Who Records Direct To The Board?

chris ivey · Post by **chris ivey** » 26 Sep 2006 6:40 pm

in my local recording gigs, which i'm sure are not on a par with serious master sessions, i always plug into the board..no steel amp..sometimes i play through my stomp box delay to make sure i don't end up with a flat tone that won't blend well, sometimes my engineer cohorts prefer a quality tube preamp or lexicon delay (vocal plate), but i usually get a very decent tone...any insight into this? in retrospect, the times someone has had me play through an amp (i use a nash 400 or LTD 400) the sound has been less than acceptable to me.

Bobbe Seymour · Post by **Bobbe Seymour** » 26 Sep 2006 7:13 pm

Chris, if you have a great sounding guitar, your tone will be great, if not, it won't, no matter what.
I do record into the board at times, but actually find that bypassing the board, amp and all effects and by going directly to the machine, I can get as perfect a tone as can be gotten with my P-P Emmons, effects and EQ can be done later if taste dictates it during the mixing session.
You might try going into a mic-pre,then the machine. Make sure it is a high quality unit, the engineer will know,
Direct? You bet!

Bobbster [This message was edited by BobbeSeymour on 26 September 2006 at 08:15 PM.]

Mike Headrick · Post by **Mike Headrick** » 26 Sep 2006 7:20 pm

I have always recorded direct, but since the advent of the Peavey Profex ll. recording direct is a sweeter experience. I like the Profex a lot. Direct tone is different for each player, each guitar, each kind of pickup, etc. For me, I wouldn't trade recording direct for amp noise any day.

Jim Cohen · Post by **Jim Cohen** » 26 Sep 2006 7:33 pm

All my solo CDs have been recorded direct, just using a good studio tube preamp before going into the board, then adding reverb and delay on the board. The result, from the feedback I get, has been generally 'acceptable'.

Michael Johnstone · Post by **Michael Johnstone** » 26 Sep 2006 8:45 pm

Try plugging into an amp you like and take the preamp out directly to the board or better yet skip the board and go directly to the recording device. I've had great luck with Peavey Session 400s and even better sounds with a Fender Steel King doing it that way - using the amps preamp section as a direct box. Don't use the amps spring reverb though unless you're playing surf music - use a digital reverb in mixdown.

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 27 Sep 2006 12:11 am

Although I would never argue with anyone who records using mic's.. , there is a fine quality that can come from going direct. If you have a nice tube preamp and the direct unit has a very good parametric EQ, you can get a fine direct tone. Set the parametric EQ to the same settings you would use for your amp and you will be pretty close.

Yes, Speakers do give a certain LIVENESS but at the end of the day it's your ears that matter.

Experiment...and remember you still need to practice good recording skills...

------------------
------------------
TPrior
TPrior Steel Guitar Homesite

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 27 Sep 2006 2:40 am

I ALWAYS record directly into the board. I don't even own a microphone.

If I tried recording with a mike, my CDs would be "enhanced" by the sounds of barking dogs, freeway traffic and an occasional train whistle.

------------------
Warning: I have a Telecaster and I'm not afraid to use it.
-----------
My web site

chris ivey · Post by **chris ivey** » 27 Sep 2006 6:43 pm

thanx guys!

Jim Cohen · Post by **Jim Cohen** » 27 Sep 2006 6:56 pm

Chris, while they are surprisingly absent from this thread, you should know that there is a large contingent of steel players who swear by recording through an amp only, and have strong preferences about what type of mike to use, where to place it, etc. and who feel that this is the ONLY way to get a decent sound (or at least the sound they want to hear). I would guess that there are more of them than there are direct-recording steel players, though you'd never know it from this thread. Just FWIW.

Jim Phelps · Post by **Jim Phelps** » 27 Sep 2006 9:55 pm

I think Jim's probably right... maybe they just don't want to come in and say "I don't...."

MHO is that if you or your engineer is good, you can get a great sound either way, mic'ed or direct and conversely you could get a lousy sound either way if not, no matter how you record it or how great your equipment may be.

I recently took a background track and recorded separate lead tracks to it with each one of my guitars, a track recorded direct for each guitar, and another track for each recorded mic'ed, as a comparison test.

Not being a great professional engineer by any means, but I found that after some experimentation and adjustments I could get an "acceptable" tone either way, and with some guitars I preferred the tone mic'ed, and others I preferred the sound direct.

Both good, but different, depending on what you want and like.

One advantage of recording direct is I can use headphones and not disturb anyone else in the house or letting them hear me flubbing any licks...

