Home Studio - basic setup

ttf_Pteranabone · Post by **ttf_Pteranabone** » Fri Feb 10, 2017 9:55 pm

I would like to record my compositions, including overdubbing parts with a decent microphone and some basic mixing. Basically, a step up from the tools I use for evaluating my practicing. I know that this topic is generally covered from time to time throughout the history of the forum, but I also know that technology changes rapidly and would appreciate any advice on the basics I need re software and hardware.

ttf_davdud101 · Post by **ttf_davdud101** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 3:57 pm

I was gonna step out of the way and let the more experienced recordists answer here since I saw this topic days ago when it first went up. Since no one's mentioned anything, I'll go ahead an give my two cents:
If you've already got a fairly powerful computer, you generally need three components:
1) a Digital Audio Workstation (DAW for short) that you do all your recording, editing and mixing in. Logic, SONAR, GarageBand, etc.
2) an audio interface, the box that you plug mics and instruments into. The preamps on this will likely have an effect on the recorded sound
3) a mic (or two). I've frequently been recommended to use ribbon microphones on brass, but for whatever reason I've found a rather happy home in the sound of some quite inexpensive MXL condenser mics. If you're just starting out and will be recording a lot of 'bone, I personally would recommend investing in a single good dynamic mic (SM58, Cobalt CO9, or something pricier) for pretty good all-around recording.

Just my two cents!

ttf_robcat2075 · Post by **ttf_robcat2075** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:26 pm

Go with a good USB mic (there are more-than-decent USB mics available for recording music) and dispense with the extra complication of an interface box.

ttf_davdud101 · Post by **ttf_davdud101** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:35 pm

Quote from: robcat2075 on Feb 19, 2017, 04:26PMGo with a good USB mic (there are more-than-decent USB mics available for recording music) and dispense with the extra complication of an interface box.

+1

I'll stand behind this suggestion in case you're looking for the absolute simplest solution that will still give usable results

ttf_Geezerhorn · Post by **ttf_Geezerhorn** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 5:00 pm

Does that mean you will both refund him his money or buy the mic off of him if it doesn't work for him?

...Geezer

ttf_harrison.t.reed · Post by **ttf_harrison.t.reed** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 6:18 pm

The scarlett studio by Focusrite is pretty darn good. It didn't get me an invite to that audition, but I still think my recordings were good and sounded great.

ttf_davdud101 · Post by **ttf_davdud101** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 6:19 pm

Quote from: Geezerhorn on Feb 19, 2017, 05:00PMDoes that mean you will both refund him his money or buy the mic off of him if it doesn't work for him?

...Geezer

OP's free to follow the suggestions or not! I always do ample research on units (looking at YouTube videos, reading reviews, checking to see if stuff is compatible) before I drop any cash.

I recently scored a used 10-input Firewire interface in VERY good condition at the same cost of a much smaller 2-input unit that I got a couple years ago at the same price new. I had a lot of frustration when I first got it (some Windows updates had disabled my Firewire and SD ports), but thankfully within a half hour's search I was able to pinpoint the problem AND how to fix it. It wasn't the unit!

So moral of the story - don't just take my word for it!

Do your research, find what is likely going to work - and be prepared to maybe jump through a couple of hoops. Technology can be stingy!

ttf_robcat2075 · Post by **ttf_robcat2075** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 6:48 pm

If one already had some good analog mics or even just one very good one then an interface box would be a smart way to preserve that investment.

But, USB direct or interface box... they are both taking an analog sound wave and converting it into USB data, even when you plug a multi-thousand dollar mic into an interface box. All the fretting and hand-wringing over USB... there's no logic to it.

If you do decide on going with the ultimate analog mic... you better have the ultimate recording environment to use it in, and the ultimate speakers to monitor them with, and you better have perfect human hearing to listen to those speakers with because that's about what it will take to get the extra $9800 out of that $10,000 mic. Note that no one who listens to your recordings on the web will have those.

The OP isn't real clear about what he's been working with already but I'm thinking maybe a cellphone recorder or the mic on a headset?

You're just starting with recording? Start small with a quality USB mic and learn about things like mic placement and room acoustics which are thing far more likely to cause a poor recording result than USB vs. interface box.

Quote from: Geezerhorn on Feb 19, 2017, 05:00PMDoes that mean you will both refund him his money or buy the mic off of him if it doesn't work for him?

