| Author |
 Topic  |
|
eugovector
- FB Fan -
21 Posts |
 Posted - 05/11/2003 : 19:12:56
|
As evidenced by the response to the Frank Black Tribute CD signup, many of us are (aspiring) musicians with something akin to a recording process. I'd like to encourage everyone to post their recording setups in this thread as a starting point for someone looking to create or improve upon their current recording setup.
My project studio is as follows:
Shure SM48
Tascam US-428
AMD T-Bird 1GHz
Cool Edit Pro 2
My guitars are going direct in or via the Balanced outs on my Rocktron Piranha. Drums are loops from Loopology (other sites for drumloops are certainly welcome).
I'm think I'm begining to feel the effects of recording direct into the Tascam with an inexpensive mic. My vocals are feeling pretty lifeless. Could anyone give any input on a microphone or preamp purchase I should make <$200? How about tips on adding echo or verb? Email if you'd like to keep the thread short, though I'm sure if you have good advice, everyone who reads will benefit. |
|
|
marcusb
= Cult of Ray =
USA
308 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2003 : 19:23:33
|
2 SM57s
Behringer MX 802A
AMD Athlon XP 1.4 GHz
Epiphone Dot semi-hollow
DeArmond JetStar solidbody
Fender Champ 30 amp
A few different sound editors..
I want to buy a nicer mic for vocals.. but money is kinda light right now and I'd rather save up for a Taylor 110 or Dean Sarasota 12 |
Edited by - marcusb on 05/18/2003 11:39:43 |
 |
|
|
Broken Face
-= Forum Pistolero =-
USA
5155 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2003 : 19:24:06
|
Shure SM-58
Fostex VF08 Digital 8 Track
Sound Forge 6.0
Cakewalk Music Creator 2002
Takamine Acoustic/Electric 6 string
Schecter 5 String Bass
Fender Squire Strat
REAL old Casio keyboard
Nugget Percussion Shaker
i think thats it...
-brian |
|
|
|
makeyourheadgopop
- FB Fan -
18 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2003 : 19:27:12
|
This is going to be sad, but it's how I cope:
(1) 5 dollar computer mic from best buy
(1) stolen copy of Cool Edit Pro
Cough. |
|
|
|
Kingmob999
- FB Fan -
57 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2003 : 19:38:55
|
roland vs 880 digital recorder
sm 57/58
2 condenser mics (crown)
les paul 335 (72)
fender blues deluxe amp
gk bass amp
fender p bass
rigged up ludwig rocker drum set
bass line in
guitar miked close and far
one rock star wannabe
|
|
|
|
El Barto
= Song DB Master =
USA
4020 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2003 : 19:49:05
|
Don't any of you losers do analog?
Tascam 688 (8 track cassette portastudio)
2x SM57s
1x Rode NT1
1x AKG vocal mic (model escapes me)
Monster cables
I cheat a little...I mix down to Sound Forge. |
|
|
|
eugovector
- FB Fan -
21 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2003 : 21:30:32
|
| So I'm seeing a lot of SM57 and 58s. Are you guys happy with those for vocals? Do they sound that much better/different than the SM48 that I have? I knew I shouldn't have skimped. |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2003 : 21:52:34
|
I have a 57 and 58, but I'm not using them for this. I am using:
Audio Technica 4033
DIGI 001 (Pro Tools)
Quadroverb
Taylor Acoustic
Steinberger electric
Line 6 Flextone II
Alesis SR-16 drum machine
Sonic Foundry Vegas & Waves Renaissance plugins for mastering.
My bass is just a 6-string electric that I then pitch down an octave and run through a Sans Amp plug-in. It sounds cool.
www.mp3.com/clootie |
|
|
|
ProverbialCereal
- FB TabMaster -
USA
2953 Posts |
Posted - 05/11/2003 : 22:30:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Broken Face
REAL old Casio keyboard
-brian
That's funny, because I bought this old looking Casio keyboard at goodwill for 2 dollars and I'm actually using it for a part in white noise maker.
This keyboard is about a foot and a half long and it's got grime all over it. I think it's called Casio Sound Bank ____ ? A number goes in the blank. I used a sm57 to mic it, and then added effects over whatever voice i used on the keyboard and it sounds sweet and.... damn... now everyone will know my awesome recording secrets!!
