Amplifying synths for recording and/or reamping

[otto]

I am a complete novice when it comes to recording and sound engineering. I’ve been reading a few books and time and time again it seems that a lot of added depth and ambience comes from placement of microphones in a room related to the amplification of the instrument and the natural reverb of the room.

This might be a better topic for the tape op forum but they have a tendency to spiral and before you know it, you need to invest at least $20k into your studio to make a usable recording… Anyway, I’m curious how others feel about whether or not this is a worthwhile venture. I have some interesting spaces in my house to get real room reverb and echo (cold storage, large unfinished basement, garage, etc.). Of course the downside is I would need to purchase a decent amplifier, speakers, microphone, and possibly preamp, compressor, etc. As you can see this can spiral pretty quickly and I wonder if it is really worth it. However, I see a better vocal mic and possibly monitors in the near future so some of those costs might be absorbed anyway.

I just don't want to get caught in a cycle of doing too much for too little gain. I’d rather put my focus and money where I’m going to get the most bang for the buck. I realize I have a decent stable of synthesizers and should probably focus more on the recording aspects rather than get caught back in the loop of buying more synths.

Thoughts?

[Z]

It is general practice to record electronic instruments (synths, drum machines, etc.) direct to mixer and/or track machine rather than mic amps unless you're Eddie VH running OB-X into Marshall stacks a la "I'll Wait."

[Alex Hamilton]

Will you be using this equipment just for synths? If so, I'd say don't bother - synths are line level, as I'm sure you know, which makes it easy to interface them with plenty of outboard equipment. You can add things like distortion and ambience in the mix; no doubt using real spaces gives a different sound, but not necessarily a better one and it's probably not worth it. If, however, you'd be using it for other instruments too (things like trumpets stick out for me as an example as I like that 'Bitches Brew' sound) then it's definitely something to think about. It depends if you can configure the rest of your house around your setup!

I would need to purchase a decent amplifier, speakers, microphone, and possibly preamp, compressor, etc

I would suggest starting with a mic, preamp and compressor (if the preamp lacks one) first. Probably a stereo setup would be best, seeing as you're looking to get a more 'unified' sound. Do you want stuff distorted? Because if you do, any old crappy amp and speaker will do a decent job (you'll need a DI box if you go the guitar amp route). If you're looking hi-fi, I'd suggest - on a limited budget - that you just alternate moving your mixing/playback amp and or speakers between wherever you want to mix, and wherever you want to 'sample'. That'd certainly save money, and distortion (as in the harmonic kind) would be minimised. Obviously if you don't have decent monitors already, that's your first step.

[aeon]

I’ve been reading a few books and time and time again it seems that a lot of added depth and ambience comes from placement of microphones in a room related to the amplification of the instrument and the natural reverb of the room.

As it concerns acoustic, and some electro-acoustic instruments, this is quite true. The benefit of a room with good acoustics cannot be overestimated.

It is a different story for most electronic instruments as they are most-often recorded directly, i.e., their line-level output is recorded or mixed directly without the use of a mic, pre, or DI.

That said, the use of echo, ambience, and reverberation can be of great benefit as it concerns creating a soundstage when using electronic instruments whose timbre would be otherwise "dry." In my experience, the use of point-source and diffuse-cloud reverberation tends to work better for this application than acoustic amplification of the source with subsequent capture via microphones. Your experience may lead to a different conclusion, and indeed, your song may call for a different approach.

I simply find a great deal of synergy between synths and reverb boxes. So instead of spending all that coin on outboard recording gear, you can spend it on rack gear from Eventide, Bricasti, Kurzweil, Lexicon, t.c. electronic, Quantec, AMS, AKG, Sony, SevenWoods, Roland, Klark-Teknik, Yamaha, Dynacord, and so on.


cheers,
Ian

[Hossinfeffa]

Interesting. I record my synths direct in, but had heard some bands "back in the day" would mic up an amp and record. For instance, I heard Depeche Mode did this on their debut album. I was considering giving it a go sometime too.

I can understand a good reverb taking the place of recording from an amp, but what about if the amp had its own sound? Like a tube amp.

[tallowwaters]

Will you be using this equipment just for synths? If so, I'd say don't bother - synths are line level, as I'm sure you know, which makes it easy to interface them with plenty of outboard equipment. You can add things like distortion and ambience in the mix; no doubt using real spaces gives a different sound, but not necessarily a better one and it's probably not worth it. If, however, you'd be using it for other instruments too (things like trumpets stick out for me as an example as I like that 'Bitches Brew' sound) then it's definitely something to think about. It depends if you can configure the rest of your house around your setup!

I would need to purchase a decent amplifier, speakers, microphone, and possibly preamp, compressor, etc

I would suggest starting with a mic, preamp and compressor (if the preamp lacks one) first. Probably a stereo setup would be best, seeing as you're looking to get a more 'unified' sound. Do you want stuff distorted? Because if you do, any old crappy amp and speaker will do a decent job (you'll need a DI box if you go the guitar amp route). If you're looking hi-fi, I'd suggest - on a limited budget - that you just alternate moving your mixing/playback amp and or speakers between wherever you want to mix, and wherever you want to 'sample'. That'd certainly save money, and distortion (as in the harmonic kind) would be minimised. Obviously if you don't have decent monitors already, that's your first step.

Wow, that is a h**l of a lot of misinformation to cram into 2 paragraphs. Kudos.


I amp my synths and drum machines and mic them for effect sometime, and it is an effect that is impossible to mimic. You can waste hours upon hours and never come close (at least I cant).