...Geezer

Will you refund his money if he buys whatever you are rooting for and it doesn't work out, no matter what user error it happens to be?

ttf_MrPillow · Post by **ttf_MrPillow** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:17 pm

Quote from: robcat2075 on Feb 19, 2017, 06:48PMBut, USB direct or interface box... they are both taking an analog sound wave and converting it into USB data, even when you plug a multi-thousand dollar mic into an interface box. All the fretting and hand-wringing over USB... there's no logic to it.

The USB part of USB microphones isn't the problem as far as I have experienced. At the USB transfer stage it's all digital data anyways. The issue lies in everything between the microphone diaphragm and the digital USB output. Quality preamps, quality gain staging, quality A/D converters, all play a part in the sound. If these are lacking in quality (as is often the case in low-end USB microphones), the usefulness of the microphone is reduced. I don't think people poop on USB because it is USBmany of the most respected audio interfaces use USB transferthey poop on them because the internals don't give great results.

ttf_Geezerhorn · Post by **ttf_Geezerhorn** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 7:39 pm

Quote from: MrPillow on Feb 19, 2017, 07:17PMThe USB part of USB microphones isn't the problem as far as I have experienced. At the USB transfer stage it's all digital data anyways. The issue lies in everything between the microphone diaphragm and the digital USB output. Quality preamps, quality gain staging, quality A/D converters, all play a part in the sound. If these are lacking in quality (as is often the case in low-end USB microphones), the usefulness of the microphone is reduced. I don't think people poop on USB because it is USBmany of the most respected audio interfaces use USB transferthey poop on them because the internals don't give great results.

...Geezer

ttf_davdud101 · Post by **ttf_davdud101** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:09 pm

Quote from: MrPillow on Feb 19, 2017, 07:17PMThe USB part of USB microphones isn't the problem as far as I have experienced. At the USB transfer stage it's all digital data anyways. The issue lies in everything between the microphone diaphragm and the digital USB output.

The other side I've read about is that a good number of USB microphones are input-only. If and when they do have a headphone output, they work more like a dedicated interface which reduces the likelihood of problems regarding latency as a result of using "two soundcards" during live monitoring (the computer's / an external soundcard AND microphone's USB converter/electronics which is also a soundcard)

Feel free to call BS on this - but I've read it everywhere for YEARS and it's been my main aversion from even considering buying a USB microphone. I admittedly won't discount this completely, however, because I've had a lot of success using a SingStar USB converter with a 1/8in to XLR cable. Same concept, but then again I DID in fact run into loads of problems when trying to get even half-decent latency - which never happened until I invested in a real interface with it's own inputs AND outputs. I'd assume it'd be the same with a USB mic that has it's own headphone output.

Again - two more cents in the box.

ttf_robcat2075 · Post by **ttf_robcat2075** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:14 pm

Quote from: MrPillow on Feb 19, 2017, 07:17PM Quality preamps, quality gain staging, quality A/D converters, all play a part in the sound. If these are lacking in quality (as is often the case in low-end USB microphones), the usefulness of the microphone is reduced.

So don't buy a low-end USB mic. How hard is that?

Why do these arguments always resort to dire warnings about what will happen if you buy a bad USB mic and totally sidestep the fact that you'll get a bad results if you buy a bad analog mic?

Why do we presume that accomplished mic makers like Shure, Samson, AKG, Audio-Technica, etc... are going to sabotage their product by putting poor electronics in it? It's nonsense.

ttf_davdud101 · Post by **ttf_davdud101** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:23 pm

Quote from: robcat2075 on Feb 19, 2017, 08:14PMSo don't buy a low-end USB mic. How hard is that?

Why do these arguments always resort to dire warnings about what will happen if you buy a bad USB mic and totally sidestep the fact that you'll get a bad results if you buy a bad analog mic?

