Just Getting Into Home Recording

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rampant Colt
  • Start date Start date
I’ve been treated like a fucking piñata since the first fucking day I got here. If anyone should be cautious, it’s me.
You might benefit from recalibrating some of your definitions.
If a string of knowledgeable people queuing up to ask sensible questions and offer their advice is 'unfriendly' and 'persecution'
then I don't think we're all on the same page.


The people here simply pointed out that your aim of 'clean' and 'uncoloured' doesn't really gel with your gear selection,
and asked what informed your purchasing decisions.

You can get upset about it and assume the world is out to get you, or have a conversation with them.

If you misspoke, just say that, or if you have more experience than people assumed from your first posts, just say that,
...or get upset and swear at everyone.
 
I knew if I looked long and hard enough I’d find a couple of tracks we did (full band) from around 1999. These were done on a Tascam Porta Studio, either 12 or 16 tracks, I can’t remember. Tracks were recorded in our rehearsal studio.

In the first track (country) I’m playing lead, using a 1962 Fender Strat, slab rosewood board with clay dots. I never used this guitar live even on tour. I think it turned out pretty well given what we had to work with, and we got to burn CD’s afterwards.

Here is the first one.

Second track more of a calypso feel, I played my 1934 Gibson A-4 the entire song.

Here is the second track.
 
I'm not really into country, but those are professional performances, Barron.
 
Very nice Rampant. Looking forward to hearing your new stuff.
 
Very nice Rampant. Looking forward to hearing your new stuff.
Well, you’ll get the new stuff in time.

I did however include a link in my signature of my second album. CAUTION: it will put you to sleep, just easy listening, original acoustic, fingerstyle and flat picked songs.
 
Everything is here, save a couple of items which will arrive Monday.

I’ll post pics now so everyone can piss and moan and tell me what horrible choices I made.

IMG_1902.webp
IMG_1903.webp
IMG_1915.webp
IMG_1871.webp
IMG_1904.webp
IMG_1905.webp
IMG_1920.webp
IMG_1923.webp
IMG_1921.webp
IMG_1924.webp
 
In the mic section - I think I have positive reaction to the Telefunken, and that new ribbon you bought. I like properly engineered products. I guess that's why I just don't like the mic where excellent electronics are in a bit of old plumbing pipe. I have old copper pipe that shows me exactly how they age. If it sounds good, I suppose I should ignore the look, but that one won't ever be on my shopping list. Probably my loss, I think - but it is why I have never wanted a Sennheiser 441 - I hate the look. I have some original Oktava 319's - and really like the black crackle finish, but hated their 219. I'm hoping to hear your comments on the new ribbon.
 
In the mic section - I think I have positive reaction to the Telefunken, and that new ribbon you bought. I like properly engineered products. I guess that's why I just don't like the mic where excellent electronics are in a bit of old plumbing pipe. I have old copper pipe that shows me exactly how they age. If it sounds good, I suppose I should ignore the look, but that one won't ever be on my shopping list. Probably my loss, I think - but it is why I have never wanted a Sennheiser 441 - I hate the look. I have some original Oktava 319's - and really like the black crackle finish, but hated their 219. I'm hoping to hear your comments on the new ribbon.
Both the AEA (active) and the Alder Audio (passive) sound great IMO. I use a Cloudlifter CL-1 for the Alder Audio which provides me with +93dB of crystal clear gain. However, it’s probably not necessary as the builder of the mic told me somewhere around +55dB is sufficient (the 88M provides +68dB). I’ve ran it with/without and can’t notice a difference, the exception being how much I have to increase/decrease the gain on the 88M.
 
In the mic section - I think I have positive reaction to the Telefunken, and that new ribbon you bought. I like properly engineered products. I guess that's why I just don't like the mic where excellent electronics are in a bit of old plumbing pipe. I have old copper pipe that shows me exactly how they age. If it sounds good, I suppose I should ignore the look, but that one won't ever be on my shopping list. Probably my loss, I think - but it is why I have never wanted a Sennheiser 441 - I hate the look. I have some original Oktava 319's - and really like the black crackle finish, but hated their 219. I'm hoping to hear your comments on the new ribbon.
I haven't heard the TF myself, but I personally own a last gen AK-47(MK II) and I find it a completely uncolored mic. Even in comparison to something like my AT-4050 from the late 80's. So, knowing how many mic's you have experimented with, I was curious about your experiaence with the TF. I have a newer 414, and I have an old 319 as well as 3 219's and all of them are more recognizable sonically than my Telefunken.
Don't get me wrong, It's an absolutely phenomenel (IMHO) mic, but it just get's out of the way of whatever I put it in front of.

So what sort of description or what mic would you consider similar to the TF? Just curious.
 
I’ve not used one regularly since around 2013 I think, but at that time the Telefunken and the old 87 I had sounded totally swappable. I’m very lazy. If one was already out, two flights of stairs meant it stayed. I’m not certain I was always the best choice, but that applies to 87s as well. They seem to really flatter a voice or instrument, or require way too much EQ. That’s why I moved away to 414s because they didn’t need much EQ to sound nice on almost anything. I’m not at all convinced that any mic with the neumann style capsule sounds very much different and I don’t subscribe to tiny circuit changes that make you go wow. I’ve never gone wow in my life, just perhaps nodded sagely when a swap worked better?
 
I guess that's why I just don't like the mic where excellent electronics are in a bit of old plumbing pipe. I have old copper pipe that shows me exactly how they age. If it sounds good, I suppose I should ignore the look, but that one won't ever be on my shopping list. Probably my loss,
This is what is known as “judging a book by its cover”. But as I have learned, right here in this thread, you have zero problems judging just about anything from afar, really without ANY of the details.

And furthermore, yes, it’s your loss.
 
Last edited:
you have zero problems judging just about anything from afar, really without ANY of the details.
and it is why I'm still alive. I eat details for breakfast.
And furthermore, yes, it’s your loss.
making friends are ya'? wait what happen to 'i get kicked where ever i go' , for sympathy. not important. nobody remembers.

That just looks like a brand new headphone amplifier..or another boutique microphone that will be hard to sell.

it's getting stuffy in here.
 
Well, any microphone manufacturer who buys mic clips from Shure because it fits a bit of manky copper tube deserves to be chosen based on first impressions count. I spend a lot of money based on first impressions. As in I like the design of your new ribbon and hate the one that’s made from plumbing. I think frankly it does not look like the quality apparently attached to it. You’re very touchy? I’ve tried. I’ve failed.
 
Last edited:
I think the gear is MORE than sufficient - I think 100% it's more than enough, you did a good job! I think the most important thing is just start producing, and every day create something without waiting for the muse to come. Only by practicing it'll be more clear how it's comfortable for you to work. Experiment more and this is the way!
 
Back
Top