Comparison of how post production changes tone

Excellant example. Nice playing, too. Good to keep this in mind when we attempt to "nail" our favourite tones off of CDs.

 

Interesting. When I record guitar, I always clone the track, having one dry and at lower volume, then add the reverb and delay on the wet track (having it turned up louder). It really fattens things up and adds the phasing you talk about.

 

btw, really nice playing, Scott! :AOK

 

Hum very interesting. Have to try that out sometime. Presume this is based on the RF kind of recording tehniques.......

although...........have to say, I prefer the first clip

Playing as always - wonderful!

 

THe phasing thing is called comb filtering. It can be cool if you want it. Recording with 2 mics, and pulling back one mic 1 inch will start the onset of comb filtering. at 3 feet or so, is pretty hollow sounding...

 

Scott you are a master at many facets around the guitar. I really enjoy listening to your work. Thanks for that!

Also I agree with most everything I've heard (read) you say lately, but in this case I must say that I can hear the core of the amp the same in both clips. The difference is not as overwhelming (because of the common player) than was the difference between the Martin/Ed GR takes, for example. Nonetheless, this goes to show the influence of some of the many variables from one recording to the next.

 

Yeah - 'chewy' is what I'd call it too - very hip - great playing and great tone. Cool comparison.

 

yeah scott- sounds great man. post production has a lot to do with the overall tone. to me, in comparing the two, the remixed guitar tone sounds like a part of the overall track as opposed to sitting on top of the backing track. it also sounds thicker and "chewey" is a good way to describe it. nice work- great tones.

jack

 

Very interesting & educational Scott ...
Thanks for demonstrating this ..

Agree with Woody though, still prefer the sound of the first clip's tone ...
But man, do I dig your playing .. Happy New Year

 

Cool demo Scott, never tried that. I'll have to now!

Chuck

 

great stuff Scott! enjoyed them both! flat out killer tone and really nice lines and touch.

hmm, so this is the BM eh? the gears are already turning....


Happy New Year to you bro!

 

I loved the track! You threw down the guantlet of good taste and finesse and so I had to respond!!! So i did my own version, royer 122v, no eq, amp verb.

:RoCkIn

 

I loved the playing.

Post-production is like cooking: you ain't gonna make a good meal unless the basic ingredients are good and the first clip is there to prove it.


M.

 

Ah...nomatter what version...the playing and sound is just so delicious!

 

Nice touch on the post production. One thing I hear in RF's tone, and yours, is that it doesn't sound too distorted. There's a clarity to the tone that keeps it articulate.

Love that Bluesmaster HRM tone.

 

My conclusion is that the post-production adds some great things- sort of a girth, a type of fatness, and at the same time kind of a more up-front quality. Which to me, are things that can exist in some amps, or some more than others, but it easy for us guitar players to get obsessive about thinking all that HAS to exist in the amp alone.

A similar thing has gone on in around here in Nashville, lots of people trying to nail some of Brent Mason's tele tone, especially on his Alan Jackson cuts. For a clean bridge pickup chicken-pickin sound it's a benchmark for many, myself included. It can be so hard for a squeaky clean bridge pickup tele to not sound plinky and thin and get swallowed up in a mix, and those recorded tones have a certain sustain and smoothness, but still a lot of snap and "rubber-bandy"quality. A lot of that is in post-production, though I know for a fact what's coming out of his amp is great. So a reality check for a lot of us is to see Brent play around town live, and if I'm going to compare apples to apples I can compare what I've got to what he's blowing straight out of his amp in the room. Of course that isn't always an option, and sometimes even if we hear our favorite players live once we hear them through the PA there are more variables introduced that can alter what we hear (soundman's processing, mic placement, the room, the PA, etc).

Having said all that, thanks Scott for posting this (I always drool over
your tones, post-production or not). I'm going back right now and remixing some my old stuff using such techniques.

 

Yep like that.

Real interesting, ta for the insight.