Questions about Recording? Ask here! [Archive]

Peter

06-13-2005, 01:20 PM

Originally posted by Logashkna
I've been recording on an old fostex multi-tracker for a while now. it's a four track model, so i was curious how to bounce tracks in order to squeeze in more tracks?

Dig into your recorders manual. MOST (if not all) multi-track units have the ability to internally bounce a group of tracks down to one or two tracks. But each unit is different.

Originally posted by Mr Misery
ok, im using audacity to record some music...I record a guitar track first, then i record some vocals...when i play it back, the vocals start off in sync but as it progresses it gradually slips more and more out of time until at the end of the song the vocal track is about a third of a second earlier than it should be. So I try and fix this by using the "Time Shift" tool...but this doesn't work cos the tracks are more out of sync at different points in the song. What do i do??

You're having a problem known as latency. Basically what's happening (in a nutshell), is that there is a time delay between the moment your computer plays back the guitar track and how long it takes your computer to digitize your analog vocal track. In other words, your computer playback is instant, whereas it takes a moment to record things, and thus the vocal lags behind.

So what I have to ask is, are you using an external audio interface for the computer, or is it internal (eg. pluging a mic into your souncard)? Secondly, are you using a single hard drive or two hard drives? Computers don't like to have audio being recorded to the same drive as the audio program is running off of. It causes the read/write head to fall behind and even crash. THIRDLY...just kidding. Two questions is all.

Elliott Smith

06-13-2005, 02:41 PM

Ok Peter, I swear i'm not trying to be rude here, but you didn't really read my post did you?
My vocal track is coming in EARLY not late.
It starts off fine but gradually slips out as the song progresses.

I'm plugging my guitar and vocal mic into a mixer and that goes straight into the back of the computer (or the soundcard, right?) I believe it's only one hard drive. 'fraid I know next to nothing about computers or recording equipment, so use baby talk with me if you have to.

Thanks

Peter

06-13-2005, 03:21 PM

Alright, then reverse my words. Latency works both ways. So it's really taking the computer longer to play back your guitar track because it's occupied with recording the vocal track. It's the same issue just a different way.

What I'd suggest as a temporary fix would be to just record four or five lines at a time instead of the entire vocal track. Record a couple lines, go in and fix them, record the next few, fix 'em, etc. Also, check the help section of your program and see if it has any tips on solving latency issues internally.

then, go buy a second hard drive...record all your audio to that and run the program from a different drive.

Then refer to my budget recording sticky about recording interfaces...by a cheapy, it'll help a lot.

Elliott Smith

06-13-2005, 03:25 PM

Thanks, I'll heed your advice, sounds good to me.

What sort of price range would i be looking at for another hard drive?

Six Ways

06-13-2005, 07:26 PM

Hang on a mo, I thought Mr. M. had already said something which pointed away from latency....

You said that it didn't matter if you re-aligned the tracks, because the vocals got more and more out of sync as the track proceeded. That's why I suggested it might be playing back tracks at a different speed somehow.

Elliott Smith

06-13-2005, 07:46 PM

Originally posted by Six Ways
Hang on a mo, I thought Mr. M. had already said something which pointed away from latency....

You said that it didn't matter if you re-aligned the tracks, because the vocals got more and more out of sync as the track proceeded. That's why I suggested it might be playing back tracks at a different speed somehow.

That is true...
it must be playing the first track slightly slower when I record the second track over it...it's weird.
but there doesn't seem to be anything simple i can do. and i probably can't afford a new hard drive. So I'm screwed for now. Which is when I really want to record stuff. :(

Peter

06-14-2005, 02:44 AM

once a signal is digitized, the computer will play it back at the same speed every time...it's not a reel to reel tape machine for christs' sake.

what's happening is that the computer is getting further and further behind in the vocal track conversion as the song goes on, thus making the time difference increase as the song goes on.

as far as a new hard drive, if you're just doing like...12 tracks or so at a low sample-rate/bit-depth, I wouldn't go more than 40 or 60 gigabytes. Then you could keep a whole bunch of song files in tact unmixed on the second drive. And you can always move the tracks to the first hard drive if you want to work on something else that'll take up a lot of space. So just shoot for a 40 or 60 GB drive. http://www.zipzoomfly.com/ tends to have great prices on drives.

Secondly, make sure your computer will support a second hard drive! Crack it open and make sure there's a second IDE slot to which the second hard drive is attached. If there's not, look into a firewire hard drive...USB is still a bit too slow to record multiple tracks through, IMO.

[][][][][]

06-14-2005, 08:19 AM

I'm a bit worried about latency because I'm gonna try recording HOT TRAXX with just a mic pre into the soundcard (my girl got a new computer...so it's cheaper than buying a whole new multitrack!) I reckon the "record a bit at a time" trick is actually a cool idea because then you can create the ultimate vocal comp!

Fab

06-14-2005, 08:55 AM

if you're using a second hard drive, do you have to have everything you'd be playing along to on one, and then be writing onto the other? because that sounds like rather a lot of hastle.

Peter

06-14-2005, 03:28 PM

Originally posted by Fab
if you're using a second hard drive, do you have to have everything you'd be playing along to on one, and then be writing onto the other? because that sounds like rather a lot of hastle.

No, that would be dumb. ALL of your audio files exist on the second hard drive with alllllll of the song file information. The first hard drive just runs the audio program.

Fab

06-14-2005, 05:14 PM

Originally posted by Peter
No, that would be dumb. ALL of your audio files exist on the second hard drive with alllllll of the song file information. The first hard drive just runs the audio program. i thought it sounded too much, but then you were saying about it reading and writing at the same time, and i assumed that wouldn't work unless it was reading what you've already recorded from a different hard drive.

meh, i can't afford a second hard drive anyway, not when i have a microkorg and a 100w valve amp to shop for.

Peter

06-15-2005, 02:24 AM

thing is...the playback audio is being buffered into the RAM and then read from the primary hard drive. the audio being recorded is being written directly to the secondary hard drive. So all the secondary hard drive is feed raw data to the RAM buffer.....

it's a fucking beautiful thing.

Henriette

06-26-2005, 01:26 AM

I didn't read through this thread, and I'm not exactly sure that this is an actual recording question, but anyway - I recorded a live show using my old/cheap Mp3 player. Naturally the sound quality leaves a lot to be desired. So I was wondering: Is there any way that I can clear out the static (? - don't know the technical term for it)? I mean, is there some online program or something? Ok thanks.

