Which 'path' to take? (literally)

[student8]

Ok, I've got one,

(and again, I'm still quite 'fresh' to analog recording, so go 'easy' on me here

I'm running a 16-track multitrack r2r into a basic analog mixer. I also have a couple of analog mic-preamps as well.

Ok, my question is this: Which is the best 'signal path' to take when doing a session?

(and by the way, I've been told different methods by others out there, which is why I'm a bit confused & hope to get the 'correct' answer from you guys, since you've all been more helpful to me so far.)

For example, let's say you're starting with a basic microphone, right? Some say to run the mic first into the mixing board, then from there into the multitrack recorder, then back into the mixer.

The second example is: again, start with the microphone, then go into the mic preamp, from there go directly to the multitrack recorder (bypassing the mixer) and then finally go from the multitrack recorder into the mixer.

(does that make sense?)

Again, I'm basically just trying to figure out 'which signal path' is the best, most often used, and one to set-up & stick with, if you know what I mean?

Any help on this would be great guys. Thanks.

 

[cjacek]

I think we all have a tendency to over-analyze or dwell on needless details. There is really no one way to do things but I personally would pick the most simple of routes and that means going mic straight into mixer, then to multitrack and then back, as per your first example. Recording technique is going to make a bigger impact after that, more so than an outboard mic pre, IMO and, really, why complicate things? What mixer are you using and how about your 16 track?

 

[jedblue]

I think we all have a tendency to over-analyze or dwell on needless details. There is really no one way to do things but I personally would pick the most simple of routes and that means going mic straight into mixer, then to multitrack and then back, as per your first example. Recording technique is going to make a bigger impact after that, more so than an outboard mic pre, IMO and, really, why complicate things? What mixer are you using and how about your 16 track?

Yep I agree. That's the way I do it in all cases. Mind you I don't have any stand alone mic pre's. If you wanted to use those I guess you'd go mic pre then 1/4" TRS out of the mic pre into the 1/4" TRS line input on the relevant mixer channel. Or just mic pre to recorder and bypass the mixer as per your second example.

Maybe try them all and choose the one you like the best for the particular situation?

 

[miroslav]

For example, let's say you're starting with a basic microphone, right? Some say to run the mic first into the mixing board, then from there into the multitrack recorder, then back into the mixer.

The second example is: again, start with the microphone, then go into the mic preamp, from there go directly to the multitrack recorder (bypassing the mixer) and then finally go from the multitrack recorder into the mixer.

It depends on which preamp you will use...the one that is in the mixer or an outboard preamp.

If you are going to use an outboard...no need to go through the mixer before going to the tape deck, as that just adds more noise to your signal...instead go direct to the tape deck from the outboard preamp.

Your tape deck will output both recorded tracks and also the ones you are currently recording thanks to its Rep/Sync capabilities, and that output is what you use for your cue mix going back into the mixer.

The easiest way to have all these choices is via patchbays...though keep your preamp inputs separate from the line I/Os on the patchbay...it's just safer (ground issues, phantom power).
Often having a separate XLR mic preamp input patchbay is the way to go...though the preamp's outputs can be on the same patchbay as your other gear, and that's the better way for them...makes for easy patching.

 

[student8]

Thanks Miroslav, that info you gave was a bit more of what I was looking for.

And with all due respect, I didn't think that my questions were 'needless details'. I've been told by many pro's that 'setting-up' a proper and quintessential 'signal path' is key for starters, not only to obtain the best 'sound quality' for sessions, but to also keep things in an 'easy, but quick' way to use for your working environment in the studio as well. They also said by trying to 'stick' to just one, you'll get more 'used to it' in time, quicker to use during sessions, and not have to worry about always 'un-hooking' and 're-hooking' things back up all of the time as well.

and also, 'Cjacek' - I'm not trying to 'complicate things' at all, that's why I'm asking these questions in the first place. Obviously, 'recording technique' is at the top of the list, I agree - but I'm not talking about 'recording technique' here - I really do need to figure out how to set all of this stuff up, and hopefully, the correct way first before I can even start focusing on recording techniques. And besides, I was also advised to have & utilize at least one or two decent outboard mic-preamps in case the mixer's preamps weren't quite 'up to par' for certain things (and to also have as back-ups, just in case.) But since I've already got them - might as well figure out the best way to hook them up in the overall signal-chain, that's all.

