When I´m playing out I tend to use a small tube amp, 10 Watts or so in output, I think. It´s by no means ideal -- sounds a bit to harsh and does not provide the right type of distortion. A Joyo pedal has also entered my arsenal lately, and that´s a fine little thing, even if it works better for itself than in conjunction with the amp. But when I´m fiddling around with recording, here at home or in a small time studio setting, I mostly find a sound on the RP pedal -- or now, the Joyo -- and let that go straight to the board.
However, these are also way too much into the harsh region to be satisfying. I´ve often used Richard Hunters patches, but have now learned to do things myself.
My question is: can any of you suggest something to make these sounds a bit more palatable? More like a valve amp and less "electric". Any adjustments?
"A no-brainer" is a probable reaction, "buy a vintage amp" etc, but I´m gripping for a straw.
I´m a very lo-tech guy, but sound No 1 here is something I cooked up myself on the RP. After some 20 seconnds or so I switch to a setting on the Joyo pedal, some delay added. (And that one works live; the first one isn´t tested yet.)
The mic is an Audix -- and, in order not to give this too much of a mic leaning I did two more tracks with my vintage Beyer mic for comparison. Same settings. Sounds thinner, I think.
A tall order, I know, but I´m grateful for any pointers. And please excuse the dreadful playing, I hate it, Something that can bring out a rash on sensitive people; but I wanted some of that fast shit and various double stops: long, clean notes sound kind of all right with these settings, but shorter, quicker note sequences give this very pointed, un-organic feel. And I add, this is mainly for blues/rock etc playing. I wouldn´t approach a jazzier/softer/sweeter tune with this type of sound.
I've tried every modelling amp/box option I have come across and I can't find any one that replicates the particular features of my little cheapo tube amp. (See rant on the beginner's forum).
The harp break into a clean amp does do a good job of it, but that's a different thing.
If there is an solution that would be great.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Mar 12, 2016 9:36 AM
I think thee doth worry too much. Sounds like electric harmonica to me. While you are searching for the silver bullet (transistor?) solution, don't forget to watch Craigslist for that old tube amp.
Hello Martin. I love modelling amps too, but the truth is that from what I tested, we (harp players) are still far from achieving a great sound for recording purposes. Modelling for me excels at live playing, you can get a very convincing amplified harmonica sound, and also use a lots of great effects, but when you record over a mix you can still hear the digital artifacts.
From what I tested, the best amplified modelling sound comes from a VST plugin called Bias. It's a paid software, but well worth the price. Also if you have an Iphone or and Ipad you can use it for live playing.
You can here a sample of me playing with a backing track using Bias in this link. It's still not a perfect sound, but for me it has a depth of sound that lacks in the Zoom G3, RP or Pods that I have tested so far.
Thats exactly the problem I see in your recording, is that for my ears it is too flat, it's an unidemensional sound, I don't know if you get what I'm saying. That's what I love from Bias, to my ears, it has a rounder sound.
Lastly, we have to take into account that modelling software it's geared to guitar players, and they are made for sounding great for guitar. Since they are a reproduction of the real thing, they kinf of work for harp, but I think we still have to wait some years before finding a great modelling amp for harp.
For last, my two cents. In your audio I think you can lower the mids a little bit and also, lower the gain of the amp. You need very little gain with modelling amps, it will help to make it sound less artificial.
Last Edited by Camilo_Harper86 on Mar 12, 2016 10:56 AM
I'm certainly no connoisseur of dirt, but the Audix is a very clean mic with minimal proximity effect. Nice mic, but perhaps not the best choice for what you are trying to do. Try a 545 or 545 Ultimate. You will get greater depth of tone immediately, and since the 545 has proximity effect you can tighten your cup to drive the amp harder and get more texture and more bottom. The 545 will fatten your tone and make it less "sterile." But it is also a quality mic and works well with modeling processors and pedals. FWIW
Last Edited by hvyj on Mar 12, 2016 1:51 PM
I believe you need a combination of the kind of mic that responds to cupping, and then the amp/model/pedal.
I've recorded my cupped-mic signal straight and it is distorted, technically, in the sense the harmonic content is radically changed. But it's not gritty, the amp does that bit.
