1PfEsmskjBA2lsb42EwurD7ZKs9tTgo4Y/view?usp=share_linkM201 about 24" away, through 828es pre then cascading into two API pres, each with the 2:1 transformer option to soften things up a bit. Might be a little too much saturation this way. Then UADx with two and a half notches taken out of the high shelf and HPF at 60. Then a bit more surgical cutting at 174 and 535Hz. UADx 1176AE with medium attack and release, 20:1 reducing about 5dB max. Then finished off with UADx Studer A800 - this one's not strictly necessary but fun to play around with. So just like drbill said - dynamic mic into a Neve and then back it up a bit. I think there's a bit too much room tone in this one that you can hear particularly on the bass notes but that's getting real nitpicking. It sounds good. Now, if only we could really determine which dynamic Tom favored in his home studio then I'd be REALLY chuffed. BRB going to try to track down Ryan Ulyate. My future plans include a Heritage 1073 and a Sennheiser 441 rental. Sounds really great Cheers Wiz |
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 20, 2024 18:59:19 GMT -6
Sounds cool. Your sound is more mid forward. The TP demos are more scooped. You’re also mellower now than the TP demos. The TP guitars also sound like they might be mic’d from above a little bit, firing down toward the guitar. Maybe even over and in front of your right shoulder as you’re playing. I gave this a shot and I really like how it turned out, thank you for the suggestion! I also did a little match EQ with the original just so I could understand what was going on a little better, then tried to mimic what the match EQ was telling me with some broader curves. Of course it's not exactly right but it's a great starting point if I'm ever recording something that needs this kind of treatment. Please excuse my crummy guitar playing. drive.google.com/file/d/1ovNBkarMQBuA2sDsaAs9m_ofW_5ws8uO/view?usp=sharingAnd then same kind of match EQ treatment in front. I didn't like this as much but not without its merits. drive.google.com/file/d/1Vw91bQa1s0iKlZ81IGsiMguJ4ZOuy6Tg/view?usp=sharingHow about a combination of both? This is really nice and starts to get into a lot of the layering that's on these demos: drive.google.com/file/d/1yDzRl6aPteWQ0QkKETlEfHQg5Nmz-dpP/view?usp=sharingThis was a fun way to spend a day and a half! Thanks to everyone who chimed in for all your comments and suggestions. |
|
|
|
Post by dok on Feb 20, 2024 19:03:40 GMT -6
And the best part! I managed to get ahold of Ryan Ulyate, who mixed these for the reissue. Here's what he wrote to me:
"I have no idea what mike Tom used on the guitar. I will say this though sure it wasn’t that complicated! glad you’re enjoying the music. Thanks for the compliments. Petty would use a capo to get open strings ringing so a lot of that sound comes from the way the guitar is played, plus some compression and a lot of top (10k). I’m also a big fan of using the high pass filter and getting rid of all the boomy stuff below 120hz or so. Hope this helps!"
So, there you have it - probably not going to get better info than that!
|
|
Farther back still?
