|
Post by Hexspa on Dec 2, 2018 3:06:11 GMT
I think we all know Ethan's stance on the recording chain: it makes no sense to upgrade your converters when you have skewed SPL, comb filtering & ringing in your room. Still one question remains unanswered - when does such an upgrade make sense?
I recently listened to the Pro Sound Web interview with Ethan and he covered this. He said that there are reasons, besides audio fidelity, to buy "nice things". Some of the reasons I remember him giving are durability and appearance. I also recall others saying that reasons to upgrade a preamp, for instance, are increased gain, greater tolerance for high voltage signals, features like filters and, of course, coloration.
So here I am, eight years after installing my first panels. While I still think my room could use more treatment, I've been eyeing my signal chain. I spend most of my best hours each week working on my craft. Like my room, I know my skills can stand improvement, whose can't, but I want to know: when can I buy a sick pre or a $2k+ interface and actually have it make a justifiable improvement in my releases?
Will any of this shit actually make my recordings sound better?
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Lawrence on Dec 2, 2018 16:29:09 GMT
This is probably a minority opinion, but provided that your current rig is manufactured and operating to competent standards, I'm not sure the expense is necessary / justified. I have a $100 interface that has pretty horrible noise levels (which doesn't matter because it's only used for FFT), but I have a $250 interface that has noise levels etc within a few dB of the $5k interface I use up at the studio. I certainly wouldn't be able to tell you which interface was used on a recording by listening, and I'd be very skeptical of anyone who claims they could. (Recently I had TWO people in a forum claim they could do this, but given Ethan's test to pick out the $800 interface at 24 bit over the $25 soundblaster at 16 bit, neither got it right.) At work we have a quarter-million dollar studio, and at home I have a total investment of less than $4k in my little mixing setup, and I can get useful results in both situations. The biggest difference by far is checking my mixes from home in the bigger, well-treated studio control room, but that's about it. There's some really logistical stuff, like the fact that my home recording computer isn't nearly as powerful as the one up at the studio, so if I need 48 tracks of VI in a project, I'll take it up there. But that's not a sound quality issue. We have a studio matched pair of U87s, for instance, and I still prefer to record vocals in most cases with a Shure PGA181, which costs about $80. I certainly don't feel that mics costing literally fifty times as much are going to be the difference in the final product sounding better. We have a wide variety of mics costing all sorts of amounts and I just pick what I think is best for the application. Sometimes that's a really expensive one but most of the time it's not. In fact, I'm tracking drums today with the following:
Kick: Audix D6 SnTop: Shure beta 57a SnBot: Shure PGA181 Hat: Shure PG81 T1: Shure SM57 T2: Shure SM57 OH: Shure SM81 x2 Room Mic: Neumann U87.
So the room mic costs more than the rest of the mics combined, and it's ending up with its fader at -45 with extremely heavy distortion and compression. So you could do that with a 58 and get more or less the same thing. And I'm getting probably the best (live) drum sound I've gotten in many years. It's a good player and a good kit with mics in the right spots.
