I'd like some input regarding digital and analog recording.

[Zut8083]

I did something really stupid last night.  Like, supider than usual.

I started looking at very pretty recording consoles, as in "this console costs as much as a Ferrari", after reading arguments in the digital vs. analog discussion that grew out of Hammer's original series 1 shipping thread.  I was smitten by the visual and functional design and implied broad functionality of the units I saw (I went to https://vintageking.com/recording/consoles-mixers and oogled consoles and audio equipment until the window toward the east was softly turning blue).  Like many other things in life, be it anything like cosmology or cosmetology, this is something of which I know little and strive to know more.

While I have knee-jerk conviction to old school consoles being immensely powerful tools and works of art, the digital consoles were also intriguing as heck, with touch screens, and faders adjusting effects/plug-ins or signal.  Or even being able to dovetail with analog recording tools for hybrid strategies.  It's a really, really cool merging of art and science, but I am ignorant (as hell), and I am in the process of trying to read more to learn about recording strategies and techniques, and how to get the sound that you want, but I am curious what experience you folks have had with recording, what you prefer to do, what you have recorded, and why you went the way it did.

This inquiry is posed so long as it does not violate any professional courtesy or implicit intent to breach personal IP; I am just interested in what folks have to say, and hope to use what I can to guide further reading and thinking.  Thanks!

Cheers,
-Zut

[gtrguy]

Call me weird, but when I record (which is often) I don't even use a console. I just use the ones built into my software. I figure that a console is just one more thing to route your signal through that I don't need. I realize that this runs counter to most engineers though.
 
Here are a couple of off the top of my head questions;
1) How many channels do you need? Where will it fit?
2) How will it color your signal
3) Digital (with memory, which is nice) or analog?
4) Do you want to ride the faders by hand?
5) What outboard gear do you intend to use with it and can you use a patch bay easily to connect it all up?
6) What is your budget? Do you want new or used? If used, does it need work, like re-capping?

[gtrguy]

On a side note. last year I bought a Tascam 388 8 track 1/4" recorder for $500 (to get some real 'tape analog signal' into my DAW). Yesterday I got to looking at the recently sold ones on EBay and they are now selling for $2,500 and up!

Some vintage gear is a good investment!

[David Houck]

To add to David's list, what are you planning to record, and how often?  Are you recording a band, or just yourself?  Will you be recording pretty often, or just once in a while?

I just record myself, no band, and I run through an interface into my computer, where Reaper is the DAW that I use.

Reaper has a steep learning curve, as do many DAWs, so I'm currently editing my recordings with Audacity, which is much simpler to use.

If you're recording your band, you can get interfaces that can do a lot of channels, and still go to your computer without a console.  And you can also get basic consoles that work with the DAW on your computer.

I don't know, but the impression that I get is that, unless you're wanting to build a professional studio and work as an engineer recording other people's albums, a deluxe console isn't something that's needed.  But I know very little about recording generally; and all I'm doing is just recording myself.

[Zut8083]

Dear Dave and Gtrguy,

Thanks for the insights.  I agree that a console is a bit extreme for my needs, beyond being expensive albeit possibly an investment, it probably is something that was a minor spectacle to see the machine and the pricetag.  For now Audacity and a USB based interface to connect the DI from my amps to my computer is plenty sufficient, and Dave had suggested a model that he likes and that looks pretty solid. 

In terms of recording programs, I like Audacity, myself as it is much kinder in terms of putting things together.  Garageband, back when I used Macs, was simple and kind of neat to use, too.  Beyond understanding how recording is largely orchestrated on any scale, I do have an idea for a long-term project which will need consoles, mics, and assorted other gear, but that is an extremely speculative venture at this point, bordering on maniacal G.A.S. based on my wife's Vulcan eyebrow when I told her my master plan.  Thanks for the input, guys!

[hieronymous]

I've been using ProTools since 2002 - my current rig consists of a Mac from 2008, ProTools LE (a budget version) and the MBox 2 Pro as my interface. It worked great for just recording my bass but when I wanted to record more simultaneous inputs it only had 4 which wasn't really enough.


