How would you complete this project???

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nate74
  • Start date Start date
Nate74

Nate74

HR4FREBR
OK,
My band is no longer on a record label and we're doing our second record mostly by ourselves. We saved enough money from shows to do the drum tracking at a "real" studio. SSL board into some sort of bad-ass A/D converters into 96/24 Protools.

We'll get the drum tracks along with all the scratch tracks on our Fire Wire Drive.

We're then going to record guitars and vocals in my studio, which consists of:

Alesis HD24XR
Soundtracs Topaz System 8 24x8x2 Analog Board
Cakewalk Home Studio 2XL
Some lexicon outboard verbs, a couple RNCs etc.

I can either:

A) convert the 96/24 tracks to 48/24 and put them on the HD24XR and record the rest of the tracks and do the mixing on the Topaz. With this option I'd have all 24 tracks of the HD24XR available to me.

or

B) Mix the 8 drum tracks down to a stereo pair and record the other tracks at 96/24 on the (now 12 track) HD24. I'd dump them back to my PC and do the mixing with the Cakewalk at 96/24.

or

C) Some other combination or idea...?

My mixes are in general better in the box, but we want a really "organic/analog" sound on this project and the Topaz would lend that vibe to the project.

Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.
N
 
Nate74 said:
A) convert the 96/24 tracks to 48/24 and put them on the HD24XR and record the rest of the tracks and do the mixing on the Topaz. With this option I'd have all 24 tracks of the HD24XR available to me.
Click to expand...
I would suggest dispensing with the fancy sample rates and convering the drum tracks to 44.1/24 and putting them on the hard disk recorder. That will make everything MUCH easier for mixdown and they'll need to be reduced to 44.1/16 and dithered for CD anyway.
 
Me too

I agree as well.
I have recorded at different rates and the difference will probably not be worth the effort for you to complete the project at that rate.
Your performance will be more important.

Tom
 
Cool!

I like that option as well, but am forced to wonder then, are we better off just tracking tomorrow at the pro studio at 44.1/24? I asked the engineer about it and he said something along the lines of "we only do 96 here, that's what the pros use."

Hmmm... I thought.

Will a program like R8Brain be sufficient? I've had pretty good luck with it in the past for conversions etc.

Thanks!
 
it might be a bitch for him to change his bit rate.

however, often these people are total assholes (not necessarily this guy) who think they know more about what the client wants than the client. and its not just studios.

you'll walk into a guitar store and ask to try a certain guitar, or compressor or something and they say "oh, no, you want this other one".

how the fuck do you know what I want???? you dont even know what style of music I play!!!

so just ask him to change it. if he gives some excuse, just covert it yourself later. its not worth arguing over. specially when your time = $$.
 
plus,

if the outboard mixing thing isn't working for some reason, you can always go back and do it in the box. this way will give you the option in the end. you could even transfer into the box for editing, then transfer back and mix outboard, right??? that would be f-ing sweet.
 
FALKEN said:
plus,

if the outboard mixing thing isn't working for some reason, you can always go back and do it in the box. this way will give you the option in the end. you could even transfer into the box for editing, then transfer back and mix outboard, right??? that would be f-ing sweet.
Click to expand...

Good point. And Yes, quite often I edit in Cakewalk and clean stuff up and then put it back on the HD24 and mix through on the board. I'll even transfer the tracks with the volume adjustments in tact so I barely have to touch faders... is that cheating? :rolleyes:

I'll ask him again about recording at 44.1/24, but knowing him the way I do (we did our first record with him as well) it's gonna be 96/24 and some smart ass answer to boot!
 
you're paying him money, tell him to stick his "what pros use" up his but

you employ him
remember that because he dosen't
 
Another good point. Is there going to be a sonic difference between something tracked at 96 and converted to 44.1 and something just tracked at 44.1?
 
that's a point of contension
but whats the use of tracking at 96 just to spit it out at 44.1

you lose nothing by starting at 44.1 and staying thare
but you may (i'm NOT sure about this) by going from 96 to 44.1
(math errors and all)
 
Nate74 said:
Another good point. Is there going to be a sonic difference between something tracked at 96 and converted to 44.1 and something just tracked at 44.1?
Click to expand...

if you add noise shaping that will be there.

