TromboneChat

I decided to open a separate topic on the subject of "Recording Oneself" because I am sure there will be some excellent knowledge on the forum from which we can all benefit. This thought started with some of the videos Geezer posted in his topic "Arranging Some Familiar Tunes"

Following his first one, I posted:

Quote from: Graham Martin on Dec 28, 2016, 02:42PMI like that.

The sound was very good and I am interested in hearing about your detailed process of recording using Audacity.

Do you have the free or Pro version of Audacity?. 

Am I correct in thinking that you do not record your trombone into a file for use in the Band-in-a-Box program?

Do you record the BiaB backing direct into Audacity or via your speakers?

Do you use earphones?

This is an area where I am extremely lacking in knowledge. I have only recently decided to try and master the process of recording myself. 

To which Geezer replied:

Quote from: Geezerhorn on Dec 28, 2016, 03:17PMThanks for your kind compliment and your interest, Grah. You've always demonstrated a willingness on this Forum to share your knowledge and I think it's very admirable. I'll try to answer your questions point by point.

1) "Do you have the free or Pro version of Audacity?" I have the free version. I didn't even know there was a pro version. Now you have me curious. lol

2) "Am I correct in thinking that you do not record your trombone into a file for use in the Band-in-a-Box program?" Correct. I know there is possibly a better way, but what I feel most comfortable doing is to save my BiaB accompaniment file as a wave file in Audacity. I usually add some amplification to it once it's saved. I then play that accompaniment wave file through my stereo system with the volume down as low as possible. I record into that wave file with Audacity - what I call - "karaoke-style". I'll keep all of my efforts and use the best of how ever many takes it requires for me to get the best product. In this case, I used the Audacity compressor to level the highs. Then I adjusted my sound for the mic by dropping the lows from the 200hz point on a curve to -12db and I gave it a nudge on a curve from the 2000 through the 5000hz area by +3db. I don't really want to do those things, but I feel I have to to restore my sound. I then give it a small, dark room reverb if the accompaniment sounds wet and it did, so I did.

3) "Do you record the BiaB backing direct into Audacity or via your speakers?" No. Not necessary, since it's already been saved as a wave file.

4) "Do you use earphones?" No. I know I should. I know I should just hit the record button on BiaB. I've tried. But I really do not like using even 1/2 of a headphone set. I suppose I could get an even cleaner recording the right way, but since I'm doing this for my own entertainment and not for commercial work, I get pretty good household-quality results.

Please either feel free to use this thread or open another with what you are learning about recording using BiaB! I have no problem at all with this thread turning into a mish-mosh of my "rendition" efforts and/or BiaB.

In a subsequent post, I'll put up the lead sheets I devised for "Under The Boardwalk". It's a work-in-progress. I need to enhance my second run-through to make it a bit different from my first run-through. But for now, I just repeat.

...Geezer

And Later:

Quote from: Geezerhorn on Dec 29, 2016, 09:35AMGraham and all,

Take my recording method with a grain of salt. There are other and probably better ways.

It's been over a year since I have recorded myself and my tone has improved - thanks in large part to my instructor, Bob Riddle. Out of habit, I used the same massaging techniques post-recording as I always did. Today, I discovered that I didn't need to do any of that. My sound is good enough to just use the "raw" recording, mix it down with the accompaniment and then add a bit of reverb to the whole thing.

Here's my little simple rendition of "Blue Moon" (notation shown in one of the above posts of mine):

Geezer's Rendition of Blue Moon

For the first pass, I used a bucket mute. I've always had trouble getting a decent sound with a bucket mute and now I know why. For me, using a mute takes a LOT of finesse. I've always tended to over-blow when using one. The result was that the horn got backed up and there was a nasty rattling sound = not good. Problem solved!

...Geezer

I was intending to use my PC to record my playing directly into Band-in-a-Box. Then perhaps rebalancing the result using the DAW (digital audio workstation) called RealBand, which comes with Band-in-a-Box. However, many users seem not to use this method, preferring other programs to produce the final version.