I purchased a Zoom H6 which is awesome - 6 independent inputs, and now I don't have to drag my computer out to record my band. 6 inputs is enough for me, I just import the files into ProTools later to do editing. I also have the Zoom H2n which has 4 mics which is great for getting room sound, etc.


Like gtrguy I don't use a console, just what's in the DAW. When I first started I got some much needed help from a friend who was already using ProTools - like how to arm tracks for recording. I've helped others since then. There are some basic things that aren't too easy to pick up, but once you get that figured out then you are off into the world of EQ, microphones, preamps, compressors, etc. - so don't blow your money all at the beginning!

[cozmik_cowboy]

My only experience with digital gear is (like almost all my experience) live reinforcement rather than recording.  The band I'd been doing sound for got a new system; don't remember the model, but it was Mackie, and the controls were all on a tablet.  While there is something to said for being able mix while walking around the room with the system in one hand, the view was extremely limited; part of one channel.  What more you have to swipe, and the controls are "virtual" knobs.  First, i hold touchscreens to be an evil on a level with gigbags & pantyhose; completely unwieldy. Second, I would liken mixing live with that system to trying ride a motorcycle with a 3-foot-long tube strapped to the front of your face.
I can see where it might be fun for a digital kids making YouTube vids in the basement, but it is not a tool for professional reinforcement!  (BTW, I told the guitarist who bought it this; that was the last time they used me.  Coincidence?  I really don't know.)
But, every time I find myself ready to stand on a soapbox and proclaim the utter and ever-lasting superiority of analog, i remember editing tape with a razorblade.........


Peter

[edwin]

OK, I'll chime in! :-) I, too, came up in the world of tape and razor blades and got to work on some amazing gear (nothing like a Studer 2").


These days I use Metric Halo interfaces, 3 ULN-8s and 2 2882s, so if they are all combined, that's 40 inputs (with massive opportunities for expansion, so with the preamps I have lying around I can do 56). However, they are split into three different rigs: a ULN-8 for my home studio for mixing, a big location and IEM rig with 2 ULN-8s and an RME Octamic, and a small rig with 2 2882s. Metric Halo is similar to Alembic, in that it's a small family run business with an absolute genius behind the scenes. I'm also a beta tester, so I've been able to be involved in the latest updates in hardware (which applies all the way back to the first box they ever made) and software. Their boxes have DSP and an 80 bit summing bus, so they are digital mixers with very high precision. Live, I control them with an iPad, and then when mixing, they are a Pro Tools front end. Not cheap, but the conversion is world class, the preamps are wonderful, and the whole layout, functionality, and philosophy of the mixers is incredibly flexible and sounds great. True audio swiss army knives.

This page describes the latest hardware/software system coming out and it's a game changer in the audio world:

https://mhsecure.com/3dEarlyAccess/



Oh, and the DI in the ULN-8 is one of the best sounding bass DI's I've ever used.

[Zut8083]

It is really cool to read all of your experiences and opinions and to see how they differ, and how they are rooted in successful use in live performances and use at home.  The unique utility/strengths and weaknesses of different recording and mixing media as experienced by the Forum is some serious fodder for deeper thought and later serious gear perusal, as is the contemplation of the evils of pantyhose outside of Wardrobe for a Coen Brothers movie. 

The shout out to editing tracks the old-fashioned way was also very cool: I've seen it done on video, I haven't done it myself, but I found it to be plainly amazing.  Thanks!

[cozmik_cowboy]

I should probably add that the Mackie also lacked that wonderful "piloting a starship" feeling you get with an old-school PA....

Peter (who is going on 35 years married to someone who approached his board one night and asked "What are all those knobs and dials for?"  Ya just don't get that with a touchscreen!)