(and again, this is my first 'real' time in attempting to set any or all of this up properly, so I just wanted to get it 'right' the first time, if you know what i mean?)

I like the idea of using 'patchbays' to accomplish this, but have very little experience with them. (I might need some additional help on setting one of those up as well.)

I haven't really decided on wether to use the mic preamp or just use the one in the mixer board yet. (I'd like to have the 'option' at all times if possible, to use either/or, but don't know if that's possible or not yet.) Again, I've only got 2 mic tube preamps, and 8-channels, 4 busses on my Tascam mixer if that helps at all?

(my 16-track multitrack by the way, is an analog MS-16 r2r for whoever asked)

I fully realize that there are 'multiple ways' to do all of this (hence my original question) - but again, I was only trying to see if there was more of an 'industry standard' in doing this, if the overall 'sound quality' were to be affected if I chose one method over the other, etc? (that, and I've been told by many others in here that there are no 'stupid questions', so ask away!

(and by the way Miroslav, when you mentioned the part about 'Rep/Sync' capabilities, which way did you mean to actually 'hook that up' within the signal-path?)

Still a bit confused on some of this

- thanks.

 

[miroslav]

Try both preamp approaches, and see if you notice any quality differences...or maybe they will just be two different flavors, so you pick the one you like best for a given task.

Patchbays really come into play when your equipment list starts growing and/or when you have a console & racks that are not easy to get behind...so in both cases, the patchbay brings all the I/Os together at one location, and makes it easy to interconnect them.
For just a couple of pieces of gear...a PB may not be needed.

On the "Rep/Sync" I was referring to you tape deck.
All multitrack decks give you the ability to listen to the already recorded tracks in sync with whatever you are currently recording...there's nothing special to do, other than to set your tracks accordingly for playback and record mode, as outlined for your model deck.
What I was getting at was that you don't have to worry about how you would monitor your mic signal if you skipped the mixer by going preamp-to-deck.
As long as your deck's outputs are feeding the mixer, you will hear all the tracks.

I always have my mixer on and the deck's outputs are connected to it, but I only connect what I need for the moment to the deck's inputs...IOW, the mixer is not connected to the deck's inputs at any time during the tracking (unless I use the mixer's preamp)…I just go straight to the deck from my preamps and/or DIs unless I’m doing some weird combination thing where I need help from my mixer, and that’s very rare.

By running the deck's outputs to the mixer for your monitoring, you are then also able to do different cue mixes...you can even add EQ/reverb/FX to that cue mix, as it is only a rough/temporary mix while you track, but it allows you to already start building your mix as you track, and it also provides a better quality cue mix instead f having everything dry just as it is on tape.
How much you can do with your cue mix depends on the flexibility of your mixer...how many Aux busses (Send/Return), type of patching flexibility…etc.

And I think what cjacek was getting at is not to get too caught up in all the details, all at once...as it can be overwhelming. Focus on basic steps at first, leave the EQ and FX alone until you get comfortable with just the basic signals.
And also, if you happen to run stuff through the mixer and then the deck, it's not going to be real bad...but as always, the shortest and purest path is the best.

 

[sweetbeats]

If you are going to use an outboard...no need to go through the mixer before going to the tape deck, as that just adds more noise to your signal...instead go direct to the tape deck from the outboard preamp.

