1 mic recording.

[Zoutvat]

What is the best way to record a guitar, using just 1 microphone and still get a natural, open and spacious sounding result? Up till now I doubled the recorded track and let a number of plugins do their work (with varying results).

 

[thomasdf]

Depends on the player, the guitar (you don’t even say what type), the room and the mic.
Experiment ! No one will ever be able to you on a forum.
Record and compare, and redo it until you are happy.

 

[john12ax7]

Electric or acoustic?

 

[k brown]

What is the best way to record a guitar, using just 1 microphone and still get a natural, open and spacious sounding result? Up till now I doubled the recorded track and let a number of plugins do their work (with varying results).

You might try a little 'world-izing'.

Playback the track on a loudspeaker placed in a relatively live room, then send only that track to the FX before mixing with original.

 

[Zoutvat]

Electric or acoustic?

Acoustic, more specific: archtop 'jazz' guitar.

 

[k brown]

It has to be asked: why one mic; do you literally only own one?

..."open and spacious" generally suggests recording in stereo.

 

[Zoutvat]

It has to be asked: why one mic; do you literally only own one?

..."open and spacious" generally suggests recording in stereo.

For several reasons: very limited space, only 1 really good microphone, avoiding phasing issues and I like the overview I have in my DAW.

 

[Barry Hufker]

Phasing "issues" are not all bad. It is the time of arrival difference to our ears which creates a sense of size and depth. Recording with one microphone is fine, but you might want to add some delays or reverb (again, time-of-arrival differences) to give your guitar a sense of size and space, otherwise it might just sound like a guitar in a bedroom...

As to placement, there are many options for acoustic guitar. Three of the popular ones are: 1) mic pointed at the 12th to 14th fret (and a distance from the instrument of a few inches to 1 foot or two); 2) Placed about 6" to 1' over the right shoulder (shoulder of the strumming hand), facing down towards the bridge. 3) 1 to 2' away from the lower bout, aiming at the bridge. All these techniques have "a sound" and advantages/disadvantages. And they may require a bit of EQ to make the sound optimum.

Pardon me if this sound preachy as I don't mean it that way: A guitar is an "acoustic" instrument and as such the sound needs space to bloom. Be careful how close the mic is and don't record in a small room.

 

[k brown]

I would even go so far as to say that using two different microphones as a 'stereo pair' is preferable to sodding mono; elec guitar is one thing, but a half-way decent acoustic really deserves the small added effort of stereo.

"Phasing issues" is a rather vague catch-all phrase that often includes a few misinformed assumptions.

 

[john12ax7]

My default for 1 mic is to point it where the neck meets the body about a foot away. The main thing for an acoustic is don't point it at the soundhole, but an archtop might not have the same issues due to f holes. You could experiment from 14 fret to bridge to see what you prefer.

 

[OneRoomStudio]

I have recorded a solo artist playing banjo and singing before in mono with one mic. It sounded great, but the goal was a very natural and 'organic' sound, and of course, the final format was mono (vinyl in this case).

The trick is placement. I had to play with both distance from the source and height to balance the vocals and banjo (the mic - a large ribbon - had to be closer to the floor than you would think in order to balance the banjo and vocal levels).

Not the ideal way of recording, but it is possible and can sound good.

 

[Zoutvat]

Pardon me if this sound preachy as I don't mean it that way

No, not preachy at all, thanks for sharing these hints.

 

[ze marcelo]

Depends on the player, the guitar (you don’t even say what type), the room and the mic.
Experiment ! No one will ever be able to you on a forum.
Record and compare, and redo it until you are happy.

I complete agree with @thomasdf. You will find many videos on YouTube proposing the magic, but believe me, recording an instrument is not like making a cake recipe, It all depends on the acoustics of your room, the instrument, the musician, the equipment and the sound you want to have in the end. In my humble opinion first of all choose some reference recordings, then try the mic position as many as you can. You will find good tips https://cambridge-mt.com/rs2/lmp/acoustic-guitar-01/

good looks and all the best.

 

[k brown]

What is the best way to record a guitar, using just 1 microphone and still get a natural, open and spacious sounding result? Up till now I doubled the recorded track and let a number of plugins do their work (with varying results).

You seem to be asking two different questions.

1. What single-mic placement on acoustic guitar will result in a more open and spacious sound?

2. How can a mono track of acoustic guitar be post-processed to achieve a more open and spacious sound?

Some clarification may get you more useful responses.

 

[GussyLoveridge]

Good omni in a good sounding place in nice room?

 

[Cqwet Dbdfte]

Several ideas how a recording should sound to be "good".
Blumlein, bin-aural, RCA living stereo had similar concepts, but with some differences. Check some audio engineering books.
Those early concepts, superficially simple gave way to close-miking and heavy post processing.
"Simple" minimalistic recordings, that includes room acoustics, can sound really nice. Example: Andrews Sisters' Rum and Coca-Cola, etc.
Expectations and taste.

 

[k brown]

Several ideas how a recording should sound to be "good".
Blumlein, bin-aural, RCA living stereo had similar concepts, but with some differences. Check some audio engineering books.
Those early concepts, superficially simple gave way to close-miking and heavy post processing.
"Simple" minimalistic recordings, that includes room acoustics, can sound really nice. Example: Andrews Sisters' Rum and Coca-Cola, etc.
Expectations and taste.

? ?

Except for all being some form of stereo, Blumlein, binaural and Living Stereo have nothing in common.

Blumlein nowadays refers to a coincident pair of figure eight mics at 90 degrees, and although first described by Alan Blumlein, the technique was not called that in his lifetime.

Binaural was the term first used by Alan Blumlein to describe two channel recording, but was quickly replaced by the term stereophonic. The term binaural is now used only to describe the dummy head technique where mics are placed inside an artificial human head (or worn on/in the ears of a person). It's part of a broader class of stereo techniques known as 'near coincident', where there is a small space between the mics; ~7"-12" (including ORTF, NOS, Jecklin disc, etc.).

Living Stereo was not a mic technique at all, but an umbrella marketing term used by RCA for their early stereo releases, both Classical and Pop; though most of their Classical sessions were done with what is now often referred to as "M3" (three widely spaced mics; usually omnis), none but the very earliest releases were pure 3-mic affairs, but used several spot mics as well. What were pure 3-mic "M3" recordings were Mercury Living Presence, most of the Everests, and the first several years of Telarc.

 

[emrr]

Good omni in a good sounding place in nice room?

Yep. For these constraints. I don't even care if the room is nice.