[sonicus]

I studied Audio Engineering in the mid 1970s . I attended class at Wally Heider Studios and later enrolled in the
College for Recording Arts where Mr. Leo De Gar Kulka was my teacher ;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_De_Gar_Kulka

This all happened during the peak of  the Analog Era of the recording industry and as a result I had hands on experience with very much pro high end tape recording equipment and studio desks / mixers . Just about every tape size from 2 inch to 1/8th inch . Just about every track configuration as well .  I have sat in front of classic API and MCI console desks with hands on in front of those old ALTEC 604 monitors  and many other mixers and monitors through the years .  I have lived through the various incarnations of Dolby processing such as A/ B/ C/S and the only one that I really liked was Dolby SR . I own a Dolby 363 with CAT 300 cards for SR/ A . I have DBX decoding gear as well but preferred the Dolby SR .  There were also folks who liked to run tape at 30ips NAB / EIC or IEC or CCIR calibrations depending on if one used domestic or European calibrations and other variables . Analog tape could get tricky .

I am a member of " The AMPEX list " and " the Studer list . These lists are  internet sites very much like our own " Alembic Club " . Many of us like my self own many Ampex , Studer, MCI , Otari , etc ... ... tape machines  and maintain them in order to specialize in doing Analog to Digital transfers .  Many of us also process and do restoration on the digital files and bake the tapes prior to the transfers . Acetate based tape of the 1950s and 1960s such as 3M 111 did not have the problems of " Sticky Shed Syndrome" that the mylar based tape developed such as AMPEX 456.  Mr.  Jamie Howarth who is also on our Ampex list has a restoration system know as the Plangent Process that seems to be surpassing many methods of restoration . Sonic Solutions " No Noise "was also on the top of restoration process types.

http://audio-restoration.com/baking.php

Just about every seasoned old audio engineer on the Ampex & Studer list maintains such old machines for the purpose of just doing the tape transfers for the most part . Many of us will not make an argument of making new  analog recording on our huge machines  due to the vast improvement and advancement  of current DAW interfacing . PROTOOLS , METRIC HALO and other interfacing  and  file format digital recording  . 24/96 and 24/192 resolution are sounding really great  these days and with impressive dynamic range and low noise.

I actually record all my rehearsals and gigs these days on either my ZOOM H5 or H6  just for a " Sonic Journal " of what happened .  I also like the product line from a company called  " Sound Devices " . If I actually spend the time with careful placement or use external microphones the results get even better and can present a swell stereo panorama .   I have a few Protools rigs that I can lug around as well .  I also have a few old British Soundcraft mixers that I restored for fun however I often bypass equipment and opt for the shortest signal path. . Of course I would love to own a Rupert Neve desk . I actually met the gentleman and spoke with him once at an AES convention . He was very friendly .

[Zut8083]

Wow.  That's really great.  Are there classic books in the field of sound recording and engineering that are unilaterally recognized as either seminal or advanced, yet are central fonts of wisdom?  It seems like reading the fundamentals and how they are applied today by learning from a group of different books each with different emphasis would be beneficial and go at a pace that would not miss too much by presenting the knowledge in a single text.

Speaking of the Starship vibe, I sort of thought the Enterprise's Bridge set from the original series could have made a cool recording studio.  The screen could have been retrofitted as the glass to a vocal booth or isolation chamber.

[gtrguy]

Such good input from club members! Now for some of my gear-head geek stuff;

Mics and preamps - I have found that certain mics work well with certain preamps to record certain things.

You have to experiment and compare. For instance, my C414 works great with my inexpensive Presonus MP20 on percussion. My ADK Vienna works super on my Focusrite green 'thing' ( I don’t know what model it is, has 1 in and 1 out) if I set the EQ just so. My ART MPA Gold seems to do nothing, even though I have tested it a lot with various tubes and settings (I still have hope to find out it will do something with the right mic). An RNC compressor is a handy thing to have. etc.

I use a Presonus Firestudio input unit, which you can chain together for more inputs. They seem to work fine.

Mics; I don't have super high end mics. I do have a lot of mics though (50 plus). I collect them. I get a lot at the Goodwill outlet store near me. One in 3 typically works, and 1 in 3 needs a simple wire reattached. The last 1 in 3 usually has a bad capsule. I buy cheap metal karaoke mics and pull the capsules from other oddball vintage mics and solder them into the cheap mic body. I have created some superb mics that way!