After trying a lot of kit, I've concluded that Camilo_Harper is right that the modelling software has been optimised for guitar players, and there are some particular feature of amped harp that aren't included. It's a shame, because they might have emerged by accident rather than design, but it doesn't seem to be the case.
I haven't looked at the software, but it's not unusual for everyone to do it roughly the same way once something has been developed. So they may all have similar characteristics at heart, while the detailed implementations differ. I'd need to look, I wonder if anyone here knows.
My subjective impression is the modelled sound is compressed, has a soft sound and generally has a mid scoop. The Joyo is helpful because it has a mid-boost, and the Voice pot can boost the mids too. But when you draw hard on a note, it still lacks that sharp response.
Once in I while I get the idea that I'd write something harp-specific on put it e.g. on a Raspberry PI or some such, but I've no time for it and never will have.
I think Camilo's sample is good, and has a more analogue timbre than Martin's example. Here is a recording of the Joyo. Absolutely no apologies for the playing, none whatsoever, I'm just trying seeing if I can make it do 'that thing' on the vamps. Champ-voice, mid boost and bass cut to give it a more brittle and nasal timbre.
MindTheGap's example demonstrates why I was gonna say. With a good mic and plenty of microphone technique (the importance of which can't be overstated) you should be able to get very close to that "Champ" or "Kalamazoo" tone. The Fireball is definitely NOT the right mic as it doesn't respond much to cupping. An Ultimate 545 or a Bulletini will help you get the most out of that amp.
Martin ... your crazy. That sounded great to me. I wasnt listening thru speeakers, just my phone. So maybe there is something im Missing, but to me it was right on.
As greg said a Dirtier Mic will get you more breakup for sure. 57 with a imp. xfrmr, An Akai Dm13 or Aiwa DM10 are some of my favorites of the mics i have tried so far. They are relatively cheap aswell.
But either way try a dirty hiz mic. ---------- "Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
Last Edited by Killa_Hertz on Mar 13, 2016 9:56 AM
What about an Art tube MP. Is a tube preamp. http://www.modernbluesharmonica.com/board/board_topic/5560960/5317374.htm ---------- Sorry for any misspell, english is not my first language.
It sounds great - it does sound like an RP to me. I am pretty sure I would have insisted there was some sort of pedal being used straight in or to a miked amp. It is the nature of the beast. That works for a lot of players like Andy Just and Jason Ricci (digital in front of tube amps). There is nothing wrong with that approach.
MTG sounds great too - but I am biased as I think the Joyo is fantastic for harp. After an insane amount of A/B'ing, though, I couldn't get it to have the same upper mid rip of a Victoria 5112 (which in its own right isn't necessarily the best small harp amp for blues).
I LOVE the Joyo and think that that works as well, if not better, for harp amp sounds than any other pedal. ---------- Mike My Website My Harmonica Effects Blog
IMHO, the Fireball into the RP has a distinct sound. Changing mics radically changes what you hear, BUT can create feedback beyond direct recording (especially with the Richard Hunter patches).
I agree, when I try the joyo pedal on its own I think it sounds good, but when I A/B it with an amp I can hear it does haven't quite have that rip as you say.
Everyone now and again I give it another try, wondering if there aren't some setting that unlocks it.
indigo - Thank you. Yes straight into the computer, bit of reverb. I wanted to see if I could get a direct signal that sounded like amp and speaker. That seems to be difficult to do - not having a speaker involved seems to dull the sound. Yes indeed, I would normally use it into a PA.
I tried recording the signal direct from a Harp Break and that is very 'dull' - but through an amp it's sharp and lively and gives that ripping sound.
Re the ART Tube MP and Behringer Ultragain, Rogonzab has helpfully provided a load of great demos over on the beginner's forum.
http://www.modernbluesharmonica.com/board/board_topic/8987845/5491873.htm
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Mar 15, 2016 2:55 AM
Thank you all for tips and insights. Since I suspected that the microphone question would be brought up I recorded with *both* the Audix and the vintage Beyer mics. (The Audix sounding better.) Maybe the Beyer doesn´t qualify as a passable mic, but can´t afford to buy Bulletinis or any other stuff for the moment.
