Jump to content


Photo

Fw 2.0 Recording - Martin 6-string / Gibson Les Paul


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 wolbai

wolbai

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 285 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 16 October 2013 - 10:04 AM

Hi,

 

I am excersing the song "Through The Barricades" from Spandau Ballet currently with my band. And from time to time I  prove my jingle-jangle by recording.

 

I have therefore used the JTV FW 2.0 Martin 6-string and the Gibson Les Paul model. Especially the Les Paul now sounds very much Les Paul like: I now can clearly hear the modeled PU-switching. Much more differentiated than former JTV-FW IMO.

 

EDIT: Sorry for the initial mistake - I have used the Gibson J-200 Acoustic model (position 5) and not the Martin 6-string.

 

 

I this regard I have more accidently discovered the Vintage pre amp for acoustic-sounds. Sounds pretty good and adds some more flexibilty with high and low frequencies. I have simply used the "no amp"-model before.

 

The first part of the song is completely recorded w/o a playback. I also recorded some string-like sounds with my guitar and the Octo-reverb. Not perfect - for shure, but as an option for a lack of a keyboard not the worst to me.

 

I have used a playback for the second part of the song (average quality) and I recorded various guitar tracks. All in all I wanted to sound it more rocking than a cuddly ballad.

 

The current JTV-modellng still has the problem with the "dying sustain" when swichting the PU-selector in guitar phrases where a lot of sustain is necessary. It is hearable at a certain point in the recording.

 

Although the FW 2.0 is battlesome, the resolution of the modeled guitars is more differentiated to me compared to FW 1.9. When switching the PUs now on the Les Paul model gives a more authentic feel. I therefore find myself now playing more with position 3 and 5 which I haven't done that much before.

 

For the electric guitar tracks I choosed the POD HD Soldano full amp model. The POD HD is linked via a TASCAM-audiointerface to the PC. Recording software is Cubase/Artist 7. Pretty simple setup.

 

During the recording, the song got somehow its own flavour to me:

 

 

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=lIo5HTwX9so
 

 

Any thoughts ?

 

cheers - wolbai


  • 0

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RETROMANIAC

Gear: JTV 59, JTV 69, JTV 89F, Godin Progression, Godin Seagull, Gibson Les Paul Deluxe, POD/HD500, DT50/212, DT50/Head, Marshall JVMC212, RIVERA Rockcrusher, Radial JDX Reactor
website: http://www.soundclick.com/wolbai  Band: http://www.jump-backtorock.de/


#2 clay-man

clay-man

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 654 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 11:51 AM

Sounds great! I don't know why people complain about the new acoustics, I think they sound amazing, especially on your song. Sounds like a real mic'd acoustic!

The Les Paul tone is great as well, very nice mid-range tone!


  • 0

For a minute there, I lost myself.

Radiohead_bear-728286%5B1%5D.png 


#3 wolbai

wolbai

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 285 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 16 October 2013 - 12:18 PM

Hi clay-man,

 

thanks for your kind words! The Acoustics and the Gibson Les Paul sounds great in FW 2.0 to me. As always you have to fiddle around a bit, but not a big deal.

 

You probably have heared some string noises on the Acoustics: I recorded it with my JTV69 and there I have set the strings pretty low far faster playing. Unfortunately for Acoustics this is not the best. But these are more physical limitations which the modeling has to deal with.

 

The Gibson model has indeed a nicely midrange tone. It cuts also very good through a LIVE-Band mix. I do the old trick by setting the mid-EQ on the amp somewhere between 70-90% depending on the amp models.

 

wolbai


  • 0

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RETROMANIAC

Gear: JTV 59, JTV 69, JTV 89F, Godin Progression, Godin Seagull, Gibson Les Paul Deluxe, POD/HD500, DT50/212, DT50/Head, Marshall JVMC212, RIVERA Rockcrusher, Radial JDX Reactor
website: http://www.soundclick.com/wolbai  Band: http://www.jump-backtorock.de/


#4 guilhordas

guilhordas

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 301 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 16 October 2013 - 01:50 PM

can you share this acustic patch?


  • 0

Jtv 69 , pod hd 500, suhr S3,prs custom 22, Gibson SG standard 96, fender plus strat 93


#5 broker2

broker2

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 68 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 03:00 PM

Sounds great,nice job.


  • 0

#6 clay-man

clay-man

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 654 posts

Posted 16 October 2013 - 05:47 PM

Hi clay-man,

 

thanks for your kind words! The Acoustics and the Gibson Les Paul sounds great in FW 2.0 to me. As always you have to fiddle around a bit, but not a big deal.