-Derek |
|
|
|
mdisanto
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1140 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2003 : 03:43:05
|
el barto, youre not gonna be like albini and the white stripes who have annoying little rants about how digital sucks on the back of their cds are you??? analog is great and all, but with my 7$/10hr a week job i cant argue with free recording software. i use cooledit
other then that i have
a Shure KSM 27
american telecaster
fender twin reverb amp
ibanez acoustic
roland midi controller
behringer mx602a mixer
-miked |
|
|
|
billgoodman
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Netherlands
6214 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2003 : 04:59:39
|
I'm doing analog
Tascam 414 MK II (4 track recorder)
I do mix down with Cool edit these days
But I used to do it on plain cassetes
Shure Microphone
Ibanez acoustic guitar
''it's not a box, it's a submarine'' |
|
|
|
peter radiator
= Cult of Ray =
USA
653 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2003 : 06:11:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by eugovector
As evidenced by the response to the Frank Black Tribute CD signup, many of us are (aspiring) musicians with something akin to a recording process. I'd like to encourage everyone to post their recording setups in this thread as a starting point for someone looking to create or improve upon their current recording setup.
I started out years ago using Tascam 1/4 reel-to-reel 4-tracks with simul-synch capability. I moved on to Tascam and Fostex analog cassette 4-tracks, and then got totally out of home recording.
An ex-bandmate recently gave me his old Tascam 424 and someone else gave me an old Roland 707 drum machine (now, that's OLD). As soon as I can figure them out again, I'll use them along with an SM48 (!) and an old Electro-Voice omnidirectional "Bob Barker" mic (which works surprisingly well for single-miking a drum kit).
For this particular session, I'm using an actual recording studio in my town (Savannah, GA) for most of the tracks, and a few overdubs will likely be done in Athens, GA at a great studio owned by the old bass player from Sugar.
Here's a link to the place where I'm tracking "Cold Heart of Stone." A few tracks by one of my current bands (Superhorse) are on their site as well – if anyone's interested – although that's not the lineup that will be cutting the FB cover.
www.elevatedbasement.com
~ Peter Radiator
"Real music is out there and real people are making it." ~ Webb Wilder |
|
|
|
Steak n Sabre
* Dog in the Sand *
Uzbekistan
1013 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2003 : 12:15:45
|
| Personally , I really don't get too involved with the recording end of things. As a group, we prefer analog, but just look how much a reel of 2" tape is compared to an S-VHS tape. We use an ADAT setup thru a Behringer 2442 and a rack full of things I am not allowed to touch. 1826 will be done at a different location where the trusty Otari 8-track has been replaced by a digital setup as well. |
|
|
|
El Barto
= Song DB Master =
USA
4020 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2003 : 14:00:29
|
| I've done enough ranting about how analog is better...so, not here. And to answer your question, eugo, no studio is complete without at least one SM57..it's like, the "standard" mic...it's the workhorse...I wouldn't use it for vocals, though. Vocals aren't vocals without a condensor. |
|
|
|
bronko
- FB Fan -
USA
10 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2003 : 14:02:24
|
for 'I Need Peace':
roland vs 840
G&L Legacy
Squire P-Bass
roland rs-5 synth (drums)
presonus VPX preamp
shure sm57 and 58
AKG3000b
Martin d-16
POD original
mixed and mastered in soundforge 4.5 and vegas |
|
|
|
PsychicTwin
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1772 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2003 : 14:14:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by El Barto
no studio is complete without at least one SM57..it's like, the "standard" mic...it's the workhorse...I wouldn't use it for vocals, though. Vocals aren't vocals without a condensor.
Really? I've heard the exact opposite. The only mic I own is actually a condenser mic which, I have to say, works wonders as being the most versatile mic I have ever used. anything from acoustic guitar, to mic-ing an amp, to sitting that sucker in front of a drum set will work with decent to excellent results. The only thing it sucks for is vocals...I recorded a cd of about 8 or 9 songs with that whole microphone (on my Korg D1600 - a digital 16-track) and the only thing it really didn't cut it for was the vocals I recorded. It made them sound awfully "tinny", kind of just thin and a tad treble-y, and the pop factor was unbelievable (every b and t sounds like a bass drum thump for god's sake...ok, not THAT bad, but pretty noticeable.)
then again, I didn't really mess around w/ EQ or adding any reverb, so I realize the result could be attributed to the "straight up" approach I took. but i've been hearing how the Shure M57 is supposed to be optimal for vocals.
I'm seriously considering investing my money in a new, badass vocal mic...so if this not the best choice, I'd definitely want to know! |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2003 : 14:17:34
|
Wow..lotsa neat stuff here (Steinberger..drool..)
