Need help. . .again!

[Alison]

I was trying to track my Ovation which has a plug-in and a mic hoping to get a stereo recording but Reaper did not give me the option of choosing the inputs, it only recorded in mono. How can you choose inputs in Reaper? With Studio One, it's pretty simple, Reaper, not so much!!

[Armistice]

I was trying to track my Ovation which has a plug-in and a mic hoping to get a stereo recording but Reaper did not give me the option of choosing the inputs, it only recorded in mono. How can you choose inputs in Reaper? With Studio One, it's pretty simple, Reaper, not so much!!

When you click the Arm button on the track - the thing that goes red - a little box should pop into the track itself - by default it should say "Analog (1)" - click on that and there are your input choices.

More importantly - DON'T DO RECORD IT THAT WAY ANYWAY - what you're getting is not stereo, it's two mono tracks forever bolted to each other on a stereo track, and you then can't treat them separately, and you will want to treat them separately, knowing how acoustic guitar pickups sound. Much better to record them as two separate mono tracks which are then fully adjustable.

[Alison]

I was trying to track my Ovation which has a plug-in and a mic hoping to get a stereo recording but Reaper did not give me the option of choosing the inputs, it only recorded in mono. How can you choose inputs in Reaper? With Studio One, it's pretty simple, Reaper, not so much!!

When you click the Arm button on the track - the thing that goes red - a little box should pop into the track itself - by default it should say "Analog (1)" - click on that and there are your input choices.

More importantly - DON'T DO RECORD IT THAT WAY ANYWAY - what you're getting is not stereo, it's two mono tracks forever bolted to each other on a stereo track, and you then can't treat them separately, and you will want to treat them separately, knowing how acoustic guitar pickups sound. Much better to record them as two separate mono tracks which are then fully adjustable.

When I clicked the arm button, all that showed up was "audio or midi record". So basically what you are saying is, I have to record twice if I want stereo?? What good are 2 inputs if you can't use them? Ugh, frustrated, my hand hurts, and I'm tired. . .

[Armistice]

When you click the Arm button on the track - the thing that goes red - a little box should pop into the track itself - by default it should say "Analog (1)" - click on that and there are your input choices.

More importantly - DON'T DO RECORD IT THAT WAY ANYWAY - what you're getting is not stereo, it's two mono tracks forever bolted to each other on a stereo track, and you then can't treat them separately, and you will want to treat them separately, knowing how acoustic guitar pickups sound. Much better to record them as two separate mono tracks which are then fully adjustable.

When I clicked the arm button, all that showed up was "audio or midi record". So basically what you are saying is, I have to record twice if I want stereo?? What good are 2 inputs if you can't use them? Ugh, frustrated, my hand hurts, and I'm tired. . .

That must have something to do with your interface talking to Reaper - what's your interface and how many channels does it actually have?

This is what I get - a full array of options - in this case mono, but stereo, MIDI and No input are also there as well... that's because my interface has about 8 channels in of various types, despite only 2 mic options. MIDI goes direct to the computer, Kemper goes direct to the computer. They're all there...

AlisonPic.JPG

You absolutely should be able to record as many inputs at once as your interface has - but how many does it have?

[Alison]

Wow, my interface only has two inputs. . .guess I'm behind the times. It served me well until I got into Reaper!

[Greg_L]

Right click the track > input stereo > then assign the inputs

[Armistice]

I wasn't saying record it twice if you want stereo.

Stereo is something that involves two (usually matched) microphones placed apart to give a stereo image of a source that has some width - it can be an acoustic guitar, it can be a piano, it can be a choir, or drum overheads, or an orchestra, or unamplified band - all sorts of things. It can be effects pedals with stereo features, or electric keyboards where you get more of the bass notes on the left and more of the treble notes on the right. Etc.

An acoustic guitar with a pickup plugged in and being recorded and a microphone recording it at the same time is not stereo. It's just two mono tracks. You can record them onto the same track if you want to, but there's no benefit to doing so, only downsides.