I love Shure SM58's and have 15 or so. I much prefer them to SM57's. After A - B testing dozens of SM58s and 57s I have concluded that the older gray body ones are better for recording than new black body ones. I sold off all the newer ones I had. Live I can't tell the difference.

Drums: I have 15 - 20 snares and 4 great kits, but I usually use a aluminum Ludwig Acrolite (I have 2) snare for recording 75% of the time. I also use Superior Drummer software plugin and I even sample my own drums and use software to put them into my tunes (I am NOT a studio drummer). I use an Evens drum key (the one like a torque wrench) and the Tune-bot to tune them. I use SM58s on toms, but the MD421 is the industry standard, and for good reason. I have foam all around my drum room and some on the ceiling, as I don't have a great sounding room. Kick drums work well with Shure Beta 52s or The Egg.
 
I DI bass into an Alembic F2B or F1X into my DAW (usually the F2B).
 
Plug ins: Love them! Waves has great sales all the time. I master my own stuff too. I usually have a mastering plug in on my tunes at the end of the signal chain all the time so that I can hear up front what it will be doing. The Waves L2 is easy to use and works well, though certain things will get pulled down when a lot is going on and they seem to narrow the stereo width somewhat. I have Bob Katzs book on mastering and it is very complicated, so I finally just went to using the 3 slider Waves mastering plug in. I also have a somewhat rare 2 track Meek SC3 optical mastering compressor, but don't use it much.

Monitor speakers: I have great sounding speakers for tracking because people playing like to think they sound great and they play better! These speakers are NOT for critical listening! I have 6 - 8 pairs of good headphones. Mixing: I just replaced my Event 20-20 BAS internal amped speakers with JBL LSR4326ps that you can tune to your room with the included mic. However, the Events sounded fine and are a great bargain. They also made a sub to go with them, if you can find it. I use a JBL Sub. I understand Genelecs are super monitors, but out of my price range.

The biggest thing is making sure you have a great sound going in from your instrument and amp (often overlooked). You can always 'dumb down' your sound to make it sit well in the mix, but 'dumbing up' is a lot harder.

Vocals; Get a good book about recording vocals. Different mics may work best for various singers; test them with your vocalist. Find a good space to record singers and get them a good headphone mix. They may want reverb etc on the headphone mix (don't record the effects, add them later). The human voice is only good for so long in the studio. Learn to recognize when your singer has had enough and then stop. Often they will either be wanting to quit OR they will insist that the 'next take' will be the one. this also holds true for players as well.
 
You would think that to record a great song you want every instrument to sound perfect and clear (logic will tell you this) but that is not the case at mix down.
There seems to be several stages of learning about recording that I hear on peoples demos:
First they just get it all down and recorded come what may
They then start to pay attention the how each track sounds
Then they realize that the song structure should be well crafted and the timing should be good
Then they try to make every track individually sound perfect
Then they realize that each track needs to Serve the Song
Then they realize that often Less is More
Then they realize that the Vocal is what matters these days, on most songs, and stuff like guitar solos etc are not as popular as they once were.
Then they mix to get a song that will appeal to the intended audience

Of course this is just my opinion and I am neglecting many types of music here and that there are other stages and ways to record, many of which I have yet to learn. In addition, I have seen engineers that are either limited in knowledge or equipment or they are just good business persons, who have figured out that being nice and easy to get along with in the studio is a great selling point, and being that way, as opposed to getting the most out of a tune, will get you more business than being a perfectionist! I have also seen many bands break up during the recording process, as it will bring problems the band already has to the fore.

Lastly, getting paid! Get money up front. Decide either to charge a flat rate (has many pitfalls) or by the hour.

[gtrguy]

Sound On Sound has online stuff about recording and gear reviews that are great!
soundonsound.com

[sonicus]

Zut8083
                 A foremost and highly recognized text book for Audio Engineering is and has been ;
MODERN RECORDING TECHNIQUES  originally written by Robert E. Runstein and now updated by David Miles Huber.

https://www.amazon.com/Recording-Techniques-Engineering-Society-Presents/dp/0240821572