Peter

06-26-2005, 03:53 AM

the crappiness in quality is due to the poor audio encoders in the recorder, i'm guessing. I'd have to hear a clip to be sure.

but in that case, there's nothing to be done about it.

Fab

06-26-2005, 02:10 PM

a noise reduction might help clear stuff up (obviously i'm like peter in not knowing the exact problem). Get something like wavepad from www.download.com to do it, it's pretty easy but if you need help, just ask.:-o

Henriette

06-26-2005, 06:22 PM

Ok, I'll try out that download. Thanks.

Drunkenmaster

07-03-2005, 11:23 AM

How the hell do I use Cakewalk Pro 24. It looks really complicated.

Peter

07-04-2005, 01:47 AM

Originally posted by Drunkenmaster
How the hell do I use Cakewalk Pro 24. It looks really complicated.

http://www.cakewalk.com/

download a manual (i've never used it)

Jonathan

07-04-2005, 03:33 AM

hay peter why does my marshall valvestate amp not sound like billy corgan!?!?!?!?!

this is really bummin me out

Dressed for the H-Bomb

07-05-2005, 01:04 AM

hey this might be a horrible open question, but I have a Fostex Mr-8. I record tracks on there, than take the tracks and put them on my computer, I use Soundforge and Acid to do the mixing and "polishing." I'm not all that familiar with MIDI, but the Mr-8 does have a MIDI output. Is there some easier, more efficent way I can go about recording my shit?
EDIT: thanks

Six Ways

07-07-2005, 05:30 AM

Originally posted by iamtable
hey this might be a horrible open question, but I have a Fostex Mr-8. I record tracks on there, than take the tracks and put them on my computer, I use Soundforge and Acid to do the mixing and "polishing." I'm not all that familiar with MIDI, but the Mr-8 does have a MIDI output. Is there some easier, more efficent way I can go about recording my shit?
EDIT: thanks

That IS a horrible, open question. First thing though: MIDI has nothing to do with what you're doing, forget about it. MIDI does not transmit sound information, it transmits sequencing information to synthesizers and the like. You cannot record sound with MIDI. And overall it sounds like you're doing things the best way without changing recording device.

Dressed for the H-Bomb

07-07-2005, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by Six Ways
That IS a horrible, open question. First thing though: MIDI has nothing to do with what you're doing, forget about it. MIDI does not transmit sound information, it transmits sequencing information to synthesizers and the like. You cannot record sound with MIDI. And overall it sounds like you're doing things the best way without changing recording device.
yeah i figured it was open, i should of worded it this way, how the hell would you record straight to computer? I'm assuming I'm gonna need new equipment for this. EDIT:This link seems to answer this question http://www.blamonet.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=70139
Is it easier to record this way? Would I get better sound quality? What exactly do I look for in one of these things?
Sorry about all this, just think of it as teaching a man to fish.

Six Ways

07-14-2005, 07:07 AM

I don't see any particular advantages recording straight to the computer over recording to a compact flash card and transferring, or using the USB thingy, surely it's quite quick and easy? Especially since you'd have to spend a fair amount of money to get something else.

The sound quality would in general be slightly better. The Fostex is 16bit/44.1khz (don't know if you know what they mean, I wont talk down to you unless you want me to!) but the direct-to-computer interfaces are all at least 24bit/44.1khz, and some do things like 24bit/192khz and crazy stuff like that I believe.

The thing is though, 16bit/44.1khz is actually not too bad. It can be very hard for someone who's not a complete audiophile to hear the difference after 16bit/44.1khz. 24bit would be nice, but I certainly wouldn't worry about the sample rate.

There are pro and con points in terms of ease of use for an interface. Pros include the fact that it's straight on to your hard drive, so lots more space available and no dicking around afterward transferring. It's also straight into the sequencing software so you can start editing on the fly if need be. However, there's always a lot more room for things going wrong, since the fostex is a fully integrated system; you're never gonna get incompatible drivers, or not know where to plug things in, etc. I had a lot of trouble with my new interface, the Lexicon Omega, to begin with since it refused to work until I'd fiddled with my system loads. The fostex is dead simple in that respect; turn on, record.

revgoozen

11-16-2005, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by Peter
Alright, then reverse my words. Latency works both ways. So it's really taking the computer longer to play back your guitar track because it's occupied with recording the vocal track. It's the same issue just a different way.

What I'd suggest as a temporary fix would be to just record four or five lines at a time instead of the entire vocal track. Record a couple lines, go in and fix them, record the next few, fix 'em, etc. Also, check the help section of your program and see if it has any tips on solving latency issues internally.

then, go buy a second hard drive...record all your audio to that and run the program from a different drive.

Then refer to my budget recording sticky about recording interfaces...by a cheapy, it'll help a lot.

a second hard drive will really help? assuming he's got a zippy enough processor and a gig of RAM, shouldn't the guy be fine? if he doesn't have these things he'll probably still run into latency issues anyway right?

Imploding Ed

11-17-2005, 11:17 AM

Peter! Hi!
I've got a question...whenever I come to record vocals or acoustic guitar using my microphone, in the background there is always an audible hissing sound that I can't seem to take away. And the more I boost and compress the sound of my voice or guitar to the appropriate levels for a song, the louder the hissing gets, till it's a real nuisance. Do have any idea what it could be from...the connection to my computer's soundcard, the soundcard itself...the microphone quality, or accidental leakage onto the track (though I use headphones)?

Thanks for any thoughts.

revgoozen

11-17-2005, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by Imploding Ed
Peter! Hi!
I've got a question...whenever I come to record vocals or acoustic guitar using my microphone, in the background there is always an audible hissing sound that I can't seem to take away. And the more I boost and compress the sound of my voice or guitar to the appropriate levels for a song, the louder the hissing gets, till it's a real nuisance. Do have any idea what it could be from...the connection to my computer's soundcard, the soundcard itself...the microphone quality, or accidental leakage onto the track (though I use headphones)?

Thanks for any thoughts.

all of the above. you might be able to eq some of the noise out, depending on what utilities you have. you could also try to boost your recording volume and try to mic'ing closer.

