Live Recording

  • Thread starter Thread starter JayX
  • Start date Start date
J

JayX

New member
Hi Guys, posting in the Fostex forum cos the models i'm currently looking at are Fostex.. but if you feel it should be in another place, feel free to move.

I've been shooting gigs on video for a few years now, and i'm happy that my current choice of camera is fine for what i'm doing (Sony PD150 if you know it) and withot spending many thousands i'm simply not going to get a better look. Now whilst adding another camera to the 2 i've got would be great, i'd have to find an operator and i'd still have to deal with my main failing point.. the sound.

Now in one club i can take a single channel feed from the crossover, and if the mix is quite flat, its certainly a lot better than just using my mics. However some bands crank their backline and as the venues i use are generally quite small, the PA is adjusted and i'll get no guitars on my line in. We've used a Motu and Laptop combo in there before, and taken the 16 chans and it sounds fabulous in comparison to what i've been doing.

Now, i can't afford that.. but i think i could get one step closer. I've been thinking of going for a Fostex D-80 and hoping i can use the group outs on the desk as 8 channels isn't very many... then in the future adding a second D-80 to give me the 8 in.. or if i can find one at a good price point.. something like a D-160 which will give me the 16 chans straight away.

Price is obviously a major factor as ever, or i'd buy the latest and greatest DVDRAM 24 track solution, but thats just out of the question.. so i have a modest budget to deal with i believe. I need something that I can use in the majority of small venue situations, and even in larger ones, without bugging the crap out of the engineers working it. Am i going the right away about this? I was considering the Yamaha MD8 but the 18min limit and 8 tracks in and no real way of expanding upon it has put me off, i think a unit like the D series is the way to go.

Any suggestions would be most appreciated. Thanks!

(I'm based in the UK btw)
 
I'd go for a Fostex VF160 - built in mixer could be useful for monitoring recording, as well as playback. You can record 8 channels at once out of the box, and a further 8 (total 16) with something like the Behringer ADA 8000.

Orc
 
Hi thanks for the suggestion, the VF looks a natty little unit, but i think i'm more likely to get an older more "separate" unit at a better price (due to the people who are funding me, they might be able to lay their hands on something that nobodies using anymore) and then build up from it in the future when moneys better (ie add a mixer) if i need the expansion.

I think the only extra i'd need for the 160 is the card to give me all 16 inputs not just the 8.
 
To record 16 tracks at once you will won't find anything cheeper (in price not quality) than a VF160 and an ADA8000.

Look for a used VF16 it is the same as the VF160
 
Ok i'll research it and see if it'll suit everything i need to work with and see if i can piece it together.

Say our budget is pretty decent tho.. something like teh 2424 would be my obvious ideal choice then yeah?
 
If this is something you intend to do for a long time, and are looking to interface with bigger setups and get bigger/better gigs, keep the future very much in mind. Your goal should be, as you say, to get what you need without bothering anyone.

This pretty much means a splitter, your own pres or a mixer, and a multitrack recorder, and enough snake/AC to stay out of the way.

Where I do sound, for instance, I use many of my inserts, the direct outs are post-fader, and my group outs feed a small matrix mixer that provides a mix to other areas of the club. Your proposed setup wouldn't do you a lot of good, though I would figure something out for you. :) Not a bad place to start, if you know what you are getting into.

If you purchase something like the Fostex, it should be with the idea that it will be useful in the future, like maybe it will serve as your mixdown platform when you purchase something like an Alesis HD24, or with the knowledge that you will be selling it when you upgrade, and figure out if it will pay for itself and provide profits for more purchases before it becomes useless to you.

I did the same as you propose, with a Roland. It worked for me, as I had no other mixing platform. And I kept it for small gigs where I knew the setup after I built my bigger rig.

Knowing what I know now, I would have bought a used DA-88 or ADAT and a snake for grabbing the group outs, to start, or something similar, and schmoozed someone for mixing duties. Pretty cheap and expandable, and then I would have started building a rack of cheap 8-track pres, splitters, and snakes. I could have kept all this stuff when I ditched the DA-88s and upgraded to my 24 track recorder.

As it turned out, I had to start from scratch when I wanted to move to a fully independent 24 track rig.

My .02
 
Thanks for a detailed post.. audio certainly isn't my strong point but I do my best to learn and adapt to whatever I'm doing.

I'm trying to get responses from the two rigs I use the most about the fostex.. with the one rig (a ~300 capacity club, backline is relied on to provide some sound) we've taken a laptop and a Motu setup in, and recorded via 16 tracks with Nuendo, and the output sounds beautiful to my ears. The other rig is more portable, and is taken to different venues, and again relies on the backline somewhat. In both cases, everything is mic'd. With regards to the future, the stuff im doing is mainly punk/metal/hardcore and i don't have any intention of changing this. I mainly work local and we don't have anything that much bigger setup wise to what i'm working with now, so i can't see my situation changing that much, and i don't see a problem with these desks to walking up to it before it starts, plugging the two looms in , monitoring the soundcheck so i know the levels aren't hitting the red, then just making sure someone hits record. Am i oversimplifying things here? I'm not expecting world quality results, and the D-160 i've seen i'm hoping to pay around $500 for. I wouldn't really want to spend an awful lot more than this (i know i'd have to buy the addon to do the further 8 analog ins, but hopefully not much more than that).