Roundabout way of saying that in no way do I feel that the quality of the product is negatively influenced by using less expensive stuff. If you need more I/O or more pres or (for some reason) a higher sampling rate, then of course get what you need. But I wouldn't drop 2k on a new interface and expect revelatory results. Just my $0.02 anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2018 22:20:36 GMT
Is it possible you could post some drum sounds here? Interested. This is probably a minority opinion, but provided that your current rig is manufactured and operating to competent standards, I'm not sure the expense is necessary / justified. I have a $100 interface that has pretty horrible noise levels (which doesn't matter because it's only used for FFT), but I have a $250 interface that has noise levels etc within a few dB of the $5k interface I use up at the studio. I certainly wouldn't be able to tell you which interface was used on a recording by listening, and I'd be very skeptical of anyone who claims they could. (Recently I had TWO people in a forum claim they could do this, but given Ethan's test to pick out the $800 interface at 24 bit over the $25 soundblaster at 16 bit, neither got it right.) At work we have a quarter-million dollar studio, and at home I have a total investment of less than $4k in my little mixing setup, and I can get useful results in both situations. The biggest difference by far is checking my mixes from home in the bigger, well-treated studio control room, but that's about it. There's some really logistical stuff, like the fact that my home recording computer isn't nearly as powerful as the one up at the studio, so if I need 48 tracks of VI in a project, I'll take it up there. But that's not a sound quality issue. We have a studio matched pair of U87s, for instance, and I still prefer to record vocals in most cases with a Shure PGA181, which costs about $80. I certainly don't feel that mics costing literally fifty times as much are going to be the difference in the final product sounding better. We have a wide variety of mics costing all sorts of amounts and I just pick what I think is best for the application. Sometimes that's a really expensive one but most of the time it's not. In fact, I'm tracking drums today with the following: Kick: Audix D6 SnTop: Shure beta 57a SnBot: Shure PGA181 Hat: Shure PG81 T1: Shure SM57 T2: Shure SM57 OH: Shure SM81 x2 Room Mic: Neumann U87. So the room mic costs more than the rest of the mics combined, and it's ending up with its fader at -45 with extremely heavy distortion and compression. So you could do that with a 58 and get more or less the same thing. And I'm getting probably the best (live) drum sound I've gotten in many years. It's a good player and a good kit with mics in the right spots. Roundabout way of saying that in no way do I feel that the quality of the product is negatively influenced by using less expensive stuff. If you need more I/O or more pres or (for some reason) a higher sampling rate, then of course get what you need. But I wouldn't drop 2k on a new interface and expect revelatory results. Just my $0.02 anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Lawrence on Dec 3, 2018 3:32:53 GMT
Sure. This is a chunk of one of the tunes we recorded today. It's just faders up and pans, the raw WAV files. No EQ, verb, or anything else yet. It's a nice clean sound so once they're mixed properly they're going to sound absolutely monstrous. DrumsDrySample.mp3 (648.89 KB) EDIT: Since I anticipate the question, the preamps are Neve Portico 5024 for Kick, SnTop, SnBot, and Room with the Silk setting on, but we're not driving them hard enough to matter. The Hat, T1, T2, and OHs are through True Systems Precision 8 preamps. I find the metering to be poor and I don't like the design of the things but those are aesthetic concerns, not sonic ones. Those go to an Antelope Orion32 A/D and I/O then to Logic Pro X via USB. None of this is important to me.
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Dec 3, 2018 4:38:25 GMT
Thanks for the detailed response. Pretty much answers my question and confirms the [Song > Performance > Instrument > Mic Placement/Room > Mic > Pre > Converter] order of importance I've written down. I don't record many live instruments but I have to think that mic placement is more important that just the room in general.
Why do you like that PGA181? Shure says it's their entry-level mic and has worse polar and frequency response than anything else they make. It says the handling noise is worse than the SM series too but I doubt that's much of an issue in the studio. Today is the first time I hear about these mics.
I also failed Ethan's converter test. In fact, I actually thought the soundblaster sounded best! I could say, "Oh, but maybe my MOTU isn't good enough to hear the difference," but I doubt that's the main issue. Good point about the computer and that ties in well with buying for capability.
Good sound on the drums. Those toms are poppin'. I love the beta 58 on my voice but I broke it using it to hammer in a nail. I guess they're less durable than the SM series haha.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2018 8:06:56 GMT
I have also two PG81's, they're older model than PGA81 (never tried the A version). These are OK mics, my opinions are about them: little harsh midrange, overall not that detailed. I've used them because they're still only pair of LDC's I have available.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Lawrence on Dec 3, 2018 13:39:22 GMT
I like the way it sounds! That's the artistic answer, at least. Here's the engineering one: I regularly used the U87s on vocals but I'd have to apply a bit of EQ to get the sound I wanted. With the 181 I roll up the HPF and I'm done. So I have to do less work to get the sound, which saves me time and saves the client money.