Imploding Ed

11-17-2005, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by revgoozen
all of the above. you might be able to eq some of the noise out, depending on what utilities you have. you could also try to boost your recording volume and try to mic'ing closer.

I will try that. Thanks.

Peter

11-19-2005, 02:16 AM

When flourescent lights are on the same circuit as your recording gear and are turned on, they introduce noise into the signal due to there being a shared electrical ground. So kill all the lights before you record and that may or may not help (it depends on if the circuit your lights are on are shared by anything else electrically oriented.

Maybe post a clip of what the buzz sounds like and I can be more specific/helpful.

Imploding Ed

11-19-2005, 07:10 AM

Originally posted by Peter
When flourescent lights are on the same circuit as your recording gear and are turned on, they introduce noise into the signal due to there being a shared electrical ground. So kill all the lights before you record and that may or may not help (it depends on if the circuit your lights are on are shared by anything else electrically oriented.

Maybe post a clip of what the buzz sounds like and I can be more specific/helpful.

Ahh. Good thinking! I did try turning off my Speakers rather than just muting them, cos they've got a flourescent light in it. But you're also talking about the room lighting are you? Ok well I'll try making sure those are off. I will upload a clip so I can show you what I mean. Thanks Pete.

Peter

11-19-2005, 12:20 PM

Originally posted by Imploding Ed
Ahh. Good thinking! I did try turning off my Speakers rather than just muting them, cos they've got a flourescent light in it. But you're also talking about the room lighting are you? Ok well I'll try making sure those are off. I will upload a clip so I can show you what I mean. Thanks Pete.

Just kill all the lights in your place. it's sexier to record by candelight, anyway. Mood lighting is very important when recording music :)

Imploding Ed

11-19-2005, 05:05 PM

Originally posted by Peter
Just kill all the lights in your place. it's sexier to record by candelight, anyway. Mood lighting is very important when recording music :)

hehe I've actually been doing that anyway, looks like I've been helping the recording process subliminally.

Imploding Ed

11-20-2005, 06:15 PM

Well it seems that I've gotten rid of one problem but gained another....

I bought a Creative 24bit external sound card and some Phillips wireless headphones. I thought this would do me good, because
A) My internal soud card is messed up...ie the line in doesn't work, the line out only sends the right speaker signal and so on, so a new sound card was a must
B)Not have long headphone cords makes recording in a good acoustic space impossible as you have to stay close to the computer, as the cord allows. So a wireless set of headphones I thought we be good. They work very well, and I can even listen to music when in the bathroom now. Which might be a bit too much information.

Anyway Peter, with the new sound card the hissing has been significantly reduced, but I have a new problem.
It concerns recording with the mic (I'm not sure if the same will happen when I try to record electric..we'll see).
I tried recording vocals last night and I got this problem, and then I tried recording acoustic guitar today and I had the same problem. What happens is that the recording that I'm working on putting down ends up being a little off time with the rest of the song. And it seems that this time difference only occurs after 30 seconds or a minute...up to there the time difference is either non existent, or hasn't gotten out of hand yet so it's not noticeable.
It's strange and frustrating. So say I'm working on my lead acoustic guitar part. I record it and play it well. But when I come to listen back to it, after a bit there starts to be a discrepency between the base track I'm recording along to, and what I am actually recording. And it ends up being completely out of time with one another.

Do you know what's going on Peter? The only things I can think of are
A)My microphone cable's too long, creating lag or something. but this has never happened until now with this mic cable.
B) It's some sort of lag or latency from the fact that the new sound card is external and has to travel down the usb cable to get to the computer.
C)It's the wireless headphone, which has a slight delay between the receiver sending the signal and the headphones picking it up. I wonder though, because the receiver is about two feet from the headphones...not much difference at all.

????
I'd be grateful for any thoughts.

Peter

11-21-2005, 01:12 AM

Originally posted by Imploding Ed
Well it seems that I've gotten rid of one problem but gained another....

I bought a Creative 24bit external sound card and some Phillips wireless headphones. I thought this would do me good, because
A) My internal soud card is messed up...ie the line in doesn't work, the line out only sends the right speaker signal and so on, so a new sound card was a must
B)Not have long headphone cords makes recording in a good acoustic space impossible as you have to stay close to the computer, as the cord allows. So a wireless set of headphones I thought we be good. They work very well, and I can even listen to music when in the bathroom now. Which might be a bit too much information.

Anyway Peter, with the new sound card the hissing has been significantly reduced, but I have a new problem.
It concerns recording with the mic (I'm not sure if the same will happen when I try to record electric..we'll see).
I tried recording vocals last night and I got this problem, and then I tried recording acoustic guitar today and I had the same problem. What happens is that the recording that I'm working on putting down ends up being a little off time with the rest of the song. And it seems that this time difference only occurs after 30 seconds or a minute...up to there the time difference is either non existent, or hasn't gotten out of hand yet so it's not noticeable.
It's strange and frustrating. So say I'm working on my lead acoustic guitar part. I record it and play it well. But when I come to listen back to it, after a bit there starts to be a discrepency between the base track I'm recording along to, and what I am actually recording. And it ends up being completely out of time with one another.

Do you know what's going on Peter? The only things I can think of are
A)My microphone cable's too long, creating lag or something. but this has never happened until now with this mic cable.
B) It's some sort of lag or latency from the fact that the new sound card is external and has to travel down the usb cable to get to the computer.
C)It's the wireless headphone, which has a slight delay between the receiver sending the signal and the headphones picking it up. I wonder though, because the receiver is about two feet from the headphones...not much difference at all.

????
I'd be grateful for any thoughts.

Your problem is called "Latency," as you thought. It has both to do with the wirless headphones and the external soundcard. Get rid of the headphones. Buy some with a long chord, or buy an extension cable for them. Also, are you using two hard drives when you record or doing it all from a single hard drive? Two hard drives is proper and wouldn't cause problems, one hard drive would be a problem. My other suggestion is to record small sections at a time instead of doing an entire take of a song. Or start learning how to loop tracks (this'll also make it sound a bit more professional if done properly). If your recorder has a metronome function, it may also have a function to automatically time expand/compress your files so that they stay on tempo. Have a look into that.

