So where is the weak link?

[TullyL]

I've purchased equipment for digital recording, mainly to help my practicing by being able to hear myself play. However, I would like to be able to hear my tone as it actually sounds, since my recordings sound considerably different than when I've heard myself recorded on better equipment. My set-up is as follows:

Audio-Technica 2021 small diameter condenser
decent quality (i.e. not brand-name, but not dirt cheap) XLR-XLR cable
M-Audio AudioBuddy preamp w/ phantom power
Live Wires 1/4"-1/4" cable
1/4"-1/8" adapter

This is plugged, in that order, into my soundcard, a Sounblaster Audigy. I'm thinking the soundcard is the problem, but I don't want to fork out the money to upgrade it if something else is the weak link in my set-up. Would upgrading to, say, an M-Audio Audiophile 24/96 be a significant improvement? Also, I was told that a vacuum tube preamp (a Behringer mic100 was recommended) would also help--any truth to that?

You can hear something I recorded with the listed equipment if you click here and listen to Small Talk (soprano sax) or All the Things You Are (alto sax). For both songs, the backgrounds were imported from a CD, so the quality isn't a concern there. Thanks, and I really appreciate your help.

 

[Dot]

...I would like to be able to hear my tone as it actually sounds...

Well, TullyL, that's going to be impossible. : ) Even with the most expensive equipment, it's still going to be a filtered interpretation of the "actual" sound. There are more "accurate" ways of recording, but that would involve a chain with something like DPA mics, Millennia HV-3 mic preamps, and Lavry AD converters. And then you'd still have to monitor back - so you'd need something like Lavry DA and some neutral monitors such as Dynaudio or Genelec. Probably looking at $10K+ to put all that together - even just tracking a couple of channels.

But ya' know what?... That still wouldn't allow you to hear your tone as it "actually sounds". It would be closer than what you're getting now, but...

The good news is that the way to really hear something as it actually sounds is with a pair of ears while being in the same room. And you've already got that - even if you had no gear other than you, your ears/brain, and your sax.

I'd suggest using the recording part of your practice as a way to listen to your phrasing and improvisational ideas. And use your ability to listen as you play live to work on and listen to your tone. And also keep in mind that good tone can translate through even the shittiest of recordings. So, that's more good news.

I think what you have is good for your purposes. I see no weak links - if what you're wanting to do is use the recordings as a practice tool.

Good luck with it.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

since my recordings sound considerably different than when I've heard myself recorded on better equipment.

Kinda answered your own question there, though that's not an entire answer.

The mic/pre combination will be the most critical part of the recording chain there, I would say. The condition of the room in which your recording can also have a signifigant effect. Those will be the two biggies. Upgrading your comberters/PC interface will help as well - the Audigy really needs to go if you want a nice clean sound to make it to disk, but that'll be secondary. Great mic/pre selection and tracking technique will sound much better through cheap converters much better than cheap selection and blind technique will sound through great converters. Right now the biggest difference between your recordings is in the conversion of sound waves to electricity, not in the conversion of analog to digital..

Upgrading from the 2021 would probably be the biggest return on your investment. The standard go-tos for sax would be a Sennheiser 421, or even better yet, a Sennheiser 441. If you can't afford something like that, if you're in or near a decent-sized metropolitan area, you could usually find a theatrical supply company that you could rent them from by the day or by the week. If you're renting, then you might even want to look into a nice ribbon mic from RCA or Royer, if they have them.

A good mic deserves a good matching preamp. "Tube" pres are very nice if they are actually real tube-based preamps with good design. Not all of the econo "toob" pres are. Again, it depends upon your budget; decent tube pres can run from $125 a channel to $4000 a channel. On the economical side, one you might want to consider would be an ART DPS-II which is farily versatile when it comes to matching to different mic models. They go well up in quality and price from there, depending on how far you want to take it.

Then there's the matter of tracking. Mic placement and room acoustics make a hige difference as well. Take you mic stand and you sak and try it in different rooms (staircase hallways and kitchens often can work well). Expiriment around with rooms and mic placement and see where that takes you as well.

HTH,

G.