Classical piano recording: newbie Qs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Grotius
  • Start date Start date
G

Grotius

New member
I play classical piano, and I'd like to record some of my playing on CDs for friends and family. I'd also be interested in creating .wav files or MP3's for distribution via the computer. I've been lurking here, I've posted a few questions at pianoworld.com, and I've browsed through dozens of web sites on home audio, but I'm still pretty clueless about home recording.

My piano (a 7-foot grand in good condition) sits in a nice room, a sort of second living room, that is 12 feet by 24 feet with windows and drapes on three sides, soft furniture, and a wall-to-wall carpet. It's a relatively dead room acoustically, which is good -- this piano already makes plenty of sound, and our house is not that large. I like the idea of recording onto my PC (Athlon 900, 512M RAM, Windows XP, CD Burner, Sound Blaster Live value), but my PC resides in the attic, two floors above the piano. I suppose I could commandeer my wife's laptop, but I'm not sure she'd like that.

Ultimately, I might be willing to commit a couple thousand dollars to this project, but before I spend that much money, I'd like to get my feet wet. After all my Web browsing, I still don't have a clear idea of what my options are. Here are my specific questions:

1. Microphone(s). I know not to skimp on this. Mostly, I need general guidance on what quantity and type of microphones to get -- omnidirectional? Condenser? 1, 2, or more microphones? I've searched these forums, and I now have a long list of microphones that people use to record classical piano, but I'm still rather lost.

2. Pre-amp. Do I need one if I just want to get my feet wet?

3. Recorder. This is my biggest question. I don't have a clear idea what my options are. I like the idea of digital recording, preferably with 24/96 sampling. What are the options? A DAT machine? A recorder/CD burner? (I already have a burner on my PC, but as I mentioned above, it's in my attic.) A minidisk player? The new Masterlink thingie from Asesis (?)? A laptop computer with a huge hard disk and fancy audio sound card? A Mac? A recorder that can produce these new SPCD (?) or DVD-A files? Other options? Which options would you recommend?

4. Editor/mixer. I intend only to record solo classical piano, so I don't know if I need to do any mixing, but I assume I have to edit the raw recordings somehow. Can I transfer raw recordings from a DAT or Masterlink or whatever to my PC? Will the files degrade if I do that? If so, should I get a dedicated mixer? Still, even if I don't record on my PC, I assume I can download some shareware and use it to "finalize" recordings, after which I can create .wav's and burn CDs. Right?

Many thanks in advance for your help. Cheers,

Grotius.
 
It seems like you have a good handle on the components you need. Your best bet is to peruse the specific forums here that apply to those components and you will get some good info.
 
I have a remarkably similar situation - an 1897 Steinway B in a "living room". The mics and preamp alone I usually use on it cost me over $3000, but I am making money recording, so my situation is different.

You can get a decent pair of Octavas (MK012) small diaphragms from the Sound Room for around $500 I think. I would not buy them from Guitar Center, because they don't weed out the bad ones, and quality control is an issue with Oktavas. You could easily end up with a dog in an effort to save money.

You might look into a pair of Grace 101's for preamps. For around the same money you could also get a Sytek, but that has four channels and you probably only need two.
 
I worked several times with classical recording engineer, former instructor, and friend Riccardo Schulz (I built him monitor speakers, diffusers, and such). He makes very minimalist recordings and as I recall used this basic technique for piano:

Lid open with a Near-Coincident-Pair (DIN specifically - 90 degrees/20 cm) of small diaphragm cardioid mics placed about 7 feet high with the center axis aiming down into the piano (more towards the bass strings ) about 7 feet away.
http://www.tape.com/Bartlett_Articles/stereo_microphone_techniques.html

The rooms were always quite acoustically live. He often recorded in the living room of his Victorian house which had 15 ft ceilings, hardwood floors, one small oriental rug, and no curtains. He would even open all the doors inside the house to increase the reverberation time. On location he would often move the piano, musicians, furniture, etc., around to find the sound he was looking for. He could place mics pretty quickly, but I know that came with lots of experience.

I think his signal chain was basically this:

Pair of B&K mics (omni or cardioid depending on the application)
John Hardy Preamp
Apogee Converters
Mac running Pro Tools

That's it.