Imploding Ed

11-21-2005, 06:46 AM

Originally posted by Peter
Your problem is called "Latency," as you thought. It has both to do with the wirless headphones and the external soundcard. Get rid of the headphones. Buy some with a long chord, or buy an extension cable for them. Also, are you using two hard drives when you record or doing it all from a single hard drive? Two hard drives is proper and wouldn't cause problems, one hard drive would be a problem. My other suggestion is to record small sections at a time instead of doing an entire take of a song. Or start learning how to loop tracks (this'll also make it sound a bit more professional if done properly). If your recorder has a metronome function, it may also have a function to automatically time expand/compress your files so that they stay on tempo. Have a look into that.

Oh shit! You mean I have to get some new headphones after I just bought these ones?! Crap. No I'm only using one hard drive. Two would be better then...should it be an external hard drive or doesn't it matter?

Good idea on the small sections. I;ll try that. Time Compress/Expanding eh? That's not the same as just a Compressor is it? Cos I use that to beef up my vocals all the time...I don't think you're talking about that. I'll have a look for a time compressor expander then.

Thanks.

Peter

11-21-2005, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by Imploding Ed
Oh shit! You mean I have to get some new headphones after I just bought these ones?! Crap. No I'm only using one hard drive. Two would be better then...should it be an external hard drive or doesn't it matter?

Good idea on the small sections. I;ll try that. Time Compress/Expanding eh? That's not the same as just a Compressor is it? Cos I use that to beef up my vocals all the time...I don't think you're talking about that. I'll have a look for a time compressor expander then.

Thanks.

I'd invest in a second hard drive before worrying about headphones. You see...there's only one read/write head on a hard drive and if you're forcing that one head to both read program information for the audio recorder AND write encoded audio to the disk simultaneously, you are definitely going to run into timing problems. So get a second hard drive immediately and see how much that happens. Internal/external doesn't matter, but if it is external, go Firewire.

Six Ways

11-21-2005, 02:45 PM

Originally posted by Peter
but if it is external, go Firewire.

Meh, my USB2 one works AOK.

Peter

11-22-2005, 02:18 AM

Originally posted by Six Ways
Meh, my USB2 one works AOK.

firewire sounds cool, so be quiet :-p

Imploding Ed

11-22-2005, 01:38 PM

Well I tried using different headphones...but I still got the latency. So I did what you said and recording small little parts at a time, and it worked, despite being twice as time consuming. Thanks though, at least I can still record without having to go out and buy another expensive piece of hardware just yet.

Anyway, what size hard drive would you suggest I get?

Peter

11-22-2005, 02:52 PM

That depends on what bit-rate/sampling-rate you're recording at. If you're doing high resolution stuff (like 24 bit/88.2Khz or better), you'll want at least a 100 GB drive. The other thing is...if you plan on keeping all your songs in full recorded form (eg, so you can always go back and remix them), then you'll want a larger one just for storage reasons.

Overall though, it doesn't really matter what size you get. Just get something big enough for your needs. What does matter is the speed of the drive, do not buy a 5400 RPM drive, it's too slow to recall all the data you need to recall. A 7200 RPM drive is what you're after. I recommend Western Digital drives with the 8MB Cache on 'em. They work rather excellent. Zipzoomfly.com has excellent prices on them.

So here are some links to make it easy:
Western Digital Caviar 120 GB, 7200 RPM, 8 MB Cache (http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=101205) - $72
Western Digital Caviar 200 GB, 7200 RPM, 8 MB Cache (http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=101213) - $88

Imploding Ed

11-22-2005, 05:46 PM

Right on. You are fantastically helpful. Man those are cheap!
But what's this about a controller card needed to access the full extent of the higher model's capacity?

Six Ways

11-22-2005, 06:14 PM

Mine is 7200, 250gb. Do I win? Although it cost nearly twice as much as that 200gb one there. Stupid american rock-bottom electronics prices.

Oh, and 8mb buffer, not that 2mb shit they try to palm off onto you.

Peter

11-22-2005, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by Six Ways
Mine is 7200, 250gb. Do I win?

You get the mercury prize. But don't try to eat it, it's poisonous.

lostinyou

11-25-2005, 08:19 AM

hello peter, i have an electric guitar, an acoustic guitar, my computer and a SURE sm58

i want to start recording on my computer, and i want it to sound good

tell me what to get, what to do :)

(i tried to record using CoolEdit, because it's the only program i have, but my voice is recorded very low, i think it's the microphone's fault -sure sm58- i think the signal is just to weak, and besides i'm recording the din of the computer as loud as my singing)

Fab

11-25-2005, 11:24 AM

how are you going into your computer would probably be helpful information. Have you just got the SM58 plugged into the soundcard with some adaptors and stuff, or have you got some kind of mixer or USB/Firewire interface?

lostinyou

11-25-2005, 03:23 PM

well. i just plugged the sm58 directly to the outlet for the microphone, the one next to plug the headphones. am i terribly dumb? :-o

It's Harry!

11-25-2005, 06:44 PM

Have you gone into the sound properties and turned on "mic boost" in windows for your vocals? Microphones can't just give sufficiant volume.

Six Ways

11-26-2005, 08:52 PM

Umm, ok. You need a pre-amp probably to start with, although if you were gonna do that you'd need something better than CoolEdit to justify the purchase! To start with, go to www.kreatives.org and download Kristal. It's a free multitrack app, pretty good too. In there you can boost the volume of the vocal track as well as having the volume boost on in windows.

I take it the SM58 (it's Shure btw, not sure (unless you have some cheap rip off!)) is plugged in to some kind of adaptor? Unless you have some wierd crazy soundcard with an XLR input. In any case, it's not gonna give you much volume. Also, why are you getting noise from the computer? SM58s are relatively directional; is it hugely loud?

lostinyou

11-27-2005, 03:58 AM

Originally posted by It's Harry!
Have you gone into the sound properties and turned on "mic boost" in windows for your vocals? Microphones can't just give sufficiant volume.

i was looking for "mic boost" and i can't find it, it would only allow me to adjust the volume, the normal volume, and it's all the way up

lostinyou

11-27-2005, 04:07 AM

Originally posted by Six Ways
Umm, ok. You need a pre-amp probably to start with, although if you were gonna do that you'd need something better than CoolEdit to justify the purchase! To start with, go to www.kreatives.org and download Kristal. It's a free multitrack app, pretty good too. In there you can boost the volume of the vocal track as well as having the volume boost on in windows.

