Premier Rock Forum

Andrew Weatherhead wrote:I hope you realize that there are other interns here besides Intern 8033.

-the other intern named Andrew

My humblest apologies. Andrew, you're part of a great team.

My humblest apologies. Andrew, you're part of a great team.

Thank you, you're a good man.


cgarges wrote:

Do you plan on posting any details about the mix?

Talking about the mixing is extremely difficult because I don't have anything to reference, but I will try and explain a little of what went on:

The majority of the mixing that went on on this day was dedicated to one song, I am not going to name the song because the record has not been released yet and I may be giving details away which would upset the band or their record label. For reference purposes, I will call the song "Song #1," however it is not a Fugazi cover. Well "Song #1" features a breakdown featuring a melody played by baritone violin, acoustic guitar, and electric guitar using an e-bow. This was a topic of much debate as Sturgeon, who was directing the mixing, had a clear idea of how he wanted it to sound, but it wasn't exactly translating to the mixing board. First of all, Steve and Sturgeon worked on the eq and effects settings for each instrument (baritone violin, acoustic guitar, and electric guitar using an e-bow). The baritone violin was run through the Lexicon Primetime Digital Delay (http://www.electrical.com/item.php?page=255&pic=pictures/255-0.jpg). After setting effects and eq, they mixed the levels to get an ideal balance of the instruments. Sturgeon still wasn't getting the sound that was in his head, so he vocalized his ideas to Steve and they continued to work on it. After changing some of the effects and eq settings and rebalancing the levels, Sturgeon was happy. Then, Steve was worried about the overall mix not being "bright" enough, in his opinion it was too midragney. To fix this, Steve added a touch of overall eq with the GML 8200 (http://www.electrical.com/item.php?page=263&pic=pictures/263-0.jpg). At this point, Steve made a burn of the cd so Sturgeon could go play it for the other guys in the band who were up in the lounge. Everyone seemed to be happy, so, after a few minor changes to the mix, Steve was ready to make a master using the ATR 102 (http://www.electrical.com/item.php?page=278&pic=pictures/278-0.jpg). While they were doing this, I, unfortunately, had to leave because my band was playing a party that night, but I gained a great deal of knowledge and experience from the day I spent mixing with Leftover Crack.

djanes1 wrote:I enjoyed seeing how far away the mics were from the amp. I dont know anything about recording techniques, so now i will stop mic ing my amp 1 inch away and start micing it 3-4" away like it is done at EA.

Yes, different mic positions will yield different results. I too have found that pulling a mic away from an amp can, in the right situations, yield a better tone, especially with a nice room with lgood isolation from other sources. But this depends on the amp, the mic, the polar pattern of the mic, the mic pre, the guitar, the player, the room, other sources in the same room, and what I ate for lunch.You really dson't have to "stop micing (your) amp 1 inch away and start micing it 3-4" away like it is done at EA". A mic 1" away can sound good in some situations. Or maybe it sounds best with only one mic 10' away. Trial and error is the best way to learn good mic technique.

Andreweatherhead, looks good. thanks
mike

well, im recording in my room with a pretty bad, un-preamped, un-phantom powered dynamic mic. Plus, its all digital, so its futile trying to sound like EA anyway. But this will encourage me to try some other ways. I was keeping the mic close to the amp so that i didnt have to turn it up so loud that i couldnt hear the background stuff in my headphones.

It looks like a beyer m201 in the red cup. Ha ha ha.

b.

b wrote:

It looks like a beyer m201 in the red cup. Ha ha ha.

Are you being serious? How can you tell?

-Andrew

Thanks Andrew!

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

PS- The Beyer 201 is black. That's how he knows.

It really was an SM57, not chosen by any Electrical employee. The talent had a favorite scheme.

-Mike

My initial thoughts where that it was a m201n/c. If you look at the second picture, a little before the mic enters the cup you see a white line. It may just be a reflection of where the tape meets the body of the mic. On the m201n/c that's about where the writing of model number is. That's what made me think it was one. But looking at the first picture I don't really see that line. On the newer m201tg models the writing is at the base of the microphone. If mike says it's an sm57.... I can see his point looking at them again. Oh well, I tried. The m201 is a awesome mic. I do like looking at the pictures of recording setups. You should definately post more.

Something else I noticed about the picture concerning the unique mic recording technique that was more than likely a key part of the 'overdriven/distorted' vocal sound. It appears the PL-20 was routed to a DI box (the red box) to convert from balanced XLR to unbalanced line for the amp input. From the DI there is a cord going to a white stomp box which is then plugged into the input on the Twin. It looks like the white stomp box is a Crowther Hot Cake overdrive pedal. Am I correct?

I'm kind of interested in hearing the end result as I own one of these as one of my main overdrive/distortion stomp boxes. I generally hate most distortion stomp boxes as they often sound like stomp boxes, i.e. overdrive from a little metal canister. It's very transparent and very natural sounding. It sits very nicely in front of a tube amp and accentuates the amp's natural tone quite nicely.

However, I've noted in trying to use it in other applications such as a distortion/overdrive pedal for my roommate's keyboards the result is less than stellar. So if the end result on the lead vocals sounds good it's another nifty use for the damn thing.