Conference napalm::guitar

    Carvin offers a condensor mike with good specs (up to 20 KHz) for 
    about $120.  If memory serves me correctly, it can run on either
    phantom power, or an internal battery.   I don't have one, so I
    can't vouch for the quality, but I've thought about picking one
    up.
    
    I use a Stedman N90.  The Stedman is a very nice dynamic mike 
    with great specs.  Since no phantom power is required, I can
    use it with both my Crate AC-30 acoustic amp, or my portastudio.
    It goes for about $300.
    
    There are lots of pickups and pre-amps out there.  The internal
    mike / saddle tranducer combo seems to be gaining popularity.
    
    Jim

    You're right that the vocal mic (like the sm57) is not a good idea
    for a guitar mic.  There's so much going on in upper harmonics that
    the vocal mic just can't get.
    
    I've tried the Carvin mic, and it's good for the price.  Whether you
    use a dynamic or condenser is a personal preference, but since the
    guitar is such a percussive instrument, a good quality mic is required
    to capture the real sound.   More money really does make a lot of
    difference here.   One of the best I've tried lately is the CAD
    Equitek E-200.  It's also a superb vocal mic too, so it can do lots of
    jobs.  (comes in handy when you spend $500).   For about $330 to $350
    you can get the E-100 version which is a single element version of the
    same mic.   
    
    Audio Technica makes some good sounding mics for not too much money
    too.  The ATM-31 is a good all-around mic for about $160 to $190.
    Anything less, and you'll be compromising the sound of your guitar.
    
    But then, once you've spent that much, go for a CAD Equitek.  You'll
    find you start mic'ing *everything* with it like I do.  :-)
    (and locking it up every night too)
    
    Mike
    

re: .0

I've had very good luck with a Shure SM-81 for acoustic guitar.  I think
they go for around $300 nowadays, and the do need phantom power.  I also
have an AKG C1000S, which I think costs just a bit more than the SM-81.
I don't like the C1000S quite as much for guitar as the SM-81, but it's
also nice for vocals and can run on batteries as well as phantom power.
The SM-81 is too sensitive to breathing and sibilants to easily use as
a vocal mic.  If you can only afford one mic, the C1000S might be a better 
choice than the SM-81.

-Hal

    OOps
    I didn't even discuss AKG's.   Nice mic's if you can afford them.
    Not much experience with them except for the D-112 on kick drums...
    Some of the cheaper AKG's didn't sound good to me - very lacking in
    the upper freq's.   I've used some of the C-414 mics and they're nice,
    but at $1,000 a piece, I can't afford to own one.
    Mike
    

I've used a Fishman Natural in my Yari dreadnaught,
and I feed that out from the Guitar into a Boss CE7
EQ...

I've had really good results with both recording, and
live (right into a mixing board) with this...

The EQ's around 80 bucks...  not the quietest config
on the planet, but it's worked well for me..


So, to each his own, I preffer the mics
but without a decent one to use, the option with 
the fishman/EQ seemed to be ok.

Now, looking at my handy Manny's Music catalog, they
got a ton of mics in there, many are for micing acoustic
instruments (Piano, Gutiar...)

Give em a call, talk to one of the sales people...
Prices are pretty good too..

(1-800-448-8478)

    re: .5
    You keep a toyz catalog at your desk too?   I have a couple different
    ones -- like a security blanket, eh?
    Mike
    

>I've had very good luck with a Shure SM-81 for acoustic guitar.  I think
>they go for around $300 nowadays, and the do need phantom power.  I also
>have an AKG C1000S, which I think costs just a bit more than the SM-81.
>I don't like the C1000S quite as much for guitar as the SM-81, but it's
>also nice for vocals and can run on batteries as well as phantom power.
>The SM-81 is too sensitive to breathing and sibilants to easily use as
>a vocal mic.  If you can only afford one mic, the C1000S might be a better 
>choice than the SM-81.

Hal....

Sm81 is really what I meant not SM87. What is it that you like about the SM81
over a C1000s? I realize this may be subjective,but thats ok. For example did
you find the Sm81 had a "warmer sound" I'm interested because I don't want to 
end up buying both mikes.

