3 Songs, 3 DAW's, Part 2 - Pro Tools 10

Back once again, with part 2 of the "3S3D" series. Yes, I realize this series is VERY slow going, but rest assured I'm determined to see it through to the end. If you wish to hear the final results now, feel free to click below...

For this second installment of the series, I originally planned to record a song from scratch, using Reason 6 as my DAW of choice. However, at some point I realized things track were not working out the way I had hoped. My problems were with motivation and inspiration. Motivation to record a song from scratch using a program I'm not very familiar with (which, unfortunately, was exactly what this task entailed!). And inspiration to come up with a track, arrangements, production ideas, etc. So in the meantime I decided to re-work and re-mix one of my old projects and see what I could do with it using Pro Tools, so I could get  some sort of project completed, using tools I'm much more familiar with.

This instrumental originated as a basic "idea" sort of track that I recorded back in 2004, using Pro Tools LE on my first Power Mac G4. The title "Saturday" has no significance really, other than it was the day on which I recorded it, and I couldn't think of anything better... This was a long time ago, but I'm fairly sure that all the instruments were recorded all in one day in a single session, different from how I record these days, to be sure. At the time I believed that I would some day come up with some lyrical ideas and turn it into a "song", but nothing has come to me so far. So until that day arrives, it will continue to live out its days as an instrumental.

As far as the changes that I made from the original version, I did a bit of editing to delete some parts of the original arrangement, which was about 4:30 long. I felt it needed to be shortened in some sections, just to keep things moving along, so to speak. As you can see from the Soundcloud timeline, this new version clocks in at 3:22. The edits were made to hopefully keep from boring the listener too much. Because this was born as an "idea" track, I didn't really play all the parts as tightly on the beat as I could have. So after listening to it again 9 years later, it was apparent that some fixing of parts here and there was needed, using a bit of editing "magic". Some of the new arrangement ideas were born out of necessity for the same reason. As much as I would have loved to re-record certain parts, I decided to simply work with what was already there.

I decided to re-visit this piece because I still like the musical idea, and my overall skills using Pro Tools have much improved since 2004. Especially since the past 3 months or so, I feel that I have much more of an idea of what I'm doing as far as mixing goes. Some newly acquired skills in using Pro Tools itself, as well as general mixing skills, seemed to help out quite a bit in finishing this new version. In fact, this just may be a new upcoming "experiment" of mine; to continue re-visiting more of my old Pro Tools recordings, and re-mix them to more "listenable" standards...

Now, on to the software. As I mentioned before, I recently upgraded my Pro Tools from LE 8 to version 10. In detail, Pro Tools 9 was bundled with the new Mbox audio interface I purchased last year. But I had no intention of using PT 9 at all. Since PT 10 was already out when I bought the Mbox/PT 9 bundle, I was allowed to upgrade to 10 free of charge. Perhaps I'll talk about my experiences with the new Mbox in a future post.

After putting this new version through its paces, I would say that I'm very pleased with it. Although there weren't any life-changing improvements in this version, there were some incremental ones that improved my workflow, and allows me to get the results I'm looking for.

Pro Tools' Edit Window.

Mix Window.

Version 9 (I chose to skip this upgrade) introduced the ability for Pro Tools to be used with "3rd party audio interfaces"; meaning audio interfaces other than those sold by Avid (the company that develops and sells the Pro Tools software), as well as the option of using your computer's native audio outputs, eliminating the need to a separate audio interface at all. This feature is fairly new for Pro Tools users, as they previously required the use of the interfaces to use the software at all. So, this little convenience may come in handy for me someday.