I would recommend using a similar minimalist arrangement, but of course with components and software that fit into your budget. The PC will give you more bang for your buck.

His recordings are both lush and airy and definitely something you would want to emulate. You can find his bio here. http://www.cmu.edu/cfa/music/facultyandstaff/

SACD and DVD-A are great formats, but probably way out of your price range. First of all, you need world class equipment and facilities to even make these formats worthwhile. Then, I'm pretty sure the authoring software for these formats is still very expensive - many $$$ thousands. Plus, not many people even have the ability to play DVD-A or SACD yet. I'd stick with the good old CD format until you get really good.:)

barefoot
 
Last edited:
Littledog has some good points on mics - for one thing, small-diaphragm condensers are generally more "accurate" than other types of mics. To (attempt to) cover your questions point by point -

1. Mics - Generally, two mics over the harp, one near each end, or both together in an "XY" setup - either way, two mics, how to use them can come later, once you've got the gear and discover 37.5 more questions you didn't know you had...

2. Pre-amp - If you're considering condenser mics, you're beyond "getting your feet wet" - all but "home recordist" types of electret condensers need phantom power (typically 48 volts, rides on the mic signal) This means either a mixer with phantom power or a decent pre-amp with phantom power built in. Some of the newer pre's have the option of a SP/DIF digital output which could come in handy. More on this later. Piano is one of the most difficult instruments to recreate harmonically, so scrimping on a pre-amp by getting a low-cost "me-too" unit makes no sense. If you're classically trained with a good ear, you will want perfection (or slightly better) in a recording. Basically, as far as I know there is no consumer grade recorder that can use real condenser mics without a preamp or mixer.

3. Recorder - If you're just going to "clip off" the dead air at the beginning and end of a song and splice several together to make a CD, there is very little advantage to 24/96, and some cost/space/hassle disadvantages. Where high sample rates and high bit depths help is when you're going to do any DSP, such as EQ, reverb, level changes, etc, IN THE COMPUTER. There is an advantage of 24 bit over 16 bit, where you can leave a little more headroom while recording in order to avoid "overs" which sound like crap. Recording to 24 bit gives you 8 extra bits to play with after recording, that can get "thrown away" when making a CD so you actually get all 16 bits of dynamic range onto the CD. For classical piano, this is a very good thing. There are one or two newer DAT machines that record at 24 bit, but I haven't seen any that do 96k. (looking in the wrong place, maybe) You would use your entire budget on the DAT machine (almost) and still need mics/pre's/etc... There are stand-alone CD burners for under $500, but I haven't seen any that do 24 bit, other than the Alesis Masterlink (where would you play them if you made them ? Do all your friends have them? Also, Alesis is in deep doo=doo financially lately, and I would be really cautious about buying anything from them if I expected any support. Minidiscs all use "lossy" compression schemes, and if you're a purist you probably won't like someone else deciding what you "probably can't hear" and throwing it away. If you temporarily move your PC downstairs, you will need some serious sound deadening if it's in the room with the piano, or else you will "fade to hard disk whine" instead of "fade to black". Laptops are a little quieter, but still too loud to have close to the recorded sound source. A quality sound card for a laptop will cost about $500 (The VX Pocket comes to mind, don't remember if it provides phantom power.) By SPCD, are you referring to SACD, as in Super Audio Compact Disc? Again, do all your friends have one?

4. Editor/Mixer - If you're going to record piano in a decent acoustical space, trim the silence, and put together a CD: IF you can set up and maintain a CONSTANT signal level that is repeatable, you will avoid having to adjust levels later in the computer (This = DSP, a no-no) Then, you could (if careful not to go "over" in level while recording) conceivably get good results recording and staying at 16 bit/44.1k sample rate. This would simplify/cheapen the process considerably. Once you get a digital recirding, either on a CD burner or a DAT, transferring it digitally to a computer is either going to work or not, depending on whether you do it right. In other words, no degradation just by transferring. WAV files are un-compressed, same as CD Audio files. Some CD burning software that comes with burners allows rudimentary editing (trimming silence) or there are shareware editors available.