I´m not as conviced as Greg H, the resident mic guru, that microphones are that decisive in this context -- but of course I lack his knowledge. However, I´ll make another recording attempt with a couple of different mics, a Shure and some other thing that´s lying around here collecting dust, in order to settle that matter for myself. Will be posted.
But before that I´ll try to come to grips with an Art Tube that I´ve borrowed from a friend. Once again, many thanks, and "I´ll be back".
IMHO the mmicrophone is the most significant piece of equipment and has the greatest effect on a harmonica players sound than any other item. I've never tried a Beyer, but I am under the impression that it is a fairly clean mic. The Audix is a certainly very clean mic. So neither gives you a feel for how a more "textured" mic would affect your sound. FWIW
So I borrowed an SM 58. (Couldn´t find a 57, which might have been better.) And here´s the result, to be compared with the above. First it´s the 58 into the RP. (And regrettably I can´t take that sound with me out on a gig, which I´d liked.) There´s a difference compared to the Audix in my first sample -- but is it significant?
Then the 58 into the Joyo AS pedal. Clearer sound than the Audix, but not really significant, to my ears.
Then for comparison, and old cassette tape mic, ultra cheapo stuff, first into the Joyo, then the RP. Not a hell of a lot of difference.
So, as far as I´m concerned, and as far as I´ve gone here, the microphones in *this* context don´t seem to me to be a decisive factor in getting a warmer, more tube-like sound. Perhaps on those faster, sloppy passages it sounded a bit more "real", but ... nah.
Now, next thing is, "Are you cupping properly?". And well ... let´s not go into that now.
Beware listener, once again. As The Dude´s friend says, "You´re entering a world of pain here". (And yes, one harmonica was seriously out of tune, I noticed.)
The 58 is another essentially clean mic. With all due respect, it is not rational/reasonable to conclude that the mic is not a decisive factor based on comparisons of different essentially clean mics. I'm not trying to argue with you--I'm trying to help you out. I've tried a lot of different kinds of mics over the last 35 or so years and the differences as they affect the sound produced are significant and even dramatic if you compare DIFFERENT TYPES of mics,
Your input is valued, hvyj, believe me, and I´m grateful for all perspectives. Somtimes I suspect, though, that we build belief systems in these matters that are very hard to penetrate and I lean just a little bit towards that (which could be interpreted as if I´m building up my own belief system ...) when it comes to mic fundamentalism.
Please note that I in my latest clip above played through a mic that is very dirty. If you compare the first and very last parts of the clip, do you really hear that much difference?
But I´m just this day going to try out an SM 57 in a controlled environment. Don`t know if I can record it, but I can record another sample with my green bullet here at home -- if not that´s also a clean mic?
What would you say, if I may ask, is a reasonably dirty mic beside the 545?
One of my favorite mics for a dirty and powerful sound is the Shure 533SA. Could be worth a shot. The SM58 into the RP that you played in the beginning of the last clip sounded pretty nice and full bodied to me, but you said you can't take that sound on a gig with you.. I'm curious why not?---------- -LeWin$key
Electrovoice RE10, Electrovoice 664. The 57 has good proximity effect but really isn't what I consider dirty. The 545 is more textured than outright dirty, although some older 545s are dirty.
@Harmonica Lewinsky: The reason was that it was a bit too much gain for it not to feed back. But I made a very slight, almost inaudible corection, and tested it with a PA, and it went pretty well. Functional volume, anyway.
@hvyj: OK, thanks. Could only find an SM 57 at the moment -- but tested that one into a PA, as well as a Green Bullet, the SM58 and another one that I don´t recall the name of plus the lowly cassette mic.
The Audix comes out on top of all of them -- both in terms of volume and warmth. The SM 57 was impressively close to the Audix in volume, but thinner, more metallic, in sound.
The best sound in terms of dirt came from one of my 50 cent cassette mics, but, unsurprisingly, it didn´t hold up in the volume department.
This was with a 400 W PA, and the Joyo and RP pedals respectively.
My conclusion this far: The Audix was a good purchase.
