pandamonk
Well-known member
What happened to that last thread? Why was it closed?
Anyway
Another problem with the one room system is that it is far more likely that the problems in that room are going to be doubled. For instance, you might have a large null at 200Hz. During tracking you might compensate for this null, and then when you come to mix, in that same room, you get the same null again, so compensate for it a second time. This leads to a very muddy mix that you just can't hear.
Now when you've got 2 different rooms, it's likely they will have completely different problems, so you are less likely to encounter this double compensation. You are also far more likely to hear the problems in the tracking room over monitors if the control room is treated properly.
Other problems include: computer/equipment noise and the engineer (or anyone else) having to stay really still and quiet so they aren't picked up.
Anyway
What Rick is talking about is mic/room placements, etc. If you track using headphones, you won't be able to hear the little nuances that you could with separate rooms. No matter how well you know your room and mics, you still have to be able to hear them properly in tracking. Even movement of just 1" can reveal a completely different frequency response. No offence, but I suspect you're a "fix in the mix" kind of guy.miroslav said:No one is talking about always *monitoring* with headphones, rather just use them during the record portion so your monitors are not on and bleeding into the one-room area. I usually monitor with my ears, and since I already know my room before the start of a sessions, there's no need for me to analyze it every time I record…IOW, I’ve already “monitored” the sound in the room before I hit record.
But here’s a different perspective...
How bad is your monitoring and mixing going to sound doing it in a small, boxed-in control room?
I would rather deal with headphones just during the tracking...since the tracking sessions are setup using my ears during the basic/initial sound-checks before I start recording, and I know the sound I am capturing.
In a small-box control room, odds are pretty good that the "room" (as in control room) is going to be lying to you anyway….and THAT small room is where you will be making all your critical decisions. It's very hard getting an accurate response in a small room.
Not to mention...it gets pretty stuffy in a small control room with the gear in there.
Granted...a seprate contorl room is the proper way to go...IF you have the space for a nice size tracking room and a nice size contorl room. But if not, for my money...one larger room worlks much better than two smaller rooms...both for tracking and for mixing.
But hey...everyone has their perspectives, so by all means, go with what seems best.
Another problem with the one room system is that it is far more likely that the problems in that room are going to be doubled. For instance, you might have a large null at 200Hz. During tracking you might compensate for this null, and then when you come to mix, in that same room, you get the same null again, so compensate for it a second time. This leads to a very muddy mix that you just can't hear.
Now when you've got 2 different rooms, it's likely they will have completely different problems, so you are less likely to encounter this double compensation. You are also far more likely to hear the problems in the tracking room over monitors if the control room is treated properly.
Other problems include: computer/equipment noise and the engineer (or anyone else) having to stay really still and quiet so they aren't picked up.