[This message was edited by Jim Phelps on 27 September 2006 at 11:33 PM.]

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 28 Sep 2006 12:23 am

Recording with mic's is probably a much more involved technique and I am thinking really requires a more savy engineer, because you are dependent now on a few more links in the chain.

The primary reason I record direct on my small projects is because of the VOLUME factor in my practice room. and, nobody needs to hear that it took me 30 takes to get it right...

On one of my projects where I recorded direct, a few commented on how nice my Push Pull sounded. Problem was, my Push Pull was a 96' Carter pre BCT...

go figure..

You still have to work to get a fine direct tone..it's not an easy street there either...

t

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 28 Sep 2006 3:53 am

With the advent of good quality amp emulator software.
I go into a tube preamp,
preferably the Revelation.
into a mic preamp and then the Protools.

I can then adjust the amp and speaker combination after the fact,
very important for dialing in the best sound for the mix,
and my tastes.

And also use a close aproximation during tracking.

Tube feel is on the track, and if I REALLY wanted to I could send it back out to an amp in the room,
with no penalty of sound quality.

Leroy Golden · Post by **Leroy Golden** » 28 Sep 2006 4:46 am

I have had good results from going direct to one track and mic the amp on another track and combine the two, you can really get a wide range of tones with this method, it works for me!

David Doggett · Post by **David Doggett** » 28 Sep 2006 7:15 am

Jim is right, in past threads on this topic people like Paul Franklin and Dan Tyack gave their reasons for prefering to mike an amp and speaker. If you search hard enough, a year or two ago someone posted several tracks of the same music and steel recorded direct and with several different amp and mike combinations. Basically, the direct method gives a very hi-fi sound that is almost like an acoustic guitar in tone, while miking an amp and speaker gives a more electric guitar-like tone, the kind we are more use to for steel. The two sounds are very different. However, as mentioned above, you can work with either one and get something good.

Briefly, here is the technical reason the tones are so different. Solid-body electric guitars and steel guitars have pronounced highs and high overtones. When you send this through a hi-fi amp and flat response hi-fi speaker systems with tweeters, it can sound thin and harsh. Most electric guitar and steel amps don't have tweeters, or even midrange speakers. They are basically just 10"-15" woofers. This filters out and tones down the highs and greatly fattens up the tone. Guitar amps have been matched to these type speakers for 70 years. That is the guitar and steel sound we are use to. In reality, the amp and guitar speaker are part of the instrument. If you eliminate that, and run the signal directly through a hi-fi amp and flat response hi-fi speaker system, you eliminate the characteristic tone of the instrument. It's like swapping the top and bracing of an acoustic guitar.

Franklin and others went on to talk about the fine points of placing a mike to capture "room" sound, etc. But the main difference is between a guitar speaker designed to shape the tone of the instrument, and hi-fi speakers designed for flat response.

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 28 Sep 2006 7:23 am

I usually have better results using a miked amp, but I think that a lot depends on the quality and placement of the mike. I've actually had some awful steel tones using both methods at one time or another.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://b0b.com/b0b2005.gif" width="78 height="78">Bobby Lee (a.k.a. b0b) - email: quasar@b0b.com - gigs - CDs, Open Hearts
Williams D-12 E9, C6add9, Sierra Olympic S-12 (F Diatonic)
Sierra Laptop S-8 (E6add9), Fender Stringmaster D-8 (E13, C6 or A6) My Blog 
<div style="display:none">

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 28 Sep 2006 7:30 am

You also need to have the room....

Which is why I also use the tube preamp direct route,
but NOT to the exclusion of Leroy's method.
Of course for that you have to have the spare tracks.

Idealy I prefer 2 for the amp and 1 direct.

Which is also why I am building a big room....
or a large space with a variaty of room sizes and tones available, by moving walls, changing angles etc. etc.

chris ivey · Post by **chris ivey** » 28 Sep 2006 8:34 am

this is all very interesting...aside from tonal considerations, i imagine the reason i've stuck with the direct route is because setting up in the control room next to the board allows for immediate, trouble free communication with the engineer/producer, no headphones, and the ability to quickly say 'i screwed up again, go back'

Al Terhune · Post by **Al Terhune** » 28 Sep 2006 8:17 pm

That's funny, Tony. I feel the same way about torturing my wife with a million takes, trying to get that part right. If she's not home, I don't mind at all using a ShinyBox ribbon mike. With the fiddle, though, which I'm really crappy at...there's no direct recording, and to save my marriage I only record it when Susie's out of the house.