 

You probably have heared some string noises on the Acoustics: I recorded it with my JTV69 and there I have set the strings pretty low far faster playing. Unfortunately for Acoustics this is not the best. But these are more physical limitations which the modeling has to deal with.

 

The Gibson model has indeed a nicely midrange tone. It cuts also very good through a LIVE-Band mix. I do the old trick by setting the mid-EQ on the amp somewhere between 70-90% depending on the amp models.

 

wolbai

 

Yeah, I liked the amp setting you had on the Les Paul. Great lead tone.

 

I know you did a bit of tone tweaking but I just feel like the acoustics sound incredibly real. I'm guessing it requires a bit of EQ tweaking for a good live/band setting though. That's what most Acoustic tracks need though. I just think it sounds remarkably close to when I mic my acoustic with my AT2020.


  • 0

For a minute there, I lost myself.

Radiohead_bear-728286%5B1%5D.png 


#7 wolbai

wolbai

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 285 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 16 October 2013 - 11:53 PM

can you share this acustic patch?

Hi guilhordas,

 

attached you will find the HD500-preset. Unfortunately I did a mistake: it is not the Martin 6-string I have used. It is the Gibson J-200 (position 5 in the JTV):

 

http://line6.com/cus...ne/tone/239966/

 

 

wolbai.


  • 0

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RETROMANIAC

Gear: JTV 59, JTV 69, JTV 89F, Godin Progression, Godin Seagull, Gibson Les Paul Deluxe, POD/HD500, DT50/212, DT50/Head, Marshall JVMC212, RIVERA Rockcrusher, Radial JDX Reactor
website: http://www.soundclick.com/wolbai  Band: http://www.jump-backtorock.de/


#8 wolbai

wolbai

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 285 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 17 October 2013 - 12:15 AM

Yeah, I liked the amp setting you had on the Les Paul. Great lead tone.

 

I know you did a bit of tone tweaking but I just feel like the acoustics sound incredibly real. I'm guessing it requires a bit of EQ tweaking for a good live/band setting though. That's what most Acoustic tracks need though. I just think it sounds remarkably close to when I mic my acoustic with my AT2020.

 

Hi clay-man,

 

you are so right: all acoustics need some EQ-tweaking live and for recording. The reason for that is that the frequencies are more complex and have a wider bandwith than electric guitars.

 

In the acoustic preset I have used a StudioEQ at the very first place in the signal chain:

 

-12 db at 80 Hz

- 3,5 db at 220 Hz

- 11 db at 440 Hz

+ 1,5 db at 1,1 Khz

 

I also have used the HPF + the LPF in the Vintage Pre amp to color the tone.

 

The are 2 effects in the preset: dimension (with sw2 + sw3 off) at 20% and Hall reverb (standard) with 20%.

 

The Tone-knob is set to 85% in the JTV-Acoustic model to get more room for that specific recording.

 

In the recording software itself I have changed additional seetings with a Studio EQ, Stereo Enhancer and bit of Vintage Plate Reverb.

 

Sounds a lot of tweaking, but I think that is (unfortunately) normal for Acoustic sounds.

 

wolbai.


  • 0

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RETROMANIAC

Gear: JTV 59, JTV 69, JTV 89F, Godin Progression, Godin Seagull, Gibson Les Paul Deluxe, POD/HD500, DT50/212, DT50/Head, Marshall JVMC212, RIVERA Rockcrusher, Radial JDX Reactor
website: http://www.soundclick.com/wolbai  Band: http://www.jump-backtorock.de/


#9 brue58ski

brue58ski

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 458 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 12:43 AM

I think the JTV acoustics can sound several ways I've heard them recorded when using the HD500.  The old Variax acoustics also sounded several ways like I've heard them recorded when going through one of the X3 mic preamps.  However they are both very different.  I lean towards the old Variax through the mic preamp.  Just my opinion and I think that's what people are complaining about.  I personally thing the JTV acoustics sound a little thinner, for lack of a better word.  I only use my JTV and the HD500 so I haven't given up on them.  I have a few tricks I still need to try but I also wish the HD500 offered a bigger selection of mic preamps.  I liked what you did but I wish there were a way to come closer to what I had with the old Variax and X3.


  • 0

#10 wolbai

wolbai

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 285 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 17 October 2013 - 01:40 AM

I think the JTV acoustics can sound several ways I've heard them recorded when using the HD500.  The old Variax acoustics also sounded several ways like I've heard them recorded when going through one of the X3 mic preamps.  However they are both very different.  I lean towards the old Variax through the mic preamp.  Just my opinion and I think that's what people are complaining about.  I personally thing the JTV acoustics sound a little thinner, for lack of a better word.  I only use my JTV and the HD500 so I haven't given up on them.  I have a few tricks I still need to try but I also wish the HD500 offered a bigger selection of mic preamps.  I liked what you did but I wish there were a way to come closer to what I had with the old Variax and X3.