What I want to know is all the detail of how one makes the connections from the mike to the recording program and what one should use to control volume and tone etc. I also need to know in detail how you listen to the backing track you have created when you record the trombone part - earphones, speakers or what? And if you use speakers, how do you prevent them from being recorded along with the trombone? The detail of all connections is very important to me.

I think part of my problem in not being able to work out this recording process is my PC setup. I have a Laptop which I use as a desktop with many connected devices and I do not use Bluetooth. I have the Audiophile version of Band-in-a-Box on an external drive. I also have an external soundcard because the one on my computer was not good enough. I have a full Hi-Fi System with two sets of excellent speakers connected to the external soundcard. This soundcard is connected to the computer via a USB 2.0 PortHub which also has two printers connected. I think the use of so many devices is part of the reason I cannot seem to work out the connections. Where, for instance, do you think I should connect the microphone?

Yes, I know that PG Music has a separate forum called "Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production"

http://www.pgmusic.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=postlist&Board=69&page=1

.... but my knowledge in this area is so poor, I have never been able to get much from it. I guess this is because my main use of Band-in-a-Box has always been to provide backing tracks for practice purposes and making lead sheets. So now I am following the pack and I am badly out of my depth.

I feel any knowledge that members have regarding recording oneself would be useful, even if not using Band-in-a-Box. Especially if you are using the free recording program Audacity. 
 

Maybe I missed it but it's not clear what you are using for a mic.

A USB mic would dramatically simplify things. 

There is nothing inherently inferior about a mic that digitizes the sound at the mic and send the data over USB versus an analog mic you plug into a sound card that digitizes the sound and then sends the data on.

An external USB hub shouldn't be a problem but may be it is.


Quote
 I also need to know in detail how you listen to the backing track you have created when you record the trombone part - earphones, speakers or what? And if you use speakers, how do you prevent them from being recorded along with the trombone?
Unless you have some super-duper directional mic that can hear you and ignore your speakers, you can't.

Most people will listen to the prerecorded tracks on ear phones while playing to a mic. It is awkward and takes getting used to.

Quote from: robcat2075 on Dec 29, 2016, 07:48PMMaybe I missed it but it's not clear what you are using for a mic.

A USB mic would dramatically simplify things. 

There is nothing inherently inferior about a mic that digitizes the sound at the mic and send the data over USB versus an analog mic you plug into a sound card that digitizes the sound and then sends the data on.

An external USB hub shouldn't be a problem but may be it is.


Unless you have some super-duper directional mic that can hear you and ignore your speakers, you can't.

Most people will listen to the prerecorded tracks on ear phones while playing to a mic. It is awkward and takes getting used to.


Yes, you can.

...Geezer

Quote from: robcat2075 on Dec 29, 2016, 07:48PMMaybe I missed it but it's not clear what you are using for a mic.

A USB mic would dramatically simplify things. 

There is nothing inherently inferior about a mic that digitizes the sound at the mic and send the data over USB versus an analog mic you plug into a sound card that digitizes the sound and then sends the data on.

An external USB hub shouldn't be a problem but may be it is.


Unless you have some super-duper directional mic that can hear you and ignore your speakers, you can't.

Most people will listen to the prerecorded tracks on ear phones while playing to a mic. It is awkward and takes getting used to.


Not to pick on you, Rob - but a USB mic is a notoriously bad choice for recording lower brass. There is a next generation of USB mic out now that might be better, but no one has as yet reported on TTF about using it.

It's also commonly accepted that an SM-57 is not THE best choice for lower brass either, although it is a very common stage mic for vocalists and guitarists.

Lower brass instruments are tough instruments to record nicely. Perhaps it's because most mics are built to favor the human voice which generally is pitched in the middle and upper-middle tenor range. Go below that range and mics don't pick it up well and if they do, it doesn't have the fidelity that the upper middle and upper ranges have. Add to that dilemma the percussiveness and power of a lower brass instrument! It's very easy to crash a mic (at least for me it is).