I take it the SM58 (it's Shure btw, not sure (unless you have some cheap rip off!)) is plugged in to some kind of adaptor? Unless you have some wierd crazy soundcard with an XLR input. In any case, it's not gonna give you much volume. Also, why are you getting noise from the computer? SM58s are relatively directional; is it hugely loud?

thanks for the advice on Kristal :)
yes, it's a SHURE, sorry the bad spelling
i plugged it directly into the computer socket, but the jack of the microphone it's a big one, like the guitar ones, and i used an adaptor to fit the socket of the computer, whick is small (headphones size) but i'm sure that is irrelevant

the noise i get from the computer it's not coming from the microphone, it's added, it's like the vibrations of the computer thinking, well, it sounds like R2D2 just talking all the time

(sniff)

11-29-2005, 05:44 AM

here's a question....

I have a Crate CSX8 mixer, a SoundBlaster Live! 5.1 sound card with 1/8" inputs, and a desire to have recordings run directly into my computer.

I cant seem to get audio onto my computer (maybe I need a certain program to record it...), and when I run the audio out and into the mixer for overdubbing and whatnot, I cannot adjust the levels on the mixer. I will be getting hold of a Tascam DA45HR DAT recorder (once belonging to Elliott Smith) this week, and have a Korg PXR4 digital recorder now. I would like to go in from the mixer into my computer, allowing for more recording time and whatnot. However I do not know how to do this.

any ideas?
any questions?

thanks,
sean

thecourtesyfalls

12-07-2005, 10:59 AM

I used to have a pxr 4. Have you tried using the USB function? You can run a usb cord for the pxr4 to your computer, and import the tracks. You will need a multitrack program though (Cubase, Protools, cakewalk, adobe audition, etc...) As far as mixing on a board, after your computer, you will either need a digital mixer, or a digital input/output interface (such as MOTU) going to an analog board, or use the digital mixer on the screen for whatever program you get. Hope this helps...

Imploding Ed

01-08-2006, 08:49 AM

Hi Peter, so I have just bought and installed my second hard drive, now how will this help with my latency? Am I supposed to install my recording studio onto the second hard drive so that it's not on the same disk as my operating system?

Peter

01-08-2006, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by Imploding Ed
Hi Peter, so I have just bought and installed my second hard drive, now how will this help with my latency? Am I supposed to install my recording studio onto the second hard drive so that it's not on the same disk as my operating system?

Keep your operating system and programs on the first hard drive. When you open your recording software, you should be saving your session files and all the audio files to the second hard drive. So one hard drive just runs the program and the other hard drive records all the audio.

Imploding Ed

01-08-2006, 11:56 AM

Excellent, thanks. That makes things very simple.

Peter

01-08-2006, 12:16 PM

I'm here to simplify your life, Ed.

here's what I plan on buying in the near future:

M-Audio Firewire 410 Interface
Pro Tools M-Powered
Two Studio Projects B1s
A Shure SM57
Pair M-Audio BX5 Studio Monitors

Cables/stands/etc. Oh...and 512 MB RAM for my Lappy :) Just gotta work up the balls to put it all on my credit card!

marquiSP

02-23-2006, 07:19 PM

Hey Peter. I am going to be buying a new computer soon and I want to get into digital recording. I don't know much. People have told me the Mbox 2 is a great starting off point, but I went to a music store today to check things out and the guy who worked there started to sway me in the direction of using Logic Express 7 with a Firebox. Do you have a preference or can you tell me anything about one versus the other???? Thank you.

Peter

03-20-2006, 12:12 PM

With the Firebox you'll be able to use virtually any recording software that you want on your computer. Logic, Cakewalk, Sonar, Reason - anything, well, anything except Pro Tools. That's where the Mbox 2 comes in. The MBox 2 comes with DigiDesign Pro Tools included in the price. That's pretty much a steal considering that they could easily charge $1000 for the software. Also with the MBox you get Propellerheads Reason (midi sequencer) which is quite a lovely program.

At the end of the day it comes down to personal preference in my opinion. Both options will do what you want. I myself have an MBox 2 and it works perfectly.

qwert

03-22-2006, 03:14 PM

how do you post music on the internet and how can i put a link to it hear?

RoadToJoy

03-22-2006, 03:50 PM

how do you post music on the internet and how can i put a link to it hear?

www.yousendit.com

p.s. i already answerd this in another thread

TheImplodingVoice

06-30-2006, 11:18 AM

OK THIS IS URGENTE!

I need to record a string quartet and I've been recording it mixing all the instruments in a console and then through the line-in jack in my comp, but now I need to record each instrument in a different track while they all play together...please this is really really urgent..I have 300 dollars, what do I need to buy?

Fab

06-30-2006, 11:49 AM

How many mics you already have and whether or not your console has preamps in it would be useful info.

TheImplodingVoice

06-30-2006, 12:35 PM

a mic per player and an ambience one, so 5

yes it does

but the real question is how can I record several tracks simultaneously
the thing is that I need to edit lets say the violin without editing lets say the cello

Peter

06-30-2006, 12:45 PM

if time is not an object, you could have them record the whole thing together with the one mic, and then go back and have them each record independently with the same mic. We'd call that an "overdub". Mainly because if you were to record everyone with different mics playing simultaneously, every mic would pic up every instrument, so if you did edit the violin, the cello that's being picked up in the violin mic would move, too. and then you'd have this really odd inconsistent sound where sometimes the cello is being picked up by all 5 mics and sometimes with only two mics...

so. record everyone playing simultaneously, and then overdub each person individually. At the end you can throw away the recording of everyone playing together and you'll have four perfect clean tracks to edit together.

make sense?

Trickster

06-30-2006, 02:22 PM

Is a Studio Project B1 the best mic I can buy for the money? I could afford a little more, say around £100, but if the B1 (£62) is decent enough then I think I may just go for it.

I don't currently have any condenser mics at all. I have an sm58, and a couple of other similar dynamic mics, and I want to be able to record vocals and guitar mainly with this condensor mic, but in a live recording I might also use it as a drum overhead. I'll be plugging it into a Yamaha AW4416.

Peter

07-01-2006, 01:42 AM

I like my B1 just fine! You'll need a preamp with phantom power though, just make sure that your mixer has it.