Secondly, Pro Tools 10 comes with standard with a new "channel strip" plugin, which allows you to get right down to business of the most important audio processing you will do as a DAW user. This plugin emulates the functions of the audio channel of a large format audio mixing console, the kind found in the big-time commercial recording studios. These mixing  console channels typically include EQ, Compression, Expansion, and Gating controls. Without a plugins like these, you can certainly get the job done with individual plugins of each type of effect you need, but it's convenient to have all these functions in a single plugin. I also recently treated myself to the SSL 4000 Collection bundle, by Waves. Part of this bundle includes my new favorite plugin, the SSL E-Channel. This plugin as well as the others in this bundle are emulations of legendary SSL mixing consoles, used to record and mix hit records too numerous to mention. After using both the Avid Channel Strip and the SSL plugin on this mix, I must say that I am a new fan, and will continue to use them on other projects to come. These types of plugins helped me to limit my choices of effects and other processing in a positive way, and apply more focus to getting the mix done.

Avid's Channel Strip Plugin, comes standard with Pro Tools 10.

Waves SSL E-Channel Plugin.

A new feature in Pro Tools 10 is Clip Gain, which allows you to reduce the amount of gain (volume) on a section of audio in your project on-the-fly and in real-time, without having to process and create a whole new audio file similar to older versions of Pro Tools. Also new are features to let you automatically import your new mix into your iTunes library, and upload to SoundCloud as well as Gobbler, an online storage and file sharing website, seemingly geared towards audio and other media creators. The "import to iTunes" feature was especially handy in quickly checking out new mix versions. These handy little features make Pro Tools 10 a nice, if not a "can't-live-without" upgrade for me.

Pro Tools' Clip Gain feature allows changes in volume to individual pieces of audio in real-time.

In some way it feels strange to be "reviewing" these DAW's at this point in time, because I'm always a bit behind the times. It seems that by the time it takes me to post a new piece of music, the DAW that I'm talking about has already been upgraded to a new version. Pro Tools is now on version 11; Reason was also updated to version 7 earlier this year; and just this past July, Apple FINALLY released Logic Pro X.

However, I understand that it doesn't matter in the big scheme of things. For one, just because these DAW's have moved on to new versions, it doesn't mean that I can't continue on with my "experiments" simply using what I have, which are great tools in their own right. They perhaps don't have the shiny newness of whatever version they happen to be on at the moment, but does not in any way hinder me from making music.

Secondly, it looks like the computer system requirements for all 3 new versions are beyond the specs of my current laptop; so, apparently I couldn't upgrade to them if I wanted to. It doesn't really bother me, though. The software versions I'm working with are MORE than capable of being the tools I need to produce some high quality recordings. I remember when all I had to record to was a cassette boombox, so I've got to keep some perspective. I'm still learning and re-learning the important lesson of not focusing on the "tools" themselves (as cool as they are!), but actually learning and using these tools to actually create SOMETHING.

Soon I will start working on my new track in Reason 6, for the 3rd and final installment of this series. Until next time...

Lessons Learned

The tracks of the song from the last post were recorded around June of 2012. I picked the project back up this March, and the mix was completed in April. The learning curve of working in Logic Pro to produce this recording is only part of the story of why it took so long to finish. Another part is more about me and my journey to learn to make better quality recordings. It felt like a desperate struggle during much of the time working on this song. The sounds of the tracks were very much "off", and I didn't understand why at first. I have all this great equipment that can deliver music with the potential of rivaling commercially released music in terms of sound quality, yet I'm still producing stuff that sounds like I record in my bedroom (which I certainly do)! "Amateur", in other words. This is the year I decided to put some time in to figure out why that is, and do something about it...

Somewhere in the middle of the mix, I came across some home recording videos on YouTube. The channel is called "The Recording Revolution". The guy who produces the videos, Graham Cochrane, has a great series of audio mixing tips called "5 Minutes to a Better Mix". This series of videos (93 5-minute clips in all!) were all done using common sense, non-technical language. I couldn't have discovered them at a better time! Although it did sort of delay completion of the mix a bit, the knowledge gained was tremendously valuable. I've got to say that this is, hands down, the best collection of home recording video instruction available on the Internet, free of charge, that I have come across. Highly recommended to anyone trying to improve their recording and mixing skills. Graham also has a website, also called The Recording Revolution, where he posts blog articles on recording related topics and concepts. He also has paid videos and online classes for those who feel they need or want more detailed instruction.