The thing here is that it really does depend on your outboard pre. See, typically in a mixer you've got 2 or (depending on how you use what you have) 3 gain stages:

1. MIC TRIM
2. channel fader
3. group fader

If you just use the direct out on your channel then obviously #3 doesn't count. what's my point? Well, again, depending on the preamp, it may or may not produce enough gain at the TRIM stage to drive your MS-16 input amp the way you want to get the levels the right way to tape...you have no flexibility. You may want hotter levels to tape but run out of headroom on the TRIM on the preamp. If the preamp has a lot of headroom then that may not be an issue, but none of my preamps do at that stage (Yamaha i88x 01X, Presonus Digimax FS, and my now sold Tascam M-520...the Tascam had the most of any of them, but they all depend on the secondary gain stage i.e. the output stage of the channel strip). So what I'm saying, and this is where cjacek was going (he wasn't harping on you ) is that sometimes, and I'm totally pointing the finger at myself, we get focused on finding the cleanest path. Nothing wrong with that until you miss a vital step. Many outboard pre's are setup assuming you will be running them into a secondary line amp gain stage and on to your recorder from there. So that's where the mixer comes in. What kind of pre? Maybe you can go straight from the pre to the MS-16 and I need to shut it and go watch some reels spin some more, but I bet you'd be better off going to the mixer from the outboard pre and then to the MS-16. And here's the other thing (and this gets back to cjacek's point...): the mixer was designed to be your ins an outs tool...I used to avoid using program groups because I was afraid of what they'd add to the signal. Sometimes what they add is good, and those groups act like an infinitely variable multichannel patch bay. That is something I hadn't really seen until A Reel Person shared why he uses the groups and then I realized I've been trying to treat my open reel recorder like a DAW and keep everything stripped and clean blahblahblah, rather than using the mixer for what it was designed to do. SO...food for thought.

So what are the outboard pre's and what model 8 x 4 Tascam mixer are you using?

I bought so much stuff for DAW tracking and I figgered that'd translate over to analog tracking but once I started I realized so much of it was totally superfluous.

Okay...and "not complicating things"...this is NOT what you were asking and I'm sorry but I've got to share...I still hold to the idea that careful placement of mics, consideration of the room and treatment of the instrument, all that stuff is good stewardship to the process and great things can happen with that kind of attention, but I also know that I recently got my best drum recording result using a pair of $5 dynamic mics and my spare kick mic using my least favorite pres and with almost no regard to mic placement...no up-front eq or other processing. I was really short on time so I practically threw stuff up, laid the tracks down and called it after that. The tracks sounded awesome to my ears and I was trying to figure out why I couldn't do that when I was trying. Well, I surely have much to learn but I know from that experience I learned to not try so hard. So My point is that, for me anyway at this stage in my experience, I'm trying to be particular about stuff that I really don't know about...too much putting the cart before the horse.

Again, not what you were really asking for at all, but the discussion prompted me to share, and, um...that's what its here for...right?...guys?

 

[miroslav]

Many outboard pre's are setup assuming you will be running them into a secondary line amp gain stage and on to your recorder from there.

Mmmmmmm...there may be some, but most of the ones I ever used had more than enough kick to go straight to the tape deck. I can't even recall ever needing to stick something between the pre and tape deck for signal gain.

But I agree...if a pre doesn't have it...then yeah, absolutely, do what is needed to punch up the signal to desired levels before hitting the tape...though at that point, maybe try a different mic...or different position to increase the signal strength rather than going for more gain at the back end...but I know what you are saying.
Sometimes you have to use guerilla techniques to make something work!

 

[student8]

sweetbeats - here's my gear list that you asked for:

1) Tascam MS-16 r2r

2) Tascam 320B mixer

3) (mic pre's):

* M-Audio DMP-3

* Focusrite ISA ONE

* BEHRINGER TUBE ULTRAGAIN (4-channel mic pre)

4) Otari MTR-10 (2-track mastering deck)


- hope that helps?

(and after you answer the first series of questions, I have one more: on the back of the recording deck, what is the difference between 'reproduce line output' and 'sync line output'? - and which one should I use?)

- thanks again guys.