It's not necessarily *that*, Rob - but USB mics have a tendency to be aimed AT a sort of 'lower level' market - people just getting into recording, or who aren't maybe even looking to upgrade to something higher quality later on. I personally think that's the thing - for a couple more dollars, you get a modular setup that will both record at an equally high quality AND can potentially be upgraded to get an even better or different sound if desired. With a USB mic, you're sort of stuck with what you get - and they sure don't make a USB Neumann U87.

ttf_MrPillow · Post by **ttf_MrPillow** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:32 pm

In the scheme of recording equipment, I can't think of any USB microphones that fall outside the "low-end" category. Depending on the context and desired end-result, that can be perfectly fine. They're kind of the equivalent of Walmart bicycles. Good enough for some, horrible for others.

ttf_davdud101 · Post by **ttf_davdud101** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 8:35 pm

Quote from: MrPillow on Feb 19, 2017, 08:32PMIn the scheme of recording equipment, I can't think of any USB microphones that fall outside the "low-end" category. Depending on the context and desired end-result, that can be perfectly fine. They're kind of the equivalent of Walmart bicycles. Good enough for some, horrible for others.

Bingo. I had trouble putting it into words

... as always

ttf_Pteranabone · Post by **ttf_Pteranabone** » Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:11 pm

OP here. Thanks for the guidance.

Right now, I am just using a handheld digital recorder with a built-in condenser microphone. It is useful for recording my practice for intonation, tempo etc. but not for my objective of recording music as a hobby, with good sound quality, mixing, overdubbing etc.

I assumed I would need some type of external microphone, stand, cord, input, mixer and there would be combinations of External components and software programs. I'm fairly ignorant and appreciate the different points of view that others are sharing.

ttf_harrison.t.reed · Post by **ttf_harrison.t.reed** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 6:34 am

Quote from: Pteranabone on Feb 19, 2017, 09:11PMOP here. Thanks for the guidance.

I assumed I would need some type of external microphone, stand, cord, input, mixer and there would be combinations of External components and software programs. I'm fairly ignorant and appreciate the different points of view that others are sharing.

For what you are doing, you really should take a look at the Focusrite products. Their studio package is entry level but very high quality. It comes with a two or four xlr input usb preamp, a large diaphragm condenser mic that is really good, an xlr cable, and some closed back monitors. It also includes feature limited versions of protools and FL Studio, two of the best DAWs out there.

You would still need to get a mic stand and depending on what you're doing, you miggt wish to eventually upgrade to a full version DAW.

ttf_anonymous · Post by **ttf_anonymous** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 7:46 am

If I may tack on a couple of questions:

I'm planning a similar basic setup on a laptop using Ardour for GNU/Linux (Trisquel). I can record and add multiple tracks using the built-in sound card, but sound quality is poor as expected. Ardour does not recommend using separate audio interfaces - in their example: a USB mic combined with built-in audio presumably so that recording and playback can be simultaneous - is this what an interface provides in addition to better sound quality? I'm very new to this.

Ardour also recommends specific interfaces, some of which are pretty expensive. I see that companies like Presonus sell inexpensive interfaces (~$100) which would probably suit my needs assuming that they are compatible with free (i.e., non-proprietary) software. Can anyone else who works in the GNU/Linux realm recommend a specific free software-compatible interface? I can buy/try and return if a vendor has a liberal return policy, but that takes additional time/effort.

My plan at the moment is to run a Best Brass emute-connected trombone through effects as well as a live mic to the interface.

Thanks!

Vito

ttf_harrison.t.reed · Post by **ttf_harrison.t.reed** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:21 am

A USB audio interface, like the one I mentioned above, is also a sound card of sorts. Usually you have to use some form of ASIO driver with such an interface, and it will act as your sound card, bypassing the audio in your PC.

You can use it to direct monitor the mic. This means that whatever is going into the mic goes two places simultaneously. First, the audio goes straight from the mic to the interface, and then out to the monitor headphones or speakers. At the same time, the mic signal goes to the interface and through the USB into your DAW to be recorded/processed. As long as you tell your DAW to NOT monitor the recorded/processed mic track during recording (usually it's just a "switch" or option in the DAW), this means that there will be no perceivable delay between the backing track and your sound in real time during recording. In other words, when you record, you will get the backing track(s) in your ear, the click track (if you are using it), and the raw audio from the mic as well, with no delay. Once you are done recording the track, THEN you can go back in and hear the recorded track WITH whatever effects you want to add, and unless your PC or DAW is garbage, there won't be any delay there either -- good DAWs know what the latency was during recording and automatically drop your recorded track onto the timeline where it is supposed to be, compensating for the delay between the output of the backing track, and how long it took for the audio to go through the mic and into the DAW.

