home recording / mixer or should i just go direct into garage band ?????

D

durlew04

New member
hi there ive just turned my garage into a studio and sound proofed it etc. im looking at doing some recording now. my question is should i get a mixer or should i get 1 good usb microphone ? i play guitar, sing and ive got a midi keyboard going straight into my mac, im using garage band atm. the stuff that i want to do is just acoustic stuff and some electric nothing else no drums or anything ill prob just use my midi keyboard ? someone enlighten me with your knowledge .
p.s is yes just get a mic which one ? i need a all rounder microphone really ??????
 
Rent a mixer and a mic, then try it both ways. Record test tracks thru the mixer and going direct.

You will be surprised at how a mixer in between the mic and the software can almost totally ruin your sound. I suppsoe if you dont have an interface then you dont have much choice. But if you are using an interface with decent preamps in it, then do yourself a favor and shut off the mixers. I'm starting to think the converters and the preamps in most of the interfaces available today will walk circles around anything that you can get in a home budget style mixer. If pro studios need to record several players at once, they dont go out and buy a bigger mixer, they buy a bigger interface. Must be a reason.
 
soundchaser59 said:
Rent a mixer and a mic, then try it both ways. Record test tracks thru the mixer and going direct.

You will be surprised at how a mixer in between the mic and the software can almost totally ruin your sound. I suppsoe if you dont have an interface then you dont have much choice. But if you are using an interface with decent preamps in it, then do yourself a favor and shut off the mixers. I'm starting to think the converters and the preamps in most of the interfaces available today will walk circles around anything that you can get in a home budget style mixer. If pro studios need to record several players at once, they dont go out and buy a bigger mixer, they buy a bigger interface. Must be a reason.
Click to expand...

Um, no. A large high quality analog mixer is a great way to handle large sessions. There's really no other way to generate multiple zero-latency monitor mixes. So the question is, does the OP need to generate multiple zero-latency monitor mixes and does he have the budget for a quality mixer? Probably not, so a smaller simpler setup would be better.
 
Yup, forget the USB mic. If you are a one-man band or maybe a two-man band, a simple 2 channel interface is all you really need. You would want more than 2 channels if you are recording acoustic drums or recording multiple players at once. But most times, a one or two man band is recording ne instrument at a time.

Plenty of good USB interfaces on the market for a great price.

But with the usb interface, you will need mics, cables, stands, monitors, headphones, etc. all worth it if you went through the trouble of converting your garage to a studio.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
Um, no. A large high quality analog mixer is a great way to handle large sessions. There's really no other way to generate multiple zero-latency monitor mixes. So the question is, does the OP need to generate multiple zero-latency monitor mixes and does he have the budget for a quality mixer? Probably not, so a smaller simpler setup would be better.
Click to expand...

bouldersoundguy said:
The trick is a sixteen channel microphone splitter that sends each microphone (or D.I.) to both the house mixer and to the sound guy's recording system.
Click to expand...

I don't think we are talking about the same things here. The OP makes it very clear that multiple monitor mixes have very little to do with his question. And when 'the sound guy' records a big live production, he splits off all of the mics and DI's to get signals to his digital recording system, completely bypassing any large boooteeek mixing console that is on site. If you want to bypass the big mixer at a live venue, why would you prefer routing thru one in the studio? If you were starting from scratch like the OP, and you needed to record 2 or 4 or even 8 or 16 sources at once, you would still buy a large mixing console to corral all of your signals before going to the interface? Rather than going directly into the 2/4/8/16 input interface?
 
soundchaser59 said:
I don't think we are talking about the same things here. The OP makes it very clear that multiple monitor mixes have very little to do with his question. And when 'the sound guy' records a big live production, he splits off all of the mics and DI's to get signals to his digital recording system, completely bypassing any large boooteeek mixing console that is on site. If you want to bypass the big mixer at a live venue, why would you prefer routing thru one in the studio? If you were starting from scratch like the OP, and you needed to record 2 or 4 or even 8 or 16 sources at once, you would still buy a large mixing console to corral all of your signals before going to the interface? Rather than going directly into the 2/4/8/16 input interface?
Click to expand...

That second quote of mine is out of context, about live recording using a mic split. And anyway I'm splitting to another mixer even if I don't use the mixing features. Having all my preamps in one chassis with one power cable is convenient.

In large studios they still use large consoles (with excellent preamps) to route signal as needed. But for the OP, since it's unlikely he'll need the features, a simple two input interface will do fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top