The Tone Thread

[Greg_L]

Messing around with eq wasnt getting me anywhere and I foound this (pictured below) to get me started. Maybe I got a little carried away. I used to use the eq plugs that came with Reaper, I still can. I need to find a good tutorial on them. As for the mic this one is an e906 about midway between the center and edge, slightly off axis pointing towards the edge. I typically use the 57 but I was having issues with some clipping which turned out to be my headphones but at that point didnt want to switch the mic back.

Ok, well first off, throw that chart away. It's too generalized and it's wrong. Well, it's not totally wrong wrong, but it's wrong to generalize like that. Mic placement makes all of that moot.

Get you a sound that requires no EQ. Easier said than done, but when you get there you are golden.

You want body and clarity with high gain tones, so you need to start on the part of the speaker that gives you all of that - usually just outside the dustcap. The further you go to the edge of a speaker, the darker it gets, so stay in the clarity range. Not dead center, that's too bright and fizzy, but somewhere in that first third of speaker cone from center outwards is usually the sweet spot.

There's nothing to gain from going off axis with a flat faced mic like a 906. Just put it flat against the grill for ease of use and use lateral movement to find the sweet spot. Also, get your head down there at speaker level and see what it actually sounds like. Don't blow your ears out, but get an idea. Don't dial in a sound with your head up away from the speaker. What you hear in the room and what the speaker is actually doing at mic level is different. The mic doesn't lie. It will pick up what you feed into it. If you don't like what you're recording, it's your tone settings or mic placement. I know for a fact that your playing, guitar, pedals, amp, cab, mics, etc are all plenty good enough to make killer tones. You have great gear. So any problem you have is operator error. That seems terrible, but it's not. That's the best problem you can have. You can fix that through time and effort.

[liv_rong]

Ok, well first off, throw that chart away. It's too generalized and it's wrong. Well, it's not totally wrong wrong, but it's wrong to generalize like that. Mic placement makes all of that moot.

Get you a sound that requires no EQ. Easier said than done, but when you get there you are golden.

You want body and clarity with high gain tones, so you need to start on the part of the speaker that gives you all of that - usually just outside the dustcap. The further you go to the edge of a speaker, the darker it gets, so stay in the clarity range. Not dead center, that's too bright and fizzy, but somewhere in that first third of speaker cone from center outwards is usually the sweet spot.

There's nothing to gain from going off axis with a flat faced mic like a 906. Just put it flat against the grill for ease of use and use lateral movement to find the sweet spot. Also, get your head down there at speaker level and see what it actually sounds like. Don't blow your ears out, but get an idea. Don't dial in a sound with your head up away from the speaker. What you hear in the room and what the speaker is actually doing at mic level is different. The mic doesn't lie. It will pick up what you feed into it. If you don't like what you're recording, it's your tone settings or mic placement. I know for a fact that your playing, guitar, pedals, amp, cab, mics, etc are all plenty good enough to make killer tones. You have great gear. So any problem you have is operator error. That seems terrible, but it's not. That's the best problem you can have. You can fix that through time and effort.

All good tips, thanks. I think Ill just use that same clip and re-track guitars again to play around with. I know mic placement is a big deal, just getting the amp where it needs to be settings wise will be the challenging part. I think the new headphones i just got will help with both. Then once I get where it needs to be decide which mic I prefer later down the road.

Also for mic placement I naturally kept away from the center because this amp has kind of a high end shrillness to it at high volume/high gain situations. You can kind of hear it in those two raw clips, the "markiv" is one of the high gain channels where the "crunch" is the lower gain on the "clean" channel. Anyways, I shouldnt be afraid and just go ahead and stick the mic places where I thought it shouldnt go

[WhiskeyJack]

In addition to gregs advice re: placement around the dustcap If i had any advice for you in respect to micing up an orange cab it would be dont be afraid to back that mic off the grill a little bit. Anywhere from 3/4" off to almost 2 inches off dependimg how loud you got that rig humming may get you some pretty rad useable stuff.

[liv_rong]

In addition to gregs advice re: placement around the dustcap If i had any advice for you in respect to micing up an orange cab it would be dont be afraid to back that mic off the grill a little bit. Anywhere from 3/4" off to almost 2 inches off dependimg how loud you got that rig humming may get you some pretty rad useable stuff.