If I can get my hands on an EV or 545 I´ll have another test session.
I am surprised by your results Martin. It was when I first cupped an SM57, rather than a vocal mic with a grill, that I began to realise what all the fuss was about. I found a massive boost to the signal, especially at the bass end, that easily caused the amps and pedals I was using to overdrive. The difference between open/closed cup was very large - even with my rudimentary skill.
It was quite a different sound to getting overdrive using a mesh-type vocal mic, say into a RP device, by using more gain. Which you can do.
I know people talk about clean/dirty mics. Personally I've never found a mic to be actually 'dirty' itself. I've tried recording the straight signal, and not heard any. What I've heard is that the cupped mic presents a strong but essentially clean signal, but with a highly modified timbre, to the amp/pedal, and it's that that causes it to distort in particular way. If I'm wrong I'd be pleased to be corrected with a sound sample (seriously, that would be interesting to hear).
One of the key things of the organic-valve-amp sound you refer to seems to be the variations people get opening and closing the cup. Even if you can make a Fireball sound distorted, if it doesn't change with varying cup I feel you are missing out an important bit.
Just to say, I do think the sound you are getting is pleasing, and really good, but I'm only responding because you don't appear to be happy with it yourself.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Mar 19, 2016 2:26 AM
@MindTheGap: I´m not derperately unhappy, but I detect the prescense of an "artifical" element -- esp. when it come to those double stops and the faster phrases -- that disturbs me a bit.
I positively *hate* doing these things (testing sounds), and if I´d been more compos mentis I´d have asked my friend to turn on the recorder in the studio so I could get some more objectivity. But it never entered my mind. Anyway, we were two listeners and shared the exact same opinion on the SM57.
OK. I do agree with you about the slightly artificial sound. I've found adding a bit more treble on the joyo can give some more bite, which you might like better. Takes it away from the soft-fuzz territory. This morning I tried some settings with strong distortion, more like your area. It's definitely 'a sound'.
These setting below, and an SM57 with NO impedance matching transformer. The lower mic signal allows more travel on the gain pot.
"I know people talk about clean/dirty mics. Personally I've never found a mic to be actually 'dirty' itself. I've tried recording the straight signal, and not heard any. What I've heard is that the cupped mic presents a strong but essentially clean signal, but with a highly modified timbre, to the amp/pedal, and it's that that causes it to distort in particular way."
@MTG. That's pretty interesting. I ll have to test it out for myself, but you might be on to something there. Perhaps its more to do with the specific pickup pattern and how it reacts to cupping. Is that what makes a mic "Hot" ... I mean the HiZ helps the overdrive ofcourse, but .. interesting. Surely someone who knows better will weigh in and let us kno.
Btw some of those "cheap tape recorder mics" are my favorite. Ide put em up against mics 10x their $value. For that specific sound anyway. Its been said before, but all the mics your trying are of the same class. Try an akai mic. They don't cost much and they might be what your looking for. Or atleast give u a start. ---------- "Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
Last Edited by Killa_Hertz on Mar 20, 2016 7:21 AM
@MindTheGap: Thank you. I´ll give those settings a shot. I suppose you have to compensat quite a bit on the PA for the low level.
@Killa Hertz: The crappy mics have their use. I find them lacking quite a bit in the volume and bass departments, but in controlled circumstances they can do the job. I´ll kepp my eye open for an Akai. Thank you.
kHz - well, that's my assertion and I expect it will be dismissed. But I can only go on what I've found. And thinking of processes that are available - part of the 'dirt' supplied by the amp can only be created with a non-linear process, and I can't see how a mic could do that. Unless it were say, a carbon button mic, which is a form of powered amplifier anyway.
If someone does disprove this, then I'd be interested in buying that type of mic as that would be great to have a naturally distorting mic.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Mar 20, 2016 11:36 AM
@Martin : @MindTheGap: I´m not derperately unhappy, but I detect the prescense of an "artifical" element -- esp. when it come to those double stops and the faster phrases -- that disturbs me a bit.
I'm sorry to say this, but Martin, you are never going to achieve a non artifical sound. You might try hundreds of mics, all the Modelers in the market, try hundreds of presets but the truth is that modeller technology is not there yet.
