This may seem an odd query but i’m currently at the bottom of a rabbit hole on recorded sounds and what sound best. I think now I’m just overly critical of everything that i’m doing and it’s leading to confusion and frustration.
Attached are two files rendered from Reaper. They are Acoustic via Katana 50 MkII - UMC202 - into Reaper with nothing added in Reaper.
What I would like to hear from you Justin aficionados is what do you think sounds the better tone? I will refrain from saying what small adjustment I made (although some may know) so as not to influence your decision.
If they both sound rubbish to you please feel free to say so but please add what it is that doesn’t sound right to you.
I like EQ Check 2 the best. I think acoustic tones needs a lot of “air”, and the first one sounds just a little bit too “boxy” and mid focused.
But to understand; you’re using an acoustic guitar with piezo pickups, into the Katana and from there to audio interface via some line level output? (don’t know the Katana amps very well)
EQ Check 2 sounds better.
What kind of amplification do you have in your guitar?
If it is just a piezzo pickup - there is only that much you can do with an EQ…
I think you are going to get a mixed result. I have a good bit of tinnitus and loss of upper range in my hearing, so the brighter sound made nuances stand out for me.
I’m also in the EQ2 camp. It sounds warmer and fuller to me. The first a little too bright. Though if I heard just the first I would not have thought it sounded bad.
Hi Kasper thanks for your feedback, yes correct, acoustic with Piezo pickups, via the rec/headphone out (wet) from the Katana, then AI to Reaper.
Hi Alex thanks for listening, appreciate your feedback mate. Yes it’s the Taylor ES2 Piezo Pickup system.
Thanks also Michael, Brian & Dave for your feedback guys.
So, the onboard guitar EQ is a treble and bass control and the treble was reduced slightly and the bass was increased slightly.
On the Katana the treble and bass were slightly reduced, (about 10 or 11 o’clock).
The only difference between the two recordings was that in 1 the mid was slightly increased (1 to 2 o’clock) and in 2 the mid was slightly reduced (about 11 o’clock)
All was with a light Dunlop 0.46 Nylon pick. (It all changed again once I changed picks )
You will be better served by developing your “ears” and the ability to self-assess. The sooner that you can get to dialing in a tone that you like the better.
Thanks Clint, yep I agree, but this exercise is part of developing that. As sound is very subjective in general I was interested to see if there was a majority one way or the other and if that aligned with my preference.
In developing your ear you also need some general baselines to asses against in my opinion.
Also you need to factor in that we are all listening through different devices of differing quality and its unlikely to mirror your set up. For example, I can listen to the same piece via my Shure or Sennheiser headphones, Shure In Ear Monitors or cheap buds, my Behringer Studio speakers or my budget soundbar that acts as my PC speaker. They will all sound different, so I think that adds additional relevance to what @CT Clint is saying.
Then you will also have to mix your overall production, so its balanced across multiple platforms or target what you think may be used more frequently by your listeners.
YMMV
I used to listen to my mixes on headphones, in the car and with my Mac speakers, all at different volume levels. The idea was to make sure I had a good all around mix before releasing a track. This was when I was finding my way around the studio. I’m not launching the space shuttle or recording the next “Dark Side” LP, but I’ve learned to take the time to get the tone and volume levels where they need to be “Going in” --rather than in post production EQ futzing. I think I asked a group of folks for feedback on a track one time before releasing, and that was enough for me.
yes correct, acoustic with Piezo pickups, via the rec/headphone out (wet) from the Katana, then AI to Reaper.
)