Al

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 29 Sep 2006 6:22 pm

My, now ex-wife, was in NYC when I was
finishing off a blugrass album,
before leaving for a summer vaction in France,
that ended up lasting 10 years....

1 day off the plane from France,
she insisted on "resting" in the studio room,
as I sang around 7 songs from scratch,
and then learned and sang the harmonies
on the spot. She wasn't even on headphones.

Well listening to songs being tracked
like speed reading, but with errors,
and no reference of the music either,
is not my idea of how to rest with jetlag.

She was never tha same after that.
But I got disturbed in the studio much less after that.

It is sometimes cool to be in the studio
for rythmn section tracking or the classic
do it live to multi-track, like in country sessions.

But over-dubbing sessions for the un-involved are pure torture,
living with it on a constant basis,
is a divorce in the making...

I have purposely built a lounge/apartment
with visual access to the studio,
AKA "girlfriend control space", to aleviate this issue.[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 29 September 2006 at 07:27 PM.]

Jim Phelps · Post by **Jim Phelps** » 29 Sep 2006 7:09 pm

She was never tha same after that.

ROTFL!

One of the reasons I do my home recording direct with phones.

Bob Hoffnar · Post by **Bob Hoffnar** » 30 Sep 2006 10:26 pm

I generally refuse to record direct at this point. I put a good mike in front of a tube fender and I'm good to go. Even at those hundreds of home M-box sessions. I bring along an old princeton or deluxe and put on the cans for playback. I don't use my steel king or nash 400's though. They don't quite cut it for me. Might as well record direct.

------------------
Bob
upcoming gigs
My Website

Mike Sigler · Post by **Mike Sigler** » 1 Oct 2006 3:41 am

All 9 of my Cds have been direct to the board!
and i get many good comments on the tone!
all in the players taste!

Dave Zirbel · Post by **Dave Zirbel** » 2 Oct 2006 11:23 am

I used to be opposed to direct recording but now that I have a couple of good sounding guitars, I prefer it in some situations. I like sitting in the control room and playing to the monitors. I feel that my intonation and my playing suffers when using headphones,

If I was recording to 2" analog and there was a nice sounding room I would want to mic the amp but most recording gigs are to hard disc in small spaces these days. I overheard the engineers talking about a program called "Amp Farm."

I did two sessions last week, both with the Kline. For one I went direct and the other I went through the amp. They both sounded great. I guess I favored the amp.

Dave Z[This message was edited by Dave Zirbel on 02 October 2006 at 01:14 PM.]

Paddy Long · Post by **Paddy Long** » 2 Oct 2006 3:32 pm

Personally I prefer to use my rack rig in the studio, but some of the smaller studios I work in don't have big sound rooms so I tend to go direct from my Revelation Preamp. Having this piece of kit does make my direct sound very good -- but then I use the Rev in my rack rig as well! I tailor my equipment needs to the job when doing sessions. If I'm flying out of town to do a session I usually just take the Rev and go direct -- unless I can borrow a PV Steel amp from a local steeler!

David L. Donald · Post by **David L. Donald** » 2 Oct 2006 8:12 pm

Dave Z.
I have been using Amp Farm for years.
it is basically a Line 6 Pod in software form for DAW.

While it isn't as completely flexable
as moving mics in front of speakers,
etc.

In some ways it is MUCH more flexable.

I go; Revalation to tube preamp to Protools into Amp Farm plugin,
and then can :

a) change ALL sound paremeters fluidly
with time lines over time.
Such as increase the bass for the solo,
and dip a problem high note's treble for two notes.
Add more or less drive / distortion as needed.
Switch on or off brilliance, etc, etc.

b) change amps and or cabinets for different sections of a song.
or even different parts of a solo.
Go from Soldano or Mesa amp in a Marshal cab, to '59 Fender cab and a Beatles era Vox tube amp.

c) double the original, tube warmed, line on another track
and have 2, or more, amps
fed by the exact same, post Revalation, signal
for fat 'two tone' solos etc.

Ideally I record :
1 close mic on amp,
1 or 2 distant mics (depending on room)
and a direct line through tubes.

If you can't get a killer 'set of sounds' this way,
you don't know how to mix. IMHO

I am USUALLY looking for multiple possible sounds from a track,
especially when used for both backing and front of mix,
since only 1 sound limits you and it's abilty to
clearly and cleanly cut through a mix.
And EVERY mix is different.
[This message was edited by David L. Donald on 12 October 2006 at 05:26 AM.]