I would not record with a mute, unless you are going for some specific sound. What is the reason for recording with a mute? You can do all your effects in the DAW itself. For example, you can add reverb easily without needing a mute. Record in a dry room so there is no reverb. Double the recorded audio up on the DAW timeline so it is two tracks. Run one of the tracks through your reverb plug-in at 100% wetness (ie, maximum reverb). Then you can adjust the volume of each track to get the amount of reverb you want, and you can change it via volume control as the tracks roll along.

ttf_Geezerhorn · Post by **ttf_Geezerhorn** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:26 am

Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Feb 20, 2017, 08:21AMA USB audio interface, like the one I mentioned above, is also a sound card of sorts. Usually you have to use some form of ASIO driver with such an interface, and it will act as your sound card, bypassing the audio in your PC.

You can use it to direct monitor the mic. This means that whatever is going into the mic goes two places simultaneously. First, the audio goes straight from the mic to the interface, and then out to the monitor headphones or speakers. At the same time, the mic signal goes to the interface and through the USB into your DAW to be recorded/processed. As long as you tell your DAW to NOT monitor the recorded/processed mic track during recording (usually it's just a switch), this means that there will be no perceivable delay between the backing track and your sound in real time during recording. In other words, when you record, you will get the backing track(s) in your ear, the click track (if you are using it), and the raw audio from the mic as well, with no delay. Once you are done recording the track, THEN you can go back in and hear the recorded track WITH whatever effects you want to add, and unless your PC or DAW is garbage, there won't be any delay there either -- good DAWs know what the latency was during recording and automatically drop your recorded track onto the timeline where it is supposed to be, compensating for the delay between the output of the backing track, and how long it took for the audio to go through the mic and into the DAW.

I would not record with a mute.

But it can be done. However, it takes a certain finesse so that the mute doesn't rattle. Perhaps play a little more softly with a mute in and then adjust the gain when you process your recording track against the accompaniment.

...Geezer

ttf_anonymous · Post by **ttf_anonymous** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:56 am

re: Harrison's comments
That was all very helpful. Thank you.

I use my PC with an external DAC regularly for audio playback (it's recognized as a sound card), so it sounds like the USB audio interface would be recognized the same way except that it has inputs and as long as (in my case) it's free-software compatible.

re: mute
I'd like to run the signal through effects pedals and the like isolated from the unprocessed sound from the horn. I've seen the emute used for this to pretty good effect, but I'm open to other options.

ttf_Geezerhorn · Post by **ttf_Geezerhorn** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:59 am

Quote from: vito on Feb 20, 2017, 08:56AMre: Harrison's comments
That was all very helpful. Thank you.

I use my PC with an external DAC regularly for audio playback (it's recognized as a sound card), so it sounds like the USB audio interface would be recognized the same way except that it has inputs and as long as (in my case) it's free-software compatible.

re: mute
I'd like to run the signal through effects pedals and the like isolated from the unprocessed sound from the horn. I've seen the emute used for this to pretty good effect, but I'm open to other options.

Perhaps I misread. I took the traditional meaning of the word mute - as in Harmon, straight, bucket, plunger, etc. They can be used on a recording, but with finesse.

...Geezer

ttf_anonymous · Post by **ttf_anonymous** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:03 am

Perhaps traditional mutes with microphones as well, but for effects I'm looking into:
http://www.hornguys.com/collections/tenor-trombone-practice-mutes/products/best-brass-e-brass-iii-mute-for-tenor-trombone

E.g.,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ug2KK-heBM

Yamaha Silent Brass would also work, but it's heavy and the sound quality isn't great IMO.

ttf_harrison.t.reed · Post by **ttf_harrison.t.reed** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:03 am

If you mean, you want to play the trombone and not hear that sound at all, but get some processed sound out of the speakers instead while you play, then yeah. That makes a lot of sense.

ttf_anonymous · Post by **ttf_anonymous** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:03 am

Perhaps traditional mutes with microphones as well, but for effects I'm looking into:
http://www.hornguys.com/collections/tenor-trombone-practice-mutes/products/best-brass-e-brass-iii-mute-for-tenor-trombone

E.g.,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ug2KK-heBM

Yamaha Silent Brass would also work, but it's heavy and the sound quality isn't great IMO.