Recorded vs Live Guitars

    What is it about the duality of liking a particular guitar for playing out a live amp vs liking an entirely different guitar for recording?


    I love my LP live. But my PRS just records better. More cut through the mix, more presence. Live, it doesn't inspire me. Seems to not have character like the LP, Tele, or Strat. Or is it I'm just used to those guitar tones recorded commercially?


    The thinner ones seem to record better than the darker ones (i.e. Tele over LP) but live the LP is just a beast. Or do the pro's just brighten the hell out of LPs in the mix?

    Just look at Jimmy Page. He recorded with his tele WAY more than his Les Paul, though that got the most play live. Yeah, sorry, doesn't answer your question, I know...

    Quote from Michael_dk

    Heh... Good question :)


    ...On an unrelated note, I see @sambrox has a PRS in his collection now.... What's that all about, man? :D

    That's been there for a while, my favourite Danish forum buddy ;)
    PRS Starla from 2009 (bought at Woodstock - not one of the reissue S2s, or whatever they're called). It's lovely and is quite versatile, even though its sound is very unique.

    I knew that, but didn't think about it.


    Probably because I'm not Jimmy Page in any way, haha.


    (well, except when I sit on the couch too long, I feel like a lead balloon)

    Quote from Michael_dk

    Oh, nice!! Those pickups are like filtertrons, right?


    I thought you were looking for a PRS some time ago... Was that before you got this one, or were you looking for a companion to it? (guitars are like horses - they should always be in teams!)

    Lol, it's getting a bit off topic now, but I've always hankered after a Custom 22/24, ever since I owned a lawsuit Epiphone Spotlight but part-exed it for an Ibanez RG450 back in my teens... Well regret that one.

    My feel is that live we pay much more attention to the sound how we perceive it from the stage \our monitored position, while when recording we are more aware of how our sound sits in the mix.
    Live, we tend to privilege a sound that feels more important and present. On a record, a sound that copes well with the others.


    Also, the fact that levels are way higher live and that we only hear ourselves while playing (while when recording we listen and re-play several times) plays (see what I did here? :p ) a role IMO.

    For me, it's mostly about what matters in the situation. For recording, it's sound. For live playing it's playability, for me. For instance, I recorded an entire EP with a band on - at the time - my Gibson Les Paul. Sounded amazing for what we did and nothing we had available sounded better. It also weighed more than 5kg's and didn't play as nice as my SG does. So live, I used my SG and had my Les Paul as a backup just in case.

    I reckon it's the volume thing, db... the dB thing, if you will!


    Michael Britt's Profiles are perhaps the most popular live-use ones out there, and if anything they verge on dark-sounding with a distinct lack of over-the-top high-end bite. I'd place Bert's work in this category too, but with less low end.


    At gigs, where more dBs seem to rule, regular, Strat and Tele-sounding guitars' twangs tend to hurt ears unless toned down at the desk... IMHO. The acoustic fingerprint of the venue plays a huge role too IMHO. A heavily-carpeted, "dingy" and cosy (generally on the small side) venue lends itself pretty well to the use of twang, but as venue size increases and the ratio of heavily-absorbent surfaces (including people) to overall cubic volume decreases, the reflection and reinforcement of the guitars' high-end bite becomes ever-more accentuated and requires more-drastic EQ attention from FOH.


    Generalisations, yes, but I don't know how else one can answer the question. This is just the pattern I've always seen, and it makes sense to me.

    I reckon actually that people use the guitar that feels most comfortable live. I know I do, where possible. Different sounds in the studio call for different guitars, but live all you're thinking about is the performance and playing well.

    Well I'll have a go at answering this from a engineering POV.


    Our ears are filters, yes its correct, we can harness full scale below a certain threshold but the quieter we start to loose some bottom, and louder we loose some top, this is natural, and perfectly normal.


    When you record, general rule is to be comfortable with the volumes as ear fatigue can otherwise harness a good performance, and this is where the ears then are faced with normal freq spectrum and therefore results in a much brighter sound..


    Years ago back in the days of real rock n roll, stage setups were real. a collection of 4x12 cabs with a Marshall head scattered on stage. - I too have had these very heads, and the fact remains that they are VERY dark by nature.. they were designed this way.. why I hear you say..


    Well because when the Amp is then cranked up to full tilt. the brightness will peek its ugly head though because our ears are perceived that way, and yes there is a difference in measurable freq than actual hearing. - later on through the years they added presence knobs for the studio, and only for that reason.


    So generally the louder you are, the darker you want it, the quieter you are the more bass resonance you can throw at it. - This is why sitting at home trying to create your live sound will never work.. because of freq mismatch.


    The good news is though.. that with the Kemper, anything is possible, it just means you have to know what to do in these situations, and sadly that is a very small percentage of people that dismiss things early on - but the kemper can go from killer studio tones, to killer live tones at the flick of a knob.


    General rule to follow, Quiet tones = Natural sound, so more bass/more presence, the room will also add to the tone.
    Loud volumes, Less bass, less trebble/presence, room will scatter the sound and be less direct.


    So, this is why folks who regularly use LP's on stage record with tele's/strats or whatever. (or vice versa), same conception was led with Cabs. - Everyone wanted the 4x12 rock sound, but not many studios carried them, as in a studio of course anything is possible, moreover you can always get a bigger/better/clearer sound from a 1x12 than a 4x12 anyway....


    because we always need to treat the two competently different from one another. - Stage sound.. needs to be just that... and recording sound needs to be another, they can both produce headaches but at the same time, you will always want "your sound" so its always a fight of compromises along the way


    Of course there is no rule, and sound is subjective and we all hear it in our own way, so this does not apply to everyone, there should be and will never be a template for music/sound or feeling of sound.. but its open to be interpreted in your own desires that suit & please you the most.

    Great post Andy! Makes a lot of sense. I'd never thought about it that way, but of course! You just switched on a lightbulb in my head mate :D