Methods of 'BIG' sounding guitars and vocals.

[LordBTY]

Thought I'd start a thread concerning techniques for 'big' sounding vocals and guitar. I've included vox and guitar together since at the moment I'm doing a similar thing with both of them.

 

I tend to do some pseudomicing close to the amp panned near-ish to the center (but not so much that they retract attention from the vocals.) I then so some pseudomicing away from the guitar amp with a less 'defined' sound and pan them very wide. I then try to balance the two. I may use the freehaas plugin at some point too (it's free.)

 

http://www.vescofx.com/vfxFreeHaas

 

 

For vocals I'm very careful not to overdo reverb. I like to add some quick delay since it can give the vocals a smoother 'legato' kinda feel (sometimes making the singer sound better than they are.) Like the guitar, I have the vocals panned center and a copy wide - I might apply more reverb or delay to the wider image. Making sure the wide guitar and wide vox don't clash is an issue.

 

 

EDIT:

 

Your thoughts? What do you do for that 'BIG' sound?

[chris carter]

Well, for guitars, forget all this pseudo this and haas that stuff and panning nearish that other stuff.

 

1) mic 'em so they sound big going to disk. Make sure to check phase between mics!

2) pan left, center and right. Don't bother with that other inbetween stuff unless it's absolutely necessary (which is at best 1% of the time).

3) Good arrangement (especially with bass) is key.

 

With vocals, again, forget about this copyng stuff. If you want more voices, then double or triple (etc.) track the parts.

[UstadKhanAli]

The above, with a highlight on good arrangement, to which I'll add that a combination of close and distance micing can frequently get you a huge sound.

 

Clear, defined parts that are played clearly - even if you are using lots of distortion - through a good guitar and amp are important, in my opinion.

 

Highpass filter is your friend. Eliminate unnecessary mud.

 

Check your mix in mono to check for phase issues, as Chris said.

[Lee Knight]

You could try having those two guy hanging out with Ken in his avatar track your guitars. They get big sounds. Jimmy to the left, Jack to the right.

 

To me, bigness can come from the perception of either space or low frequency. Bigger isn't always better (I keep telling myself). A lot of times what I think is a big sound on the radio sounds tiny when a Zeppelin song comes on after. But assuming what you really do want is BIG.

 

Tape a PZM to the cabinet to pick up the physical turmoil that structure is going through. That can be cool to blend in along with your regular mic. The same can be accomplished by micing a seemingly odd place on the cab with a regualr mic. Like the corner. Listen for subsonic mayhem to blend in.

 

Using a room mic, panning it strategically, and play with delaying (moving the file back) to mess with the size perception. A lot of Zep tones benefited from room mics.

 

Use a crazy fuzz that gives monstrous low end a la J. White.

 

Analyze the guitar through a spectrum analyzer, lpf out the sub muck then boost right to the left of where the cab sound rolls off. This just exaggerates what's already there while downplaying the mud.

 

But these all need to somehow be incorporated into the overall picture. So sometimes thinking in terms of perceived size is where it's at.

[I was The Funk]

Less gain. More takes. Layer upon layer of different guitars/amps. Mix to taste.

[UstadKhanAli]

You could try having those two guy hanging out with Ken in his avatar track your guitars. They get big sounds. Jimmy to the left, Jack to the right.

 

 

Using a room mic, panning it strategically, and play with delaying (moving the file back) to mess with the size perception. A lot of Zep tones benefited from room mics.

 

Yup. My pal Jimmy frequently used to say "distance equals depth".

[Instrospection]

 

Nice! I swear that Jack looks like a chick in that photo though!

 

For guitars, sometimes you don't need alot of processing. Alot of times, it just boils down to two really great stereo dual guitars that compliment each other well. For example, on single note /fill lines, playing the other part an octave above or below the other guitar part can make it sound bigger than it is. Well coordinated parts always go way further in the end. Also, the bass parts make alot of those guitar parts sound bigger than they are, if the bass player is playing the right notes--some root notes at times and then counterpointing at crucial times. For example, in Nirvana, Kurt's playing was pretty straightforward most of the times, but Krist's bass lines really make an album like "Nevermind".....because it's sort of halfway between the mindset of a guitarist and bass guitarist. Live, with a three piece and only one guitar, the bass really has to fill in for that second guitar that alot of bands have. Therefore, those guitar parts become that much cooler when Krist counterpoints an almost atonal part that almost sounds like a mistake--a clash of notes that maybe isn't the norm-- but in the right way.

[Lee Knight]

Nice! I swear that Jack looks like a chick in that photo though!

 

 

I think it looks like he's having an issue with Ken's cologne. Or lack of...

[Jesse G]

For guitars, using different mics/amps/setting/speakers/picks/player/post EQ/whatever for the left and right guitar tracks makes a difference, I think. Whatever you can do to make the left and right sides sound different from each other will make the stereo image wider while using the same sound for the left and right side seems to make it sound more mono.

 

I usually don't even like having guitar in the center when it comes to achieving a big sound. Once I've got two guitars panned hard-left/right, I feel like putting one in the center takes away from the stereo width. If I do put guitars in the center, it's usually really dark, almost muffled sounding guitar very low in the mix. Having really dark guitar underneath brighter guitars can really make for a wall of sound and can make for some 3D-ness when panned in the center without narrowing the image provided it doesn't interfere with the cutting mids of the guitars on the L/R. Or with the vocals, just 'cause I'm one of those guys who likes to leave the center for the vocals as much as possible.