Through Graham's site, I discovered a similar website, Home Studio Corner, run by Joe Gilder. Joe's site has very much the same goal as Graham's; home recording instruction, with tips and tricks, articles, videos, and paid online classes. I like the fact that these two guys promote each other's sites; in fact, they have a joint podcast that they produce called Simply Recording Podcast.

In fact, I just discovered a third home recording site through the previously mentioned two, called Mix Coach, run by Kevin Ward. I'm only just getting acquainted with Kevin's site, but it's set up very similar to Graham's and Joe's. The knowledge gained by all three sites simultaneously be redundant at points, but because these are three different people, they have three different personalities, and three different approaches to how they teach. Basically I take what info I like best from each one, and store it away in my brain for later application to my own recording projects. These are three guys that do this stuff for a living, and for whatever reason, have a calling to try to help people out there to improve their recordings. I for one am sure glad that they do.

The bottom line is that I've been doing this home recording thing now for many years. But after picking up some valuable knowledge and information from these sites recently, it has become embarrassingly obvious to me that I've been lacking a lot of basic fundamentals to facilitate good quality recordings. I must admit it was a hard pill to swallow after all the frustratingly amateur sounding recordings I've produced in the past, but I know that I simply have to move on, apply what I've learned to my future work, and hopefully I will see improvement.

I debated with myself long and hard whether or not to post the song at all, because after all my work, it still did not come out the way I wanted it to. I won't bore you with specific reasons why; you all can listen and judge for yourselves. I'll just say that there were things that I simply could not fix, without spending yet more time working on the track, and that was something I was not willing to do. But in the end, I decided to go ahead and post the song because hopefully it will serve as a document where I can hear the progress in my skills as a recording engineer, even if my only "client" is me!

When I listen to the song, I hear the result of hours of trial and error in the attempts of applying newly learned techniques. Some techniques helped the mix sound better than it would have otherwise, I think. Here's a list of some lessons learned after recording and mixing this song:

• The better your recordings sound going in, the easier it will be to mix them later. Hands down, the biggest lesson I learned this year. This song contains mainly acoustic instruments and vocals, so the majority of the parts were captured using microphones, as opposed to virtual MIDI-based instruments coming directly from inside the computer. I understand now that the tracks were not well recorded due to bad microphone placement, so it took long hours in trying to fix the sound in the mix. "Fixing in the mix" is NOT a job any mix engineer wants to do because it's hard work, and not enjoyable in the least. Taking more time for proper microphone placement during the recording phase is most important in getting the sounds right in the first place. Properly recorded tracks can help make mixing fun and easier, if not easy. This song was NOT fun to mix because of all the troubleshooting, cursing and wanting to cry, all due to mistakes I will hopefully not make again in the future.

• High and low pass filters are your friends. These are EQ tools which help get rid of frequencies you don't want on a particular track. Particularly useful is the high pass filter, which filters out the "mud-inducing" low frequencies I don't need, thus helping achieve clarity in the mix.

• Route similar tracks together to a group channel. When there are multiple vocals, guitar parts, percussion, etc. like I had for this song, I learned that grouping similar parts together to a single group channel in the mixing stage can be more efficient and really comes in handy when balancing levels or applying effects to the group, opposed to making those adjustments to each individual track.

• I've been recording my tracks way too hot! Modern digital systems don't require recording audio at such a high level like I was used to doing in the analog (tape) and earlier digital (16-bit) worlds. Today's systems, with high sample rates and bit depths, have a much lower noise floor so you don't have to turn up the gain so high when recording. The record levels on this song were pretty high, which required me to either bring the track faders way down when mixing, or use a "Gain" plugin to lower the gain on the track, allowing me to bring the track faders up higher. The same goes for the mix buss, or master buss, which I was taught back in the day, that you should get the level as high as possible without "getting into the red". This is going past 0dB on the level meter, usually inducing distortion, which, to briefly say, you don't want when recording digitally. Now I find that about 50% to 60% of the way up the level meter is all you need, because you can always bring up the overall level later in mastering (a whole other subject).

