Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

[GuitarStv]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Well, in a sense, no.

In a recording - ideally and in most cases - you want each instrument to sound like itself. That is, you want to create the best sounds you can during performance and get them down to track as accurately as possible.

EQ in terms of creating sonic space should be approached from the angle of doing JUST ENOUGH to get each instrument out of each other's way to the point where you've achieved the amount of clarity you want.

I've heard recordings where everything was so heavily shelved and EQ'd that each instrument sounded totally disconnected and separate from each other, and the whole thing in those cases always sounds extremely empty and artificial.

A certain amount of incidental, natural frequency overlap is a good thing. It makes a recording sound like a band, among other things.

I think that maybe I'm being misunderstood . . .

I'm not talking about eliminating frequencies with huge EQ adjustments, I'm talking about doing a few 2-4 dB cuts to certain frequencies, or using mics that very slightly enhance the sounds that I want from the different instruments. That seems to me to make each instrument pop out clearly, but also keeps the song together as a whole. It would be ridiculous to say pick three frequencies for the guitar, and cut everything else to zero, or say low-pass filter only the stuff below 100Hz for the bass guitar.

It's possible to make a guitar/bass/drum sound fantastic on its own, and then when you put it with the rest of the band instruments it sounds like crap. In my mind that's where all the creativity involved in mixing comes in . . . you have to pick and choose what to modify to make the whole song sound better. The finished product might sound crappy solod, but in the song context it works . . .

Again, this is just the approach that I take.

 

[sosomething]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

After reading that, I don't think our approaches are that different at all.

Actually, I'd say what you're describing is pretty much standard industry practice.

The way you put it out there like it was some totally different approach to recording and mixing made me think you were talking in extremes.

 

[LesStrat]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Mama always said that the best mic for a guitar amp is the SM57.

 

[sosomething]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Yo mama so fat she kno what a SM57 taste like

 

[Virtual Kevorkian]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

I've read that Michael Jackson was recorded singing into a 57.

Close, it was an SM7 .

 

[MetalMike_II]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Close, it was an SM7 .

well I'm the first to admit I don't know nuthin and I don't know what one of those is, but I read it in a mag all about multitracking and stuff, in a mic-related article, and it was in the context of having used the 57 as a one-off for effect or something on some occasion, as in, "even Michael Jackson was recorded singing <some song> with a 57," like it could be even used in that application if one wanted to, cuz the point they were making with that punchline was that the 57 was underrated

for guitar I could get away with just a 57, 421, and a $79 Octava upstairs or down the hall

poy-eece yodel

 

[StrangeSound]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

I used to hate the Sm57 but it was my fault, mic too close to the speaker and well, I used it wrong. Nowadays I like it very much, although I bet the Sennheiser MD421 kicks ass.

 

[Ocifer]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Sosomething and GtrStv: you guys have the same idea, just some miscommunication.

+1 to what both of you said.

 

[cream123]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

because I said so.