Hi brue58ski,

 

(luckily) I am completely blank in acoustic sound history with L6-gear (older Variaxes, X3-Live, etc.). The existing FW 2.0 is pretty okay for my needs so far:

 

I am gigging with my band (no possibility and desire to carry acoustic guitars and additional equipment. I have decided to go for the "all-in-one" solution and therefore I was prepared that I can't have everything) and I do from time to time some recordings for (my) private fun.

 

The used Vintage mic preamp was a sound improvement in my acoustic sound - as explained above - to my former presets. So that may overlap to your experience with other L6 mic preamps you have used in the past. So I can understand your wish for a wider range of mic preamps.

 

What still remains at the end of the day: acoustic sounds needs more fiddling and tweaking than E-guitar sounds regardless what equipment is used.

 

wolbai


  • 0

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RETROMANIAC

Gear: JTV 59, JTV 69, JTV 89F, Godin Progression, Godin Seagull, Gibson Les Paul Deluxe, POD/HD500, DT50/212, DT50/Head, Marshall JVMC212, RIVERA Rockcrusher, Radial JDX Reactor
website: http://www.soundclick.com/wolbai  Band: http://www.jump-backtorock.de/


#11 guilhordas

guilhordas

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 301 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 17 October 2013 - 04:54 AM

I guessed right, the martins not sound so good, I can only use the J200 live

Hi guilhordas,

 

attached you will find the HD500-preset. Unfortunately I did a mistake: it is not the Martin 6-string I have used. It is the Gibson J-200 (position 5 in the JTV):

 

http://line6.com/cus...ne/tone/239966/

 

 

wolbai.


  • -1

Jtv 69 , pod hd 500, suhr S3,prs custom 22, Gibson SG standard 96, fender plus strat 93


#12 guilhordas

guilhordas

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 301 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 17 October 2013 - 05:20 AM

trying your patch I confirmed something that I had noticed a short time ago, your patch when playing alone sounds a little thin, no bass, but it sounds great in your Recording, this is what I have tried, as I play with a band, I have also taken out all the bass frequencies to not mix with the bass and kick, even though it sounds bad when I play alone in the band is good.

 


  • 0

Jtv 69 , pod hd 500, suhr S3,prs custom 22, Gibson SG standard 96, fender plus strat 93


#13 CACHERA

CACHERA

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 50 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:16 AM

Very nice job  wolbai. I like you acoustic sound.

Did you change firmware 1.9 > 2.0 or did you used an older FW than 1.9 ?

Because I am in FW 1.9 and normally, there is no change in acoustics sounds between 1.9 and 2.0

I hesitate to change FW......

Thank you for your answer.

Regards

Philippe


  • 0

#14 wolbai

wolbai

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 285 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:51 AM

Very nice job  wolbai. I like you acoustic sound.

Did you change firmware 1.9 > 2.0 or did you used an older FW than 1.9 ?

Because I am in FW 1.9 and normally, there is no change in acoustics sounds between 1.9 and 2.0

I hesitate to change FW......

Thank you for your answer.

Regards

Philippe

Hi Cachera,

 

thanks for your nice feedback! The recording was done with JTV FW 2.0. I personally haven't noticed differences in the acoustics between FW 1.9 + FW 2.0. And that is what I have read so far from the one or another L6 Experts in this forum.

 

wolbai


  • 0

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RETROMANIAC

Gear: JTV 59, JTV 69, JTV 89F, Godin Progression, Godin Seagull, Gibson Les Paul Deluxe, POD/HD500, DT50/212, DT50/Head, Marshall JVMC212, RIVERA Rockcrusher, Radial JDX Reactor
website: http://www.soundclick.com/wolbai  Band: http://www.jump-backtorock.de/


#15 CACHERA

CACHERA

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 50 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 02:57 PM

Ok thanks. On your example acoustic, did you play with finger or picks ?
  • 0

#16 wolbai

wolbai

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 285 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 17 October 2013 - 09:55 PM

Ok thanks. On your example acoustic, did you play with finger or picks ?

fingerpicking - like the original played by Gary Kemp.

 

But that is a good question. I am pretty shure that the preset I have used will sound different (more highs, less warm, more percussive) when played with a pick.

 

To complete "fingerpicking versus pick story":

 

I have used a Sharkfin plectrum from Landström (white) for the e-guitar tracks. It is a pretty amazing plectrum with 3 in 1. It is my favorite now. In addition to a regular pick it has also a sharkfin part which is awesome for faster playing and another sawtooth like part which is pretty cool for special distorted guitar rhythms and harmonics.