 

[lonewhitefly]

i think the basic rule of thumb (or "industry standard") for best fidelity would be using as few steps as possible to get to your final destination. microphone > mic preamp > tape deck. i would say if you have a decent tape deck, decent mic and a decent preamp that 90% of the sound comes from room, mic placement, instrument quality and performance. i have been genuinely shocked at how much this affects the sound lately.

 

[jpmorris]

on the back of the recording deck, what is the difference between 'reproduce line output' and 'sync line output'? - and which one should I use?)

I suspect it's for overdubs. On a three-head deck, you can switch the record head into playback mode on the tracks you're not actually recording so that you can hear what you're doing when doing an overdub or other kind of punch-in.

Because there is a gap between the record and playback heads there is a delay, so you always want to monitor off the Sync output when doing that. However, for mixing down you want to use the repro output because the quality from the repro head is far better (the record head is usually optimised for recording).
I've never heard of a deck with both output connectors - usually there's only one and you can switch the output mode from the control panel. It would be handy for doing echo, though....

 

[sweetbeats]

I suspect it's for overdubs

No, its not. The MS-16 has some special functions for track 16 for syncing to the AQ-65 autolocator. There is a switch on the control surface of the transport to output track 16 to either the regular output jack like the rest of the tracks, or to output track 16 to the SYNC out jack which you would have hooked up to the timecode input of an AQ-65. Its a patching convenience feature. Read up on this in your manual.

 

[cjacek]

1) Tascam MS-16 r2r

2) Tascam 320B mixer

<snip>

4) Otari MTR-10 (2-track mastering deck)

You've got a fine setup there. As was mentioned earlier, the shortest the path the better and, personally, I'd ditch the pres, especially that the MS16 / M320B is a very good combo. When you simplify, not only do you get a cleaner signal but also, creatively, you're way ahead.

 

[JRSIV]

The Path of the PortaStudio

This question of the best signal path has always concerned me when using my Tascam PortaStudio's. (I know, I can just hear it now: "You're worried about signal path and noise but you still record with a PortaStudio?" Smartasses.)

I love my 424 and 488mkII for demos,etc. but still want the best performance possible, with any piece of equipment I use. I use outboard micpre's whenever I use a LDC or want a certain sound but since the mixer and tape recorder are connected on the Tascam's I have to go micpre into the line in of a mixer channel.

I always figured if the trim is turned all the way down and EQ is used sparingly then that's the best I can do. Using the better preamp on a nice mic "overrides" using a crappy mixer pre even if a negligible (or not so negligble...) amount of noise is introduced in the chain. At least that's what I tell myself. If I did have the option to go straight from the preamp into the recorder like Student has I'd experiment and see if it provides better sound and "vibe" or if the convenience of a mixer route is the way to go.

 

[sweetbeats]

(I know, I can just hear it now: "You're worried about signal path and noise but you still record with a PortaStudio?" Smartasses.)

Well, you won't hear that from me. Maybe if you were pushing that everybody had to use external gear on a portastudio then I'd have something to say, but you're not at all. For having fun, working stuff out, and certainly for getting decent-to-good workable sounds the onboard mixer is great. The pre's are noisy on my 424 for my taste but they work fine and sometimes (many times) it sucks the fun out of the process to hook all this other stuff up that I know will just have to be disconnected when its time to put it away, but better outboard gear will open the potential for better sounds with anything. I did just what you are talking about awhile ago using a Studio Projects B3 LDC and used one of the channels on my Tascam MX-80 preamp which has a rail for external phantom supply. I have a Stewart Audio phantom supply that is wonderful. Hooked that all up and the sound to that cassette tape was pleasingly wonderful to my ears, but it was a pain to have all the 'stuff' compared to just plug and go with any ol' dynamic mic straight into the 424...fun.

BUT, if anybody scoffs you for using outboard gear with your 424 or 488 then they need a headcheck because the "cockroaches" are cool here AFAIC.