Trickster

07-01-2006, 11:39 AM

The AW4416 has 2 on-board pre-amps with phantom power... I might just buy two then since they're reasonably cheap.

Peter

07-01-2006, 03:11 PM

and record in STEREO?! CRAZY! ;)

Trickster

07-01-2006, 06:42 PM

Well, I was thinking more one for voice and one for acoustic guitar... that should come out pretty good. Also it means I can have two (stereo!!) overheads when recording drums.

Trickster

07-01-2006, 06:52 PM

Do you have any example recordings where I can hear how it sounds? I mean, just a dry sample or anything?

Trickster

07-04-2006, 07:49 PM

I've been looking at maybe going for the C1 instead now... it seems to be a bit more... swish.

vitelloM

07-05-2006, 12:57 AM

this might be a retarded question but is it possible to record onto the sonar program using the mbox 2?
if so how does one set it up. i can get sound in my earphones through the mbox but nothing records into sonar?

can i plug into my mbox2 and still record using sonar 5?

greatly appreciated

vitello

Peter

07-05-2006, 03:39 AM

I haven't used the C1, but all the reviews I've read give it a bit more hype than the B1. Sounds like a better choice to me.

As far as the MBox/Sonar equation goes - if you bought an MBox, then you also bought Pro Tools, so why want to use Sonar? And no, the MBox won't work with Sonar because DigiDesign creates it's hardware to interact with it's own proprietary software only and no one else's software.

Trickster

07-05-2006, 07:08 PM

Hmmm... I've been recommended the Audio Technica 4033 by someone now...

Peter

07-05-2006, 10:24 PM

If you're willing to throw down the $400 for the 4033 then it's definitely worth it. It gets good reviews, but I've never used it. AT mics are generally really good, although sometimes a bit too bright for my own personal liking.

revgoozen

07-19-2006, 06:21 PM

so peter, i'm doing some acoustic recordings in my bedroom and unfortunately, after compressing my vocal track, some undesired roomsounds have popped up in the dead spaces. i tried a few things that sounded really shitty, like pairing the track down to only things that were melody related, cutting and pasting "good" room sound into the ambient spaces of the track, etc... are there any other options, or do i just need to reconsider the compression that i used? the issue is that i really like the level of compression on my voice, i just don't really care for it anywhere else in the track.

Trickster

07-19-2006, 06:49 PM

can you not edit out the spaces in between the actual vocals? or do it automatically with a limiter/gate?

revgoozen

07-20-2006, 02:34 PM

can you not edit out the spaces in between the actual vocals? or do it automatically with a limiter/gate?

i've tried both, it just sounds terrible. what you end up with is absolute silence and then you get assaulted with compression noise, roomsound, and actual melody... it just sounds choppy. i even tried compressing the spaces in between differently, so that there would be less roomsound, but you can totally here the transition.

i guess i've probably never noticed in previous recordings because a) i didn't have as much room sound b) any noise was probably being masked by other instruments c) the compression plug ins i used with my old software may have been less noisy.

Fab

07-20-2006, 02:44 PM

Is it not worth trying to re-record it with a bit of soundproofing round the mic to reduce room sound?

revgoozen

07-20-2006, 04:59 PM

Is it not worth trying to re-record it with a bit of soundproofing round the mic to reduce room sound?

i'm just trying to avoid it, because i like the room sound for the most part. it's only problematic in 3 places.

Fab

07-21-2006, 08:32 AM

its cheating a bit, but you could re-record it soundproofed and add an extra track of room noise?

revgoozen

07-21-2006, 11:05 AM

its cheating a bit, but you could re-record it soundproofed and add an extra track of room noise?

That's actually a pretty good idea...

Big Muff

07-21-2006, 01:50 PM

Is it not worth trying to re-record it with a bit of soundproofing round the mic to reduce room sound?

That's the best possible solution. Never use devices for fixing anything, only for enhancing or bringing things in the mix together. Get the source right to begin with unless it was the perfect take that can't be recreated.

There are some cheap ways to for sound treatment. I used outdoor rugs (brown) from lowes ($15.00) for a 8x6 feet pieces x 6 to cover a 10x10 room. I used 1.5" white pvc pipe ($3.00) x 4 for curtain rods. And bought regular wooden curtain rod hangers ($5.00 a pair x 6 pairs). For a total of $132.00. I just poked holes in the rugs to use wire ties to fasten the rugs to the rods, wraping over the rods so it didn't show the white rod.

I've also used carpet pading which is about the same cost but ugly and hard to fasten. Both work very well.

I keep a 2 to 3 foot area at the bottom of the walls untreated. to suit the kick drum and bass amp micing. Treating to much can ruin bass freq sometimes i have found.

Peter

07-21-2006, 07:05 PM

I put my vocal mic in my clothes-filled closet amongst all the clothes and sing into it. The clothes tend to dampen down the reverberations and make a cleaner vocal. and use a pop filter!

fixing things "in the mix" is always more difficult than just getting the right sound straight away.

fwoty oz

08-05-2006, 07:32 PM

I was wondering if someone could help me out with my mBox - I'm using a 57 into the mBox but I have to crank up the gain so high that I pick up all kinds of background noise just to get levels in pro tools high enough to work with.. should I be having to crank the gain all the way to the right on the mBox to get normal levels with a sm57? I don't know what I could do differently. Thanks for any help.

Lukulo

08-07-2006, 06:13 AM

To early.

Peter

08-09-2006, 01:24 PM

fwoty oz

08-09-2006, 05:45 PM

the original MBox or the MBox 2? They have different preamps so it does matter which one you're using.

Original mBox - here's something else I've discovered since then: I bought the mp3 option from digistore and when I export to mp3s I get a normal volume.. it's only when I'm exporting to .wavs that songs are coming out ultra quiet. Very odd, and I suppose as long as I can make mp3s it's not a major problem as I'm just recording myself and not running an actual studio. However, it would be nice to be able to create a lossless format... Thanks for any help.

