recording with monitors on

  • Thread starter Thread starter dobro
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dobro

dobro

Well-known member
So if you mix and record in the same room, you can record mics with the monitors on, and the mics will pick up both the sound source AND the monitors playing the sound as well. Have you ever done this with a good result?
 
dobro said:
So if you mix and record in the same room, you can record mics with the monitors on, and the mics will pick up both the sound source AND the monitors playing the sound as well. Have you ever done this with a good result?
Click to expand...

No because that's not generally what I'm going for on a studio recording. But I can decent results recording stuff live with stage monitors and PA speakers blaring.
 
I record and mix in the same room. I generally record with monitors off.

From time to time I've recorded with monitors on. This is usually because I'm doing something quick and nasty and I can't be bothered with headphones and stuff . . . just throw up a mike, play the track, then go for it.

Feedback is not a problem . . . note bouldersound's response above . . . if you are sensible about levels.
 
The only times I've done it is by accident, and I've never liked the result. I was wondering if anybody had ever made it work for them. Looks like not. I suppose you could actually mic the monitors...
 
Record what?

I record bass with monitors on, because I record direct. :D

But vocals, guitar, drums, etc....no thanx.

Though, I have read that there's a way to invert the polarity on something or another, and set up with the mic and speakers forming a triangle or something, which is supposed to cancel out the bleed or something. But I wouldn't bother.
 
RAMI said:
Though, I have read that there's a way to invert the polarity on something or another, and set up with the mic and speakers forming a triangle or something, which is supposed to cancel out the bleed or something. But I wouldn't bother.
Click to expand...

That's a silly method because if your ears are in the same vicinity the sound will partially cancel there too.

The way to do it is to keep the mic and speakers absolutely stationary, not change the monitor mix at all, not put any of the voice or instrument being recorded into the mix, and after recording a good track of the performance record a track of just the monitor mix bleeding into the mic. Then invert the polarity of that track and use that to cancel the bleed in the main track. I've heard of this being used for horn sections or vocal choruses where someone didn't want to deal with putting everybody on headphones. It's more natural for some performers.

But for the other 99.999% of the time headphones work better.
 
If you record a track using a mic'd signal - and have the monitors on, you will get bleed of whatever mix you have into the mic (depending on monitor volume, distance of the mic from monitors, position of the mic, etc. If isolation of sound is not a concern - then it is what it is (although it can also compromise whatever final 2 track stereo mix you may hope for.

Feedback can be a concern - again depending on how the mic is positioned compared to the monitors.

If I'm tracking direct (bass or guitar through an amp sim - then I often use monitors instead of phones.
 
Thing is, even if you don't get complete instability you can get a very coloured "ringy" sound.

Dave.
 
Anything I 'record' with a mic is done with monitors switched off... So vocals, acoustic guitar & 'live' percussion are monitored through headphones when tracking...
My drums come through Maschine (so a non-issue) and Bass Guitar is DI'd so obviously I leave the monitors on for those sources...

Simple rule of thumb: if using a mic turn monitors off; unless feedback (worst case) and bleed (best case but not ideal) are your thing...
 
Schwarzenyaeger said:
Doesn't that just feedback?
Click to expand...
This ^^^ was the same question I asked when I read the OP. The only time I ever had my monitors on and a mic activated at the same time (in a 15' x 12' room) I got massive feedback. My eardrums might have busted...or the speakers...or the mic diaphragm...I dunno. It was painful though.
 
Dave Holmes said:
...unless feedback (worst case) and bleed (best case but not ideal) are your thing...
Click to expand...

For as long as I've been recording, I can't recall anyone in my studio ever saying anything like this... "So, for this number, we want to have lots of ringy, phasey sounding feedback going on in the background. Can you do that for us?"
 
When I mix live and give monitor feeds, there are a number of compromises:

Mics are ones like the SM58, e835 or OM5/6/7 designed to not pick up too much stage wash and to reject feedback.

The monitors are placed, as much as possible, in the null spot of the mic.

Monitors are mixed and EQd to give the artists what they need but don't always have the best sound because problem frequencies are "rung out"

...so, it can work but it's still a compromise.

Just as an example, on some occasions I've had to record the chorus for numbers in musical theatre. There was just no way to give them all headphones so they were give monitors directly behind cardioid mics with little or no vocal in the monitor, mainly just the music.
 
The main design feature makes a live vocal mic more resistant to feedback is the built-in pop screen placed close to the diaphragm. This lets the singer get much closer to the diaphragm thus exploiting inverse square law. If you could get that close to the capsule of a studio condenser you'd get similar resistance to feedback.

Actually, I'm tempted to try a 4050 on live rock vocals just to show it can be done. The trick would be to stretch some nylons over the mesh to improve the pop resistance with the singer as close as possible. I have used a 4033 on a 1-mic bluegrass band so I know it's not impossible to use LDCs live.
 
pikingrin said:
This ^^^ was the same question I asked when I read the OP. The only time I ever had my monitors on and a mic activated at the same time (in a 15' x 12' room) I got massive feedback. My eardrums might have busted...or the speakers...or the mic diaphragm...I dunno. It was painful though.
Click to expand...
Der...uh...If you're recording something with a mic, then you can hear it in the room. If you can hear it in the room, then why the fuck do you need to hear it from the monitors? Turn off whatever feature is feeding it through the recorder back to the monitors. Can't feedback then!

I avoid mics wherever possible, so it's kind of non-issue for me, though I always track vocals through headphones.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
The main design feature makes a live vocal mic more resistant to feedback is the built-in pop screen placed close to the diaphragm. This lets the singer get much closer to the diaphragm thus exploiting inverse square law. If you could get that close to the capsule of a studio condenser you'd get similar resistance to feedback.
Click to expand...

Worth saying that, besides the built in pop screen allowing you to get up close to the diaphragm, they also have a frequency response curve designed to compensate for the proximity effect. This is why mics like the SM58 sound so thin as so as the source is more than a foot or two away.

Like you, I've had occasion to use LDCs in live situations, in my case not bluegrass but rather theatre stuff where the big mic was partly for the image. With pop filtering and the right EQ plus careful placement of monitors, it worked fine
 
I'm not sure why you'd want mix layers onto an existing stereo track like that. Essentially, it would be the same as printing effects...leaving you far less latitude when mixing.

Why? Why?
 
Bobbsy said:
Worth saying that, besides the built in pop screen allowing you to get up close to the diaphragm, they also have a frequency response curve designed to compensate for the proximity effect. This is why mics like the SM58 sound so thin as so as the source is more than a foot or two away.
Click to expand...

Yep, and I still find myself wanting to shelf it down a few dB all the way up to 500 or even 1k when used at the typical rock distance. But that cuts even more bleed and minimizes plosives, so I'm not complaining.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top