I've tried the USB and SM-57 mics. I didn't like either of them. Understanding that the sound I get from a recording is the sound I pay for - I ponied up the $400 for an EV RE20 mic. It works. There's another fellow who plays alto 'bone on this Forum and makes amazing recordings of his playing. I estimate his recording equipment cost him about $10,000.

But it's not necessary to pay out THAT much for a quality recorded sound. There are some affordable hand-held recorders that do a very nice job. Perhaps some guys will share what they use and even better yet - post proof in the form of a recording of themselves. People can talk and make claims. But I like proof.

...Geezer

SM 57 is classic but I use SM 137. My boss, who is playing tenor saxophone is using a vocal Beta 87A which is also doing a good job.

Quote from: bonenick on Dec 30, 2016, 06:00AMSM 57 is classic but I use SM 137. My boss, who is playing tenor saxophone is using a vocal Beta 87A which is also doing a good job.

I have also heard that there is a world of difference between an SM-57 and and SM-58, with the latter being much superior. I don't have proof, though.

It's very difficult to compare apples to apples on this topic as recordings are done in different environments. Some guys will swear by a ribbon mic, where it's actually the studio itself that is the best "equipment".

This topic has been discussed before and we could do searches. But perhaps it would be nice to see information reprised from the ones who are out there currently recording, as they ought to be the most knowledgeable.

...Geezer

Quote from: Geezerhorn on Dec 30, 2016, 06:06AMI have also heard that there is a world of difference between an SM-57 and and SM-58, with the latter being much superior. I don't have proof, though.


...Geezer

Here's a Mic that I'd go for now, (I owned 15 good condensers a few years back), http://www.seelectronics.com/se-x1-usb-mic/

You can use your speakers instead of headphones, but you need to be in a reasonably dry sounding room. I've multi tracking a big band by sections, this way. You need need to change the phase of one of your speakers by reversing the leads on the back, this means that one speaker is pushing while the other is pulling. You'll find that there's a spot where the sound is at a minimum, this is where you put the mic. You'll still be about to hear the track but the mic won't.

It sounds like you need a beginners guide to home recording?

https://www.google.co.uk/#q=+a+beginners+guide+to+home+recording

Quote from: Geezerhorn on Dec 30, 2016, 05:55AMNot to pick on you, Rob - but a USB mic is a notoriously bad choice for recording lower brass.


A USB mic is bad if you choose a bad one. Don't choose a bad one.

There are many fine USB mics available.  The data rate of USB far exceeds any digital audio signal. USB is not a limitation on mic performance.

Rob, have you actually done any recording with a USB mic? Do you think the rate of data transfer through USB has anything to do with the quality of the AD conversion?

They aren't used for a reason...

Quote from: Exzaclee on Dec 30, 2016, 08:44AMRob, have you actually done any recording with a USB mic? Yes.

Here are some recordings I've made with my sorry little USB mic. The USB mic has faithfully captured me, warts and all.

I think these are within the sphere of what Graham is wanting to accomplish with his own home recordings and Band in a Box.

QuoteDo you think the rate of data transfer through USB has anything to do with the quality of the AD conversion?

They aren't used for a reason...

No, I don't think the data rate of USB has anything to do with the quality of AD conversion, however that seems to be a common notion that limits the conversation.

Here are some numbers...

a 24-bit USB mic capturing at 48KHz will produce a data stream of 1,152,000 bits per second or 1.2 megabits, plus whatever small overhead is involved in the data packaging.

An old-fashioned USB 1.1 link has a capacity of 12 megabits per second
USB 2.0 has a capacity of 480 megabits per second


USB data rate is not an issue for audio purposes.


The external USB hub may indeed be a problem.  Here is an excerpt form one USB mic's manual...

QuoteThe MXL Studio 24 USB will operate with both USB 2.0
(high speed USB) and USB 1.1 data buses. We recom-
mend you connect your microphone directly to the com-
puter’s USB port as opposed to using a USB hub. USB
hubs have been known to interfere with the performance
of various USB devices.