 

When I changed to that pick, I was reminded how heavily a pick can influence your overall tone. So in reality the signal chain (apart of yourself) starts with a pick. I think that is underestimated sometimes.

 

wolbai.


  • 1

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RETROMANIAC

Gear: JTV 59, JTV 69, JTV 89F, Godin Progression, Godin Seagull, Gibson Les Paul Deluxe, POD/HD500, DT50/212, DT50/Head, Marshall JVMC212, RIVERA Rockcrusher, Radial JDX Reactor
website: http://www.soundclick.com/wolbai  Band: http://www.jump-backtorock.de/


#17 clay-man

clay-man

    Gear Head

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 654 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 10:19 PM

I just feel like the old acoustic sounds far from a mic'd acoustic. The tone is great, but the acoustics are more or less referenced as a mic'd acoustic sound. I think the new acoustic sounds accomplish the tonality of a mic'd acoustic that the old ones couldn't get.

 

Some frequencies on the new acoustics are a little wonky, like the high end was lacking when I heard the 1.8 update. That's easily fixable through EQing though, which is what you normally do to accomplish a preferred acoustic tone.

 

I can EQ my Variax 600 to sound like it has more body like a mic'd acoustic, but there's still a lot of tonal differences that make it obvious that it's not mic'd, but the new acoustics honestly sound convincingly like a mic'd guitar. I kind of prefer the tonality of a mic'd acoustic over a plugged in one, and it's nice for when I want to use the Variax over a real mic'd acoustic to track acoustic parts on a song.


  • 0

For a minute there, I lost myself.

Radiohead_bear-728286%5B1%5D.png 


#18 CACHERA

CACHERA

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 50 posts

Posted 17 October 2013 - 11:40 PM

Maybre differences between 1.8 and 2.0 fw for acoustics sounds but i don't think between 1.9 and 2.0
  • 0

#19 CACHERA

CACHERA

    Just Startin'

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 50 posts

Posted 20 October 2013 - 11:20 PM

Hi clay-man,

 

you are so right: all acoustics need some EQ-tweaking live and for recording. The reason for that is that the frequencies are more complex and have a wider bandwith than electric guitars.

 

In the acoustic preset I have used a StudioEQ at the very first place in the signal chain:

 

-12 db at 80 Hz

- 3,5 db at 220 Hz

- 11 db at 440 Hz

+ 1,5 db at 1,1 Khz

 

I also have used the HPF + the LPF in the Vintage Pre amp to color the tone.

 

The are 2 effects in the preset: dimension (with sw2 + sw3 off) at 20% and Hall reverb (standard) with 20%.

 

The Tone-knob is set to 85% in the JTV-Acoustic model to get more room for that specific recording.

 

In the recording software itself I have changed additional seetings with a Studio EQ, Stereo Enhancer and bit of Vintage Plate Reverb.

 

Sounds a lot of tweaking, but I think that is (unfortunately) normal for Acoustic sounds.

 

wolbai.

Thank you  wolbai for your clean explanations of setting. I have now Variax acoustic guitar model which seems to something acoustic !!


  • 0

#20 wolbai

wolbai

    Iknowathingortwo

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 285 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 21 October 2013 - 02:34 AM

Hi cachera,

 

I am glad to be beneficial to you!

 

As the output systems, the playing style and the musical context (recording, practicing at home, Live-perfromance with a band) are varying from user to user, specific user presets like mine,  always needs some adjustments to these specifics.

 

Apart of EQ-ing, the gain/volume level is something which may be adapted to the user environment. I mainly use two possibilities in that preset: First is the Mixer. Could be increased up to 7db (that is my subjective experience just by listening) w/o any clipping/distortion.

 

Another possibility to increase gain/volume w/o sound coloration is the Studio-EQ. I have used that second Studio-EQ at the very end of the signal chain solely to increase by increasing the gain-parameter +8db.

 

What I haven't done so far is to play a bit with the positioning of the "vintage pre amp" in the signal chain. I will do some testing at the rehearsal room on that in the next days. May be this will turn into a bit of additional improvement.

 

wolbai.


  • 0

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE RETROMANIAC

Gear: JTV 59, JTV 69, JTV 89F, Godin Progression, Godin Seagull, Gibson Les Paul Deluxe, POD/HD500, DT50/212, DT50/Head, Marshall JVMC212, RIVERA Rockcrusher, Radial JDX Reactor
website: http://www.soundclick.com/wolbai  Band: http://www.jump-backtorock.de/





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users