I was saying record it as two separate mono tracks at the same time. One for your pickup. One for the microphone - then you have many more options as to the processing of the individual tracks when you're mixing.

I've recorded acoustic guitars lots with multiple microphones and the pick up. Am yet to use a stereo track to do it, however. Always multiple mono tracks. And multiple microphones doesn't necessarily mean stereo, either.

[Alison]

I wasn't saying record it twice if you want stereo.

Stereo is something that involves two (usually matched) microphones placed apart to give a stereo image of a source that has some width - it can be an acoustic guitar, it can be a piano, it can be a choir, or drum overheads, or an orchestra, or unamplified band - all sorts of things. It can be effects pedals with stereo features, or electric keyboards where you get more of the bass notes on the left and more of the treble notes on the right. Etc.

An acoustic guitar with a pickup plugged in and being recorded and a microphone recording it at the same time is not stereo. It's just two mono tracks. You can record them onto the same track if you want to, but there's no benefit to doing so, only downsides.

I was saying record it as two separate mono tracks at the same time. One for your pickup. One for the microphone - then you have many more options as to the processing of the individual tracks when you're mixing.

I've recorded acoustic guitars lots with multiple microphones and the pick up. Am yet to use a stereo track to do it, however. Always multiple mono tracks. And multiple microphones doesn't necessarily mean stereo, either.

I get it, thank you. I'll check it out later today. And, yes, @Greg_L I did set the inputs in the device settings. Weird thing is I know I've seen the option of using both inputs when setting up a track for recording but it wasn't there this time. Tis a mystery! I'll try Armi's suggestion and see what happens!

[Greg_L]

Here I even added the voice pauses like that Reaper guy does.

[Greg_L]

Another thing...what Armi was saying is correct.

You need to learn about phase and how phase plays a part in using two mics/inputs on a single mono instrument like a guitar. Using a DI of the guitar and also using a mic some distance away is guaranteed to introduce phase problems, and it very likely will not sound great. That's also not really a "stereo" recording. As mentioned, it's double-mono and will definitely be out of phase. By all means give it a try if you want. But with experience you will find that it is not a good way to record a guitar. You'd be WAY better off recording it twice and panning each take, or do a true stereo recording in a nice sounding room....which to me still isn't really "stereo" but that's semantics.

[Alison]

Another thing...what Armi was saying is correct.

You need to learn about phase and how phase plays a part in using two mics/inputs on a single mono instrument like a guitar. Using a DI of the guitar and also using a mic some distance away is guaranteed to introduce phase problems, and it very likely will not sound great. That's also not really a "stereo" recording. As mentioned, it's double-mono and will definitely be out of phase. By all means give it a try if you want. But with experience you will find that it is not a good way to record a guitar. You'd be WAY better off recording it twice and panning each take, or do a true stereo recording in a nice sounding room....which to me still isn't really "stereo" but that's semantics.

Hmm, interesting, thanks (and for the video too. You do sound like that Reaper guy! ). I've always recorded my Ovation with 2 inputs (a mic and the pick-up) and sometimes 2 mics on my Martin. You've given me lots to think about.

[rayc]

If I were recording one mic & one pickup I'd use two mono tracks so that I could treat each as needed and then blend them as required and/or pan them as desired. I only track in stereo when working with a stereo effect or a keyboard - even then I'll reduce the keyboard to mono afterward.
Good Kenny vid Greg. We need one for the Ampeg project.

[Armistice]

If I were recording one mic & one pickup I'd use two mono tracks so that I could treat each as needed and then blend them as required of pan them as desired. I only track in stereo when working with a stereo effect or a keyboard - even then I'll reduce the keyboard to mono afterward.
Good Kenny vid Greg. We need one for the Ampeg project.

I find myself reaching for the wideness control with keyboards as well. Given multiple hard left and right guitars, a fully stereo keyboard can get lost pretty easily - and it's usually, in our guitar-based world anyway, an add on, not a feature. Best to narrow it and put it somewhere deliberately.