5. My suggestions - $2000 is not enough to go first-rate for what you want to do. One channel of pristine pre-amp can easily leave you with just enough money for a burger and fries. To get two channels going with condenser mics, super-clean pre-s, and a high sample rate recorder, would cost more like $7000. The cheapest way to "get your feet wet", or at least several toes, would be a small stereo electret condenser mic into a non-tube stereo preamp (some adaptation would be necessary) into the left and right line inputs on the laptop. (Most mic inputs are mono on computer sound cards) This would cost about $250, and would leave LOTS of room for improvement. Computer sound cards (the non-audiophile kind) let the audio signal into the electrically noisy box that is the computer, BEFORE the sound is digitized. This adds noise to the audio signal before it is encoded, so the noise gets encoded with the sound. For $10 to $40, the analog portion of a sound card is pretty much an afterthought, so no help there either. This would also leave a fairly noisy (sound-wise) box in the room where you record, so another loss. The next way it could be done is with the same pre-amp feeding into the analog inputs of a stand-alone CD burner. CD burners are not as loud mechanically as PC's, so that would be better. Also, as I mentioned under Preamps, if you get a pre with SP/DIF input you could optionally go digital into the burner from the preamp, bypassing the analog circuitry in the burner. This should be cleaner. Then, you could take the CD-R upstairs and rip it to editing software, trim silence, sequence the songs in the order you want, and burn as many CD's as you need. By saving the individual songs on your hard drive, you could re-order them on CD as you wanted. For this you would need a standalone burner (under $500) two mics $300-$500) a pre-amp ($300-$600 for discrete solid state stereo) and a decent set of headphones ($100 if you don't already have them), and misc. cables/mic stands ($100-$300, depending on cable quality, etc) So, this could be done for about $1200-$1800. One more option to consider for mics is the Audio Technica series - pretty good bang for buck overall - I have the 4033 and a pair of ATM-25's (NOT Pro-25's) These (ATM-25) are dynamics so do not require phantom power, and are pretty flat down to 30 hZ and up to 18k. I have recorded piano, bass, and kick drum with them and they are well worth the money. (Abour $150 each, mail order) They are not as airy as a small diaphragm condenser, but do a pretty good job on everything I've thrown at them.

There are more options left than I mentioned, but I don't see how you can go first cabin for less than $6000, probably more. The highest bit/sample rate I would worry about for what you want would be 24/44. Zero processing other than trimming silence makes this a good option. More expensive software has several "dithering" options to get back to 16/44 for CD's, so that would be another cost if you go higher than 16/44.

I hope this gives you more of an idea as to what helps quality and what costs what... Steve
 
Excellent post Steve. Good to see that you are here.

lou
 
Thank you for all the helpful replies. I'm learning a lot here! A few follow-up questions:

Littledog: I don't think I'll ever make money doing this, but it's nice to know that someone can. Incidentally, I'm playing a new Bluthner model are 4 -- it's about half an inch shorter than your Steinway B. One question for you: how many tracks do you use? And a dopey follow-up question: when recording live, does each microphone correspondent to a different track? E.g., two microphones equal two tracks?

Barefoot: thanks for the great links; they were very helpful. I like the idea of a minimalist arrangement, at least to start. But I'm just not sure I can get a computer into that room; my wife wants to keep it looking nice, and it's hard to pry the laptop away from her. What's the next best minimal arrangement? Microphones, preamp, DAT? Or mics, preamp, standalone burner? Either?

Steve (knightfly): wow, what a thorough post! I read it three times to digest it all. I do have a couple follow-up questions. First, suppose I try microphones, preamp, recorder, then copy files to PC for editing; which recorder would you recommend -- DAT or standalone CD burner? Second, which media is easier to copy onto the PC -- DAT or audio CD-R? My Sound Blaster Live Value apparently has SPDIF inputs; would those help?

Many thanks again, everyone.

-- Grotius.
 
Whew! You threw me some easy ones this time!

Yes, two mics go to two tracks - one per mic - this allows me to get a stereo image via panning. On occasion I might use a room mic as well to pick up natural ambience.

In my situation, I usually close mic the piano, as the piano is usually part of an ensemble. Especially in pop music. If I am doing solo, I might back the mics off to get more of a classical sound.

