| Author |
 Topic  |
|
jcfergus
Aloha
USA
30 Posts |
 Posted - 09/01/2002 : 03:20:27 AM
|
Like many other human endeavours, it seems this can be as simple or complex as you wish to make it. Although I have more than one computer at home that would be more than adequate for digital recording, I have chosen to keep the guitar-playing separate from the high-tech. At this point, I use recording as a tool to help improve my playing and as a way of capturing improvisations since my addled brain doesn't seem to remember the next morning, that cool one that came in a flash of brilliance last night.
I have used a Shure SM-57 with both a Marantz PMD222 high quality portable cassette recorder and with a Tascam 414MkII multitrack analog cassette recorder. The Marantz provides a very simple configuration, as it has an XLR input for the mic, so no mixer is required. I found that the internal speaker was of pretty low quality and that by connecting an external monitor things were much more satisfactory. I had a pair of JBL Control Micros kicking around. They are small, inexpensive and sound quite nice for guitar. Because the recorder is mono, I only need one.
The Tascam provides a somewhat higher quality recording, with much greater control and the ability to actually accompany myself with ukulele if I so desire. This makes it more compelling than the mono tape recorder. It is also more complicated to learn to use, and it requires an amplifier and monitor if you are not content with just using headphones. The ironic thing is the Tascam is actually less expensive than the Marantz. The 414 goes for about $250 most places.
My experience is that the room acoustics and mic'ing probably have more impact on the sound than the recorders. The Harley going by or the air con turning on have a much more distracting effect to me than having a little more hiss than I would get with digital recording. I have not tried transcribing my cassettes to a digital format so they can be burned on a CD. When I need to do that, I guess I'll resort to the computer age. For now, I am sticking with the analog '70s. 
Aloha,
Jim
|
 |
|
|
richard
Aloha
USA
28 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2002 : 3:33:14 PM
|
Hi All
Just a couple of comments from years of making lots of poor and a few good recordings.
1. Spend as much on a microphone as on everything else put together. A large diaphram condenser is best. I'd avoid Octavas, not because I'm anti-Russian, but because their quality seems to vary considerably.
2. Record in a quiet, well-baffeled room. You can always add "presence" but you can't take it away.
3. For a solo instrument you can get by without stereo. Add it in your mix.
Aloha,
Richard |
Edited by - richard on 09/20/2002 4:05:34 PM |
|
|
|
Admin
Pupule
USA
4551 Posts |
Posted - 09/19/2002 : 4:05:57 PM
|
Thanks jwn for starting and everyone who posted on this topic. I have found the comments very helpful in learning about home recording. It's really nice having a gamut of opinions ranging from amateur to expert.
I'm going to order a portable minidisc because it is relatively inexpensive and I do not even have a working tape recorder at home. I hope to eventually upgrade my PC and add some necessary equipment for recording later on too. It is a jungle of info out there, but thank you for getting me started.
BTW, does anyone have any opinions on Aardvark Direct Pro series? I'm wondering if anyone has experience with it or if you guys who have done the research have any comments. It seems like a lot of dough but the external box has XLR inputs, phantom power, and mic preamps. Maybe if you buy all these things separately, you end up spending a lot of money anyway. I was reading Terry Oyama's article at Hawaiimusicians.com.
Andy |
|
|
|
cmdrpiffle
`Olu`olu
USA
553 Posts |
Posted - 09/20/2002 : 12:16:22 AM
|
John,
Just saw Andy has this topic up again cause it ROCKS. (I learned more about recording reading this tread than I've ever figured out for myself)
Write me, piffle @ piffle7.com or piffle7 @ hotmail.com
Lemme know whats up with you, how life goes my friend, and the current state of GUITARDOM...
...still listening to you play in the background of Hale one, numero uno, 1 etc ad nauseaum........
His Holiness,
The Piffle |
my Poodle is smarter than your honor student |
|
|
|
Mark
Ha`aha`a
USA
1628 Posts |
Posted - 09/21/2002 : 6:34:38 PM
|
Some good stuff here, guys.
Back a few posts ago there was a question about the relationship between sample rate and bit depth:
1) Sample rate has to do with the frequency response: the CD standard, 44.1 kHz, can reproduce a range from 20hz - 20kHz; more or less what we can hear. Unless you went to too many Greatful Dead concerts.
44.1 is the standard for CDs.
Higher sample rates allow a greater range; natch. But you'll have to do a sample rate conversion to get it down to 44.1 for a CD -- and not all sample rate conversion algorhythms are up to the task.
IF (big if) DVD audio catches on, this won't be an issue.
Can you hear the difference? Depends on the system. If you are recording in a typical home studio with lots of computer fan noise, CPU buzz and the like, probably not.
Still, record at a higher sample rate if you can hear the dif and if you have the ability to archive it.
2) Bit depth refers to the length of the digital "word" used to write the sample. Higher is better (1 bit color is black/white, 8 bit color is a cheap box of crayons.....) up to a point. Again, the CD standard is 16 bits, so you'll have to dither higher bit rates down to 16.
But do record at higher rates (24 bits is nice) cuz any signal processing does funny stuff to the work length, so it's good to have some elbow room. (I know, this is a less than technical answer, but it'll have to do for now.... Go to http://www.digido.com for a more rational approach.)
BTW: Minidiscs use a lossy compression scheme, which means that some audio data is thrown out. The idea is that it's stuff you'd never hear. Ummmmm, right. Still, a minidisc smokes a cassette.
If you are looking for a easy, no hassels, always-ready recording rig go with a workstation. There are lots, ranging from a couple of very inexpensive units by Zoom and Boss, all the way up to full-featured 24 track recording-studios-in-a-box. Be sure to listen to 'em first. Some have noisy fans that will creep into your tracks, some have very loud drive access noises.
Happy recording.
|
|
|
|
Reid
Ha`aha`a
Andorra
1526 Posts |
Posted - 09/24/2002 : 1:45:33 PM
|
Just a word about MD compression (called ATRAC x - where x is the version number). The latest schemes in Sony components are vastly superior to the old versions. (You can read gobs about this on the web, too, if you care to.) The loss is totally unnoticeable to this set of Golden Ears :-) and no artifact is visible in the graphic displays of the music when transferred to computer and viewed by n-track software.
...Reid |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
