How do we get Width/spread from a single guitar performance?

[alanfc]

How do we get Width/spread from a single guitar performance?

hi, a bit frustrated here-

my band is wanting a more "raw" sound from my guitar parts on this particular song (Lefthanded Woman Rough Mix 4
http://www.nowhereradio.com/artists/album.php?aid=2962&alid=1170). I re-recorded all the main rythym parts with a more "raw" tone, still using human doubles L/R panned 80% or so. (When I panned 100% L/R they got lost.) The band still think it sounds too perfect and not Raw enough. They keep talking about Jack White and Franz Ferdinand's guitars but =damm= I wanna sound like ME dammit ^(%*^%$ .
I can still sound like =me= , I know. Just want One of me now, not 4.

In the intro to this song I did =not= do human doubles but rather, clone copies on L100%/R100%/Center. I have the center copy turned way down, the Left copy I have a slight reverb on, and the right side copy I have eq'd hotter than the other 2. But I hear them as too upfront and too Mono sounding. Is my reverb on the left rather than the right, a step in the right direction? The customary reverb on the right sounds overprocessed no matter how light the reverb mix is.. I know that I can get it real gnarly and raw just cloning single performances. The question is how to make it wider and not so amateur sounding..when I put my guitars at 100% left and right, they get lost

Must be an EQ thing?

How can we spread wider than 100% ?

BTW I tried an M/S widening setting on my multiband comp (DigitalFishphones' Endorphin) to try out, and it was really awful. But I do have that tool at my disposal to continue tweaking on if thats the answer.

thanks

[T.Wesley]

I don't know how to address your problem, but I think you should stick with YOUR tone and try to keep your bandmates at bay. If you sound 'just like' another band you won't have much of a chance of standing out, eh?

Just my opinion, though.

On the occasions I've needed to double up a track, I either shifted the 2nd track back a few milliseconds or adjusted the tuning a few cents so it wasn't *exactly* like the first track. In my experience it lends fullness/lushness though, not 'rawness'.

--chiba

[MichaelK]

Originally posted by Chiba
On the occasions I've needed to double up a track, I either shifted the 2nd track back a few milliseconds or adjusted the tuning a few cents so it wasn't *exactly* like the first track. In my experience it lends fullness/lushness though, not 'rawness'.
Same.

Because you're working with only one take it still sounds like mono, just a little more full.

I'm not sure what you're asking... are you asking how to get a more raw sound, or are you complaining that a "raw" sound isn't full and lush enough?

Try recording clean then re-amping to another track with distortion. Pan the two tracks dead center to start. Blend them till you have a sound you like for the verses, then when the song starts to build for the chorus, faded the clean channel down and the distorted channel up by the same amount. Drop them back to where they were for verse 2. Cut them out and use a different guitar/amp/pedal combo entirely for the bridge.

When you have what you like in mono, then pan. Sometimes if you go too hard L & R it tends to sound like centered mono. When I have something I want to sound big across the stereo field, like a B3 or piano, the widest I usually go is about 80% each way. Try panning one track 3/4 left and keep the other track centered, just play around with it. Add a tap delay to each track, but different delay times. Pan each delay to the side opposite from its track.

Just some suggestions to get you started in some new directions. The clean/dirty blend is used a lot. If you don't overuse the delays and keep them from sounding mucked up you might be able to keep a "raw" sound. You don't want to overdo it and sound like someone just gave you a DAW for Xmas. :)

[Kevin]

There are a million ways to record guitars and it's all subjective.
Disclaimer over.

The way your singer sounds and the song sounds, if it were me trying to fit a guitar sound in the mix, I would do this.....

Use a lot less gain on the rhythm guitar. I assume you're miking it.
Turn it up and push some air. You probably won't even need eq if you do a good job miking it. You could play the part twice panning L/R 100%. The key will be using the right amount of compression and getting the volume up so it's in your face sounding. Using a lot less gain and turning it up will sound much bigger than a lot of compressed distortion which will sound muddy and dull . Stay away from reverb on that song, you don't need it. If you're trying to make it sound big, try using 2 different guitars, a single coil and a humbucker type for each take.

