| the HOME RECORDING STUDIO thread
Posted: 6/23/2007 4:11:41 PM | @ causticism
do what the person above me said, also i recommend checking out the beta money double bass sample library, i got my hands on it and it's pretty good stuff. | |
|
| the HOME RECORDING STUDIO thread
Posted: 6/26/2007 5:52:15 AM | Ummm errrr... New to the PlentyOFish thang... but kind of grinning to find this here forum thead... quite new to the home recording deally also.. I currently use Audacity... and am mostly learning as I go... Ill be reading over the post here and picking up tips ect...website for sound samples etc... giggle...wag wag...thought it polite to say hi first tho... Sooo um... hi..[goofygrin] | |
|
| the HOME RECORDING STUDIO thread
Posted: 6/26/2007 8:11:58 AM | causticism for some drum tracks try this...
http://www.xlnaudio.com/index.php?page=downloads
Just got it in a Audio Recording newsletter...
Addictive Drums Demo
This is the best free download that we have seen in a while: Addictive Drums Demo - no time limit and no annoying beeps or audio cutouts. The one main limitation is you are limited to one basic drum kit. For anyone wanting to try out this new software or add a kit to your midi software setup
And Hi There SmilingEnigma, welcome.
| |
|
| WisestIsSheWhoKnowsSheDoesNotKnow
Posted: 7/6/2007 3:08:04 AM | ... have been reading over the posts here and picking up some great tips etc.. most are a little beyond me...so is best I think, that I just ask really simple-borderline-dumb questions ....and hopefully betwixted rolling your eyes and plain giggling at me, one of you sweet cleva guru's might be amused enough to reply...
Ok so first really simple question:
When mixing tracks ...on the PC [ I use Audacity, yes, cos it's a freebie]...What is the best sample rate to use... 16-bit, 24-bit, 32-bit... am mixing as wave files... but then mixing down to Mp3 with final product.. I noticed my drum mixes tend to click to 16-bit and guitar vocals ect to 32... giggle... or does it all just not matter.
Thanks for reading me -T | |
|
| WisestIsSheWhoKnowsSheDoesNotKnow
Posted: 7/16/2007 8:15:50 AM | ^^^^^^^
Smilingenigma,
I'm afraid I don't know what you're asking.
A CD has a sample rate of 44.1khz and the bit depth is 16bit.
Now, when recording it really doesn't matter so much. The bigger the bit depth and sample rate the bigger the FILE is on your computer. When I record I use 24bit 48khz but that's just me and I have my reasons. Keep in mind Mp3's are way smaller than audio .wav files.
This is actually a really good segway has anyone out there heard the new 1bit converters. I believe Korg just released a consumer version. Pyramix I think is the new DAW flavor of the month at a pro level. check it out.... www.sonotechnique.ca
Let me know what you guys think.
 | |
|
| WisestIsSheWhoKnowsSheDoesNotKnow
Posted: 7/16/2007 10:22:54 AM |
Now, when recording it really doesn't matter so much. The bigger the bit depth and sample rate the bigger the FILE is on your computer. When I record I use 24bit 48khz but that's just me and I have my reasons. Keep in mind Mp3's are way smaller than audio .wav files.
47 year musician, 32 year audio engineer here.
MP3 is a "lossy" compression format. This means that audio is THROWN AWAY and a note is put into a bin to reproduce that sound when asked. Then on playback the software tries to recreate that sound which was thrown away. The more bins the better the recreation with a lossy format. Only problem is. Too many bins and the song is too heavy. Defeating the purpose.
AIFF is a "lossless" compression format. In a lossless format only silence is thrown away. And silence is always recreated in the same way.
AIFF is what you get on a CD.
In closing. MP3's suck. AIFF is good. Anything other than Pro Tools is like walking on crutches.
- | |
|
| the HOME RECORDING STUDIO thread
Posted: 7/16/2007 1:42:47 PM | It's that inexpensiveness that is creating crap production. I formally produced music in the late 80's & early 90's, back when analogue was the way & the open reel & razor blade was king. I've done live sound & am starting to get back into that again. (It gets in your blood!) Home studios drove the quality of audio to a new low. Not to say that it can't be done, but people have to educate themselves on how to do it properly. Unballanced audio sounds like hell even when it isn't digital. Good gear costs much more than a home stereo.