Transfer data has never been an issue. Frequencies captured by the microphone is. If the range of frequencies is good, usb or xlr, who cares? XLR can be used also for  amplified gigs...

Quote from: robcat2075 on Dec 30, 2016, 09:55AMHere are some numbers...

a 24-bit USB mic capturing at 48KHz will produce a data stream of 1,152,000 bits per second or 1.2 megabits, plus whatever small overhead is involved in the data packaging.

An old-fashioned USB 1.1 link has a capacity of 12 megabits per second
USB 2.0 has a capacity of 480 megabits per second


USB data rate is not an issue for audio purposes.


The external USB hub may indeed be a problem.  Here is an excerpt form one USB mic's manual...


Kinda a key word with a mic. 

Quote from: bonenick on Dec 30, 2016, 10:19AMTransfer data has never been an issue. Frequencies captured by the microphone is. If the range of frequencies is good, usb or xlr, who cares? XLR can be used also for  amplified gigs...

 

...Geezer

Quote from: Geezerhorn on Dec 30, 2016, 10:22AMKinda a key word with a mic. 


meaning?

Quote from: robcat2075 on Dec 29, 2016, 07:48PMThere is nothing inherently inferior about a mic that digitizes the sound at the mic and send the data over USB versus an analog mic you plug into a sound card that digitizes the sound and then sends the data on.

my point, Rob, is that the USB itself is not the issue... it is the conversion happening in the mic itself.

Quote from: Exzaclee on Dec 30, 2016, 10:24AMmy point, Rob, is that the USB itself is not the issue... it is the conversion happening in the mic itself.


And there is zero reason the conversion can't be done well at the mic.

It's done with microchips.  They are not degraded by being on the mic. They are not too large to fit on a mic. They do not require too much power to be on a mic.

It's not exotic technology anymore.

My point however was, to look the specs regardless of the media transfering datas (usb or xlr). My mic capture    20 to 20,000 Hz. This one http://www.bestbuy.com/site/yeti-professional-usb-microphone/9737441.p?skuId=9737441 may eventual offer similar quality of sound reception. However, a microphone is not just that. I am not specialist but if you go for shure USB mic, you will have to pay 20$ more than you would for my SM 137 http://www.shure.com/americas/products/microphones/pg-alta/pga27-large-diaphragm-side-address-cardioid-condenser-microphone

I certainly was worried about that hub and so I will have to work out some way of complying with the advice "We recommend you connect your microphone directly to the computer’s USB port as opposed to using a USB hub. USB hubs have been known to interfere with the performance of various USB devices." I do have a spare port and will see if I can reroute things a bit.

On the question of microphones, thanks for all the input. To be frank I had not even suspected the mics I own would not be suitable, since they do a great job with my PA system. What I have at my disposal is Shure PG57, or SM58, or SM58LC. Would any one of these be a better choice?

The SM 58 and PG 57 lacks a bit on extreme ranges, but unless you are playing contrabass trombone or the lower range of the tuba, they will do just fine.

Graham writes:

> I had not even suspected the mics I own would not be
> suitable...What I have at my disposal is Shure PG57,
> or SM58, or SM58LC.

If you're happy with these mics you can use an XLR-to-USB interface to connect them to a USB port on your computer.

Quote from: Todd Jonz on Dec 30, 2016, 10:07PMGraham writes:

> I had not even suspected the mics I own would not be
> suitable...What I have at my disposal is Shure PG57,
> or SM58, or SM58LC.

If you're happy with these mics you can use an XLR-to-USB interface to connect them to a USB port on your computer.



I'm just speculating. Is that enough of a booster? Does it follow that if some boosting of signal to noise ratio is good, then is more better?

...Geezer

I have been recording directly into a DAW using a focusrite pre amp and a condenser mic.

It works great. The only issue is that you need to experiment with mic placement. I put it out in front and above the bell a few feet and rotate the mic about 30 degrees.