Just some stuff to try. :dude

[alanfc]

thanks guys-

basically what I've decided is to give the band 2 mixes, one with an Alan guitar approach (the current one in the link) and one with the Jack friggin White guitar approach with all new tracking and different mixing and using your ideas. I still want to sell them on =my= version. This'll be in a couple weeks when the singer finishes all his vocals. I'm not really that mad anymore.. I have, you might say, "high-quality problems", in other words, I'm just glad to have people to play with.

thanks

[T.Wesley]

Originally posted by alanfc
I have, you might say, "high-quality problems", in other words, I'm just glad to have people to play with.

Great attitude to have :D

--chiba

[GaryNattrass]

For a wide spread I always record the same guitar piece twice either using two different guitars or two different amps.

I then pan them about 3 and 9 o'clock left and right.

Adding a third guitar in the centre will also fill out the spread and I use a Great British stereo spring reverb to thicken the tone.

[MichaelK]

Originally posted by GaryNattrass
I use a Great British stereo spring reverb to thicken the tone.
Dig it!!

I have one from Germany. The best guitar effect I've ever used. Much richer than any amp.

[straticus]

I just recorded a 3 piece band. They wanted to keep that "raw" one guitar sound too. That's what these guys are all about.

What I ended up doing was panning the guitar (Les Paul through a clean Fender amp) a little off center (whatever sounded right with the vocals) and then use a little wide stereo chorus set at a very slow rate or a stereo delay. Mix them in so they're barely audible. You don't really hear them. Just enough to get some width. Most of their music is very sparse so there's lot's of room to do stuff like this. Worked great, they like it and that's what counts. I like it too.:)

[LSchefman]

If you want a raw, gnarly, guitar sound it isn't about the spread.

I wouldn't double-track it at all. Double tracking creates phasing and smoothness. You evidently want edge and cut and grit.

Go to the source. Get your raw tone out of the amp. You might want to try a different amp instead of different other stuff. Try a different guitar. You can get really raw sound out of something with P-90s, BTW.

Don't compress the signal. Set your input levels low if your preamp is clipping, because a compressor will also smooth out the signal.

Then put the amp in a fairly large room, and don't close-mic the amp. Get a bit of the room sound happening, set up the mic a foot or two back, or even more. Try different mics. I'd actually pick a condenser for this, something I almost never do on my own tracks, because most dynamics will compress and smooth out a track.

[alanfc]

thank for the notes guys...

unfortunately I'm limited to an iso-box thing..
my iso-box situation is due to my recording studio (apartment bedroom) and neighbors.
I can get the Rivera up to power tube cook in that iso-box (using an extension 1x12 with an Eminence V30 clone in the box).. But outside of that thing the volume would be a major problem. This'll be a 55 watt with the master on 4+. Not good for my neighbor situation. A good attenuator is not in my budget right now...

**Let me ask this though.... regarding speaker movement, "excursion", air movement: is the distance from the mic the key- that is, distance for waves to form? Or is the speaker pumpin going to be captured if I remove the grillcloth and get right close. I mean which of these will capture the sound of the "movin air" ?. My guess is the first, mic further away. Trouble is, is that the further I move the mic away in this iso-cab, the more nasal it sounds, I assume from more sounds bouncing around even though I have it dampened quite alot.

thanks

[Pete2]

Originally posted by LSchefman
Then put the amp in a fairly large room, and don't close-mic the amp. Get a bit of the room sound happening, set up the mic a foot or two back, or even more. Try different mics. I'd actually pick a condenser for this, something I almost never do on my own tracks, because most dynamics will compress and smooth out a track.

This is exactly what I was thinking as I scrolled down this thread, and then Les's post beat me to it. Distance miking with a condenser can give you a great raw sound when you get the natural reverb from the room going and you can feel the space. If you record in a dead room, you may want to experiment with a more live space like a bathroom. Remember that Zepp recorded Bonham's monstrous drums in Levee Breaks on Zepp IV by having him sit and play at one end of a long hallway in a mansion, and miking it halfway up the stairwell on the other end of the hall! And you can't get much rawer than that!

Pete

[FlyingVBlues]

Originally posted by LSchefman
If you want a raw, gnarly, guitar sound it isn't about the spread.

I wouldn't double-track it at all. Double tracking creates phasing and smoothness. You evidently want edge and cut and grit.