Mic placement in general is at least as important as what mics you use. Take a few hours and experiment with moving mics to various positions relative to eachother and the piano itself and record each postion (take careful notes!) and listen critically. The particular instrument in a particular acoustic space will make your situation unique from anyone elses.

One tip that may get you started: if you can have someone else play, move around the piano and the room and try to find a spot where you really like the sound. Then try putting your mics there.

Although this wasn't one of "my" questions, I'll chime in by saying that in my system, it is much easier to get audio off of a CD into a computer than a DAT. The DAT has to be played in real time, whereas I can extract the files directly from a CD (Toast Audio Extractor) and import them into my software (Pro Tools).

As far as noisy computers, sound doesn't like to go around corners much. Can you set the computer up just outside of the room with the piano? If your computer does not have a "line of sight" with the piano mics, it should attenuate the noise quite a bit.
 
Grotius,

If you can't use a computer then, I would also recommend going with a hard disc recorder over a DAT. Besides the pain of linear access that littledog mentioned, I'm pretty sure DAT bandwidth is too limited to support 24bit 96kHz recording (though I prefer 88.2kHz because there tends to be fewer errors when resampling to 44.1kHz)

I have never heard or used it, but the Alesis MasterLink looks like a good candidate. From the product description it appears as if you don't even necessarily need a computer. You can record, edit, arrange, and burn your CD all in one.

Team this up with a pair of Neumann KM184's and a Great River MP-2 preamp and you'll have quite the rockin little classical recording setup. (Oops, with cables and stand I think that puts you about 100% over budget). Eventually you can upgrade the mics to a pair of DPA (formerly Brüel & Kjær) 4011's. Then you'll be ready to record for Chandos.:) The Great River preamp will last you through the duration.

https://www.neumann.com/infopool/mics/produkte.php?ProdID=s180
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/pro10.htm
http://www.greatriverelectronics.com
http://www.alesis.com/products/ml9600/index.html


barefoot
 
Quote - "First, suppose I try microphones, preamp, recorder, then copy files to PC for editing; which recorder would you recommend -- DAT or standalone CD burner? Second, which media is easier to copy onto the PC -- DAT or audio CD-R? My Sound Blaster Live Value apparently has SPDIF inputs; would those help? "

Littledog, as usual makes a valid point for CD recorder over DAT - Here are others -
1. Dat machines come in two basic flavors, not including the newer 24 bit models - Cheaper, and Usable. By that I mean, the RIAA successfully lobbied manufacturers to include non-defeatable SCMS copy protection in all DAT machines that retail for less than $1000, I think that's still in place. Therefore, to keep from having to futz with SCMS you would need to spend at least twice as much for a DAT as for a stand-alone CD burner. I have not played with ANY of the standalone CD burners, so I'm not sure if they have the same problem. Since all but the newest commercial CD's can be ripped to .wav files by most CD software, I doubt that there would be a problem.

2. Dats have to be played in real time, see Littledog's post above.

3. For playback, you would have to move the DAT machine upstairs to your computer, hook up a SP/DIF cable, and transfer the song(s) into your computer. Time: How long is the song? See #2.

4. To get a CD-R transferred, you just carry the CD upstairs (need any help with that? :=)) slide it into that funny, wimpy coffee cup holder that pops out when you push the little button thingy on the front, :=) and rip it to a .wav file; time: How long is your song, divided by the slowest read speed of your CD-rom. (CD-roms that list 40X are lying to you for all but the outside tracks, and since those are the last to be recorded, won't apply til you fill up the CD-R) Still, even 16X means ripping a 4 minute song in 15 seconds, give or take some...

5. Cost - Real DAT, $1500 or more, CD-burner, $500. Both digital, both 16/44.1, both pretty quiet to operate. Dat tape, $10 or so for good one, re-usable. CD-r, $.50 or so, NOT re-usable. CD-RW, IF the burner can handle them, $1.50 or so, re-usable. (You probably won't get 1000 recordings on a DAT tape before you SHOULD throw it away, especially if you PLAY it several times. A DAT is just a miniature VCR, from a mechanical standpoint, so every pass thru the machine puts wear on tape, tape guides, heads, etc - Since the advent of CD-burners, my DAT machine has gotten very dusty. Only use it for location recordings any more...

