Audio Quality

Jeremy Muller

New member
Using Cubase LE4. Wondering how to optimize my audio quality. Upgraded my interface to PreSonus AudioBox 22vsl. Upgraded microphone to Rode NT-1-A. Trying to max use of EQ as well. Anything I can do within Cubase? Any help/thoughts are greatly appreciated. Thanks.
 
Anything specific wrong with the audio quality you're getting? If not, I'd guess the biggest thing for you to look at would be the acoustics of your recording space. The best recordings need the least processing, including limited EQ. The gear you've got, while not the most expensive out there, is capable of giving you a good, clean--and accurate--recording of whatever you want. Trouble is, they'll also be accurate on all the little quirks, room echo and background noises in your space.
 
So, hope this isn't too lengthy a response to your question, and thanks for the reply.

The problem with my audio quality is that I have sent my recordings to industry professionals and a consistent response is that the audio quality is not great. I assume that is compared to "professional" recordings that are submitted to them, be it a professional studio or a "professional" home studio. The quality sounds good on the many devices I play them on here, whether computer, car, home stereo or kids crappy player. However, there is a definite "home" quality about the recordings. I've been thinking that a lack of compression or EQ or reverb (or all plus others) might be a partial explanation. Reverb has helped tremendously with vox and some guitar work. EQ has helped bring a part more in the pocket or more out front depending where I use it. Haven't been able to use compression yet - a lot to learn. I've made a lot of progress in mixing and in the initial recording to get things to sound a good deal better, but there seems to be this final "hump" I can't get over. Is that hump a $10k mic and a sound engineered room?

As for my recording room, it is a 12x12 room in my house. It is carpeted. I have some sound absorbing material on the one wall where my amps are directed and have other material in different places on the other walls. It seems to be a pretty dead room with no echo (which I understand to be desired/good). In any case I mic up close so am getting hardly any room noise (as I can figure it) with guitar, bass and vox. So I don't see the room as a problem.

The other factor is the computer, a new Dell Inspiron with Windows 7. It runs Cubase much better than my old machine, although there is an occasional hiccup with the old Cubase (LE4). Are there concerns with the sound drivers in this machine that could affect quality? I doubt it cause when doing anything else with the computer (like watching ESPN highlights) the background sound tracks sound phenomenal on the headphones/monitors running through the presonus interface. So that's my scenario.
 
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I wish I could give you an easy "just buy an XYZ and you'll sound like Abbey Road" but it just doesn't work that way.

I'll revise my previous response to say that the things you need to work on are the acoustics of your recording and mixing environment...and your personal level of skill. The latter is something that can only come with experience and practice.

You mention EQ, compression and reverb. All three are tools very commonly used on professional mixes but there's no single setting or piece of advice that can substitute for just trying things. EQ, for example, is something that's different every time. There are a couple of main functions: first, to simply correct things in the frequency response of your recordings that aren't as good as you want and, second, to help one track of your recording "play nicely" with other tracks. The best recordings (good mic suiting the material in a good acoustic) need little or no EQ. Other times, you're working like mad to save things. Either way, it's a case-by-case sort of thing using your ears.

Compression is also commonly used on recordings. At it's simplest, it's simply an automatic way of evening out the loud and quiet bits of a recording to make mixing easier. However, on some things, often electric guitar, compression can become an audible effect in it's own right. Compression takes some time--and quite a learning curve--to understand and get right. However, once you do, it's an extremely useful tool. Have a read (or three) through these RANE NOTES about dynamics processing--and experiment with your own recordings as you go.

Reverb? Yeah, it can help a lot of things but beware the temptation to use it too much. It's not a magic bullet that fixes everything--at worst it just covers up the bad bits. However, used properly, it gives your recordings a sense of space, especially when you work in a fairly dead environment.

If you're happy with your room then that's a good start. Getting things just basically dead then adding electronic reverb later is a pretty common technique--one I use myself. However, this could also be a big part of the difference between what you perceive as "professional" as opposed to "home". The most popular studios aren't just dead; rather they are designed to have pleasant sounding characteristics. On corner might sound good on acoustic guitar; another might be good for vocals and so on. However, this is hard to emulate at home without lots of money so "dead" is likely the way to go for you.

Now, the good news: your computer and your drivers don't affect sound quality (other than that, if really badly wrong, your recordings will be full of dropouts and glitches). Similarly, the differences between your mic and a $10,000 one are far more subtle than you might think. Where there IS a difference is that a pro studio has a cupboard full of mics and pulls out different ones depending on what they will be recording. The NT1A is a good all-rounder though and, rather than replacing it, I'd just use it until you reach the stage where you know what changes you want in the sound--warmer, crisper, more mid range detail, etc. and choose a second mic that gives you the desired characteristics. You'll find that gear acquisition syndrome kicks in and you may end up with a mic cupboard as big as Moresound's!

I guess a last thing to remember is your monitoring set up. It's hard to make your recordings sound professional if you don't have the resources to actually know how they sound in the first place. However, I think you're doing the right things in the first place--do a mix then play it back on all sorts of different systems, comparing it to commercial recordings. Mentally note what changes you want--more bass, less bass, more detail in the mids, whatever--and do another mix before repeating the testing. All this is much easier with a good set of monitor speakers but, even with the best, there's still a learning curve. This is also another place where acoustics come into it, by the way. Lack of treatment in your mixing room can quite drastically affect what you think you hear.

Anyway, sorry I can't give you a "buy a Neumann mic and a Drawmer compressor and all will be great" type of answer. It really is just a matter of plugging away at it and learning what your tools will do and when to use them. Your initial set up is good enough that I wouldn't be running out and spending more money just now. Use what you have until you can actually hear what you with to change for yourself.

Happy recording!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMS
Thank you again. After your first reply I did some rummaging through other forum threads here on acoustics and believe that I have found the culprit (to a degree) of my troubles. It is the room, both as a recording environment and a mixing/listening environment. (Boy this site has a lot of help readily available, wish the web address came with my purchase of gear!) I am glad to know my equipment should suffice. Now I have to work on the room for a while without spending any real dough. Thanks again for the thoughts...I now go on the search for an acoustically accurate surrounding at home. First step: tape the kids' mouths shut!
 
Sounds like you're on the right track. Gaffer tape is just as useful in the home studio as it is for live work!

Tony-Hawk-duct-tape-photo.jpg

Human bodies...even kids...make quite good HF traps!

Good luck!
 
One problem with a square room is that the shared dimension accentuates the same frequency. If your room has unequal dimensions (ideally a ratio of 0.6:1:1.6) then the resonant frequencies are more evenly distributed.

Small rooms in general are challenging because of inverse square law. Sounds reflected off the walls travel a shorter distance and have more energy left than in a larger room. You apply treatment to diffuse reflections, but the treatments to do it at lower frequencies take up a lot of space. The amount of treatment to get a small room "correct" might take more volume that there is in the room.
 
wow man, it's so awesome of you to take the time to help, very detailed reply. i just like to browse the forum and reading and learning and i just had to stop and say thanks, b/c of people like you so many of us are getting somewhere in the war on sound. or the many battles i should say.
 
Back
Top