 

Thick strings is a big one for me- bigger strings, bigger tone. Higher action, too. The tone is just bigger when there is some space for the string to vibrate, some room tom breathe and do it's thing- really helps the guitar to sing or roar.

 

Another thing is EQ'ing some highs out of delays if you're using them. This goes for vocals, too. If the delays have significantly less high-frequency content than the original sound than it gives the impression of depth, 'cause far away sounds have less HF content. And having some low mids in your reverb can make your guitars sound really big, but it's always about finding that place where there are enough low mid to make the guitar sound powerful and heavy, but not too much to where it sounds muddy.

[Zeopold]

Duane Eddy recorded in a grain silo

[barny15]

In my (admittedly limited) experience, "big" guitar doesn't happen unless everything else is mixed properly; this is assuming we're talking about your typical rock track. That said, nothing beats "good" placement of an SM57 on a "good" speaker cab that's being driven by a "good" tube amp that's turned up loud. Put a decent condenser mic in the spot in the room where the amp/cab sounds the "best", and the resulting recording, 9 times out of 10, will sound pretty damn huge.

[Carcinogen]

For guitars, I record the same take from the same input on two separate tracks, pan one left and pan one right. Rinse and repeat, preferably on a smaller COMBO amp rather than on a half stack. I find that 4*12 cabinets are designed to sound awesome when you are standing at a distance, absorbing all 4 speakers. Without the aid of specialized equipment, it is rather difficult for the engineer on a budget to capture those sounds, so using an amp designed to sound awesome with one speaker works out much better.

 

For vocals, (I've only done this recently) I take two microphones, a Shure SM57 and a 58 (remember that budget we were talking about earlier?) and point them facing towards each other at an angle about a foot or so away from each other, so that if they were emitting lazer beams they would cross and form an X, except on a vertical axis rather than horizontal, if that makes sense (one mic over the other one). I ran the '58 through an overdrive pedal, and ran the '57 clean. Some compression and reverb is nescessary, but I didn't have to EQ {censored}! I then went and overdubbed another vocal track using the '57, sometimes I'd use the overdrive or maybe some echo, but not always. I think it worked out well....

[Amigo]

dynamics ..... nothing sounds loud if there isn't space to break it up... make sure your songs/recordings are dynamic.

 

also doubling vocals can really make them stand out

 

and what the above were saying.

[Temple of Light]

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too many ways to get what you want. If your'e using multi-effects processors; going direct to channel works for me. Use stereo outs to 2 channels, panned 3/4 hard left and right of course. Eq'ing the channel is not ideal, dial the tone you want from the unit itself. Keep the channel EQ as neutral as possible. And leave it that way throughout the mix. Adjusting it later down the road will cause phase cancellations and other nastier effects you dont want. Check your mix from at least two but prefferably three sources: Sealed {isolated}cans, Open cans and monitors. If using an amp with an effects box chain or just onboard effects alone, the room and space you track in is key. An acoustically treated and isolated room is best. Next is Mic placement, in the room a stereo pair of small {or large} diaphram condensers work well placed at least halfway the distance away from the source, and on the amp itself; a cardioid or supercardioid

mic 2" to 6" from the cone, offset about 2" from the center of the cone.The close mic is the center {2} channel, panned center, the stereo pair of mic's are channels 1 and 3 for example, panned left and right...Just a few basic tips:

the rest I would have to klll you for...

HUGE has very little to do with hardware actually, HUGE is something you hear...and/or something your'e born with....lolol

[Phil O'Keefe]

What do you do for that 'BIG' sound?

 

Put it next to something "small"sounding.

 

IMO, you need some contrast and a point of reference for comparison in order to convey "BIG".

 

But IMO, there are many different things we could be talking about when you say "big". Loud Guitar Amp in a Big Room "big"? Dry, loud in your face and close miked? AC/DC or MBV? Lots of effects or lots of layering? One guitar, up close and loud in the mix? Etc etc... The first thing I want to explore is what "big guitars" means to the artist. Close and raunchy, big room and roaring, multi layered... tell me a bit about what it is you want to hear and I'll either capture what you're giving me or help you dial it up.

 

Then, when we work with the mix, we turn it up... and maybe turn something else down a little bit to help with the illusion. Makes them sound BIGGER in comparison.

 

Just one old example: Boston records. BIG guitars - especially for its time. But the vocals are pretty far back in the mix.

 

It's all a matter of perspective.

 

Here's another common sense idea for BIG guitars: PLAY HARDER. Seriously. It gives big guitars a big realism increase when you play them with some gusto and energy. There's also a timbrel shift that occurs when an instrument is played loudly / hard as opposed to just being "turned up" or "dirtied up" in a mix.

 

Give it some space around it in the mix - have the other players playing a bit more sparsely to leave room for it, then turn it up a bit... maybe give it a little compression... maybe not... In terms of techniques to get "big" guitars, the options are pretty limitless... people seem to come up with new ways of doing that all the time... or at least new ideas of what constitutes "big" guitars. The definition - or some common understanding of the sound you're seeking, has to be the starting point IMO.