I'm also curious how everyone is monitoring their stuff...?
Here's one end:
Seagull acoustic (cedar top)
Tex Mex Strat
Epiphone SG copy
Jackson bass (from '83)
I mainly use my AT 4033 for recording..but also have a pair of C1000's, an SM57 and Beta58.
This all goes into my POD, BassPOD or Mackie 1402-VLZ (tho i wanna downsize to an FMR Really Nice Preamp, or some other 2ch preamp.) Got a Fender Princeton Chorus and Blues Jr amps, but don't use 'em so much these days..
All that usually ends up going through my FMR Really Nice Compressor (gawdsend for us budget recorders..)
And into my Layla24, usually @ 24/44.1, P4 1.7gig w/1gig RAM, and i use Cubase SX and Halion for most stuff (registered!!), plus a bunch of other plugs..
It all gets blasted out my Layla, into my Rotel amp and B&W 602 speakers.
Wee - and that's how a bill becomes a law. |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 05/12/2003 : 20:08:27
|
I'm monitoring with Tannoy 6.5 PBM speakers through a Crown D-75 amp.
www.mp3.com/clootie |
|
|
|
pong
= Cult of Ray =
France
315 Posts |
Posted - 05/13/2003 : 04:57:30
|
- fender telecaster
- shure SM 57
- xp Athlon 2.1
- Studio Maxi Isis
- Electric drum Yamaha XPress
- old Samik Bass guitare
- a little zoom
- Pong
"i'll be on the first fligh" |
|
|
|
miguel
- FB Fan -
USA
213 Posts |
Posted - 05/14/2003 : 22:38:57
|
-guild hollowbody
-jagstang
-blueridge br-160 acoustic
-fender precision bass
-cybertwin
-marshall b65 bass amp
-behringer 802a mixer
-alesis m1 active mk2 monitors
-mxl v67 condenser
-korg es-1,er-1
-m-audio omni studio
-cooledit pro 2.0 recording, mixing
-t-racks 24 mastering
-alesis qs6, ION june 1st.. yay.
-gateway pent 4 2.53 GHz 512mb ram
-a xylophone my brother in law stole from school.
That's it, now I feel nekkid.
|
|
|
|
ProverbialCereal
- FB TabMaster -
USA
2953 Posts |
Posted - 05/14/2003 : 23:06:53
|
guitar: 2000 gibson les paul studio
amp: marshall 130W valvestate which i don't like. It's not even tube.
mic: shure sm57 w/ monster cable
peds: zoom505II (it is so-so)
boss digital 8 track
plectrums: dunlop tortex .73 mm (I think)
strings: elixir 9-42s
bass: ibanez BK400 (?)
mattress: sealy
-Derek |
|
|
|
ivandivel
= Cult of Ray =
394 Posts |
Posted - 05/15/2003 : 01:58:15
|
My setup;
Fender acoustic + a bunch of fleamarked accoustics
Epiphone Elitist Sheraton and one old epiphone
VOX amp
Farfisa Farnese organ (bought at fleamarked - 20 bucks)
Shure SM57
AKAI CS-34D - old 2 track tape recorder
Fostex X-28H 4-tracker
Pc with emu-aps soundcard and misc. software
I did 4-track recordings for many years, but you have to be a millionaire if you want an analog set up that can compete in any way with a digital set up when it comes to functionality. Further, if you write your own songs and don't want to negotiate with a band - going digital offers way more flexibility. Sooner or later you'll have to transfer your stuff to cd, so it'll get digitalized anyway. I run my guitars and vocals through the fostex first though, or the akai. Tweaking the trim on the fostex gives it an awesome overdrive, while running them through the akai gives them a nice, round and warm sound. Cubase 5 has a tape emulation feature, which simulates 32bits recordings and where one can adjust tape "overdrive". It sounds awesome. The SM57 is a classic regarding electric guitars, and can be used for vocals if you're a loud singer. I'm not - and it sucks for accoustic guitars. Thus, I really need a good condenser mic and a good preamp.
By the way, does anyone know wether Frank Black masters his albums digitaly?
|
|
|
|
PsychicTwin
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1772 Posts |
Posted - 05/15/2003 : 07:51:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by ivandivel
The SM57 is a classic regarding electric guitars, and can be used for vocals if you're a loud singer. I'm not - and it sucks for accoustic guitars.