Having said this, it's better than people keep the DIY attitude in the time of the net. Soon there will be virtually no money to be made & it will just be the love of the medium that makes people create. With the net as the distributor it gives a "market" that can't be beat.
ak. | |
|
| WisestIsSheWhoKnowsSheDoesNotKnow
Posted: 7/16/2007 1:49:41 PM | Bigger numbers are better - ie 96Khz is far better than 44.1Khz & 24 bit is better than 16. Having said that, if your going to mp3, you'll be limited to it's specs (48Khz sample rate, 320bps bitrate) anyhow for the final. Just keep a wav or flac (lossless compression) as a master if you have to continue editing. Uncompressing mp3's, editing & recompressing created horrid artifacts.
ak | |
|
| WisestIsSheWhoKnowsSheDoesNotKnow
Posted: 7/16/2007 10:36:21 PM | | My take on MP3 format is it removes redundant & sounds that are beyond the normal range of hearing. MP3's do have advantages & disadvantages. Mp3's are so popular because of small file size & downloading is a lot faster. AIFF, while is better quality, file size is alot bigger so its really a matter of trade off. | |
|
| firewire cable quality
Posted: 7/20/2007 1:42:36 PM | hey all,
i'm running a digi 002 (audio interface) to my pc via firewire. would upgrading to a high quality cable like monster make a difference? i know it would for analog audio signals, but what about digital/data? would it have any bearing on the sound/recording quality? | |
|
| firewire cable quality
Posted: 7/21/2007 10:10:12 AM | If the cable actually transfers data quicker than yea!
But as far as sound quality ....absolutely makes no difference. Your converter dictates the audio quality among other signal processing(analog) before it hits the converter.
Hope this helps,
P. | |
|
| firewire cable quality
Posted: 7/29/2007 6:55:01 PM | @Zach - 2 sm57s?
for that price try the mic I have. ( I only have one mic )
It's a sennheisser e865, and a reviewer described it as a
much better sounding sm57. He was right. For one mic,
it can do a hell of a lot. It needs phantom power though.
As for mp3's. Everytime I've tried an A B test on my friends
with mp3 at 320 and a the same wav file. They couldn't tell
the difference.
As for moniters, I bought the cheapest Yorkviles I could find.
I love them. My friends Genelics sound so good, we both can't
tell what's REALLY happenging.
Tried the Rocket KRV 8's. Lots of bass. I thought they sounded
too good and the mixes wouldn't translate. ( a theory, not tested )
For testing speakers I use "and god shuffled his feet" by the Crash Test Dummies,
go about a minute in.
It's got acoustic guitar, background vocals, a pad, a sick drum sound,
and beautiful bass. Produced by Lord Thom Algea ( or something like
that ) | |
|
| firewire cable quality
Posted: 8/16/2007 11:11:03 AM | OK guys and dolls, need some advice.
I am looking to get another Mixer. Old one is too small and just plain Crap (Alto 8ch).
I have found a used Mackie CR1604 for under $300 (cdn) that interests me and wondered if anyone have any good or bad comments.
I already have found that this model has an issue with the outputs being tip cold, but a phase shift is not hard to achive.
I'd rather a Heath& Allen, but at over $700 (cdn)..well not this month.
So is the Mackie worth it or should I just keep saving my pennies and dimes till....
Thanks for your time... | |
|
| firewire cable quality
Posted: 8/16/2007 1:19:40 PM | trewq36
the cr1604 is an old mackie board...........old often = good
the allen &heath stuff is good-make sure to see where it was made ...the older stuff u.k. newer stuff china | |
|
| firewire cable quality
Posted: 8/17/2007 6:51:18 AM | | Thanks Guitarman, much what I was thinking. I figure I will pick up the CR1604 this evening and give it a work out over the weekend. This one also has the XLR expansion unit, so 16 Mics, hot damn! | |
|
| Hello Gearheads!