• Mix at lower volumes. A mixing technique I've heard about years ago, but the concept never truly clicked for me until working on this most recent song. You can get the tracks effectively balanced at an overall volume comparable to, or even lower than, a conversation between two people. I found myself many times bringing the mix down to a whisper-like volume on my speakers to adjust track levels... If you can hear all the important parts of your track well-balanced at that low a volume, chances are it's going to be well-balanced even when you crank it up. Mixing at lower volumes also allows you to work on your mix for longer periods of time before your ears get tired. Ear fatigue is a real phenomenon, and once it kicks in hard, you might as well just stop mixing and give your ears a "break", because you are most likely going to be making bad decisions that will only require you to make corrections the next day!

• Mix in mono. Yet another technique that I picked up recently. With our recording equipment, we have the ability to pan tracks to the left, center, right, or anywhere in-between in the stereo spectrum (between the left and right speakers, or headphones). I learned if you do the majority of the mixing (adjusting levels and EQ) with all tracks straight up the middle, the audio tracks will tend to sound much more balanced when you pan everything out the way you want them later. It also helps with mono compatibility, if by chance someone hears your track in mono. Not the most common situation with today's ubiquitous stereo systems, but hey, it could happen! I found that this technique worked out pretty well for me.

• It's not the gear, it's the user. This final lesson remains as the hardest to learn, me being a guy that loves playing with new gear! But what I've come to understand is if I keep on buying and experimenting with new gear, it won't necessarily help me get any better at recording. Chances are that it will only make me a gear collector, and that's not what I want to be. There's plenty of those kind of guys out there, spouting all kinds of half-assed, ill-informed opinions on Internet forums, and again, I don't want to be that guy. I know now that I've got to be much more resolute in learning all the ins and outs of the equipment I already own before throwing my credit card number out there to buy more. That's not to say that I will never buy any new equipment ever again, but any new gear I buy now has got to serve a very specific purpose. I have all that I need to produce quality recordings; it's now time to get to work and do it!

The process of recording this song was quite a journey, a long and hard one! I must honestly say that it wasn't particularly enjoyable, yet it was also one of the most rewarding, because of these lessons learned. Right now I'm pretty confident in saying that my recordings can only get better moving forward. It's a simple adage, but to adapt something I read in one of Graham Cochrane's articles, ultimately the only thing that will improve my recording and mixing... is more recording and mixing! We're just about halfway through 2013 now, but there's much more recording that can be done before year's end, and I hope to do just that! Until next time...

3 Songs, 3 DAW's, Part 1 - Logic Pro 9

I've finally completed the first entry of my "3 Songs, 3 DAW's" experiment. For those who don't care to read my ramblings below and simply want to hear the track, here it is...

Avid's Pro Tools was my introduction to computer-based recording, and has since been my recording platform of choice. It wasn't my introduction to digital recording in general, because I'd been using (and still own) an 8-track digital recorder called the Roland VS-880EX since 1999, then got my first Macintosh G4 in 2003 to run Pro Tools LE. As time went on, I would read about the intriguingly cool features of other DAW's on the market, and figured this project would be a good way to explore what other DAW's have to offer, and satisfy my curiosity.

I recorded and mixed the song above in Apple's Logic Pro. Much like Apple's computer hardware lines, many of their software titles are divided into "professional" and "consumer" categories. In the case of their audio software, Logic Pro is their "professional" DAW, the "consumer" level  program being their also-excellent Garageband, which comes installed with a new Mac computer purchase.

Logic's history actually goes back to the early 90's, originally developed by a company called Emagic, and then was purchased by Apple in 2002. Logic has been a Mac-only program for a while now, but before Apple bought Logic, it was available for both the Mac and Windows. Once Logic became an Apple product, they initially had two versions, Logic Pro and Logic Express, which is my first experience with the software, and I later upgraded to the Pro version. Apple have since discontinued Logic Express, and now carry on with Logic Pro and Garageband.

