Fret noise from acoustical guitar

By fret noise, can I assume you mean the string "squeaks", that are heard when moving hand positions on the guitar?

If that is what you're referring to, there are a couple of ways to deal with this.

The most effective, I have found, is to simply edit the audio file itself, and knock the squeaks down 8 to 10 db in the sample editor.

The "squeak" is easily recognizable, and can be attenuated, without disrupting anything important (i.e. the guitar sound itself), to the audio file.

This is because, 9 times out of 10, the squeak occurs "in the break", as a player moves his/her hand, before, or after, a note or chord is played.

I deal with this all the time, and this is the method that works the best, imo.

Another option is to try a de-esser plug-in. It will take some experimenting, and more than likely need to be automated, to really work. Find the offending frequency, and lower teh threshold, so it kicks in.

I'll bet there'll be acoustic guitar sample collections that will have the string squeak noise to make the samples sound more "authentic"!

Anyway- is the guitarist playing chords?
If so, maybe he/she could try playing alternate chords?
Say the chords are G, Em, C, D7, G, Em, Am, D7.
On the first take play, G, (rest), C, (rest), G, (rest), Am.
On the next take play (rest), Em, (rest), D7, (rest), Em, (rest), D7.

In the "rest" the player can move to next chord and hopefully there'll be less noise, but if there is still noise it will now be in the gaps and should be easier to cut out.

I've done this a couple of times, it takes a wee while to get used to, but can work well.

I do pretty much what Jim does as well. Automating the volume is the most effective and most common thing I'll do, but sometimes de-essing can help - it depends on the dynamics of the playing because you don't want to "de-ess" the part of the song where the guitar is simply playing louder. Have the de-esser enabled only at the times you need it is the best way to use one.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the string noises are more pronounced when you close-mic a guitar. If you back the mic up to about 12-18 inches or so, they're a lot more manageable than at say, 3 inches.

As far as sample libraries having this, they already do. Often string squeaks are sampled and mapped to a note outside the usual range of the instrument so you can add them wherever you want.

Trilogy actually has a separate "fret noise" layer where you can control the level of the noise made as the bass player "lifts" his finger from the fret. It certainly does help with realism - especially for upgright bass parts.

Also...you don't want to totally eliminate the string noise or it could begin to sound unnatural and like a sampler instead of a player. You just want to reduce it a bit so it's not distracting.

This is theoretical, but if the squeaks are softer in volume than the played notes, and there's a discernable threshold, the Expander could possibly be used to drop the volume of those squeaks. Similarly, a noise gate can be used, with the reduction set to a percentage less than 100. Practically, this may not be a solution, considering the fact that string noise and sqeaks can sometimes be the same volume as the notes, or even louder. But it's worth a try.

Now that I've written that, I just came up with another idea. Perform the same guitar parts using a software instrument, but instead of using that "fake" guitar as the actual guitar sound, use it as a side chain for a noise gate/expander on the actual guitar channel. In other words, the gate would lower the volume on the real guitar where the silent bits would be on the fake guitar. You'd need to keep the reduction subtle, as well as adjust the attack and release to keep the "ducking" effect gradual, but again, it's another possible technique to try out.

By the way, there's a Sade song in which the guitar squeaks so much it's difficult to listen to. I don't remember the title. Know which one I'm talking about?

In the dark ages we used to spot-erase the most obtrusive squeaks from the tape.

You could try compressing the guitar signal - that should smooth it out - or see if there's a particular frequencey that could be de-essed.

Generally fret and finger noise can be managed if the player produces enough volume to overcome those artifacts. Larger mics can help, as can some distance from the source. With small diaphragm mics, that extra distance also helps avoid the bass build-up that you get with cardiods up close.

LJ

LJuber wrote:
In the dark ages we used to spot-erase the most obtrusive squeaks from the tape.

You could try compressing the guitar signal - that should smooth it out - or see if there's a particular frequencey that could be de-essed.

Generally fret and finger noise can be managed if the player produces enough volume to overcome those artifacts. Larger mics can help, as can some distance from the source. With small diaphragm mics, that extra distance also helps avoid the bass build-up that you get with cardiods up close.

LJ

Huh? Compression would be just about the worst thing you could do to eliminate fret noise. It will accentuate it.

The size of the mic has nothing to do with whether it will emphasize fret noise or not. Proximity effect is there whether it's a small or large diaphrahm mic. The frequency response of the mic will definitely be a factor as some mics with a pronouced peak in the 5-7K range will tend to emphasize squeaks more.

Mic distance is also a factor. I mentioned that above.

Considering fret noise mostly comes from the fingerboard area, angling a cardiod microphone away from it may help a bit. Also, I've heard of some stuff you can put on your fingers, or the guitar strings, to minimize fret noise. It's been years, so I don't remember the product, if it even still exists.

It's called Fingerease. I'm not a fan myself, but it's certainly an option.

If the recording is already done, then you'll probably save the most time at this point just manually ducking (using the pencil) the squeaks.

William Furner1 wrote:
'Another option is to try a de-esser plug-in. It will take some experimenting, and more than likely need to be automated, to really work. Find the offending frequency, and lower teh threshold, so it kicks in".

Thanks for the post, what do you mean by "need to be automated" to work"? I didn't see any automated function in the de-esser controls.

Thanks

You should be able to automate the bypass of the plugin. Just turn it on when you need it. The rest of the time it can be bypassed.

William Furner1 wrote:
...what do you mean by "need to be automated" to work"? I didn't see any automated function in the de-esser controls.

ALL functions, of ALL plug-ins, can be automated. Simply open the automation lane, and you'll see any plug-in loaded on that track, listed, and all of it's paramters listed as well.

Or simply throw the track into touch mode, and turn a plug-in parameter.

When I suggested automating it, I meant you may need to automate the frequncy, and/or the threshold, so it only kicks in when needed. Sometimes bypassing a plug-in via automation can created "pops" in the audio, so I tend to stay away from that, when possible.

Sadly, Logic's De-esser is the worst de-esser known to man. I honestly don't know what they were thinking when they designed that. They certainly never actually tried to use it in a real world situation. It may work better for this application though, 'cause Lord knows it's useless anywhere else.

All that to say, I strongly suggest you look into editing the waveform itself, from within the sample editor. This method allows you precise precision when knocking the gain off of the squeaks, leaving the musical part of the guitar performance in tact.

Baby Powder on the hands before you track. Works like a charm......