If you were to insist on using the DAT after all this, the SP/DIF input on the SB Live would be the only practical way to avoid polluting the sound with computer hash - With the standalone burner, it won't matter. Although, for playback on the computer afterward, a better sound card and some Sennheiser 600 headphones wouldn't hurt.

BTW, the reason I mentioned earlier staying away from tube preamps only applies to lower cost units. Almost all "tube" preamps for less than your entire budget use a lower power supply voltage to save money, and probably to simplify interface with the solid state circuitry. This is referred to as "starved plate" operation. The only real advantage I've been able to discern is that the manufacturer can say their stuff is "tube" - Kinda like putting a Ferrarri muffler on your Volvo and expecting to kick Enzo's ass at Sebring... To really get the benefits of tube designs, you need all tubes throughout the circuit, or at least to fully utilize the ones that are there. This takes a lot of hand-wiring, careful attention to detail in wire routing, good cooling flow design to avoid a noisy cooling fan, and most of all MONEY. This is why I personally would stay away from any tube pre's that cost less than maybe $1000 per channel. A clean discrete transistor pre can be had for quite a bit less. Too low a price and you're into Op Amp design, which usually is not as clean as a GOOD discrete transistor design. These are generalities, you need to listen to your affordable options to decide for yourself.

Since your wife wants to keep the room from looking like a control room, one of the nicer TV/VCR stands could be used for the burner and preamp, and could be rolled into a closet or corner when not in use. Mic placement repeatability is another story, if they have to be hidden when not in use - I've seen special support bars for close-miking, that could be lifted off the piano and stored in a closet. For a more classical, distant approach, I can't think of anything other than an Atlas SB-36 boom stand with casters and an X-Y spreader, with a means of locating it repeatably. Maybe a set of 3 strings attached to the center of the spreader bar, cut to reach the 3 "corners" of the piano when the position is right? Just a thought... Steve
 
knightfly said:
...BTW, the reason I mentioned earlier staying away from tube preamps only applies to lower cost units.....I personally would stay away from any tube pre's that cost less than maybe $1000 per channel.
Click to expand...
I would say Grotius should consider staying away from tube pre's altogether, at any price.

The information I get from discussions with people who record classical music for a living, cover notes, and magazine articles, is that high end discrete solid state preamps are used almost universally. Tubes almost invariably color the sound. Many prefer the warmth they add, but this really not the way the vast majority of classical recordings are approached. Most classical recording engineers and producers are looking for absolute linearity - hence the common choice of B&K mics and John Hardy type preamps.

Of course, you can always choose to break from the orthodoxy. But, at least it's good to know what the orthodoxy is.

barefoot
 
Thanks again for another great round of replies. You guys have really helped focus my thinking. I promise not to hound you too much longer.

Littledog: I think you and the other guys have persuaded me that a CD burner (or maybe a hard disk recorder) fits my needs better than DAT. I did a little research into ripping audio CDs, and while I found many tools for doing so with the Mac (e.g., Toast) or Windows 9x (e.g., replacing cdfs.vxd with a 'rip-friendly' version of that driver), I did not find any tools for ripping onto Windows XP, which is what I use. Do you know of any? (In case the FBI is reading this, I have no intention of pirating gazillions of copies of my Beatles CDs! <g>)

Steve (and everyone): if I do get a CD burner, do I need one with more than 1 CD drive? I looked at a few Philips models today, and some of them had two or even three drives.

Barefoot: Thanks for the links. I'm glad you mentioned hard disk recorders, because I had meant to ask about them. They seem generally more expensive than CD burners. Are they worth the added expense? A hard disk recorder does appeal to me for at least two reasons: (1) I already have a CD burner -- in my PC. Is a stand-alone burner (say, a $400 Philips recorder) of significantly better quality than my trusty HP CD-Burner Plus? (2) I assume it would be easy to transfer audio files from a hard disk recorder to my computer's hard disk. Of course, if I invest in something like the Masterlink (which others have recommended to me), I don't even have to worry about transferring files around. I take it you would recommend a hard disk recorder over a CD burner?

I don't think I'm quite ready for the Neumanns or DPAs or the Great River. <g> With my budget, I'm thinking a pair of Oktavas or AT822s or AT4033s or MXL2003s. And these mic preamps all seem so expensive. Do any of these hard disk recorders or CD burners come with built-in preamps (or phantom power or whatever it is I need)?

