Phantom Power

  • Thread starter Thread starter IreSeven
  • Start date Start date
I

IreSeven

New member
Hi,

I've recently purchased my first Desktop recording studio, or M-Box. The product is a Lexicon Alpha Desktop Recording Studio. I'm also thinking of getting a Fostex MR-8 Mk II for internal recording.

The thing is, I've been made aware that if I was to buy a condenser mic for the Alpha I'd need a phantom power supply. Just before I go ahead and buy the microphone(s) I just want to make sure that there won't be any problems or compatability issues. Is there anything I need to look out for when checking for combatability between the Alpha I already have, the mic and the phantom power supply unit? I was looking at the Sontronics STC2 and some Rode/Samson products. What would you recommend product-wise considering what I already have/am thinking of buying?

Thanks in advance.

- R.
 
That seems like a whole lot of mic for the little set up you have there. Plus you would need a Phantom power source before you go into the Alpha. I personally would consider starting with a basic Shure Mic < $99 and mess around with that before you spend $300 on a mic with a $50 recording interface.

What are you trying to record specifically anyway? That is probably the main thing you need to determine what equipment you are going to buy. If you are only recording at your computer then I would recommend a mixing board interface that uses your harddrive and a DAW instead of a self contained unit like the Fostex MR-8 Mk II - not much of a price difference for a used Alesis 16 USB 2 mixing board with phantom power and Cubase LE 4.

So what are you recording? what kind of music, what instruments, etc.
 
I want to record experimental music and aim to touch on many different genres, atmospheric music such as black metal and shoegaze/slowcore. I'm going to be buying a KORG R3, I already have a good Epiphone guitar.

I want my setup to consist of 2 mics (vocals, mic'd up amp) and guitar/synth. I plan on getting a drum machine, physical or digital. The Lexicon alpha was cheap but seems like it can do the job for the DAW route. I already have Cubase LE4 with that and I've been using FLStudio too. However, I would like a digital 8 track such as the Fostex MR-8 for easier, more focused recording.
 
There's no reason for a stand-alone recorder if you are recording on the computer - decide which route you want to go!
 
If you end up going standalone route... don't limit yourself with 8 tracks... they get eaten up pretty damn quickly..
 
Why wouldn't you recommend me trying both computer and internal recording? I've spent very little on my audio interface for the PC and already have the DAWs, and this route seems more daunting (albeit more flexible) than recording into an 8-track unit. I figure the Fostex unit would come in handy and I could surely transfer my recordings onto a computer for post-editing anyway?

Are all phantom power supplys compatable with most mics?
 
there are different volages of phantom power but just stick with 48v most equipment out there uses that.
 
IreSeven said:
Why wouldn't you recommend me trying both computer and internal recording? I've spent very little on my audio interface for the PC and already have the DAWs, and this route seems more daunting (albeit more flexible) than recording into an 8-track unit. I figure the Fostex unit would come in handy and I could surely transfer my recordings onto a computer for post-editing anyway?
Click to expand...

Internal recording is a pain in the ass because you have to transfer it. Just record it right to your DAW. You can get 8+ tracks recording right into your PC you do not need a middle man piece of equipment. I'm not sure what you mean by one way being more flexible than recording into an 8 track unit? Sure you can transfer your recordings - but not sure if you can transfer all tracks independently into a DAW? Sounds like a big hassle as opposed to just recording the tracks right into the interface you will spending most of your time in (the mixing interface of the DAW) - I probably spend at least an hour mixing for every minute I record (and thats on an easy mix, it can get much much longer...)
 
he might want the MR8 for location recording. That's what I use mine for. You pretty much NEED to put the tracks you get on it into a 'puter for mixing as there really isn't any decent EQing or FX on the unit.
 
I think the internal unit would be easier to use than a DAW and perhaps better for experimenting. DAWs have a steeper learning curve surely? I find it hard to get my head around them. Maybe I should invest in some books/use some tutorials and I'll end up preferring this route? The Fostex looks like a really fun unit to mess around with and everything I need is there, whereas I have the problem of choice/complications/confusing cabling options when it comes to DAWs/computer recordings. Or is it just me?
 
IreSeven said:
I think the internal unit would be easier to use than a DAW and perhaps better for experimenting. DAWs have a steeper learning curve surely? I find it hard to get my head around them. Maybe I should invest in some books/use some tutorials and I'll end up preferring this route? The Fostex looks like a really fun unit to mess around with and everything I need is there, whereas I have the problem of choice/complications/confusing cabling options when it comes to DAWs/computer recordings. Or is it just me?
Click to expand...

If you are planning on mixing your recordings you are going to want to use a DAW. Have you downloaded Audacity and played with it? They really aren't that complicated. They may look intimidating but the basic concepts are pretty simple. Record some tracks, add effects/EQ, set the levels - and your basically done. The hardware you would want to interface with your DAW will not be much different than a self contained unit but will be much more powerful.

Lets compare: Which one looks easier to use?
Fostex MR-8 Mk II
mr8mkii.jpg


Alesis Multimix 8 USB 2.0
multimix8usb2.0-27d288f5ca9e817a131b5051e43027c3.jpg



There will be set up with both of them - although initially the Fostex might be faster to set up you still have to set up your DAW to import tracks and mix
- With the Alesis you will need to install the driver and then route the VST connections so each track is dedicated to a unique channel (1-8 on the board) -
but once you set it up your done. Click record - play music - one instrument/mic per channel.

Then mix away.

Like Bob said - if you wanted to be mobile - record gigs or whatever then the Fostex makes sense - but if you are only using this in your studio you will grow tired of dumping recordings real quick.