The big issue is monitoring your playing with headphones while you record. It's very awkward.

I'm going to assume an XLR to USB adapter with anything remotely approaching decent AD conversion is going to cost more than an interface.

Buy the interface. I don't care what snappy comeback Rob has loaded for this reply. Buy the interface, Grah- any interface. It'll be better.

Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Dec 31, 2016, 07:47AMI have been recording directly into a DAW using a focusrite pre amp and a condenser mic.

It works great. The only issue is that you need to experiment with mic placement. I put it out in front and above the bell a few feet and rotate the mic about 30 degrees.

The big issue is monitoring your playing with headphones while you record. It's very awkward.

the focusrite preamps are really good... what kind of phones are you using? I don't have any suggestions really - the open backed phones that alleviate this will cause bleed into the mic so i can't really recommend them.

Quote from: Exzaclee on Dec 31, 2016, 08:55AMI'm going to assume an XLR to USB adapter with anything remotely approaching decent AD conversion is going to cost more than an interface.

Buy the interface. I don't care what snappy comeback Rob has loaded for this reply. Buy the interface, Grah- any interface. It'll be better.

My 2 cents. You can't go wrong with this approach. Until I find a better way, it's what I use.

Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Dec 31, 2016, 07:47AMI have been recording directly into a DAW using a focusrite pre amp and a condenser mic.

It works great. The only issue is that you need to experiment with mic placement. I put it out in front and above the bell a few feet and rotate the mic about 30 degrees.

The big issue is monitoring your playing with headphones while you record. It's very awkward.

I agree. I can turn the volume on my stereo system down to where any bleed of it through the mic and onto my recording track is negligible. Granted, the professional way is with a half head-set. But for my use, that extra 5% gain on the quality of my recording is more of a PITA than it's worth. 

Harrison, if you are prepping an audition file for something important, it might just be worth it to rehearse the heck out of your piece first and then hire a professional studio for a couple takes.

...Geezer

Nobody uses high quality sound cards anymore?

An audio interface acts as a sound card interface of old. Processors are so powerful and can be delegated tasks through a DAW that there isn't such a need for a dedicated sound card.

Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Jan 10, 2017, 09:43AMAn audio interface acts as a sound card interface of old. Processors are so powerful and can be delegated tasks through a DAW that there isn't such a need for a dedicated sound card.
I guess your right.  My concern would be with the input signal to noise ratio - not that that could not be handled with a good interface.

Speaking of which, what is considered a good interface?

Quote from: BillO on Jan 10, 2017, 11:04AMI guess your right.  My concern would be with the input signal to noise ratio - not that that could not be handled with a good interface.

Speaking of which, what is considered a good interface?
There's no reason that an interface would have a worse S:N than an XLR>USB convertor or a soundcard... especially considering interfaces are designed specifically for recording audio.

I've had good experiences with the Focusrite stuff, PreSonus, MOTU, Mackie and Line 6 also make good stuff that is well regarded. I use the Saffire Pro with 8 inputs, and when I use it right i get good results.

I will post my recording I did of "I'm getting Sentimental " for this audition after I submit everything (so as to prevent anyone from taking the recording for their own audition). I did it on a Focusrite Scarlett audio preamp and the C25 condenser mic that came with it. I think the quality is very high.

On a side note, I didn't play the solo the way I wanted. Since it is a BQ audition and the solo would be played with a group, the tempo is much tighter than I would have played if it was for unaccompanied trombone. Meh...

Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Jan 10, 2017, 04:59PM(so as to prevent anyone from taking the recording for their own audition).
You can post it on the net without making it available for download (just free audio streaming). Somebody can still steal your ideas just by listening, but that's another topic.

Quote from: harrison.t.reed on Jan 10, 2017, 04:59PM(so as to prevent anyone from taking the recording for their own audition).
You can post it on the net without making it available for download (just free audio streaming). Somebody can still steal your ideas just by listening, but that's another topic.