Acoustic Guitar Live Mic

badjazz

this seems like a basic issue, but I haven't ever seen much written on it anywhere, so being able to get some other players' info (and real players, not some phony 'expert' or sound engineer) makes me love the internet. Anyway, I ordered both the shure beta 57a and the rode nt3. I'm just going to test them out and see what works and return what doesn't. Knowing me, however, I'll probably find a way to justify both for some reason, but then end up using only one. Then after a few months of that, I'll sell the other one at a steep loss on ebay only to discover a few weeks later that I need it. Why are these patterns so predictable, yet so hard to break? Thanks guys!

Campusfive

What are you plugging it into? Let me know because I might be able to give you some suggestions for stage layout.

badjazz

just plugging it into a junky pa (probably from the 1970s or so, it even has fake woodgrain on the mixing board) that just has two speakers out in front of the band. Only the vocalist and I are in the mix, and there are no monitors or anything. There isn't a drummer or anybody else behind me, so I don't have to worry too much about it being a really loud environment. It is actually just a hall at a community center where they hold afternoon dances for old people--so not a loud, crowded bar or anything. However, I may be playing some other gigs with just a mic on the acoustic guitar with monitors and all that stuff, so any general tips that you'd have as far as what to do or avoid would be appreciated.

By the way, I was watching some video on the internet of Marty Grosz playing acoustic rhythm, and while his playing sounds great, it does seem like the mic on his guitar isn't necessarily picking up his guitar all that great, and it looks like an sm57. Watching those videos of him was what made me think of going acoustic in the first place. If anybody else is interested, http://www.dailymotion.com/boberwig has a treasure trove of cool videos.

nwilkins

why is it that I do not have a 16" L-5? More puzzling - why is it that no guitar makers can apply a good sunburst finish anymore?

badjazz

1) they cost $6k-40k
2) good question
follow up--why doesn't anybody make a good repro of them? Even Gibson's own 1934 reissues, at least the ones that I've played, don't sound close to the originals. On the other hand, I used to have a Japanese made Epiphone Emperor 1939 reissue (the short-lived 'Imperial' line) that actually sounded just like an original. If they can do that, why not the 16" L-5's?

Stackabones

badjazz wrote:

By the way, I was watching some video on the internet of Marty Grosz playing acoustic rhythm ... http://www.dailymotion.com/boberwig has a treasure trove of cool videos.

Thanks for that link. I've been very curious about Grosz but haven't had much luck finding anything. I'll search that site later tonight!

klaatu

I've been successfully using an Audio-Technica Pro 35 clip-on condenser mike for this application. These are more commonly used by horn players, but it works fine for me. I clip it onto the pickguard and keep it away from the F-hole to avoid boominess. The mike requires phantom power, no battery.

My big band guitar is a 1946 Epiphone Triumph, and the mike goes into a Roland AC60 Acoustic Chorus, which provides phantom power. It also has a mute button, which is handy in between songs. I generally keep both the mike channel and the master volume pretty low, because the guitar is so loud that it does not need a lot of reinforcement, even with a 20-piece big band. The mike and amp just add some depth, but the sound is pure acoustic. You do have to be careful about feedback, and the mike will pick up any bumps to the body, but that has not been a problem.

I agree with campusfive, electric guitar in the big band setting is just all wrong and muddies the sound up terribly. An acoustic archtop with a little amplification is the way to go. I use fairly heavy strings (.058 - .013) on the Epi and beat the crap out of it.

badjazz

klaatu wrote:

I use fairly heavy strings (.058 - .013) on the Epi and beat the crap out of it.

That's the gauge that I use, too. I was thinking about getting a set of .060-.014 strings that GHS makes, but since I have only a 1 11/16" nut width, I thought it might start to get a little crowded. Anybody ever try strings that heavy?
By the way, I think the real problem may be that the bass player plays electric, and that seems to be the sound that I can't be heard over playing only acoustically.

nwilkins

I have used 14-61 on a number of archtops with different nut widths and have never had any problems with them, even on an old Framus with a narrow nut.

klaatu

I agree, I wouldn't worry about the nut width. You might want to check your action with the heavier strings. You'll benefit from a higher action, although it will take more work. They say Freddie Green could slip a finger between his strings and the fingerboard at the 12th fret - you may not want go that far!

The reasons acoustic archtops worked without amplification in the old time big bands are:

The bass and piano were acoustic The drum kits weren't as loud (skin heads).

Nowadays you generally need some reinforcement, but it may not take all that much, if you get the guitar set up properly and play it right - heavy pick, solid downstroke, three-note chord voicings.