Everyone: what do you think about hard disk recorders vs. CD burners?

Grotius.
 
Grotius, by your description you want/need something quiet and portable. A hard disk recorder is neither, because you would have to take the entire unit upstairs to transfer. The masterlink would let you do it all downstairs if you add headphones or a set of speakers/amps, but I'm not sure how much edit capability the unit has. The description sounds like not very much, and what it does offer you would not want to use for your purpose, especially once you acquire better computer software. I explained the other (support) reason why I personally would NOT recommend it. You may be more trusting, if so I wish you luck.

CD burners with 2 or more drives usually tend to be more of a consumer item. I would look harder at units by HHB (CDR830) or Marantz (CDR631, CDR500) the CDR500 is a dual well, the other two are single. $500 to $700. Both the Marantz units offer balanced XLR inputs - The HHB only has unbalanced RCA in's. All have digital in's of various flavors, which you might use if you get a pre that has a digital output. None of these units offer preamps.

Marantz sells a portable CD burner, the CDR300, for $750 street price - it appears to be made by Superscope, or vice versa, who offer an identical looking unit for $1000 street price which has more whistles and bells. Both portables offer XLR balanced mic ins, and have preamps (sorta) but no phantom power. I doubt you'd like the preamps in a unit that has pre's AND a burner, and costs less than just the preamps you'd like.

If you really want quiet (and you should) I wouldn't recommend ANYTHING with a hard drive in it. Period. Some of that whine will leak through unless you build a high-isolation enclosure for it, which will make it even less portable.

Barefoot brings up a very good point on the absence of tubes for classical recording period - However, in your price range it would be even more necessary in order to minimise coloring the sound. I can't get you any closer than that, as I've not heard any of the newer solid state pre's. I've read some reviews of a couple of Focusrite models, but don't remember which ones. Someone else will need to help you with that part.

The reason quality preamps are not cheap is because nothing that is high quality gets that way by taking shortcuts. There is an old expression in the audio business that refers to a "straight wire with gain." - This is the goal of all preamps other than models that intentionally try to "color" or "fatten" the sound, and some actually get pretty close. What the term means is a device that amplifies a signal without any noticeable changes other than amplitude. That is a very tricky thing to accomplish, even with all the time and money one needs - to do it on an assembly line isn't realistic, hence the high price of perfection. This type of gear isn't really any different than Audiophile grade stereo gear - the 10-to-1 rule still applies. If you want a noticeable improvement, you pay 10 times as much.

Just to clarify, some definitions: a preamp just makes the low level signal from a microphone or phono pickup or guitar bigger so it can drive a power amp or mix amp. A condenser mic has sort of a miniature FM radio station built in, necessary because of the capacitor that is part of the sound pickup. (grossly over-simplified since this post is already getting a life of its own) - this Mini-FM radio station requires DC power to run. this is provided by phantom power, so all real condenser mics require phantom power. Not all preamps supply this power, but all you would be interested in do, if you are to use condenser mics.

Mics - I would remove the MXL's from your list for this application, and maybe add a pair of Shure SM-81's - a good low noise small condenser for about $330 each. On a lower budget, I'd want to listen to the matched pair of Rode NT5's for about $300 the pair. (I haven't heard these yet, just going on general buzz...) For classical piano, I think I'd place about as high a priority on low noise as I did on "accuracy" - unless everything you do is going to be triple forte.

Try and get a total package together at one store, with an agreement IN WRITING that you can exchange components until you are happy with the setup IN YOUR ROOM ! That way, if the mics aren't accurate or quiet enough, or the pre colors the sound too much, etc, you can try something else. Remember when checking this, that a stepladder may be necessary for finding good mic placement. The best way to find out where to put a mic is to put your ear there and if you like the sound, you're almost done. The most perfect mic in the world won't sound its best if you don't put it in the right place, and this only happens with experimentation and experience and LISTENING. You may need to have someone else play the piano while you're looking for these ideal places - just be careful not to fall off the ladder into the piano, I'm told that's painful... Steve
 
knightfly said:
....If you really want quiet (and you should) I wouldn't recommend ANYTHING with a hard drive in it. Period. Some of that whine will leak through unless you build a high-isolation enclosure for it, which will make it even less portable......
Click to expand...
Any current recording device is going to have moving parts and you'll need to take steps to isolate the noise if you want it to be in the recording room (the days of affordable high storage capacity flash memory recording are still a few years in the future)

