Jump to content

acoustic guitar, mic or internal system


Recommended Posts

  • Members

The band I work with wants to do an acoustic set in between two other bands that will be using amplified guitars and are loud.

 

They want to use acoustic guitars with mics instead of acoustic guitars with built in transducers.

 

I will be doing sound only for this band, there's a house soundman and the other bands might have their own sound person.

 

I'm concerned about feedback and for a live performance. I feel that acoustic guitars with their own internal transducers would be better. I'm also concerned about having lots of monitor changes since I probably won't have the luxury of a sound check.

 

I'd appreciate any suggestions or opinions. I have some SDC mics like Josephson C42s, AKG C1000, and Crown CM700, and a variety of dynamic mics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I prefer a mic, but usually go with transducers especially when in a kamikazi situation like that. Were I doing a gig like that I would load a small rack with two parametric eq's and a couple channels of comp/limiting for the guitars. You may not need the comps but a couple of notched parametric frequencies can really help out with feedback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm an acoustic-guitar player, and I say go with the onboard electronics and the Feedback-Buster soundhole plug. Mics are ok if you're doing a solo/duo type act on a quiet stage, but with a loud band,,,,,?

 

In my opinion, there are not many in the audience who'll give a damn about your "tone" either. As long as it sounds "like an acoustic", and is well balanced (properly EQ'd), they'll be happy.

 

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I haven't found a need for a "feedback buster" sound hole plug in years. With a reasonable guitar and a good pickup system, it's unnecessary these days in most cases.

 

 

 

I can see that,,, as long as there's someone properly riding an EQ to avoid body resonance in the guitars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I can see that,,, as long as there's someone properly riding an EQ to avoid body resonance in the guitars.

 

 

I guess I make the assumption that the person driving the bus knows a little bit about what they are doing.

 

Like somebody cuttting up meat knows to keep their fingers away from the business side of the blade is an assumption I would make before suggesting that the fellow use a dulled knife instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

That hits the nail squarely on the head Andy. Unfortunately, not everyone has the skill-set and knowledge to know where to look, nor the tools to properly notch-out the problem.

 

A buddy of mine did a solo gig at a local Legion Hall. He's not a pro by any means, in terms of playing "amplified" before a larger audience. As for the "soundman", well,,, one of the "employee/volunteers" at the Legion, knew a, where the mixer was, b, how to turn the P/A system on, and c. get some volume. That was about it.

 

Guitar started feeding back due to body resonance. Performer and "soundman" both had that "deer-in-the-headlights" look in their eyes. I quickly stuck a Feedback-Buster in the soundhole, and voila; problem gone. Cheap insurance basically. I don't suppose either one of them ever even heard of a parametric EQ, let alone know how to work one effectively. Neither one of them would even begin to know "why" the P/A was feeding back too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

All I know for sure is that any acoustic guitar sounds better direct into the board/snake instead of through an amp.They never sound full through an amp,and those really irritating mids(not sure the exact frequencies) just take your head off.

 

 

There are acoustic amps out there that sound exactly like a quality PA, and in fact have a lot in common with a PA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Pickup in the guitar.


Active DI if the guitar does not have a preamp (with a preamp in the guitar, a passive DI is OK).


"Feedback Buster" in the sound hole.

 

 

That right there.

 

Unless you have a guitar player that's used to playing with a mic all the time, doesn't move around a lot, and knows to stay at the mic without smacking it with his hand.... direct is always better IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

I haven't found a need for a "feedback buster" sound hole plug in years. With a reasonable guitar and a good pickup system, it's unnecessary these days in most cases.

 

 

I agree. As long as your EQ is set right for the monitors you should be good without a feedback buster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Mic for front of house. Transducer for monitors.

 

 

Maybe, maybe not. Seems like you are stating an absolute here where it's really not all that black and white.

 

I personally like the sound of the better pickups for the FOH too. Both Martin and Takamine (as a couple of examples that I have a lot of recent experience with) have some pickup systems that IMO sound as good as micing for live applications as the detriments of micing and stage volume are much less of an issue. For studio work, I would use both, and choose what worked best individually or blended/processed.

 

If you are talking about poor quality pickups, maybe not, but the same applies with poor quality mics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...