It real boils down to mixing - if you aren't planning on mixing your music - adjusting guitar levels, adding effects, adding extra tracks, etc. then don't bother with a DAW. Get the Fostex and leave it at that. You will not have near the flexibility as with a true multichannel computer interface, but if you aren't mixing anyway then it wouldn't matter.

I started with a Boss 600 and turned around and sold it a week later cause I could only dump stereo mix down tracks...
bossbr600.jpg


I got the multimix 8 then a month later upgraded to the 16 - (I have a lot of recording sources - 4 stereo tracks just from my ensoniq AR10, multile mics, guitars, drums) and I have been happy with that for 6 months or more and don;t see me needing anything more anytime soon.

If its the learning part of it your worried about you can get all the help you need right here on this forum - gogle Audacity - its opensource and works essentially like all the rest of the DAWs out there. You should be able to record from your mic input on your PC - mess with it and see what you think.
 
This is my first post on the forum but I felt I had to make this point.

I started out with digital recording using a Tascam P788

Now, I got this thing for recording radio productions and (at the time) it was the most affordable option to us. We were recording in a makeshift studio and editing at home on a PC with Cakewalk-whatever-it-was-back-then. In order to do this we had to physically record each track from the Tascam to the computer. As you can imagine, this took ages as we had to record each track separately.

I was only working for a small production company at the time but what we found was the recordings on the Tascam were excellent, just what we wanted. It cut down a lot of time for us having a unit that was portable because we weren't limited to recording days at one location.

This time saving was completely used up, however, by all the logging and all the time we had to spend transferring tracks from one device to the other.

Why am I mentioning this? Well, technology has come along a lot since those days. I'm not sure about the units you've mentioned but there is a good chance that there is now an easy way of transferring between the device and the computer. I've got a Zoom H2 that we use for field recordings now and it's very simple to transfer the files for editing (using the SD card). It's still not as simple as using a DAW, which is what we can now do in studio.

Technology has come on to the point where a laptop with a decent USB interface and a fast hard drive can record faster and better than the stand-alone interfaces I started using. The benefit of that is that we can also record straight on to the DAW we edit in and save a ton of time copying files and re-arranging them on the timeline.

You'll find that the DAWs look really complicated but you won't touch most of the buttons until you start getting more advanced. Yes, there is a learning curve but it is a process you'll have to do eventually, even if you don't want to.

I'm not sure what the interface is like but a friend of mine is recording a comedy show and has used the Tascam US-800 connected to a laptop to produce a 6 track (6 XLR inputs but recording instruments can be done with a simple XLR to Jack converter) timeline he can then mix down in to a final edit. I should point out, this is all broadcast quality and recorded directly in to the DAW.

It's my opinion that the above set-up could give you a few more options to play with whilst recording experimental music. It's something to think about anyway.

I hope this helps

:-)
 
I have to disagree with arcadeko-I think you are a bit dated. Rapidly, the computer interface and the standalone recorder can be *the same thing*. Namely:

Zoom R16 | 8thstreet.com | Call 1-800-878-8882 | Free Shipping on most orders!

Want more inputs?:

Zoom R24 | 8thstreet.com | Call 1-800-878-8882 | Free Shipping on most orders!

That way, you can do what you want. Want to record to the computer in whatever DAW makes you happy? Done. Want to record to the machine and then dump the tracks into the computer as WAV. files? Done. Want to record in a remote location on batteries with no computer? Done. Want to mix entirely in the standalone? Done. These new controller/standalone hybrids have all the advantages of both of the above, and give you real faders you can put your grubby little hands on. Soon, other companies will be building similar machines. The day of the standalone recorder and the computer interface as separate machines is coming to a close.-Richie
 
mr_marvellous said:
This is my first post on the forum but I felt I had to make this point.

I started out with digital recording using a Tascam P788

Now, I got this thing for recording radio productions and (at the time) it was the most affordable option to us. We were recording in a makeshift studio and editing at home on a PC with Cakewalk-whatever-it-was-back-then. In order to do this we had to physically record each track from the Tascam to the computer. As you can imagine, this took ages as we had to record each track separately.

I was only working for a small production company at the time but what we found was the recordings on the Tascam were excellent, just what we wanted. It cut down a lot of time for us having a unit that was portable because we weren't limited to recording days at one location.

This time saving was completely used up, however, by all the logging and all the time we had to spend transferring tracks from one device to the other.

Why am I mentioning this? Well, technology has come along a lot since those days. I'm not sure about the units you've mentioned but there is a good chance that there is now an easy way of transferring between the device and the computer. I've got a Zoom H2 that we use for field recordings now and it's very simple to transfer the files for editing (using the SD card). It's still not as simple as using a DAW, which is what we can now do in studio.

Technology has come on to the point where a laptop with a decent USB interface and a fast hard drive can record faster and better than the stand-alone interfaces I started using. The benefit of that is that we can also record straight on to the DAW we edit in and save a ton of time copying files and re-arranging them on the timeline.

You'll find that the DAWs look really complicated but you won't touch most of the buttons until you start getting more advanced. Yes, there is a learning curve but it is a process you'll have to do eventually, even if you don't want to.

I'm not sure what the interface is like but a friend of mine is recording a comedy show and has used the Tascam US-800 connected to a laptop to produce a 6 track (6 XLR inputs but recording instruments can be done with a simple XLR to Jack converter) timeline he can then mix down in to a final edit. I should point out, this is all broadcast quality and recorded directly in to the DAW.

It's my opinion that the above set-up could give you a few more options to play with whilst recording experimental music. It's something to think about anyway.


I hope this helps

:-)
Click to expand...




Mr. marvelous Your a close contender to Famous Dave!
 
We need to see a war between Mr. Marvelous and Famous Dave ..... My money would be on Famous Dave! ;)
 
No doubt about it! :cool:
Go check out whateverman woundering who Famous Dave is! :laughings:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top