I compared a C3000(which is similiar to a C1000s with a similiar diaphram) to 
the SM57. I found that the C3000 not only being incredibly sensitive,but on 
the higher tonal frequencies there was something that was added,plus each 
individual note seemed to have some extra clarity.

Your the fourth person to recommend a C1000s to me,actually one person 
recommended I use 2 C1000s's in stereo. Since they use batteries is there
a noise or frequency response problem when you use a battery? as opposed
to using phantom power from a power supply or mixer?  What kind of battery 
do they use? (ie rechargeable?)and how long do they last? What do you gain
from having a separate phantom power supply?

The acoustic pickup is the type that is underneath the bridge saddle and just
really lack's tone,or volume to my ears. I'm told it needs a preamp to use it 
to record. I was going to record using both a mike and the pickup,directly 
into a board and figure out later which to keep or mix. However how does it
compare to a good quality mike?

						Thanks this helps....



							Rick

re: .7

>Sm81 is really what I meant not SM87. What is it that you like about the SM81
>over a C1000s? I realize this may be subjective,but thats ok. For example did
>you find the Sm81 had a "warmer sound" I'm interested because I don't want to 
>end up buying both mikes.

I hate trying to describe sounds with words, but here goes...
I find the SM-81 to be "crisper" than the AKG C1000S.  There seems to be more
definition or something in the highs.  It kind of makes the guitar sound
more "sparkly" (am I really using words like these? :-)

Some of the very things I like better about the SM-81 for acoustic guitar
are the things I *don't* like about it for vocals.

>I compared a C3000(which is similiar to a C1000s with a similiar diaphram) to 
>the SM57. I found that the C3000 not only being incredibly sensitive,but on 
>the higher tonal frequencies there was something that was added,plus each 
>individual note seemed to have some extra clarity.

I'm surprised to hear that the C3000 has a similar diagphragm to the C1000S.
I thought the C3000 was a large diagphragm mic.  I might very well be mistaken,
though.

>Your the fourth person to recommend a C1000s to me,actually one person 
>recommended I use 2 C1000s's in stereo. Since they use batteries is there
>a noise or frequency response problem when you use a battery? as opposed
>to using phantom power from a power supply or mixer?  What kind of battery 
>do they use? (ie rechargeable?)and how long do they last? What do you gain
>from having a separate phantom power supply?

The C1000S can use a 9-volt battery in lieu of phantom power.  In my home
studio I have phantom power, and I've only used my C1000S with a battery
for live vocals, so I can't really tell if it affects the sound or not.

I highly recommend that you try to hear each of them before deciding.  Is
there a store near you that carries both?  Maybe they'd let you buy both
and return the one you don't want.

>The acoustic pickup is the type that is underneath the bridge saddle and just
>really lack's tone,or volume to my ears. I'm told it needs a preamp to use it 
>to record. I was going to record using both a mike and the pickup,directly 
>into a board and figure out later which to keep or mix. However how does it
>compare to a good quality mike?

The piezo bridge saddle pickups need to be plugged into a very high impedance
input, or they get loaded down and lose all of their lows (they sound crackly).
A preamp with sufficiently high input impedance ameliorates the problem.

-Hal

    
    My $.02:
    
    No single mic, even a U87, is sufficient for acoustic guitar.
    In my opinion, it is a 2 and in some circumstances even a 3
    mic instrument. The marvelous color of the instrument is lost
    with a single mic. My opinion, of course...
    
    I normally use two mics to record guitar. Granted, I run a
    commercial studio, so my mic selections are not in everyone's
    budget... I typcically use a Neumann KM84 near the bridge and
    an AKG C414 near the sound-hole.
    
    All of this is moot however, if the instrument itself is not
    up-to-snuff. But that's another topic...
    
    Condensors are a must for acoustic guitar, although a ribbon
    mic is an option (and typcially a higher priced option, so
    I don't suggest this as a realistic alternative)...
    
    I know a few people will disagree with me, but for my money
    I think you would have better luck recording with a really
    good pickup and preamp if all you can afford is one condensor
    mic... at least that way, you'll get both the tone of the
    bridge _and_ the tone of the body... and if you can get a
    stereo pickup, so much the better...
    