Go to the source. Get your raw tone out of the amp. You might want to try a different amp instead of different other stuff. Try a different guitar. You can get really raw sound out of something with P-90s, BTW.

Don't compress the signal. Set your input levels low if your preamp is clipping, because a compressor will also smooth out the signal.

Then put the amp in a fairly large room, and don't close-mic the amp. Get a bit of the room sound happening, set up the mic a foot or two back, or even more. Try different mics. I'd actually pick a condenser for this, something I almost never do on my own tracks, because most dynamics will compress and smooth out a track.

Les,

I have a related question. I agree that a guitar with P-90s can give you a really raw sound. But P-90s are really noisy. How do you minimize the noise level when recording a guitar with P90s assuming that guitar is properly shielded? I do have a Boss NS-2 noise gate, which works Ok when playing live, but it's not a very good solution when recording.

FVB

[therealting]

Originally posted by FlyingVBlues
Les,

I have a related question. I agree that a guitar with P-90s can give you a really raw sound. But P-90s are really noisy. How do you minimize the noise level when recording a guitar with P90s assuming that guitar is properly shielded? I do have a Boss NS-2 noise gate, which works Ok when playing live, but it's not a very good solution when recording.

FVB

My lo-fi approach: switch off any fluorescent lighting, CRT computer monitors, televisions, etc. Then walk and turn around to find a spot that has no noise.

Alternatively, buy some wood and chicken wire - and make a Faraday cage. :)

[bigroy]

Double the guitar track on an acoustic. It's worked for the Rolling Stones for 40 years.

[LSchefman]

>>But P-90s are really noisy. How do you minimize the noise level when recording a guitar with P90s assuming that guitar is properly shielded?<<

It depends on the room. My control room is dead quiet with P-90s, so I usually run the guitar in my control room, with the head in the control room, and the cab is miked up in the booth, using a long speaker cable run.

My recording booth has some kind of thing where I have to face in a particular direction with single coils to avoid buzz, which makes playing in the control room a sensible option.

You have to experiment.

[MichaelK]

Originally posted by LSchefman
My recording booth has some kind of thing where I have to face in a particular direction with single coils to avoid buzz, which makes playing in the control room a sensible option.

Will Ray calls it "facing Mecca." I call it "facing Jerusalem." Which in my studio, coincidentally, is east.

[Denyle_Guitars]

Another suggestion, whatever you used to record the guitar with, double it, i.e., 2 57's on the amp instead of one.

[onemind]

Hey, I'm not sure from your original post but if you are truly doubling (playing the track) the lack of width might be due to phasing issues, check the tracks in mono to see if the level drops, then try flipping the phase on one track...(you can do this in software if you''re using a daw).

Steve

[Impulse 101]

To "raw up" my tone I split my signal via a Tonebone Switchbone and Feed it to a cranked Fender Bassman head as well as my recto or Guytron. The Bassman is great because it never really compresses out, it just gets ruder and uglier as you feed it a hotter signal, very much like Ted Nugents early tones, just not as compressed.

It mixes in very nicely with a heavy amp and really makes it sound raw.

JT

[alanfc]

OK thanks guys

today I retracked the main guitars on this to get a "raw" singular sound like the band wanted. We'll see what they think in the morning when they hear it from the site. In case you're curious its "Lefthand Revised Guitars". The original is down the list called "Lefthanded woman rough mix 4".
http://www.nowhereradio.com/artists/album.php?aid=2962&alid=1170

for the new tone I switched to the "American" (Fender-ish?) channel 2 of my Rivera and changed mic positions alot. Trying to get overdrive without "sizzly distortion", as the band puts it. All single performance and split 95% L/R, with a reverb on the left. In the chorus I absolutely had to add another performance using open chords and copied & panned L/R too. In the original version, part of what the band was hearing before was too much size and width and smoothness, "not enough human touch"..this was due to human doubles on every guitar part I had. On this new tone I also had to EQ each main guitar a little and compress with fast attack/fast release for more grit without sizzle.
I don't know if I really like this new tone, but its just for this song. Spose its good to have some diversity for our earthshaking homemade CD eh?.

[Bassomatic]

This is a great improvement over the first approach, imo. One is so often bigger than two, when it comes to arrangements/panning schemes.

Also, the mids were getting too cluttered in the old mix. With a busy arrangement (as in the drum part), less is often more where layers are concerned (same's true for vocals, much to the dismay of most vocalists).