Thanks, will definitely mess around with that.

[Minerman]

Time to get real lol! I need to get my dirty tones better, so Im here for help from the experts. This is a clip from the 2 chord challenge. I have two versions in the mix here, one with EQ changes and one without with the panning at 45%, then I have each track on its own with no EQ just raw guitar. Im not sure what else there is to know, but if you want to know something specific I can answer. The screen shot is of the eq settings I used, the one on the left is the left guitar and the right the right.

I'm in no way an expert Liv, but I gotta agree about getting your tones as good as possible during tracking/on the way in...I get you're trying to avoid the dreaded fizz that's associated with high gain guitars, but mic placement is the key to this, & when you find "that" spot, you're good, no eq needed...

I'd ditch the eq you're using & use Reaper's stock eq if you're gonna high/low pass your tracks too, it's just a better eq IMO, & it has the spectrum analyzer so you can actually see what's happening...But IMHO, you can get where you wanna be without using an eq, mic placement will take care of it...

The tones you've posted aren't terrible by any means, so don't be discouraged dude, you've got great gear, so you just need to buckle down & learn it inside/out...

[JD01]

Liv, have you removed these attachments? Its telling me selected attachments aren't there any more?
Just asking 'cos I know WJ has done some work on the forum lately and I'm also having some network issues.

I just want to get back into listening to tones and mixes as I'm way behind.

[muttley]

Liv, have you removed these attachments? Its telling me selected attachments aren't there any more?
Just asking 'cos I know WJ has done some work on the forum lately and I'm also having some network issues.

I just want to get back into listening to tones and mixes as I'm way behind.

I dont think its Liv, all the embedded attachments are screwed for me...???

It could be something to do with WJ tinkering under the hood. Needs further investigation me thinks...

[muttley]

I suspect it may be something to do with the ssl cert. All the link locations are still http:// not https://.... I'm just guessing though.. WJ?

[WhiskeyJack]

Hmm. You know i didn't even think to check the uploaded music files the other night so i can't pin down why none of the music links are working for anyone. I'll look into it.

[JD01]

Hmm. You know i didn't even think to check the uploaded music files the other night so i can't pin down why none of the music links are working for anyone. I'll look into it.

The file I uploaded yesterday is fine

[muttley]

Hmm. You know i didn't even think to check the uploaded music files the other night so i can't pin down why none of the music links are working for anyone. I'll look into it.

The file I uploaded yesterday is fine

That will have the https: prefix I suspect.

[muttley]

It is also worth noting than none of the old images render now either, at least they dont for me. It may be worth you moving this bit of house keeping to another thread WJ, so as not to derail the general chat in here...

[WhiskeyJack]

It is also worth noting than none of the old images render now either, at least they dont for me. It may be worth you moving this bit of house keeping to another thread WJ, so as not to derail the general chat in here...

It looks as though any files that were uploaded as attachments got blown out when i did the update to to 3.2.5. Anything uploaded since then is fine. I will have to recover and replace all those files to the server tonight and god willing it is a matter of drag and drop and i don't have to sit and re path each every file individually

[muttley]

It is also worth noting than none of the old images render now either, at least they dont for me. It may be worth you moving this bit of house keeping to another thread WJ, so as not to derail the general chat in here...

It looks as though any files that were uploaded as attachments got blown out when i did the update to to 3.2.5. Anything uploaded since then is fine. I will have to recover and replace all those files to the server tonight and god willing it is a matter of drag and drop and i don't have to sit and re path each every file individually

I would check the phpBB support forums if thats the case. This cant be the only board with that problem. I would also think that as long as the relative path remains the same the images would show regardless of the http prefix..???

Replacing all file paths one by one is pretty much a non starter. There must be a script that could do it as long as you know both the path and the file location...

[WhiskeyJack]

It looks as though any files that were uploaded as attachments got blown out when i did the update to to 3.2.5. Anything uploaded since then is fine. I will have to recover and replace all those files to the server tonight and god willing it is a matter of drag and drop and i don't have to sit and re path each every file individually

I would check the phpBB support forums if thats the case. This cant be the only board with that problem. I would also think that as long as the relative path remains the same the images would show regardless of the http prefix..???