Overview of Logic Pro's Main Window.

Below are some observations on Logic Pro, describing some feature and workflow comparisons to Pro Tools, in no particular order:

Audio Region Editing - The most major learning curve for me was in this area. From a Pro Tools user's perspective, Logic Pro's editing tools seemed a bit foreign at first. However, with some of time and practice, it got easier. On the plus side for Logic, they have what's called a "Smart" time grid setting, allowing the user to easily and quickly select exactly what section of audio they want to edit with the mouse, depending on the zoom level they're using in the Edit window. It accurately "snaps" your highlighted selection to the grid for whole bars of audio, or way down to the super-detailed waveform transient level. Pro Tools' Edit window gives the user many of the same edit options, but the grid "snap level" has to be selected manually.

Composite (Comp) Track Editing - Here's an area where I feel that Logic Pro has the advantage. Their "Quick Swipe Comping" feature is well implemented, and probably my favorite feature. Very easy to audition sections of multiple takes by simply swiping the area of the region you want to hear, and clicking that area in a different take lane to hear an alternate version of that particular section - very intuitive. Pro Tools' version of that feature is not bad, but you have to click a "solo" button for each take lane you want to audition, then click another button to commit to the comp selections that you chose. These extra steps makes the process a bit "clunky" in comparison to Logic Pro. A minor gripe perhaps, but I see all those extra mouse clicks adding to the total time spent editing your tracks. Logic Pro also inserts crossfades automatically between your edit points to ensure a smooth transition between takes. Pro Tools requires you to insert the crossfades manually, though you can set it up to perform a "batch fade", which places fades between multiple audio regions.

Quick Swipe Comping makes editing multiple takes a breeze.

Plugins - I've got to say that while I find Logic Pro's audio plugins to be high quality sound-wise, the user interface for many of the plugins controls is the thing I like least about the program. The interface designs on the virtual instruments in particular, range from slightly confusing to downright horrible! The UI's for the effects aren't much better. For that reason, it took me longer than expected to figure out how to get what I needed out of the plugins. Pro Tools plugin UI's are much more user friendly in my opinion, because they tend to resemble a piece of audio hardware, with familiar knobs and buttons on the screen. To its credit, Logic Pro does have some stock plugins that are very useful in mixing and mastering such as multi-band compression and stereo imaging, where in Pro Tools you may have to look to 3rd party plugins for certain things, which will probably require you to spend some extra money. Free plugins that are both compatible with Pro Tools as well as worth the trouble of searching out online are few and far between in my experience.

Logic Pro's Ultrabeat plugin UI - my pick for the worst ever.

Mix Automation - Much like the tools for audio editing, the mix automation tools took some time to get up to speed in Logic Pro. However, it has a very quick way to globally raise or lower all the automation points on a track at once, where it's a bit more involved to do in Pro Tools.

Track Bouncing - Logic Pro has the capability of "bouncing", or rendering, a mix of your project to an audio file "offline", which is faster than real-time. That means that a 4 minute piece of multi-track music would take less than a minute to bounce. Pro Tools versions 10 and prior can only bounce a mix in real time. Meaning whether it's a 30 second piece of music, or an hour long recording, whatever length of time your audio is, that's how long you must wait for it to render a stereo audio file you can burn to CD, import to your iPod, or post online. Offline bouncing is a great time-saver, and is why I give Logic Pro another advantage over Pro Tools. With as many mix versions as I tend to do, it was a nice consolation that I was able to render the mixes and have them ready to play in seconds. I've recently learned that Avid has finally incorporated an offline bounce feature in Pro Tools version 11, due out later this year. Logic Pro can also send the bounce of your mix to your iTunes library as well. Pro Tools didn't have this feature until their version 10 released last year, which I finally upgraded to (more on that in a future post).

