Audacity Forum

bgravato wrote:(hopefully in a not so distant future I will get all variables settled and start doing some more serious recording

I look forward to hearing that. I'm sure Koz will too.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr10/a ... guitar.htm

Look what turned up in Sound on Sound Magazine.

Koz

kozikowski wrote:http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr10/a ... guitar.htm

Look what turned up in Sound on Sound Magazine.

Koz

Interesting article... Maybe they're watching this thread...

Now I guess I need to register on their website to read the full article...

I think you only do that if you're already subscribed to the paper magazine. The PDF download, however is certainly reasonable. I'll buy it for you if you're out of money.

Koz

kozikowski wrote:I think you only do that if you're already subscribed to the paper magazine. The PDF download, however is certainly reasonable. I'll buy it for you if you're out of money.

Koz

Thanks Koz for your kindness, but I can still afford it I still need to register on the website to buy the pdf though... It's more about the laziness to fill in the forms than anything else hehe

Anyway I'm doing it now...

Here's a sample using the omni pattern: 36-omni-sample2.flac

Please ignore the heavy breathe in the middle... (one of the problems of having the mic so close to my nose/mouth...)

I still prefer the cardioid pattern with the mic further away from the guitar... (on this sample the mic was much closer to the guitar than what you saw in the pics... otherwise it would sound like if I was playing at the end of a very long hall...)

It's certainly not unpleasant, but I agree that the cardioid pick-up has more "immediacy", and for solo guitar I also prefer the cardioid response.

It's interesting just how much difference there is - if ever you want to record a more "background" type sound, you now know exactly how to do it.

stevethefiddle wrote:It's interesting just how much difference there is - if ever you want to record a more "background" type sound, you now know exactly how to do it.

And if I want the opposite I can use Figure of 8 pattern which gives a brighter/drier sound...

The possibilities are so many and varied it can be hard to get round to doing any real recording

Finally I did the test I'd been willing to do for a while... testing the line-in of the xonar essence stx and the line-out of the art usb dual pre.

I recorded both samples at the same time, so the captured sound was exactly the same.

40-art-usb.flac: mic -> art -> usb -> macbookpro -> audacity

41-art-line-out.flac: mic -> art -> monitor line out -> 1m mono jack-jack cable -> xonar essence stx line-in -> audacity (on windows, because linux drivers don't allow me to use the line-in yet)

Some more info:
- same version of audacity (1.3.11)
- art monitor volume at max
- xonar's line-in volume at max
- art powered from the usb connection to the mac

Apart from the obvious difference in gain/volume, after amplifying both samples to the same level, my non-audiophile ears can't tell the difference between the two samples... Let me know if you can