I thought you were going to keep it at 48?

I would not do any volume changes in cakewalk. leave that all to the board.
 
FALKEN said:
if you add noise shaping that will be there.

I thought you were going to keep it at 48?

I would not do any volume changes in cakewalk. leave that all to the board.
Click to expand...

My initial thought was I'd do it at 48, but as was mentioned, it's gonna end up at 44.1 eventually. I don't have any experience with what effect the conversion(s) would have on sound quality.

Why leave volume adjustments on the board? I love doing a mix once then just tweaking the little things. Is there a sonic reason?
 
Nate74 said:
Why leave volume adjustments on the board? I love doing a mix once then just tweaking the little things. Is there a sonic reason?
Click to expand...

well.

do what you like and what feels/sounds best.

my personal opinion is that volume changes in the digital realm are completed by mathematical operations that create unending decimals and degrade your sonic image.

others have debated this with me.
 
FALKEN said:
others have debated this with me.
Click to expand...

I thought that's what this board was mostly about... ;)

I've only done it in the past on pad instruments, synths, strings, B3, etc. But what about applying compression on the PC, then dumping the tracks back?
 
Nate74 said:
I thought that's what this board was mostly about... ;)

I've only done it in the past on pad instruments, synths, strings, B3, etc. But what about applying compression on the PC, then dumping the tracks back?
Click to expand...

honestly, I haven't tried it. compression has the same effect. that doesn't mean to not use it. I wouldn't destroy the original tracks though!!
 
i'd say only mix the drums down to a stereo pair if you're really really sure about the mix.

if it was me and i had a track number/space issue, I'd at least keep the snare and kick tracks seperate and mix the rest of the drum tracks down to stereo...at least then you have a little more control...
 
I should have been more clear, what I meant was to mix the drums to a stereo pair and dump them to the HD24, just for tracking the other parts. Then, if I chose to mix in Cakewalk, I would just take the additional tracks from the HD24 back to the PC, where all 9 of the drum tracks would still be available...

But, after all the discussion, the engineer flatly refused to track at anything less than 96kHz/24.

He went into this tyrade about how he was giving us a killer deal to begin with and we were undoubtedly not going to be able to finish the project on our own without f-ing it all up and my questions about 44.1 obviously meant I wasn't up for the task of finishing the project in a pro manner.

This guy is one of the best "up sellers" I've ever seen. He was constantly trying to get us to commit to having him mix the final tracks for us at a "bargain" etc.

We didn't end up finishing it all on Saturday so we ended up having to go back for a half day on Sunday, which cost us another $400.

I must say though, as I listen to the tracks... they sound incredible. And yes they're at 96 and will soon be converted down to 48 so I can have all 24 tracks of my HD24 available to me... not exactly as planned but I think it'll work out OK in the end.

Thanks everybody for your input and support.
 
dude....

first off, of course your drum tracks sound awesome!! there isn't a mix!!

drums will always sound better solo'd.

secondly, you CAN finish it yourself. the guy is a douche.

but to be fair,

you might want to have him mix it. do the editing, choose which tracks to use and make your composite guitar and vocal tracks. but if your mix isn't 'sounding' right; don't spend forever and a day on it!!!! if you can't get it right after 3 tries just pay him to do it. even though he's a douche.

in which case, you probably should mix down the drums to record your other tracks in 24/96. and then when you're done with the bass and guitars, mix that down again before you do leads and vocals, in 24/96.
 
FALKEN said:
dude....


secondly, you CAN finish it yourself. the guy is a douche.
Click to expand...

I appriciate the vote of confidence. I too think I can finish it up... but as it turns out, I may not have to. A guy who works at another of the local studios was at our acoustic show Tuesday night and when our singer mentioened "here's one off the record we just started work on" it prompted him to approach us.

After our conversation, he offered to finish up the tracking and mixing for $500 and 3 points off of the first 10k of sales. Not sure we'll sell $10k worth of product (that'll be around 1000 i figure), but he said he just wanted to be part of the project.

I may only be adding some strings and some B3 at my studio now.

This has turne dout ot be quite the soap opera, but I do plan on ending up with all the files eventually, at least for mix practice of for no other reason.

Thanks again for everybody's input and help!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top