Fluke

10-09-2006, 12:07 AM

hmm, bear with me for a moment... i'm planning to do a little upgrading (can you upgrade from nothing?) to get some of these songs out of my head and onto the computer. my knowledge in this area is... well, next to none, so i just wanted to get an opinion or two on which direction i should head.

at first i was looking at getting an MAUDIO Audiophile 2496 (or perhaps 192) soundcard with a MAUDIO DMP3 Preamp and running my current mic (and perhaps a Shure SM57 if i have enough money left) through them...

but just then i was reading up on the Digidesign MBox (2?)... i gather it's a usb interface, so does this mean that i wouldn't have to worry about getting a new soundcard per se? and it has a preamp included... so, hmm.

what do people think is the best way to go?

also, could i get a decent bass sound by just running my bass straight into either of these options with a DI?

sorry about barging in here with all these questions and lack of knowledge... but i'm not much use here otherwise. :darn:

thanks :)

Six Ways

10-22-2006, 09:25 AM

I would say don't get an internal soundcard for interfacing, you want something external or it'll be limited to the bus speed and how much runtime priority your system gives it. So if it's between the two, definitely MBox 2. But there are plenty of other external audio interfaces out there, look around.

And probably yes to the bass question. Definitely a much better sound than with cheap to midrange mics.

But wait! for I have questions of my own. I just got a DI myself, which can handle speaker output, so hopefully I can make recordings of my guitar through my amp without killing my flatmates by running the speaker out of the amp through the DI. But it says when connecting to such a powerful source, I need to

a) use the -40dB attenuator (fine)
b) use the button that disconnects the DI's ground (...less fine, but ok)
c) make sure the DI isn't touching anything metal (extremely worrying).

So does this sound like it's going to damage my amp if I do this wrong or something? At the moment I'm scared to try, I don't like it...

What it sounds like to me is that because I'm disconnecting the ground I can't have the DI touching anything that might ground it, is that it? It says in the manual that the 'ground lift' prevents accidental short-circuiting of the speaker output. What would happen if it did short-circuit?

Fab

10-22-2006, 09:34 AM

Just stick the DI after your pedals?

Peter

10-22-2006, 11:25 AM

a) use the -40dB attenuator (fine)
b) use the button that disconnects the DI's ground (...less fine, but ok)
c) make sure the DI isn't touching anything metal (extremely worrying).

So does this sound like it's going to damage my amp if I do this wrong or something? At the moment I'm scared to try, I don't like it...

What it sounds like to me is that because I'm disconnecting the ground I can't have the DI touching anything that might ground it, is that it? It says in the manual that the 'ground lift' prevents accidental short-circuiting of the speaker output. What would happen if it did short-circuit?

sounds to me that the instructions are purely to minimize the risk of any electrical intereference getting into the DIs signal. They all actually sound like good, normal suggestions if you ask me. But post a link to the DI Box so I can look at it and give you mo'info.

Six Ways

10-22-2006, 02:26 PM

Just stick the DI after your pedals?

No....then I don't get the sound of my amp. That was the point. Sounds completely different when I put it after the pedals. Bearing in mind I have the clean channel of the amp overdriving the master to get the fuzzy bass end, so when I push it that hard through the Lexicon directly it's digital distortion all the way. :no:

If I DI the amp output I basically can get the sound of the amp on record without mic-ing. I'd probably still mic it when possible, but as a home recording thing it's pretty good.

Six Ways

10-22-2006, 02:31 PM

sounds to me that the instructions are purely to minimize the risk of any electrical intereference getting into the DIs signal. They all actually sound like good, normal suggestions if you ask me. But post a link to the DI Box so I can look at it and give you mo'info.

The main one I'm concerned about is the fact that it can't be touching anything metal...is this necessary? And if so, surely that's incredibly bad design, to include a button which if not used exactly right will blow up the equipment?

http://www.behringer.com/DI4000/index.cfm?lang=ENG

Fab

10-22-2006, 02:43 PM

No....then I don't get the sound of my amp. That was the point. Sounds completely different when I put it after the pedals. Bearing in mind I have the clean channel of the amp overdriving the master to get the fuzzy bass end, so when I push it that hard through the Lexicon directly it's digital distortion all the way. :no:

If I DI the amp output I basically can get the sound of the amp on record without mic-ing. I'd probably still mic it when possible, but as a home recording thing it's pretty good.Without micing you're really not going to get close to the sound yer amp makes normally, the best you'll get is the benefit of its EQ and reverb, which you can add in later anyway. If you're only using it for demos the sound isn't the hugest deal. Couldn't you put the effects loop send into the DI?

Six Ways

10-22-2006, 06:42 PM

Without micing you're really not going to get close to the sound yer amp makes normally, the best you'll get is the benefit of its EQ and reverb, which you can add in later anyway. If you're only using it for demos the sound isn't the hugest deal. Couldn't you put the effects loop send into the DI?

It should be fairly close, it's mainly the amp that determines the sound not the speaker. Particularly since it has the EQ before it goes into the power amp, so it's EQ'd before it's overdriven, which would be difficult (and not worth the effort really) to replicate software-wise. And I don't like using effects loops like that, I never know where they're coming in the chain in the amp. I suspect it would sound not very much like the amp.

EDIT: When I say it'd be difficult to do the EQ/overdrive thing, I know it's easy to arrange the effects like that in cubase, I just mean getting the combination of the sounds right so it would sound like my amp is difficult. And basically, if I can just use the amp then surely that's better anyway.

Peter

10-26-2006, 01:16 AM

question is...what do you need four channels of DI for? Why not just go get a Sansamp DI or a JDI made DI box?

Six Ways

10-26-2006, 07:05 PM

Live.

Drevpile

04-29-2007, 11:54 AM

I bought a Creative 24bit external sound card and some Phillips wireless headphones. I thought this would do me good, because
A) My internal soud card is messed up...ie the line in doesn't work, the line out only sends the right speaker signal and so on, so a new sound card was a must
B)Not have long headphone cords makes recording in a good acoustic space impossible as you have to stay close to the computer, as the cord allows. So a wireless set of headphones I thought we be good. They work very well, and I can even listen to music when in the bathroom now. Which might be a bit too much information.

wireless headphones are bad.

Asher

05-08-2007, 12:37 AM

Were you the gentleman with the Pearl Masterworks kit ages ago?

akane

07-30-2007, 11:14 AM

Peter

07-30-2007, 02:54 PM

Hey guys, my band started recording our first EP yesterday. We recorded the drums with about five mics, placed around the room and above the kit, and got this really good, atmospheric drum sound. It sounds great :D

We're going to go and record bass and guitars some time later next week. We'll probably plug the bass directly into the multi-track, and record the guitar with a mic.