Hmmm, interesting. Is there a mic that is optimal for vocals, that you could recommend to me? |
|
|
|
El Barto
= Song DB Master =
USA
4020 Posts |
Posted - 05/15/2003 : 11:21:02
|
| Vocals, definitely a condenser. The AT 4033 is probably one of the best you can get for under $500. You basicly want a large diaphragm condenser. The SM57 is fine for vocals if you're performing live, but for recording, unless it's the only thing you have I wouldn't recommend it. |
Edited by - El Barto on 05/15/2003 11:23:14 |
|
|
|
ivandivel
= Cult of Ray =
394 Posts |
|
|
PsychicTwin
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1772 Posts |
Posted - 05/15/2003 : 19:10:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by El Barto
Vocals, definitely a condenser. The AT 4033 is probably one of the best you can get for under $500. You basicly want a large diaphragm condenser. The SM57 is fine for vocals if you're performing live, but for recording, unless it's the only thing you have I wouldn't recommend it.
Thanks, I'll look into it |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 05/16/2003 : 11:28:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by El Barto
Vocals, definitely a condenser. The AT 4033 is probably one of the best you can get for under $500. You basicly want a large diaphragm condenser. The SM57 is fine for vocals if you're performing live, but for recording, unless it's the only thing you have I wouldn't recommend it.
Yeah, You can get a good Vocal on a 57, but because you have to get really close to it, you need to sing facing down a bit to avoid plosives. If you want a Sparklehorse vocal sound, then use a 57.
The AT4033 is excellent for voice and acoustic. You'll need to EQ cut around 180 HZ, but the high end is really nice. I got one for $250 with shock mount.
www.mp3.com/clootie |
|
|
|
PsychicTwin
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1772 Posts |
Posted - 05/16/2003 : 12:59:09
|
Atheist - thank you for the info.
I think I have a lot to learn as far as mics and recording hardware of sorts is concerned, so I appreciate the tips, guys. |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 05/16/2003 : 13:12:39
|
| One more vote for the 4033 as being one of the best values on the market. |
|
|
|
bwolmarans
- FB Fan -
25 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2003 : 00:12:51
|
I can't believe so many of you continue to pass yourselves off as Frank Black fans and AT THE SAME TIME, YOU ADMIT to both OWNING and USING digital recording methods!! For shame, for shame! Your only salvation seems to be http://www.tinfoil.com/
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
One more vote for the 4033 as being one of the best values on the market.
|
|
|
|
eugovector
- FB Fan -
21 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2003 : 00:28:53
|
The analog vs. digital argument was certainly not why I started this thread, and though I usually avoid these things...
Hopefully everyone feverishly supporting analog is joking. You support the analog recording process. Good for you. Now you're burning it onto a cd. Guess what, you just got digital. Perhaps in the future, you will be one of the cool few who relaxes to the sultry sounds of Frank Black on wax cylinder in the comfort of you're living room. Me, I'll stick to CD.
Everyone goes digital at some point, get over it early in the process. And besides...YOU CAN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE. You think you can, but you can't.
That's all.
rev
quote:
Originally posted by bwolmarans
I can't believe so many of you continue to pass yourselves off as Frank Black fans and AT THE SAME TIME, YOU ADMIT to both OWNING and USING digital recording methods!! For shame, for shame! Your only salvation seems to be http://www.tinfoil.com/
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
One more vote for the 4033 as being one of the best values on the market.
|
|
|
|
Cult_Of_Frank
= Black Noise Maker =
Canada
11687 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2003 : 10:39:55
|
Yeah, I'm with you on that. Unless you're listening strictly to vinyl, cassette, or 8-track, the analog-vs-digital argument is pretty weak. Especially since the only real difference you can hear is the "tape noise" (or as applies to other mediums) and I don't find that especially desirable. Plus, you're digitizing sooner or later. Even people playing with effects often go through a ADC and then back through a DAC.
Still, the later you digitize, the more true to the original sound you'll be, so I do understand the analog recording philosophy (listen to Elephant and you'll hear the miracle of reel-reel), but I think some people go too far. And let's also remember that just like not being physically able to hear above 20 kHz (most of us probably can't hear past 14 anyway), we also have physical limitations on the resolution that we can 'sample' (for lack of a better word) sound anyway, and there comes a point where it is a physical impossibility to detect a difference between a reconstructed analog waveform and the original since they match so closely.