Don't care about the polar, because it's a foot from an on-axis vocalist in a treated room. Not an issue for me. Frequency response, I'll just say that "flat" is often not the goal. Look at the D6 for example. Not flat in the slightest, but that's why I chose it. A flat mic would sound nasty in a kick, and I'd have to go and EQ to get it back to the V shape. I don't look at specs as "good" or "bad" but as information to help me decide whether it's a good fit for a situation.
And pasim, just so we're all on the same page, I think you're confusing two different models. There's the 81 (the original SM, and the PG which has been replaced by PGA) which is a small diaphram end address condenser. I'm using these on hats and overheads. Then there's the 181, which comes in Beta (side address SDC) and PGA (side address, I wouldn't call it small). I'm using them on snare bottom but I love them on vocals.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Lawrence on Dec 3, 2018 13:44:34 GMT
And as a follow-up, here's the drums after a first pass. DrumSample2.mp3 (572.61 KB) This is far from the finished sound, and we haven't even gotten into the verbs and dynamics tricks yet but you can see how a good clean source recording gives you room to process and expand things.
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Dec 4, 2018 5:10:49 GMT
I'm surprised how much high end came out of that kick. Is this a drum buss EQ we're hearing or just on channels? Which ones are you using?
|
|
|
Post by Michael Lawrence on Dec 4, 2018 5:23:15 GMT
These drums were mixed by my buddy who's the other engineer at my spot. I can find out what he did. I haven't seen the session file yet.
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Dec 4, 2018 16:26:34 GMT
Can't wait
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2018 19:57:44 GMT
Heres my latest drum recordings for a band, I didn't have any outboard when recording, so its straight into a DAW, couple things I would have loved to tweak during tracking. Not any FX at all applied. I can maybe (if allowed) link the song when they release it. I mixed it also. DRUMS 100percent dry as recorded.mp3 (791.42 KB)
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Dec 5, 2018 5:19:16 GMT
How did you attach an image to your mp3? In macOS, your mp3 has a waterfall plot showing up as its icon. Weird. Anyway, did you do this in your room? How much treatment was in it at the time? It sounds like you have a room mic set up and the room sounds spacious with no ringing tones. Do you think you could've flipped the phase on the hi hat mic or was that just the overheads?
Nice kick and snare sound. The snare reminds me of 311 for some reason. The kick has good bottom and top. Pretty impressive for raw tracks. Care to share your mic selection?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2018 7:12:42 GMT
Yes, I have Mac too and noticed that, didn't know how to take it out. It came to the file when I converted .wav file to .mp3 using To Mp3 Converter free version, downloaded from App Store.
Yes, these drums tracked in my room early/mid September. So my current treatment is still in, as it was 3months ago, except one bass trap is out now, cause I moved my mixing position closer to front wall. I had one room mic, SM58 copy, which doesn't sound that roomy or good, it was pretty quiet there. Didn't flip hi-hat phase, but maybe OH checked to snare, kick and toms. Did you hear some weird phasing stuff on hi hat?
Kick: Sennheiser e902 Snare top: SM57 Snare bottom: SM58 Tom1: Audio Technica at 2035 Floor tom: Aston origin Hi-hat: Shure pg81 Ride: Shure pg81 OH's: Cheap Chinese ribbons (Same mic sold under many brands) IMHO lovely mics "Room": SM58 copy
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Dec 5, 2018 9:59:31 GMT
Ya, I could be wrong as I don't mix live drums too much but check the drums in mono and listen to the hat. In stereo, you have the hat on the right and it sounds more full bodied from around 500-800Hz. That e902 really jams; it's my first time hearing it. What kind of kit was this? How much better did your room get when you added more treatment? You started off with less, right? I'm looking to add some in my room. You can definitely post music here. I have a whole thread of my releases here.
|
|