Obi-Wan zenabI
Active member
The poll I would like to see would assess the average speakers that HR.com folks use to listen to what's been posted.
mshilarious
Banned
JuliánFernández said:
No, I'm not standard, but it's like anything else, practice makes perfect. I read that Klaus Heyne primarily uses his own voice, counting to three, to test mics. No doubt he has other tests too, but the first test is his own voice, because he's used to it. I have grown very accustomed to white noise . . . it is perhaps not the ideal tool for discerning subtlety at the level Heyne works at, but I find that in the low end, differences usually aren't very subtle.
Turn it around the other way, would you accept a matched pair of mics where the manufacturer said they recorded two different snare drum hits and compared?
Probably 95% of people here are recording either themselves, their friends, or a few local bands, maybe for money, maybe not. A few people here have commercial studios that book larger stuff, indie releases, etc. We have had major label types here before, not sure if there are any at the moment.
But the point remains, most people can't choose to only record great musicians. Especially if they are recording themselves
Heck, go on over to REP and look up a thread called "vocal comping" or something similar, and read about how all the real actual big names pros are griping about recording vocalists, guitarists, drummers, etc., who suck raw eggs, and having to waste hours upon end with tuning and edits.
Chill, man. Let the music play . . .
C
cello_pudding
Well-known member
we all listen to different things. ie: los texas wranglers are cheesy and generic with horrid lyrics, hokey rhythms, and forgetable vocals.
but this is homerecording.com. if you want to tell someone they suck, go to analdrummers.com
but this is homerecording.com. if you want to tell someone they suck, go to analdrummers.com
kojdogg
bollocks redux!
i think that mic shoot outs are good for comparing the mics in the shoot out relative to each other. the problem for me is that mic placement, room acoustics, pre (and rest of the signal chain through the a/d's), etc. make such a huge difference that the sound samples will most likely have little value for figuring out how the mics will sound for your uses, unless they also include a mic in the shoot out that you own, which you can then use as a relative standard to the other mics.
all that imho.
all that imho.
Last edited:
O
ozraves
New member
Gear does matter as does the room.
So does talent in front of the mic and behind the mic. Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" probably would not sound the same tracked by some guy in his bedroom with a Digi 002 though.
The problem of the online recording community mindset is that most people believe that if they want to achieve a professional result then the result must necessarily flow from gear purchases.
So does talent in front of the mic and behind the mic. Pink Floyd's "Dark Side of the Moon" probably would not sound the same tracked by some guy in his bedroom with a Digi 002 though.
The problem of the online recording community mindset is that most people believe that if they want to achieve a professional result then the result must necessarily flow from gear purchases.
X
XLR
______
I think that for those recording themselves it's easy to fall into the trap of spending too much time working with the gear and not enough time working on performing well. Sometimes the two things overlap, sometimes not. I do a lot of slow, detailed practice on gtr. I enjoy it but there's no point recording it. I also like to do vocalizations of my gtr lines as I'm working out how I want something to sound, and don't want to record that either. Generally I get my best recording takes when I've been practicing a lot and recording a little.
But gear shootouts are interesting when the playing's fairly clean so the gear characteristics can come through.
But gear shootouts are interesting when the playing's fairly clean so the gear characteristics can come through.
T
tdukex
Man of the Muse
I believe Harvey Reid recorded his 1989 classic "Solo Guitar Sketchbook" using AT4051 mics through Mackie pres in his home recording space. It's still one of the best solo acou guit albums I've ever heard.
amra
Well-known member
You guys put too much thought into this.
90% of the recordings posted on the net are probably 128kbps mp3's anyway. You can't hear any detail from them anyway.
90% of the recordings posted on the net are probably 128kbps mp3's anyway. You can't hear any detail from them anyway.
X
XLR
______
I've heard some good mp3s at 128. But higher res is better. I think the artifacts that mp3 conversion create can sometimes be a good thing when you're doing critical listening because they seem to accentuate imbalances that already exist rather than create new ones. IME a good sounding wav converts very well to 128 kbps mp3.amra said:
R
Robert D
New member
I think the skill that matters for a mic or pre shootout is consistancy. Be it drum hit's, vocal lines, or guitar picking, it has to be the exact same position, velocity, attack, formants, etc., on every take. That's where a professional may be better for this, though only if they fully appreciate and apply this.
In any case, multiple samples from multiple people are really necessary before you can start to form an opinion on a mic or pre without getting it in your own hands, and how it sounds in a great room with a great instrument played by a great player may be less useful to some Homerecording members than how it sounds in a typical home studio with less than great instruments and technique. But best is to hear a variety of samples from a variety of situations.
To that end, I really wish we had a HR gear sample database that over the course of a few months might become a rich source of such samples.
In any case, multiple samples from multiple people are really necessary before you can start to form an opinion on a mic or pre without getting it in your own hands, and how it sounds in a great room with a great instrument played by a great player may be less useful to some Homerecording members than how it sounds in a typical home studio with less than great instruments and technique. But best is to hear a variety of samples from a variety of situations.
To that end, I really wish we had a HR gear sample database that over the course of a few months might become a rich source of such samples.
X
XLR
______
Agreed.
Good idea.
daav
Flailing up a storm.
This was a really interesting thread for me. Honestly, couldn't the answer to "what piece of gear will improve my recording the most" be "a metronome" much of the time?