    -b

    re -b
    
    When you talk about a stereo pickup,do you mean 3 strings for one
    pickup and another 3 strings for a second pickup. Or one under the bridge
    saddle and another elsewhere?
    
    							Rick
    

re: .9
    
>    I know a few people will disagree with me, but for my money
>    I think you would have better luck recording with a really
>    good pickup and preamp if all you can afford is one condensor
>    mic... at least that way, you'll get both the tone of the
>    bridge _and_ the tone of the body... and if you can get a
>    stereo pickup, so much the better...
    
As you knew someone, I must disagree. :-)

I'll grant you that you can do better things with more than one mic, but
I *highly* disagree that a pickup is better than one mic.  You can do a *lot*
of things with the sound of an acoustic guitar by changing the placement of
a single mic, but I've yet to hear a pickup/preamp combination that sounds
as good as what I can do with a single mic.

Of course, you must first have an idea of what kind of sound you're trying
to achieve, and think about what others sounds you're mixing it with.  What
sounds best on a soloed guitar track might not be what sounds best mixed with
the other instruments.

If you're recording solo guitar and your room sounds good enough and/or is
big enough, try backing the mic away from the guitar a few feet.  (Actually,
this is an application where a stereo pair of mics is even better).

If you're recording a guitar to mix with other things, or need more isolation,
try some of these:

    o	Put the mic about a foot or so above the bridge facing down.

    o	Put the mic about a foot or so in front of the 12th fret facing
        towards the neck.

Mic placement is critical with an acoustic guitar.  Before I had any
condenser mics, I managed to get surprisingly good sounding recordings
using just an SM-57.  Experiment.  Find out what works best with your
guitar, your room, and your song.

-Hal

    
    RE: .10

    I was talking about the pickup designs that incorporate a bridge
    transducer in combination with what amounts to a small condenser
    mic that clips into the sound hole. These devices tend to be
    expensive, but I'll stick with my claim that they can produce
    better results than you could get with a single mic...

    RE: .11

    Not all pickups are created equal. However, in terms of price/
    performance, I feel that the best of the pickup/preamp designs
    beats any single condenser mic. As I said, my primary technique
    is to use two very high quality condenser mics, but that's
    not an option for everyone, whereas a really good pickup/preamp
    system costs in the range of a single moderately-priced
    condenser mic and in my opinion will generally exceed the
    condenser mic's performance...

    On the other hand, I agree that mic placement is critical, and
    I echo your encouragement to experiment to find the best sound...

    -b

    Some of the best acoustic sounds I've heard are with a 2 pickup and a mic 
    configuration with a custom Bob O'Neal acoustic preamp/Carver power amp.
    
    The 2 pickups are the bridge pickup and a soundhole pickup run to the
    preamp to form the stereo signal.  The mic is inside the guitar below
    the soundhole and is a Fender M1 condensor that is run dry to the house 
    mains.
    
    sounds excellent,
    Mike

re: .12

>    I was talking about the pickup designs that incorporate a bridge
>    transducer in combination with what amounts to a small condenser
>    mic that clips into the sound hole. These devices tend to be
>    expensive, but I'll stick with my claim that they can produce
>    better results than you could get with a single mic...

Ah, I didn't know you were talking about those.  I've only tried the
ones with just a bridge transducer, and I personally don't think it's
possible to make one of them sound like an acoustic guitar.

-Hal

    Hal,
    
    	I was misinformed about the similiarities of the AKG3000 compared
    to the C1000s,evidently the C3000 has a 3 inch diaphram and the 1000
    has a 1 inch diaphram. 
    
    							Rick
    

    > 	I was misinformed about the similiarities of the AKG3000 compared
    > to the C1000s,evidently the C3000 has a 3 inch diaphram and the 1000
    > has a 1 inch diaphram. 
    
    Another waitress
    With an IUD
    Went to the clinic
    She got it free... :-)
    
    -b

    
    By the way, I own a C3000... and it's OK, but I didn't like
    it for the application I purchased it for (voice-overs).
    The best use I've found for it was on percussion (not drums,
    stuff like triangles, shakers, etc.)
    
    -b