So expansion in the future is always possible, but i don't see it being the main concern right now, and yes resale is always an option. If you can think of something that'd suit me more for the money, please suggest it.. i've looked at the other fostex the other guys recommended, and it looks like a nice piece of kit, but to me the D-160 looks like a more solid professional unit, especially when taking into factor its original price. Obviously i don't want to waste money here, but i'd love my audio to sound better than my current solution, despite the fact i'm pretty pleased with my crossover feed from tonight.. i just know a bit more effort and equipment will make all the difference to every show.

(Sometimes we use vocal PAs, so its just backline and Vocals... i don't think i'm ever gonna really have a much better option than using a good mic and direct vocals in this situation tho!)

Thanks again.
 
JayX said:
I mainly work local and we don't have anything that much bigger setup wise to what i'm working with now, so i can't see my situation changing that much, and i don't see a problem with these desks to walking up to it before it starts, plugging the two looms in , monitoring the soundcheck so i know the levels aren't hitting the red, then just making sure someone hits record. Am i oversimplifying things here?
Click to expand...

Nope, sounds like you have a good handle on your needs to me, and a good way to meet them. And expandability, too, to a point you already know you will be happy, at 16 channels. And just being able to mix the stereo group outs is gonna be a big step up, most likely. I've made some really nice recordings that way. The great thing is being able to add fx, eq, and compression to each separate group, and they are pre house eq. And if the guitars are too loud to be in the mix, you can beg the sound guy to leave that subgroup out of the main mix, and you still get them on tape.

If the PA is mono, and the soundguy is game, four stereo groups can be made into eight mono channels. Use two as a stereo pair for drums, and the other six as mono channels, for say bass, lead vox, BG vox, and two guitar channels. Lots of flexibilty at mixdown this way.
 
Excellent, sounds like we're on the same page. Altho maybe i'm just being confused, but if we can do a 16 track simultaneous record, surely i can just take the single channel outputs from the desk and not have to rely on groups or anything like that? Unless there's a ska band playing (and even then i didn't think it was a problem with a 7 man troupe the last time) i think the max channels they use at the one club is 12, and probably the same or less for the other desk. Added with an ambience mic i thought i wouldn't need to do anything other than ensure each channel was coming in clear and not hitting red, then exporting each track to Nuendo or Encore and doing all the fx and mixing in that?
 
Aha, spoken to my friend who did the recordings in the club.. I didn't realise the fostex was taking inputs via RCA, i presumed it was jacks (hadn't seen a rear image until i grabbed the brochure PDF.. even then via the image its not that clear) and also it can only take an unbalanced input when the desk will be feeding balanced. I can't afford the card, and even then it'd only be for the 8ch.

I've been recommended one of the Yamaha AW series, the Fostex VF is again unbalanced only, whereas the Yamahas are balanced.. 8 tracks of jack inputs for a 16trck simultaneous record (hell, maybe i'll do some demos with it too) and not too expensive, should fit what I need. thanks guys for making this easier!
 
You can't record 16 tracks simulataneously with a Yam AW16G. Check out the manual yourself at Yamaha.com.
If you got a VF16 with the Behringer ADA 8000 you could record 16 tracks at once, with 10 balanced (xlr) inputs (8 on the Beh. and 2 on the VF). Anyway, IMHO, Going balanced to unbalanced probably isn't gonna make a lot of difference in a live-sound situation. Also soem of the AW16G's channels are tied as stereo pairs I think.
 
JayX said:
Excellent, sounds like we're on the same page. Altho maybe i'm just being confused, but if we can do a 16 track simultaneous record, surely i can just take the single channel outputs from the desk and not have to rely on groups or anything like that? ?
Click to expand...

Yes, though some channel direct outs are post-fader. I mostly wanted to let you in on a way to maybe get a little more out of an 8 track machine, other than the standard recording four stereo groups on eight channels, until you upgrade to 16 tracks.

You could also do a mix of group and direct outs. I did this Friday, recording a show on my 8 track. The guy ran his PA in stereo and did lots of panning. I took groups 1&2 out for stereo drums. I took bass, two electric guitars, two vox, and an acoustic DI direct from the channel direct outs.
 
careless: sorry it was bad writing on my behalf, i meant 8 track simul record with 16 playback tracks. my mistake.

easy: cheers, totally appreciate the help. rather than take my friends direct advice and go for the current AW, i'm looking at the slightly more featured older models, which are cheaper and also have support for additional boards to take us up to 16ch. in all honesty, i'm sure 8ch will be fine for most of what i need, and its less work in the long run hehe :)

Thanks all so much, i totally appreciate this!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top