Replacing all file paths one by one is pretty much a non starter. There must be a script that could do it as long as you know both the path and the file location...

I think it will be just a matter of drag and drop in the correct folder. It seems when ya'll upload an attachment, something in the process totally renames the file to a very unique name that is just a jumble of numbers and letters. I suspect that once the data base see's those unique names in the file folder home for the attachments all will be put to right. I am going home early tonight so i will stop and buy some beer to help me through this.

[SweetDan]

...I am going home early tonight so i will stop and buy some beer to help me through this.

But not too much beer, or you'll really make a mess. See also: the Ballmer peak.

[WhiskeyJack]

It looks as though any files that were uploaded as attachments got blown out when i did the update to to 3.2.5. Anything uploaded since then is fine. I will have to recover and replace all those files to the server tonight and god willing it is a matter of drag and drop and i don't have to sit and re path each every file individually

I would check the phpBB support forums if thats the case. This cant be the only board with that problem. I would also think that as long as the relative path remains the same the images would show regardless of the http prefix..???

Replacing all file paths one by one is pretty much a non starter. There must be a script that could do it as long as you know both the path and the file location...

Done. I think i got it. Drag and drop. 500MB's at a time All the music files that weren't playing earlier today now work. I had no point of reference ofr photos or anything else but i will assume that they are all back to life?

[JD01]

Time to get real lol! I need to get my dirty tones better, so Im here for help from the experts. This is a clip from the 2 chord challenge. I have two versions in the mix here, one with EQ changes and one without with the panning at 45%, then I have each track on its own with no EQ just raw guitar. Im not sure what else there is to know, but if you want to know something specific I can answer. The screen shot is of the eq settings I used, the one on the left is the left guitar and the right the right.

Liv, I'm just getting around to this now.

I think the tones aren't too bad actually. But I think you're over-complicating it a fair bit.
Since I've got my gear sorted out with my H&K, I just use 1 mic on axis and that's it. Hi-pass a bit in the mix (I think Greg is similar).

Start with just dialing in something that you like in the room and try capturing a good representation of it with one mic, on axis. I find that an i5 takes out some of the harshness that I get with a 57, but I don't think you need to worry about that yet - that's just tweeking after the fact.

I'm assuming that you don't have a control room or anything like that (even though you have a great space) so when you're dialing your tone in actually get your face right down in front of the speakers - easy with a vertical 2x12 - you can just sit in the floor in front of it. Dial in your tone at a reasonable/safe volume. Stick an on-axis mic in front of it, turn it up and hit record.

This isn't ideal and ideal way of dialing a tone in, but in the absence of a separate room for my cab, I've found its the best compromise. It won't sound exactly the same when you crank it up, but it will generally sound better, although I find that flub can also creep in as your turn it up.

[Greg_L]

Hi-pass a bit in the mix (I think Greg is similar).

No, I don't do anything like that as a matter of course. I will if it needs it, but I never automatically high pass anything or assume I'm going to need to.

I don't subscribe to the "high pass everything that isn't bass" philosophy. I know youtube experts will say otherwise, but fuck those groupthink mogoloids. I subscribe to the "record better tones better" philosophy.

If anything, I low pass guitar tracks probably more often than high pass.

[JD01]

No, I don't do anything like that as a matter of course. I will if it needs it, but I never automatically high pass anything or assume I'm going to need to.

I don't subscribe to the "high pass everything that isn't bass" philosophy. I know youtube experts will say otherwise, but fuck those groupthink mogoloids. I subscribe to the "record better tones better" philosophy.

If anything, I low pass guitar tracks probably more often than high pass.

Oh, its not something I'd do as a matter of course. Its just something that I often feel I need to "de-flub" once I have a bass and kick in there. I'm just saying, get a good tone that you like, you might need to hi-pass it if it all goes flubby in the mix. I find if I wind the bass back too much on the amp when trying to de-flub I lose too much so its often easier to go for a little hi-pass. This is probably a habit that I've carried over from my Blackstar too.

I sometimes do this thing Bubba suggested, which is low pass to take off any harsh fizz and then a small upper mid bump just where the low pass starts if you know what I mean.