I looked at the Masterlink brochure and one nice feature it has is a remote control. This might be a valuable feature in anything you choose. So you could possibly put the unit inside a glass stereo case, china cabinet, or such to reduce the noise. If you can tinker even the slightest bit, you could also try to isolate the hard drive from the chassis. I suspended the hard drive inside my computer with those little bungee ponytail bands and now it's very quite.

Anyhow, just another thing to consider.

barefoot
 
The Masterlink can provide hi-res 2-track recording and if you change the stock HD with a 32-gig'er, you'll have an excellent unit for live recording.......

All I can say about the unit is it does what it's supposed to and it does it very well...!

Highly recommended..............

Bruce
 
I can't argue about the usefulness of the Masterlink, but does anybody know whether Alesis is still alive? Or do we have a wonderful tool with no company behind it? I don't know about everybody else, but I've been burned too many times to play that game again... Steve
 
Alesis was bought by Numark, and is still very much alive......

Bruce
 
Oh yeah, I did read something about that being in the works - in that case, maybe I'll get one myself to replace my DAT, since they're only about $999 at Musician's Fiend :=)
 
Thanks again for all your helpful replies about burners and CDRs. I have yet another round of questions for anyone who has the patience to respond:

1. Noise and the MasterLink: Steve, I do like to play Chopin and other "quiet" classical music, so noise is indeed important to me. Stereophile magazine loved the MasterLink (June 2002 issue, p. 105), but it did say this about the remote: "Somewhat disappointing is the small, crowded, unlit remote and its inability to communicate with the MasterLink for more than a few degrees off-axis from the front panel's IR receptor." I gather this means that there is no cable for the remote? On the other hand, my TV IR remote works from quite a distance -- but then again you need line of sight, right?

2. Live recording: I've read a few sources that suggest using more than two microphones for classical piano. (E.g., two to close-mike, two others further off, etc.) How many microphones/pres would, say, the Marantz portable burner or MasterLink support? Or must I buy a separate mixer if I want to use more than two microphones/pres in one live recording?

3. Quality of CD burners: I take it, Steve, that CD burners are significantly quieter than hard disk recorders? Is a standalone burner (say, the Marantz portable unit you mentioned) also superior in quality to the $150 HP CD-Burner-Plus in my PC? Does it make fewer coasters, or better-sounding CDs, or both?

4. Burners and mistakes: if I record to a CD burner and (gasp) make a mistake or perform poorly, I assume I just have to start a new track and go on. Eventually I will have a CD-R with some good and some bad stuff on it. It would seem that one advantage of a hard disk recorder is that I could erase a bad track immediately. Given the cheap price of CD-Rs, I take it this is not a significant consideration? Also, is it more accurate/efficient to use a digital-out port than CD-ripping to transfer files from the burner to the PC?

5. CD-Rs vs CD-RWs: is there any place for CD-RWs in serious audio recording? I guess CD-Rs are cheap anyway. But I've read that some CD-Rs are of higher quality than others. What are the best? Also, can anyone recommend fancy labels and jewel case inserts?

6. PC editing: I've been playing with a few shareware PC audio editors, and they are fun to use. I especially like the trial version of Cool Edit 2000; it seems easy to use. I didn't care so much for N-Tracks. The demo version of ProTools does not work under Windows XP. Are there others I should try? Is something like ProTools or Cakewalk far superior to Cool Edit? Cool Edit seems to have everything I would need...

Thanks, Grotius.
 
Here goes, kinda in order:

1. All the cd drives I've come in contact with are only noisy when changing disks (if a multi-disk unit) or when spinning a CD at high speed (this would not be the case when direct recording - you would ALWAYS be at "1 X" - There is a device I've seen in mail order catalogs, probably Heartland or one of those, that takes your IR remote signal, changes it to RF, transmits it through walls, and re-converts it to IR. There is a reciever and a transmitter. The transmitter sits in the line of sight with the controlled device, and the reciever sits where your remote can blast it. This would allow you to place either the burner OR a masterlink either around the corner, in a closed TV stand, in a closet, whatever, and still control it by remote.