When it comes down to it, we live in a digital universe. Everything is discrete, it just doesn't look that way at low resolution. And sound is no different. |
|
|
|
ProverbialCereal
- FB TabMaster -
USA
2953 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2003 : 14:15:05
|
Yeah, I don't understand all the purists who make a big deal about analog/digital. And I'm mainly talking about for just home recording purposes. I got a digital recorder because they just seem more convenient and easier to deal with. If I want to erase a track, I click "Erase track 1" and it's gone. Also, there is no bleeding of tracks and bouncing tracks is better. Now, I'm comparing my experiences with a Tascam Portastudio 4 track, which is the 300 dollar one. It kind of let me down after a while, and paying 600 bucks for an 8track digital recorder seemed way more efficient for my purposes.
I think if I am ever in a band which has enough money to go into a studio, I'd definitely use analog, but for now, I'm just recording songs in my room, so digital seems like the way to go.
-Derek |
|
|
|
Atheist4Catholics
= Cult of Ray =
USA
925 Posts |
Posted - 05/17/2003 : 23:24:49
|
The reason why analog sounds better is mostly due to tape compression. When you hit analog tape with a hot signal it produces a harmonic distortion that is pleasing and warm - this is missing with digital. If you hit a digital recorder with a hot signal, it clips and sounds like shit.
The second reason analog sounds better is bass response. Because digital audio is made up of tiny snapshots of what the original audio looked like (44,100 snapshots a second on a CD with a bit depth of 16), the bass response is not as good because low end waveforms are longer and require more snap shots. This will soon be a moot issue as more albums are released on DVD with much higher sampling rates (96k) and bit depths (24bit) - the sampling rates and bit depths will continue to improve and soon even audiophiles will be scratching their heads over weither they're hearing analog or digital.
As for most people on this forum, the arguement over analog and digital when comparing cassette 4-tracks is silly. Most of you are simply suffering from bad mic pre's and or A/D convertors. Most of the Tascam cassette multitracks have far superior mic pre's than most of the low end digital multitracks. Add to this the fact that the low end digital multi-tracks also have shitty A/D and that's the bulk of the difference. I've heard some recent albums recorded, mixed and mastered 100% digital but with top notch pre's and compressors and they sound unbelievable (I think James Taylor had one around '97? and Firecraker by Lisa Loeb was straight to Pro Tools as well.)
I'm currently working on an album and I recorded drums and bass to 24 track analog mostly for the tape compression. I then transferred it to 24 bit digital so I could record guitars at my apartment. I have a DIGI 001 system which sounds very harsh and tinny, but if I put a Neve Mic Pre and a tube mic in front of it, it sounds amazing. Now I have the freedom to record anywhere I want for little or no money and with as many tracks as I want. I also don't have to keep 7 reels of 2" tape around, nor do I have to align machines before I record, or sync multiple machines if I want more than 24 tracks. Plus, if I punch in on the wrong track and erase a great guitar take I can just hit undo and nothing is lost.
The bottom line is that analog nazis need to realise that no matter how much they complain, digital is and will be taking over. I like analog and think in some ways that having unlimited tracks and editing options is a bad thing because you aren't forced to make decisions. I also just like working with physical tape and razor blades. Analog will always be around in some capacity, but digital is way too cost efficient and easy to use and soon it will catch up sonically as well. DVDs with 5.1 mixes will become the new CD's, and after that - who knows.
www.mp3.com/clootie |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 05/19/2003 : 10:17:47
|
Well said, A4C.
Another important point is that we CAN hear sounds out of a certain range, especially if they're loud enough.
More importantly tho, these extra frequencies interact with the ones we can hear better, and definitely affect the overall sound. More freqencies is a good thing.
I for one will never buy another Redbook CD (16bit/44.1khz) - after hearing SACD, it really is terrible and un-musical.
And i've seen countless staunch analog fiends waxing poetic on SACD as well. Finally we've hit gold with digital.
Beck, if i remember correctly, recorded Sea Change at 24/44.1 and i don't see anyone complaining...
But back to audio set-up - has anyone used the new Really Nice Preamp? I'm planning on selling my Mackie 1402 for one....much less real-estate, and should sound a LOT better.. I only need 2 inputs as well.. |
|
|
|
cvanepps
= Cult of Ray =
USA
442 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2003 : 21:44:10
|
I've got an 1877 Edison Gramophone and a couple blank wax cylinders. I'm going to have to practice my ass off to get it perfect because those cylinders are not easy to find. Thankfully, my tune (Skeleton Man) is quite easy.
-= It's not easy to kidnap a fat man. =- |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
