Had some fun last night!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Herm
  • Start date Start date
Herm

Herm

Well-known member
I have just bought a new sound card Delta 44 cause my old multi track one would not work in xp and I wanted to get rid of 1 computer in the studio and besides I wanted a new card that would do 24/96k. I mostly just use it for mix down for my tascam 38 to cd.
So I thought I would do a little test since my rig here is considered cheap analog and cheap digital.
I set up one mic through the board and bussed one to one channel of the tascam 38 and bussed another to my delta 44 and set the card to 24 bit 96k for best performance. I recorded me playing drums with one mic infront of the kit and played for a couple of minutes.
Then came in to the control room to take a listen and I was very supprised at the differance in the two sounds. The highs and mids where pretty much the same for my ears but for the bottom end there was a huge differance in the sound. The 38 just had more balls and low end that sounded nice and fat and didnt sound thin and lifless like the 44 did for what ever reason or technical crap someone may come up with.
It just made me glad and verified that my decision to go Analog was the right one and no matter what the cost I plan on keeping my analog stuff till the day I die cause there is no way in Hell that no matter how great the ad,s or da,s are they are going to compete with that sound. ;)
 
Last edited:
Great testimonial, Herm! :)

I was about to scrap my entire system and get me one of them new fangled digital ga-ga gizmos but after reading your post, I will stay the course! :D

Cheers! :)
 
Best to pick up a large format console and 2inch deck these days. They will blow the doors of any digital system under $100000.00

IMHO that is...
 
I went digital 2 years ago, but I still track through an analog mixer, and analog rack gear (Preamps, etc.). Yeah digital has its advantages in the mixing, and editing stages, but for tracking you will never beat an analog front-end.
 
Preaching the the choir again, Herm??

................ :eek:
 
Herm, Got any tips for for getting good drum's sounds on the 38? I've been pretty happy with the results I've been getting but it wouldn't hurt to try to make it better.
 
What has started working for me best in recording drums is the less mic,s the better. I mostly just use one overhead and a kick. Or just one mic infront of the set 3 or 4 feet out and about 3 to 4 feet high.

I like the simple way of recording, Less is more!
 
Herm said:
What has started working for me best in recording drums is the less mic,s the better. I mostly just use one overhead and a kick. Or just one mic infront of the set 3 or 4 feet out and about 3 to 4 feet high.

I like the simple way of recording, Less is more!
Click to expand...

Same here. I'm only using 3 mikes on two tracks. One overhead on one track and the kick and snare each miked on another track. They don't have to be in stereo for me.

Are you using a DBX unit? I would think it would take away from the cymbals. I don't have one of those yet.
 
Herm said:
What has started working for me best in recording drums is the less mic,s the better. I mostly just use one overhead and a kick. Or just one mic infront of the set 3 or 4 feet out and about 3 to 4 feet high.

I like the simple way of recording, Less is more!
Click to expand...
i used to only use 1 or 2 at a max.. inspired by my friends band who did an album on 1" 16 track with only 2 mics on the drums.

but now im spoiled and use EIGHT! its way more work but its alright i guess.
 
Herm said:
I have just bought a new sound card Delta 44 cause my old multi track one would not work in xp and I wanted to get rid of 1 computer in the studio and besides I wanted a new card that would do 24/96k. I mostly just use it for mix down for my tascam 38 to cd.
So I thought I would do a little test since my rig here is considered cheap analog and cheap digital.
I set up one mic through the board and bussed one to one channel of the tascam 38 and bussed another to my delta 44 and set the card to 24 bit 96k for best performance. I recorded me playing drums with one mic infront of the kit and played for a couple of minutes.
Then came in to the control room to take a listen and I was very supprised at the differance in the two sounds. The highs and mids where pretty much the same for my ears but for the bottom end there was a huge differance in the sound. The 38 just had more balls and low end that sounded nice and fat and didnt sound thin and lifless like the 44 did for what ever reason or technical crap someone may come up with.
It just made me glad and verified that my decision to go Analog was the right one and no matter what the cost I plan on keeping my analog stuff till the day I die cause there is no way in Hell that no matter how great the ad,s or da,s are they are going to compete with that sound. ;)
Click to expand...

I think the "sound" of Analog, whether it's cassette or open reel, is but one of the many reasons people take to the format. Again, sound is just one issue but gotta tell you that a properly produced track can sound great on both Analog and Digital, if good equipment is used of course. The average listenner wouldn't neccessarily tell the difference between the two formats. For me, it's the joy of actually operating the Analog gear that brings the most satisfaction. Sure, there's the tape "compression" and other wonderful "tape effects" but I guess the number one reason I took to Analog is because I understand the concept very well and feel it is one with me. It's like everyone has a different opinion on what real "beauty" is ... I like this girl and you don't etc ..... Damn, I'm actually comparing my gear to females! :eek: You know .... sometimes my 34B starts to look pretty yummy! LOL!! :D :D

~Daniel ;)
 
I PROMISE this not an analog vs digital pissing contest :D :D :D but I feel strongly that it's a recording approach more than a medium that defines a sound. Daniel, the tracks I did for you were all done through an HD24 to computer. I admit I love the sound of tape saying "ouch" but there are ways around that. Analog is indeed VERY cool but I guess I'm a digi-guy now :D :D :D
 
Hang around here long enough Track Rat and we will make you see the light and you will be a convert in no time. ;)
 
Track Rat said:
I PROMISE this not an analog vs digital pissing contest :D :D :D but I feel strongly that it's a recording approach more than a medium that defines a sound. Daniel, the tracks I did for you were all done through an HD24 to computer. I admit I love the sound of tape saying "ouch" but there are ways around that. Analog is indeed VERY cool but I guess I'm a digi-guy now :D :D :D
Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

Yes, and I am the first to admit that your production was so good that it doesn't really matter if you used digital or analog. Damn, you could even record straight to a tin can and it'd sound respectable! :D :D

I mean, take a look at me ... I often record onto cassettes and sometimes prefer the sound of these to my open reel recorder. :eek: Say that loud enough and some people will say that I'm nuts etc .... And so I'd say my primary reason for Analog is that I enjoy working with the format, regardless of the sound. :D

Is it just me or does "lo-fi" sound really cool ?? :cool: ;)

~Daniel
 
Last edited:
Next time you do something let me know and I would be more than willing to put some drums down. That is if its not to hard of a part. ;)
Im set up for most formats. Cassette 4 track, 4 track reel, and 8 track reel 1/2 inch and 388.

And Jeff while Im thinking about it have you heard from Billy?
I never did hear from him.
 
Last edited:
Herm said:
Next time you do something let me know and I would be more than willing to put some drums down.
Click to expand...

Of course Herm! I will definitely let you know! :)

THANKS!! :) :)

Daniel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top