2. Both the Masterlink and any standalone burner are only designed for two channels, left and right. You could use a small mixer for more mics, but once you print to disk you are stuck with the balance between mics, so there would be a lot of "cut and try" to get an acceptable balance, and no changing it without re-playing/recording the song. If you want to do that, you're probably back to either a dedicated hard disk recorder, a "workstation such as the Yamaha or Roland units, or a computer. It would theoretically be possible, thru cat5 cabling and a couple of firewire repeaters, to have your PC upstairs, a MOTU 896 interface downstairs along with a secondary keyboard/mouse/monitor, and extend the computer stuff via cat5 cable and the audio via firewire, to a PCI firewire card in your upstairs PC. The 896 has preamps in it, but I don't think it offers phantom power. You would have to add at least a phantom power feed-thru box, and better to have separate preamps and go into the 896 interface with line level from the preamps. This would definitely squash your $2k budget like a puppy on the freeway at rush hour...

3. Yes, CD burners are quieter, especially when they're constrained to 1.x speed. Better sounding? probably not noticeable at the same bit rates/depths, unless you are comparing a generic sound card input with a computer burner, then yeah, the standalone would most likely wonder where the competition went. Coasters, except for newer PC burners with "burn proof" or equivalent technology, are normally a result of improperly set up computers trying to do too much while burning a CD at too high a speed. Once you cause a "buffer under-run", which is tech speak for "woops, outa gas - gotta wait here for the truck to stop and refuel so we can continue - but hey, those hot girls we were chasing got away..."Standalones wouldn't have that problem, again because they will be recording real-time at 1X.

4. Basically right, right, and right. The CDR500 I mentioned claims to be able to record to CD-r or CD-RW, so you could have a re-usable disk if that worked ok - bits is bits, as long as the PC can read them ok. With that particular burner, you should be able to use either media. Plus, that one and some others can use computer type media, which is cheaper. The digital out port would be no more accurate than successful "ripping", and nowhere near as fast.

5. I answered part of this in #4 - I would, however, NOT try to put out CD-RW's as a finished product, since they will not play right in all consumer gear. But, for transfers they should be fine. The CDR's that are best are the ones that work/are recommended for your particular drive. I have only made two coasters to date, both were cheapo's - I have had good luck with TDK, Maxell, Taeyo Yuden silver, everything BUT white box stuff. The main cause of coasters is a PC that has too much other stuff going on during burning - go to the Tascam BBS and follow the links to their PDF file on PC optimization - this covers everything on that subject pretty well. The main thing is to disable everything that isn't necessary while you're using the machine for audio. A newer burner with "burnproof" or equivalent, makes even that precaution unnecessary.

6. I'm not familiar with N-track at all, other than knowing of its existence. Cakewalk sucks for audio, is great for midi. Sonar, the update, may be better for audio - My copy is stll in the box til I get the new DAW finished (money and time)since the old DAW can't take advantage of half the goodies in Sonar, I see no reason to even install it CoolEdit Pro is fairly mature, but I've only played with a 1.0 demo several years ago, and only briefly. Protools (personal opinion here, if not elsewhere) is over-rated. I think there are cheaper ways to go that are better quality, and I don't like bullies that make you buy only their hardware. I've been using Samplitude Producer 2496 since it was Samplitude Studio 4, and I've been really happy with it. You can do all internal DSP and storage in 32-bit floating point, it comes with a lot of effects/processors, is DirectX compatible for many more, is pretty intuitive so you don't have to RTFM a lot, and there's a demo available that is a full-working one (saves are not disabled, nor is recording time limited) - it croaks after the time period, and you can't just re-install it, but if you use it for the time period you'll probably want to buy it anyway. It's about twice the money as CoolEdit Pro. Soundchaser.com sells it, probably several other places. Here is the link to their demo page -

http://magixus.magix.net/magixII/e/home.nsf/index1.html?OPEN&country=US

Don't bother with Samplitude Studio - Producer supports higher sample, more processing goodies, probably a few other features too. Hope I didn't miss anything, sure wasn't for lack of length... Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top