Any tips on mic placement and just recording guitars in general?

electric guitar, acoustic? distorted? clean? what kind of amp? 4x12? combo?

as far as bass goes, I always use both a DI and a mic on the amp, even if the amp is a throw-away track, it's better to have it around just in case. Besides, then you can use the amp mic for the low end of the sound and the DI for the higher stuff like string noise and blend them together in them mix for a fuller sound. and remember...the part of the bass' sound that's going to stand out in your mix and sound good is that 4,000 - 7,000 Hz range, not the low end stuff. Cranking the low end is just going to give you MUD!

akane

07-30-2007, 10:31 PM

electric guitar, acoustic? distorted? clean? what kind of amp? 4x12? combo?

Uh, electric. Distorted for the most part. I'll probably be using a JCM900 or 2000, depending on what they have at the studio.

And how do I do both DI and micing the amp at the same time?

Peter

07-31-2007, 03:07 AM

if you have a dedicated DI box, it'll have an input for the bass, and then an XLR output to go to the recorder and an instrument output to go to the bass cab. if that's NOT what you have, then you can always get a Y cable and split the cable coming off the bass guitar, send one end to the recorder and the other to the amp.

For electric guitar, I'm a big fan of a Shure SM57 pointed directly at one of the cones on the cab right up to the grill on the cabinet. I generally would point the mac about halfway between the outer edge of the speaker and the cone. The center of the cone yeilds the high frequences while the outer edge deals with low end, so play around to get a good sound. and CRANK the amp. the louder the better. spend time to EQ the amp and make it sound good going into the mic first off...bass turned up good and strong, mids somewhere in the middle and treble just turned up enough to make it defined. If your treble knob on the cab is anywhere past 12 o'clock, it's too high. way too high. get that mic in there and make it loud!

akane

08-05-2007, 09:35 AM

Thanks for the advice Peter. We ended up doing both DI and micing; the mic sounds a lot better though. But yeah, it sounds pretty good with both of them going at the same time.

One more question regarding guitars. What are your thoughts on using multiple mics for the guitar? I figured if I used two mics, I could pan the two tracks and get a nice, thick sound.

Peter

08-05-2007, 11:55 PM

Two mics on a guitar amp works really well, but what I do is put one right up on the grill of the cabinet and place the other about 18 inches away also pointed right at the speaker. You'll find that the distant mic picks up more low end (as the sound travels away from the speaker, the harmonics blend in more thus creating a thicker sound). Then mix the two together using the close mic for the high end and the distant mic for the low end. Check your phase though (that's the button that has a circle with a line through it). If you combine the two and find that it's getting thinner than bigger, switch one of them out of phase as they're probably cancelling each other out. It shouldn't be that big of a problem though.

Drevpile

08-07-2007, 07:18 AM

Were you the gentleman with the Pearl Masterworks kit ages ago?

sorry
for
the delay

Twas not me... I've been playing Yamaha drums for about 8 years now (before that Premier) - but having said that i've had a couple of different Pearl snares in my time... i may have tried a masterworks at some point if memory serves...

speaking of drums - can anyone recomend a decent cheap electronic drum kit that i can mess about with for quick recording on to me computer ... budget around £500

cheers

akane

08-18-2007, 05:05 AM

Okay, I have another question, although it's about mixing.

We didn't really have time to overdub guitars, and the whole using two mics thing some how slipped out of our minds while we were recording, so each song only has one guitar track. (although some songs have mulitple takes, so I guess I could use them for those songs)

Any tips on how I should pan the tracks? I duplicated the mono guitar tracks and phased it out a bit, but it sounds rather yucky. Should I just pan the guitar left and the bass right and just leave it like that?

Peter

08-18-2007, 03:27 PM

If you're going for a Frank Zappa sound you should pan the bass left and guitar right, yes. If you're going for a more rock n'roll sound that would just be odd. In 98% of rock recordings you'll find the bass guitar panned dead center. If you've only got one guitar track, pan that dead center, too. To keep interest, if you have a guitar solo, maybe then pan it to one side a bit and sweep it over to the other side midway through the solo.

I suppose if the bass is doing really interesting parts other than just following the guitar it could work to pan them to different sides, but I wouldn't pan them hard left and right. Just off-set them a little bit to each side. But if the bass is boring, don't bother.

Drevpile

01-11-2008, 03:52 PM

anyone heard of Buzz? if so could you point me in the direction of a similar [more up-to-date] program... cheears

consisting

03-10-2008, 06:06 PM

SlingeroGuitaro

05-16-2008, 05:24 AM

hello peter.

i was wondering if you have any suggestions for mic placement when recording an acoustic guitar with just 1 microphone. i have an AT2020 large diaphragm cardioid condenser mic. i dont have equipment to record two mics at once, since it's just the microphone going into a pre-amp, then into the computer.

inbetween 12th and 14th frets about a foot away is really good and one of my favorites

if you want it to sound like what it does from the players perspective put the mic above their shoulder near the ear (right ear for right handed player, left ear for left handed player)

if you want something brighter place it close to the bridge angling towards the soundhole

if you have a dreadnought guitar and want a big jumbo acoustic sound put it really close to the body right next to the neck joint below the soundhole- i find omni mics work best for this

another one of my favorites is at the end of the guitar - the mic is facing dead on where the strap button would be - and about 1-2 feet away. make sure you arent sitting near a wall for this one. it gives a nice open sound.

consisting

05-24-2008, 06:57 PM

inbetween 12th and 14th frets about a foot away is really good and one of my favorites

if you want it to sound like what it does from the players perspective put the mic above their shoulder near the ear (right ear for right handed player, left ear for left handed player)

if you want something brighter place it close to the bridge angling towards the soundhole

if you have a dreadnought guitar and want a big jumbo acoustic sound put it really close to the body right next to the neck joint below the soundhole- i find omni mics work best for this

another one of my favorites is at the end of the guitar - the mic is facing dead on where the strap button would be - and about 1-2 feet away. make sure you arent sitting near a wall for this one. it gives a nice open sound.

hey... thanks, i kind of forgot about that post i made

i have kind of played around a little bit with positioning but those give me a lot of spots to play around with. i appreciate it! :)