Maybe in 5 or 10 years it will, who knows.
In the meantime, I see modellers as they are, a fun imitation of the real thing, but still very far from achieving a realistic reproduction of a real amp for harp.
For live playing they are OK, since the acoustics hide better the artificial nature (and most people won't care), but in recording you can spot them very easily.
@MindTheGap I like the sound you got using that Joyo. Did you use the SM57 without the IMT on that sample and do you mind telling me what settings you used. Thanks.
Thank you Grey Owl. Ah, that was with the Bulletini, so it's Hi-Z anyway, but with the VC backed off a bit, It's such a strong signal. If I remember right it was...
Voice 2-3 o'clock Gain 11 o'clock Lo 10, Mid 2-3 Hi 2 o'clock
And lots of furious TBing. Anyway, the aim was to set the mic and gain to make it basically cleanish on signal notes, and distorted on double stops and chords.
Camilo_Harper - yes, you do seem to be right. Unless someone has a counter-example.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Mar 20, 2016 12:36 PM
Mtg ... well for what is worth it makes sence to me. Maybe ill throw it into a new thread n see if guys like greg will weigh in.
Martin .. the akai isnt so crappy. The tape recorder mics arent all created equal. I think you would be pleasantly surprised. ---------- "Trust Those Who Seek The Truth. Doubt Those Who Say They Have Found It."
@Camilo Harper 86: No need to be sorry. I´m an old bastard now and I can handle adversity. You may be right in your assesment, quite frankly I lack the knowledge to have an educated opinion -- but I can say that Richard Hunter for one would disagree.
And, even if this is live, are you aware of this video:
Ah yes but the Harp Break is an analogue device, not a digital modelling pedal. It definitely does have a more organic, dynamic feel to it.
Originally I thought I could go HB -> JF14 -> PA. To use bark of the HB and the voicing, EQ and speaker emulation of the JF14. But mysteriously the dynamic bite, bark, rasp (call it what you will) simply disappears :(
In fact I asked Randy why this might be, and although he didn't have a precise answer, he reckoned that the HB being analogue meant it could respond better to articulations. I remember reading somewhere that the articulations/attack of a harp note are sharper (or different, anyway) than a guitar - for which these things are designed.
Still a good sound, but it doesn't have 'that thing' and that's just how it is.
Re the Digitech RP - I think the samples I've heard on Richard Hunter's site are output through a keyboard amp? I think once an amp/speaker is involved (even a 'clean' one) it knocks the corners off a bit. So the JF14 even through the PA doesn't sound so artificial vs a direct input.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Mar 21, 2016 7:17 AM
OK. Sorry I missed that about the Harp Break´s analogue nature.
Keyboard amp is what I believe Richard uses, yes. Laney something or other. When I connect mine to my tube amp the result is rather underwhelming -- through PA or directly into whatever recording interface you use it is, as I believe I said above, passable. (I´ll post another RP sample in a separate thread, and I have to say that one of those sounds it gives me there is more than passable. But you can´t take it to town, so to speak.)
First off - Did anyone mention YOU GOT SOME FREAKIN CHOPS there boy! Do you have any recordings or videos up? What practice drills are you doing to get your speed licks going?
About the tone quest: Are you mostly looking to improve the direct recording tone, - your live tone though your 10 watt-er, or both? Your samples are all direct record.
Something on your tracks seems to be creating super (too much) compression to my ear. I love natural compression that happens with the right set up, - it get's you that singing note quality form the first breath. You've got that going on in spades, but the notes are so compressed you almost hear clicking into each one as it starts. That may be part of the 'too electric' sound that's bugging you. Do you have a compression plugin inserted on your recording software? What software are you using?
pos. experiments: Try backing off the drive dial on the joyo. Get some eq going and roll off the upper mid.s and hi's. Add a touch of reverb to soften.