CPU Usage - Logic Pro again has an advantage here (for now). You can pile on the virtual instruments and effect plugins and your computer will (usually) not break a sweat. My understanding is that Logic intelligently applies CPU power to your tracks only when audio is actually playing through it, and doesn't when it's not. This is not the case with Pro Tools. The faster your computer is, the better off you will be, but you sometimes have to be careful with your plugin usage with Pro Tools, or you start getting CPU error messages. My understanding, again, is that the upcoming Pro Tools 11 has an all-new audio engine that intelligently distributes CPU power similar to how Logic does.

Media Browser - Integrated into Logic Pro's main window where you can easily navigate through your computer's hard drive to locate files to bring into your currently running project. A nice touch that makes it feel like Logic is tightly integrated with your Mac's entire system. On the other hand, Pro Tools' "Workspace" browser window does the job I suppose, but it's another feature I'd describe as "clunky", and I've never been a big fan of it. Again, advantage, Logic Pro. 

All said and done, once I got over the learning curves, I found Logic Pro to be a versatile, very powerful and capable DAW. My minor gripes aside, you get many awesome features all in one program, features I'm sure I've only scratched the surface of. And with its price of $199 in the Mac App Store, it's the best DAW deal on the market for Mac users that I'm aware of. Many DAW's with comparable features are easily twice the price. In comparison between Logic Pro and Pro Tools, each program has its strengths and weaknesses, which is the real the point of this post. It's about one's own personal preferences. My preference? As much as I've learned using Logic Pro for the past several months and appreciate its strengths, I've got to say that I miss working in Pro Tools. It's the platform I've used most consistently over the past 10 years, and it's the workflow that I know best. However it doesn't mean that I couldn't or wouldn't go back and re-visit Logic from time to time, take advantage of its unique features, and bring my work back into Pro Tools. When necessary, moving project data (the audio track files) from one program to another is actually pretty easy to do.

Logic Pro is currently on version 9 and has been since 2009, an eternity in the computer and software business. Many among the community of Logic users feel "neglected", and say that Apple is long overdue for a new version. I must say that I agree. Far too busy manufacturing iPhones and iPads these days, perhaps? That said, a rumor of a new version has been in the air for a while now. Although I still consider myself a Pro Tools guy first and foremost, I will be looking with interest to see what Apple comes up with for Logic Pro version 10.

One down, two to go for this series. I haven't started recording anything yet, so I've got quite a bit of work ahead of me. I've also got some additional things to talk about, regarding the whole process of recording and mixing this song that I felt should be its own separate post, coming very soon.

An Update and A New Friend.

OK, first post of 2013, the first in about 7 months...!?!? NOT good, but I guess that's Life. 

But I am happy to say that the time has not been entirely unproductive. Took a trip up to Portland, Oregon last August to visit a friend, which was a nice getaway for a few days. On the music side of town, I discovered a new artist named Lianne La Havas (via these Youtube videos, here and here, not to mention here), who I think is an awesome, young talent. The first new artist I've been genuinely excited about in a LONG time. I got to see her perform twice here in L.A. since my discovery last September - a solo gig at the Hollywood Amoeba Records, then again with her band, at the Roxy in November. I was not disappointed at either show - she's already a pretty seasoned performer at such a young age. I can see why - she's been performing, touring and promoting the heck out of her debut album, and hasn't stopped yet. I just caught her on Jay Leno recently, not to mention she just released two more music videos.  Whew...

In between those two shows, I also got to see a rare performance by Chocolate Genius Incorporated, a band/project led by songwriter Mark Anthony Thompson. Been following his music since the first album in 1998, and was glad to be able to finally see him perform live.

Apparently, musical talent runs in his family... His youngest daughter Zsela (17 years old as of last year...?) has an EP of songs called "All of the Above", which I think is also great. He produced the tracks, BTW, pretty evident if you're familiar with his work. Anyway, the songs are available for free streaming on her Bandcamp page, with an option to purchase the songs for a $5.00 (or more) donation. Very cool - I certainly hope she does more music in the future.