Posted: 8/29/2007 5:47:52 AM | | Greetings everyone! Great thread. First got into home recording when the Tascam 244 portastudio entered the market. Hey I know.... cassettes! Still own that baby to! As well as the 238, 424MKlll, and the one I recently retired, the 80-8. My first trek into the "digital domain" was a Korg D888. Was floored by the way this thing sounded, but, did not like its mixdown options. Am a little leary about entering this on a P.C., so am looking at either the Zoom H.D. 16, or, the Tascam 2488 mk ll. Although this is the first Tascam product ive read bad reviews on, Im not sure if its the experience of the used thats giving the bad reviews. Would appreciate anyones input on these 2 products. A little trick I also did when using the D888..... when mixing down, I have a stand alone Harmon-Kardon CD recorder, I ran the master track into my Tascam 424 (using 2 tracks), then to CD. It seemed to put quite a bit of warmth back into the recording. | |
|
| WisestIsSheWhoKnowsSheDoesNotKnow
Posted: 9/8/2007 7:18:57 AM | Now, when recording it really doesn't matter so much. The bigger the bit depth and sample rate the bigger the FILE is on your computer. When I record I use 24bit 48khz but that's just me and I have my reasons. Keep in mind Mp3's are way smaller than audio .wav files.
thanks.... | |
|
| |
| WisestIsSheWhoKnowsSheDoesNotKnow
Posted: 9/8/2007 5:04:06 PM | just want to add to what audiokaos said. don't ever compress anything to less than FLAC. If everyone would just change to FLAC it would almost be like a revolution.
Spread the word too, its time to get shitty mp3 quality off the web, FLAC is perfection for the net. | |
|
| WisestIsSheWhoKnowsSheDoesNotKnow
Posted: 9/8/2007 6:01:49 PM | flac (or shn) is the way to go, for sure....when drive space isn't an issue, of course. otherwise, PLEASE do your research on mp3 codecs, use a good one (i.e. LAME), adn don't encode to a too-low bitrate.
if you're donig this for personal enjoyment...do what you like, but you'll know when you're following the above advice and when you're not, when you compare final products.
as for me, i work in wav, always. unless i'm sharing the end result with friends, then it's email friendly mp3 files.
as for my setup, it's painfully simple... Line 6 Toneport UX-2...EVERYTHING runs into that, use the Gearbox software for any effects/emulations I want. All multitracking is done in Cool Edit Pro.
a nice quality economical mic that can be used as both a room mic and a vocal mic, or both, is what's called a "boundary mic"...i picked it up for $70, and it's incredibly versatile...
anywho, that's my story....tra la la  | |
|
| the HOME RECORDING STUDIO thread
Posted: 9/9/2007 9:22:39 PM | | Ok i want to record and produce music from my computer. I have a semi pro keyboard which is all i need and guitar, (plus a pc)I know and have been into music stores looking for home producers equipment and i can't find anything that im able to afford.I am fond of buying reason cause it has everything i need but it's so expensive.Any suggestions advice on getting some affordable equipment where i'm able to produce music from my computer? | |
|
| |
| the HOME RECORDING STUDIO thread
Posted: 9/9/2007 10:47:31 PM | All I have for recording is my Line 6 POD XT Live, which is suprisingly good for doing direct recording into your computer so long as you wear headphones while you do it, otherwise you get boat loads of hum from laptop fans like I do when trying to record a metal track.
I am curious as to know though whether it would be worth it in the future to invest in something like the Randall RM4 preamp casing and 4 modules for it? There are a few modules I would like such as the Bogner XTC module as well as a Plexi, Marshall Super Lead and Blackface Deluxe which are some of the options. I think this would be a great solution to having multiple amps and while it may wind up costing over 1000 dollars to have the proper modules, at least I will be able to just get a 2x12 cabinet or something and use it as a preamp instead of having a zillion different heads and combos just to get those tones I want. This is mainly for live and recording purposes a year or two down the road. | |
|
| the HOME RECORDING STUDIO thread
Posted: 9/14/2007 6:22:00 AM | Wondering if someone my be able to offer some input on a couple of amp choices?
I am looking at some used ones about the same price and specs, and was hoping some one might have an opinion as too which is the better? Or maybe just forget both and keep looking?
Crest 3501s and/or Crown 602a????
GuelphDude.... although I haven't tried it, seems like one way to go. I too have thought about it. I have seen some DIs that claim to simulate various amps/cabs as well.
And an added note: The Mackie 1604 I got a while back is doing well. I like the 4 Aux..
 | |
|
| the HOME RECORDING STUDIO thread
Posted: 9/14/2007 8:49:45 PM | guelphdude
the randall is a nice preamp,get a mesa boogie 2:90 to go along with it
trewq36
crest or crown? well ,those are both good names | |
|
Home
login 