For recording direct, I like some of the tones I can get via Apple Logic's guitar amp simulators. There are also a ton of cheap iPad / iPhone apps now that can also sound good, including Bias and Jam Up
re. mic.s - of course they make a difference, as does technique. How 'hot' the signal coming off the mic greatly affects the way a tube amp especially, distorts. Each mic has it's own eq balance, and reacts differently to the proximity effect (added low end when playing close up on it). In you're live set up though the tube amp, I would expect you will hear more difference than you are though the direct-in modeling recording. That said, - on your recording samples the effect you are getting is like you are playing through a very hot mic.
This was recorded direct into logic using the amp designer and pedalboard. I don't recall the exact settings, - probably small or large tweed 'crunch'
@bonedog569: Many thanks for kind words, but let´s not dwell on my playing.
What I was looking for here was some pointers on how to get this "synthetic" type of distortion a bit more "natural" sounding. Live playing is mostly another matter. I´m not happy with how I sound there either, but I know that to some extent that´s a money question. (Although that´s a taboo comment here.)
You hit the nail on the head when you say, "the notes are so compressed you almost hear clicking into each one as it starts." Or at least I think you do, ´cause "compression" is something I don´t really understand -- unless we take it from a purely semantic standpoint. But that clicking sound is disturbing to me, and its pervasivness is one of the reasons I asked my question in the first place. It seems to give away the source of the sound as, yes, something "electric".
I use the RP (or Joyo) directly into Audacity. Nothing fancy. I´m glad that I can manage to record myself on that program: when you introduce apps or phones and such stuff I´m lost.
I mostly use the Fireball mic, and I think that despite its name it can´t be considered hot.
Your sample proves that one can sound a whole lot less synthetic with digital gear -- and I thank you for it.
re. compression: It's worth googling around on the topic. Just to confuse you - and just about everyone else who isn't versed in audio engineering, there are two very different things that are referred to as 'compression' in the audio world.
#1) - What we are dealing with here. Is when you 'compress' the louder bits making them quieter, and boost the quiet bits to make them louder. Take that overall more even sound then boost the overall volume. Now everything, even your quiet breathy attack, is boosted to nearly the same level as your louder part of the note. Everything now sounds punchy and forward .
Most of your radio hits are using a lot of compression for this reason. Compression can be used on individual instruments or on the whole mix. It occurs naturally to differing degrees, playing through tube amps.
It can be a very useful tool, and is actually a cool part of your tone too, even though it seems to be a over the top in your recordings for some reason. Unfortunately I don't know what's causing it in your case.
#2) FYI - is when you make a file , music or otherwise, smaller. Take a full CD file in .aif or .wav format and remove a lot of info you supposedly can't hear, - and voila - .mp3 file at 1/10 the file size. They do the same with video to make streaming and downloading quicker.
Bonedog - very nice example. I agree that you get a more natural sound with less distortion and compression in play. With a real amp it does seem possible to have a pretty heavy distorted sound, and lively at the same time.
Clean/Dirty Mics Back on the clean/dirty mic question. Here's a great video that rogonzab posted in the beginner's forum. It's got all kinds of useful demos e.g. proximity effect in action, different mic positions on an amp, line out vs mic'd etc. Great Stuff.
Anyway, at 10m15s he demos the DI signal from a bullet mic, which shows distortion. I've asserted that the straight mic signal isn't distorted (with grit anyway) as my own experiments have shown the DI signal to be clean.
So I may have to look again. It could still be that the bullet mic is overdriving some part of the DI input chain, but you can't tell. He shows it going into a Tonebone switch, which is designed for guitar and so the much stronger mic signal may be overdriving it. But that's speculation.
I know from experience it's easy to get a bit of grit playing straight through a PA and slightly overdriving the input channel. In fact it seems to be more of a trick to not overdrive the input channel with a cupped mic.
All I can say is I've passively padded the DI signal from the (cupped) mic until there is nothing being overdriven in the electronic chain, and I didn't get any amp-like grit over and above the acoustic grit. Big changes in the timbre and amplitude of course.
Maybe one of those vintage elements does do this, maybe that's why they are variable and highy prized when people find one that does?
Or maybe it's a failure of technique. People talk about a 'complete seal', although I've seen plenty of examples where people are clearly playing with a hard-cup-sound but one end of the harp sticking out of their hands, so that can't possibly be a complete seal.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Mar 24, 2016 2:39 AM