But enough about them, this blog is supposed to be about ME, haha... Briefly, I haven't forgotten about or abandoned my intentions laid out in the last post - to produce 3 tracks using a different DAW program for each one. I really have no excuse why they are taking so long, other than that excuse called LIFE... Art all too often plays second fiddle to Life in my world, sad to say. The good news is that the first track is in the mixing stage right now. With any luck, fingers crossed, I should have a mix to post here very soon.

But in the meantime, Here are some pics of a new friend I've acquired as of last weekend. I've sort of been jonesing for a new acoustic guitar for well over a year now. I do have an acoustic that I purchased back in 1994 (19 years ago!), and it's actually still playable, in great shape and sounds pretty good, especially now that the wood has matured some. But I suppose I wanted to take a look at what else is out there, and explore other tonal options. More specifically, I'd been looking for an acoustic with a slightly smaller body, which usually makes for a guitar lower in overall volume, which would help me because my singing voice is naturally pretty low in volume in comparison to the guitar I've been playing; it drowns my voice out in many cases. A smaller scale guitar is also naturally easier to hold and handle. Standard acoustic guitar bodies can be thick and a little unwieldy. This one feels closer to an electric guitar, lightweight and comfortable to play.

At first I purchased a guitar online, made by a manufacturer called Wechter. I was really happy with it, except that it had improperly installed frets (the small metal pieces installed on top of the neck that determine what notes to play). Several frets were not flush to the neck, and looked like they might work themselves loose with time...! After I reported the problem to the store and shipped it back, they determined that it wouldn't be worth trying to repair, and wouldn't be getting more in stock anytime soon. To me that really meant that they were not willing to pay for that level of repair - I'm pretty sure the frets could be fixed, but it probably wouldn't have been cheap. So, in the end I got a refund. A real shame that guitar didn't work out.

A few weeks later, I came across the guitar I eventually settled on, the M-120, made by Guild. The body is about 7/8 the scale of a standard acoustic guitar's body, but the neck is standard scale, but thin, for easy playability. The body is solid mahogany, top, back and sides, reputed to be a "warm" sounding tonewood, as opposed to "bright". As you can hopefully tell from the pics, the wood is a nice warm reddish-brown color. The neck is made of mahogany as well, with a fingerboard made of rosewood. No fancy ornamentation like on other (more expensive) guitars, but it does the job it's made to do.

Front...

...and back.

A nice additional feature is the electric pickup system installed with volume and tone controls inside the soundhole, so I can plug it into an amplifier or recorder just like an electric guitar, if I so choose. I see that coming in handy if I want to quickly lay down a track for a rough idea, and I'm too lazy or impatient to set up a mic, haha.

Guitar cable connects to an amp or mixer right here. It simultaneously serves as the guitar's rear strap button.

Tone-wise, I must admit the Wechter sounded a little "sweeter", but it's not a brand that's sold all over the place like Fender or Gibson, so their guitars are unfortunately harder to find. But this Guild is no slouch either. After some preliminary miking tests, I believe I will get some pretty nice sounding tracks recorded with this guitar, with less volume to potentially disturb the neighbors with in my building. The neck shape feels really good in my hand, and the frets are just fine, haha. It also came with a hard shell case, a nice plus. This Youtube video was a major factor in my decision to check it out.

Close-up of the body's wood grain.

Inside the case...

So, that's my journey in finding the new addition to my instrument family. I've hardly put it down since bringing it home, so I'd say that's a good sign. Looking forward to many, many hours of enjoyment with my new pal. The only thing is I have yet to come up with a name for it...! Silly as it may sound to some, I've named pretty much all my guitars and basses. Any suggestions? If not, I guess I'll wait until a name comes to me.

All for now... I will do my darnedest next time to not take so long between posts, for those actually still coming here to visit.  If so, then thanks...!