I think what i am getting from it and most of the stuff i have been reading about and doing with recording is that it is all about what to do with $$ and time. It is pointless to try to home record the album that will break you out to be a huge star if your playing and singing and instruments sound like crap (the semi-famous Daneil Johnston notwithstanding).
What i have learned, and what is not always apparent from topic-specific posts and beginners guides and such, is that expensive gear is often pretty darn far down the road in terms of "what will give me the most impact per dollar and minute" It would be really interesting to have people with more experience put it all in a pile and sort it out, make it a sticky in the newbie section, etc.
My take (assuming someone has something like a budget condensor and a budget interface with a built in pre, and reaper or a demo version of one of the big recording packages):
1. source- instruments that sound good, have new strings heads, are tuned. Amps that don't wreck tone, voices that are on key etc.
2. talent - finger notes cleanly, uses decent rythym, has some sense of musical creativity when needed etc.
2. room- bass absorbtion, reflection taming. Isolation from outside noise to a degree that will not interfere with a recording.
3. Monitors that can reasonably give insight as to the actualy recorded signal.
4. practice, such as recording the same source from different mic positions to actually see how mic placement affects the result, learning to use software, learning (such a big deal) proper gain staging, etc.
So far my feeling is that these are things that you need to address before you start saying "my mic is too bright" or "I want to warm up my signal, should i get a tube pre" or whatever.
That said, i have something like 8 mics right now and 6 channels of 'acceptable' (better than the behringer 802 I started with anyway) budget pres. My talent is still piss poor and my room is just stating to make me feel like i have something to work with. Intruments, amps, etc are ok, but not great yet. I will likely invest in some new mics from the group buys that are coming up, but only because the timing and price are right.
What i know for sure is that 1-4 will continue to give me much more return on my time and money investment than moving up to different more expensive pres, converters, mics, etc. If i had the experience and understand when i started out with this *hobby* i would have used the $1000-1600 that i have put into mics, patchbays, snakes, pre channels, etc that i barely ever use (yet) into room treatment, heads for drums, cymbals, amp upgrades, and time practicing playing and recording, gotten some real knowledge, and only THEN started to upgrade gear and buy extra mics to build on that. That said i think i have gotten lucky and made good investments so the stuff i barely use will get used as i work on the other stuff, but it could have been different trying to be able to do the most, with the least, earliest.
Daav.
I think what i am getting from it and most of the stuff i have been reading about and doing with recording is that it is all about what to do with $$ and time. It is pointless to try to home record the album that will break you out to be a huge star if your playing and singing and instruments sound like crap (the semi-famous Daneil Johnston notwithstanding).
What i have learned, and what is not always apparent from topic-specific posts and beginners guides and such, is that expensive gear is often pretty darn far down the road in terms of "what will give me the most impact per dollar and minute" It would be really interesting to have people with more experience put it all in a pile and sort it out, make it a sticky in the newbie section, etc.
My take (assuming someone has something like a budget condensor and a budget interface with a built in pre, and reaper or a demo version of one of the big recording packages):
1. source- instruments that sound good, have new strings heads, are tuned. Amps that don't wreck tone, voices that are on key etc.
2. talent - finger notes cleanly, uses decent rythym, has some sense of musical creativity when needed etc.
2. room- bass absorbtion, reflection taming. Isolation from outside noise to a degree that will not interfere with a recording.
3. Monitors that can reasonably give insight as to the actualy recorded signal.
4. practice, such as recording the same source from different mic positions to actually see how mic placement affects the result, learning to use software, learning (such a big deal) proper gain staging, etc.
So far my feeling is that these are things that you need to address before you start saying "my mic is too bright" or "I want to warm up my signal, should i get a tube pre" or whatever.
That said, i have something like 8 mics right now and 6 channels of 'acceptable' (better than the behringer 802 I started with anyway) budget pres. My talent is still piss poor and my room is just stating to make me feel like i have something to work with. Intruments, amps, etc are ok, but not great yet. I will likely invest in some new mics from the group buys that are coming up, but only because the timing and price are right.
What i know for sure is that 1-4 will continue to give me much more return on my time and money investment than moving up to different more expensive pres, converters, mics, etc. If i had the experience and understand when i started out with this *hobby* i would have used the $1000-1600 that i have put into mics, patchbays, snakes, pre channels, etc that i barely ever use (yet) into room treatment, heads for drums, cymbals, amp upgrades, and time practicing playing and recording, gotten some real knowledge, and only THEN started to upgrade gear and buy extra mics to build on that. That said i think i have gotten lucky and made good investments so the stuff i barely use will get used as i work on the other stuff, but it could have been different trying to be able to do the most, with the least, earliest.
Daav.
C
Cult_Status02
New member
JuliánFernández said:
Then how would a "pro." go about hearing those differences. And if you say look at a spec. sheet I'm done with this thread.
Seeker of Rock
Proud fucking American
JuliánFernández said:
bubbagump
New member
chessrock said:
Yup. A good kit witha good player is a thing to behold.... like a guy who can take a snare and really get a nice consistant rim shot... you have to have both the kit and the player... then mics and the other minutia is pretty insignificant. Want more crack out of the snare... make sure the snare has crack to begin with. Want more sizzle from a cymbal, don't use pie plates.
C
chessrock
Banned
bubbagump said:
Or trash can lids, for that matter.
.