[rayc]

I find myself reaching for the wideness control with keyboards as well. Given multiple hard left and right guitars, a fully stereo keyboard can get lost pretty easily - and it's usually, in our guitar-based world anyway, an add on, not a feature. Best to narrow it and put it somewhere deliberately.

Yep, I make it mono because I get annoyed with piano bass freqs being on the left etc. Not a great reason but it makes mixing and perceived stereo balance easier for me.
I'm also learning to only hard pan double guitar parts and bring others in a bit.

[vomitHatSteve]

If you want a stereo sound from two disparate signals on the same instrument, you could probably apply the mid-side technique to them.

edit: wrong "to"

[Greg_L]

If you want a stereo sound from two disparate signals on the same instrument, you could probably apply the mid-side technique to them.

edit: wrong "to"

Yeah but MS requires a Figure 8 mic and some DAW trickery.

[vomitHatSteve]

If you want a stereo sound from two disparate signals on the same instrument, you could probably apply the mid-side technique to them.

edit: wrong "to"

Yeah but MS requires a Figure 8 mic and some DAW trickery.

Having not messed about with the technique, I'm curious what would happen if the DAW trickery were applied to other signals. Could you widen a guitar signal in a similar way using a DI and mic?

[Greg_L]

Having not messed about with the technique, I'm curious what would happen if the DAW trickery were applied to other signals. Could you widen a guitar signal in a similar way using a DI and mic?

You could try, but the thing with mid-side is the side mic. It needs to be a figure-8. Other ways with other signals involve some time shifting and/or very slight pitch manipulations. But it hardly ever works out good.

BUT!!!!

I think you could probably mimic that with two cardioid mics with the capsules even with each other but pointing 180 degrees away from each other perpendicular to the sound source. If you look at how MS works, it's a "mid" mic which is simply a mic pointing directly at the sound source. No problem there. The "side" mic needs to be a mic that pics up the sides - like a figure-8. It's the one catching the room to give the stereo image. The side mic's null is pointed at the source so it picks up the sides. If you don't have a figure 8 you could probably get by with two dynamic mics pointing away from each other but you'd still have to set it up as if it's a real figure-8 in a real MS setup. Then you do some DAW trickery to split the Figure-8 mics signal and get a stereo image of a single sound source. Which IMO is a lot of work for something that is still usually not very good.

There's not much point to any of this if you're not in a nice sounding room.

[Lt. Bob]

When you click the Arm button on the track - the thing that goes red - a little box should pop into the track itself - by default it should say "Analog (1)" - click on that and there are your input choices.

More importantly - DON'T DO RECORD IT THAT WAY ANYWAY - what you're getting is not stereo, it's two mono tracks forever bolted to each other on a stereo track, and you then can't treat them separately, and you will want to treat them separately, knowing how acoustic guitar pickups sound. Much better to record them as two separate mono tracks which are then fully adjustable.

When I clicked the arm button, all that showed up was "audio or midi record". So basically what you are saying is, I have to record twice if I want stereo?? What good are 2 inputs if you can't use them? Ugh, frustrated, my hand hurts, and I'm tired. . .

If you record a single track then by definition it's mono which means 'one'.
You can use a stereo effect like a delay or verb to make it stereo sounding and actually that's what you're wanting.
Stereo is to provide location cues which simulate being in a room or environment.
There's plenty of plug-ins that will allow that.

Also stereo is two tracks .......
So if you record the plug-in and use a mic ..... simply give each its own channel.
Then you can pan them however you want .... hard right and hard left (stereo) or anywhere in between.
That way you c an EQ them differently to get the best sound out of each.
But because you're using one track of playing, it will always sound like one player playing ...... it's not going to sound like two players playing across from each other

[Lt. Bob]

If you want a stereo sound from two disparate signals on the same instrument, you could probably apply the mid-side technique to them.

edit: wrong "to"

Yeah but MS requires a Figure 8 mic and some DAW trickery.

also she said she wants to use a mic and the built in p'up which doesn't allow for a side-mid thing.