Be careful of dulling your attack with fast attack settings. Distorted guitars are already quite compressed, as i'm sure you know.

A few (unsolicited) observations - things are pretty woofy at the bottom. The kick is vague, as is the bottom octave of the bass. They could play nicer together.

Also, are you hip to high pass filtering? Can free up a lot of headroom and space in pop/rock styles. I'd lose some super lows on the kick, bass, guitars.

[alanfc]

Originally posted by Bassomatic
This is a great improvement over the first approach, imo. One is so often bigger than two, when it comes to arrangements/panning schemes.

Also, the mids were getting too cluttered in the old mix. With a busy arrangement (as in the drum part), less is often more where layers are concerned (same's true for vocals, much to the dismay of most vocalists).

Be careful of dulling your attack with fast attack settings. Distorted guitars are already quite compressed, as i'm sure you know.

A few (unsolicited) observations - things are pretty woofy at the bottom. The kick is vague, as is the bottom octave of the bass. They could play nicer together.

Also, are you hip to high pass filtering? Can free up a lot of headroom and space in pop/rock styles. I'd lose some super lows on the kick, bass, guitars.

thank you for the notes, I really want to get into this type of thing, although my software (Cakewalk Home Studio) only lets me use 16 real-time FX per project. So I'm very stingy with EQ's per track . ..If only I had Sonar 3 ! Anyway the kick has less body than the bass (thats my preference) but I still want it to be heard. I have just begun reading alot about filtering and the artful use of EQ. After these rough mixes for the band, I'm going to get into each detail like this. On the overall mix I rolled off 2db @ 30hz but don't really know any better yet. I want to feel the Bass guitar but only hear the kick, atleast on the more uptempo songs. On the slower songs I reverse the roles of these two.

[alanfc]

Originally posted by Bassomatic

A few (unsolicited) observations - things are pretty woofy at the bottom. The kick is vague, as is the bottom octave of the bass. They could play nicer together.

Also, are you hip to high pass filtering? Can free up a lot of headroom and space in pop/rock styles. I'd lose some super lows on the kick, bass, guitars.

since we're on the subject, can I ask you something on this-

we had our drum & bass tracked by a pro, and he gave us EQ'd wave files for each track. (he also gave us the dry ones too). I of course chose to use his EQ'd ones.

The Bass guitar and Kick drum were eq'd =very= heavy on the low end with little attack to them. The kick was a heavy "puff" sound. Next time we do this I'm going to request a mic for the beater on the kick drum too... anyway I found that I had to make a clone of the kick and make one copy super compressed with very insane high freq eq to give we a slappy wet "thwack", then kept the original to use as girth on the kick. With the bass, its the same way. Is this causing me problems you think?
I tried EQ'ing them both alone, without using clones, to make the sound I want and it hasn't worked, so I've stuck with this method.

thanks

[MichaelK]

Getting a tight kick & bass blend is the key to a great track, IMO. If it's right, it moves the bottom end in a big way without stepping on the headroom of other instruments. It took me years to get it to where I like it... like last month!!

I found these tips from Sweetwater to be a big help as a starting point. Obviously the exact EQ settings will depend on the particular tracks. It also helps to have good solid sounds already on tape:

The most prevalent sonic signature of popular music is the blending of kick drum and bass. Since much of the power in a mix comes from the bass frequencies, the way kick and bass are handled is crucial from a mix perspective as well as a stylistic viewpoint. Generally objective is to have them work together as a unit, and yet still hear them individually. A typical problem is that the kick drum seems to get lost in the mix while the overall bottom sounds muddy. Assuming a good performance on each instrument, the perfect marriage of kick and bass rests mainly in equalization (or EQ as it is called). The frequency range of the bass and drums overlaps in the low frequency range through the low midrange. The attack of the bass is heard between 700 - 1000Hz, while the attack of the kick drum presents information at 3000 to 4000Hz.