You dont need anything special. Pick up a reasonable 10-50 watt amp off craigs and something like an EV RE10 or the ubiquitous SM57 in front of it, just run it to a good pre (a good preamp is always nice to have) as well as some compressors or whatever (or just invest in a lower midlevel channel strip, like a JoeMeek VC3 or whatever).

Personally, I hate moving all that s**t around just to record a track, but maybe you drink a lot less when you record.

[Alex Hamilton]

Sorry Otto, I started to type a response but realised it wasn't going to be worth pissing off TW for it.

My suggestion is this: start recording. See if you feel your mixes need an additional push to get them sounding good - many (most?) do, and as TW says, there aren't many ways of getting the sound of, for example, a synth being played in a garage full of empty paint cans, without playing a synth in a garage full of empty paint cans. You can always start mixing without tools that you feel you may need, and acquire those tools as your skills improve enough to allow you to get the most out of them. I generally find myself using convolution reverbs on acoustic/electro-acoustic instruments, and more effect-y reverbs on synths, but that's just personal, and I know I don't do nearly as much mixing as do other members here (TW and Aeon from just this thread).

[diezdiazgiant]

reamping synths isnt necessary but it can add nice harmonics/variation and still be economic.
i remember reading some interview with james holden where he says that for some stuff to dirty up synth he'll reamp it with some shitty little gorrila practice amp.
coincidently shortly after reading that i stumbled on the exact same amp at a thrift store for ten bucks, i keep it plugged into the send on my tascam 4 track (only 50 bucks!) and mic it with an sm58. ill send stuff thru as a parallel signal and mix it with the clean original signal. i like that for lead lines or bass, and the drums ill do something similar with this little vox ac30 sim my girlfriend gave me, its not a real amp but i take the headphone out jack and jsut plug the output into another channel jsut to use it as an insert.
this is all in my living room, definitly not professional but it can add just enough grit if youre looking to make your clean synth leads sound grimy and not cost an arm and a leg.

[otto]

To be honest and I hope those that have offered feedback aren’t’ offended, I think the point was really missed. I didn’t say I wanted to use re-amping in an attempt to lo-fi my sound. I realize I could route synths through crappy amps and record them through any microphone to experiment with lo-fi sounds. I’ve read a couple books lately on pro-recording and more than a few times I’ve read mention of re-”amping” synths among other things to add natural reverb and obviously the artifacts associated with mics, mic placement and associated elements in the recording chain (pre-amp, etc.).
I think I’ve realized at this point and at my level, my time and money could be better spent elsewhere but I still thought it would be interesting to discuss. I just think it was derailed into an experimental, lo-fi thing which was not my intent. I do appreciate the feedback though.

[kayvon]

There's always speaker sims that include a miking effect. Can't really reccomend any, I've only used the one in my Fantom XR and actually wasn't that impressed when using a lead sound through it. Though I didn't do extensive testing with it.

[depecheNIN]

Otto -

I know EXACTLY what you're talking about. Bruce Swedien used it to great effect on Thriller. I believe he used really, really nice mics and re-amped the studio monitors, though...then blended it with the line signal. What this does is add early reflections (natural reverb) to the sound.

Unless you do it like this, with really expensive microphones, stereo miking, and using really high-quality studio monitors, it just ends up "lo-fi"-ing the sound. Still, I'm telling you, it's a great Lo-Fi sound (in-describably unique).

[piRoN]

I've done this in the past through my monitors with dynamics and condensors, and it's quite handy for "naturalising" synth and drum machine sounds, as it tends to soften up the more unnatural transients and such that most synth sounds have, as well as adding a bit of room ambience.

Generally I use it if I want to get a synth to fit in with a bunch of acoustic sounds, when straight 'verb isn't cutting it.

[wesleymino]

I'm doing something similar to what I think Piron is describing, playing a synth sound through your studio monitor speaker and putting a mic on that. it seems to round off the harsh edges of the sound, and you can adjust the mic position to get different frequency response. simply passing the sound through that little space of air between the speaker and mic adds a perceived dimension to it, which I find very appealing. but I just use an sm57 and it's not really capturing the characteristics of the room.

I don't think amping synths is an uncommon practice. wasn't the stevie wonder Talking Book era stuff recorded this way? those mixes are so spacious, not reverb heavy but definitely roomy. compare that with the early wendy carlos stuff (which I think is all DI'd). I hear a difference.

[ronP]

oo


I use my ROLAND MicroCube for reamping the organ sounds on my CASIO MT-70. The amp's effected mono output goes into my mixer where I add a bit of bass, middle, and treble tweaking, and then the part goes stereo out into my four-track. This recording then goes into the DAW. This convoluted process creates that distant, washy, chorused empty hall sound reminiscent of the pop organ recordings of the 1960s, which I love.


oo

[Esus]

If I understand your question, you're interested in recording your tracks in different ambiences (spaces) in your house, and maybe purchasing some gear in order to do it. The tone of your post suggests you don't have much if any recording gear, and you'd like to get some without breaking the bank (forget that metaphor, bank's already broke).

If you're starting from scratch, and assuming you have a half-decent PC, how about Reaper or n-track as a recorder/editor?
Tallow's advice on an RE-20 or SM57 is good, 'cept the 20 is about 3X the dough. I'll add a Sennheiser 421 to that list.
Mackie, KRK , Yamaha, et. al. make decent powered monitors--speakers and an amp!
There are tons of interfaces & mic pres out there--I'll let somebody else comment on that.
You should also have a decent pair of closed-ear headphones--Sony 7506 $90.

One suggestion, and even though it's obvious, I'll make it anyway. Once you're recording, take your synth direct as well as miked, and record 2 simultaneous tracks--dry and mic. That way if the furnace kicks on in the middle of that perfect take, you at least have a backup..