A common trick to getting a full sound between kick and bass while retaining clarity is to boost the lows on the kick (60-80Hz) cut the low mids anywhere from 150Hz to 400Hz (sometimes called the mudrange) and boost the highs at around 3000Hz. This will provide a solid low end, remove some of the mud in the midrange and accentuate the attack of the kick pedal on the drum. For the bass, we do pretty much the opposite; cut the lows where you boosted them on the kick (60-80Hz) boost the bass at around 120 - 150Hz which will provide a full bass sound (while occupying the frequency space we made by cutting the kick drum in this range), and boost the highs at around 900Hz since bass also provides information in that range as well. In short, we are emphasizing the frequencies that are important to the sound of each, while cutting the frequencies where they can conflict. Try this technique. You'll get a full bottom with a clear thump with a defined attack in the kick and a clear, full bass.

Another important thing to keep in mind is what we said earlier about the most power in the mix coming from the low end; EQ is frequency dependent amplification, which means that we are boosting the power of a particular frequency. Too much boost can result in either distortion or less headroom in the mix for other instruments, so use it sparingly. If you're boosting a frequency in one instrument, you should cut that frequency in another instrument, as our kick and bass technique describes. Overall, EQ is most effective as a subtractive device, not additive.

[G'OlPeachPhan]

Great article MichaelK, there's a lot of good advice in there!

Alan, I listened to the first version of the tune about 4 times to take it all in, and then I listened to the second, more raw version... I thought the second way through was a huge improvement.

For the type of tones being described, I'm a huge fan of the condensor mic a few feet from the speaker in a big room technique, but it doesn't sound like it's an option here... Sounds like you're on the right track anyways though!

[alanfc]

Originally posted by G'OlPeachPhan
Great article MichaelK, there's a lot of good advice in there!

Alan, I listened to the first version of the tune about 4 times to take it all in, and then I listened to the second, more raw version... I thought the second way through was a huge improvement.

For the type of tones being described, I'm a huge fan of the condensor mic a few feet from the speaker in a big room technique, but it doesn't sound like it's an option here... Sounds like you're on the right track anyways though!

Yes indeed thanks alot Michael:dude

thanks for the note PeachPhan, I'll just have to keep the new one then- the band is happier now too. Better mic options are really the only reason I want to buy a house, which in this town won't be anytime soon!

[Bassomatic]

Originally posted by alanfc
since we're on the subject, can I ask you something on this-

we had our drum & bass tracked by a pro, and he gave us EQ'd wave files for each track. (he also gave us the dry ones too). I of course chose to use his EQ'd ones.

The Bass guitar and Kick drum were eq'd =very= heavy on the low end with little attack to them. The kick was a heavy "puff" sound. Next time we do this I'm going to request a mic for the beater on the kick drum too... anyway I found that I had to make a clone of the kick and make one copy super compressed with very insane high freq eq to give we a slappy wet "thwack", then kept the original to use as girth on the kick. With the bass, its the same way. Is this causing me problems you think?
I tried EQ'ing them both alone, without using clones, to make the sound I want and it hasn't worked, so I've stuck with this method.

thanks

Kicks often require some substantial eq'ing, the bass typically less so (or none at all, if cut really well for the mix/genre in question). It's all a bit of a moot discussion without hearing the tracks flat. I'm assuming the non-cloned kick has been compressed at some point, perhaps during tracking? If not, i'd start there, before geeting into additional eq, clones, etc. I'd be cautious of 'insane' amounts of eq as many s/w digital eqs exhibit a phasiness when pushed (unless we're talkin some of the high end stuff out there). The idea of pre-eqing kick and bass without a mix context is problemnatic for me, unless we're talking about some very basic, common cuts. Better that you learn to do it yourself, within the context of a given mix.

What eqs are you using in your rig?

If you want to send me an mp3 of the flat kick and bass parts, i can make some general suggestions if that would be helpful.

(btw - miking the beater side is usually unnecessary, imo. There are plenty of one (or two) mic placements that will yield plenty of boomf and attack) .

[alanfc]

thanks Bassomatic
(just saw your reply now)

Since my last post and now, I've changed alot of things, one of which is going back to a single kick. I was doing something real stupid, which was to add clones to parts where they were getting lost. =Instead of turning the other instruments down= ... :o

So I'm going back to all the songs and revising the kicks..... I had done this same thing with = 3 = clones of the lead vocal for the same reason ! My goodness.. redoing those too.

My effects are all from my Cakewalk home Studio XL. I'm getting to know them pretty well but need to work on it more.
Thanks for the notes.