Just a question for those out there who have recorded themselves/others. I'm planning on buying a USB interface, so that my mic's can plug into the computer. After this, where do I start? At first, I'm planing to record myself on whistle and keyboard, with a drum machine. I might have a friend play guitar at a later time. How would I start the whole process? How do I successfully mix the different tracks? I'd appreciate any advise.
Cheers
Rob
I would buy a USB interface that comes with some multitrack recording software such as Cubase. The software will let you record multiple tracks and mix them down to stereo.
If you make sure the interface has a mic input with phantom power, you will be able to use condenser mics which typically sound better than dynamic mics for studio recording. I think a lot of people use stuff from M-Audio, but honestly there is a lot of stuff in the $100 - $300 price range. I would look online at musician's friend or music123 or some such, and also try to find some reviews.
Thanks for the reply crazy_fingers. I have a couple of Shure Beta 57's, and some SM58's. I also have a SM57. Why are dynamic mics not good for studio? I thought the SM57 was an instrumental mic. This is sooo confusing!! :-o
You know, some people love recording with SM57s and SM58s in the studio. They aren't terrible. But condenser mics typically have a better response. Dynamic mics will tend to color the sound and be less responsive. In live performance situation, the coloring of the sound doesn't matter as much as it does in the studio, and the lack of response actually can be helpful for preventing feedback. But in a studio, where you can control the environment, a condenser will tend to more accurately pick up the nuances of the sounds you are recording. This is particularly important for un-electrified instruments and often for voice as well.
I can tell you that when I bought a condenser after doing some recording with dynamic mics, I was amazed by how good it sounded in comparison, and it was only a fairly cheap Behringer B-1 condenser mic. Now I am just an amateur at recording, so it's possible that somebody more skilled could have gotten decent results with the dynamic mics.
If I were you, I would not worry about getting a condenser mic right now, but I would try to get an audio interface that supported phantom power to keep my options open for the future. On the other hand, you could always buy a mic preamp or a small mixer with mic preamps in the future if your audio interface lacks phantom, so it's not as if the decision of audio interface is all that momentous.
1. Get an audio interface with preamps and phantom power, preferably one bundled with recording software. A small 2 channel unit will probably do the trick.
2. Get a condenser mic later on. There are many decent and affordable project-studio quality condenser mics. And he's right about the level of nuance and detail even an inexpensive condenser mic will capture when compared to a dynamic mic like an SM 57 or 58.
I would always use a condenser mic for recording. Dynamic mics are rugged and only tend to pick up sound in the immediate vicinity (unless you turn the gain way up high) so do not tend to have the same feedback problems as condensers on stage.
But with dynamics, like 57s and 58s, the distance you are from the mic not only affects the volume (so you would need to be pretty stock still in recording) but also affects the tone. So with a 58 if you want to sound like a French crooner you have your lips stuck to the mic, if you want to sound natural you stand 2-3 inches away and if you want a thin sound you stand maybe 6 inches away.
For recording practices on minidisc I use a Sony ECM-MS907 condenser mic. It pretty much picks up everything in the room, including the logs crackling in the fireplace and the cat miaowing.
Which brings me to another suggestion - if you have a nice-sounding room (one that complements your playing) then that's another part of the battle over. Alternatively, if you have access to a laptop then you can do your recording somewhere where the playing sounds great. That's part of the process which is not so much about the technicalities as it is about "getting comfortable" so you can enjoy the process.
Ableton Live a good program to start with.
Its easier than Cubuse.
Its tricky at first but lets you record straight into the computer then build up tracks as you go along.
Its also good for doing things live.
(as in during a gig...many of my friends use it)
As it lets u manipulate fx and drum sounds in real time.
For example you could play a part on the whistle, have it loop, due some weird keyboard stuff, loop that, add more flute, get the drums going etc etc.
Subsidiary question: I was thinking of getting a mic for the few occasions when I need to amplify mandolin or fiddle - I've got an old, really cheap mic, and a mic stand plus several combo guitar amps kicking around. Would it be an option to plug a mic into a combo (the best one I've got is a Peavey Classic reverb) Presumably from reading the knowledgable stuff above, this would need to be a dynamic mic (I don't know much about mics). What sort should I look for without spending a fortune?
Richard:
Most players tend to favour condenser mics for amplifying fiddles - but that's if they're attached to the fiddle. Some players are quite happy to use dynamic mics. Aly Bain usally plays through an SM58 (vocal) mic rather than a 57 (which is designed for instruments). Most sound guys use 58s and Aly knows what sort of sound he will get from them, which makes for more comfortable playing.
A Shure SM58 costs around £80 (?). You're better to pay for something decent rather than shelling out a couple of quid for something that is going to cause you no end of disappointment. But most good mics will use XLR cables so you will need an XLR input on your amp. (An XLR input (female) has 3 small holes to accept the male XLR prongs). You want to set your amp to be as clean as possible.
You can record multiple tracks and mix them all down to MP3... you have to also have a <free> program called "Lame" for the MP3 processing... after that, you can just start playing around with the recording features... if you want to spend some money, Cakewalk Music Maker is a step or two better than Audacity but is a little more time consuming to learn... and Cakewalk's MP3 feature only works for 30 days before you have to pony up more money for that program... I got around this by exporting it as a WAV and having Audacity convert it for me. Microphone? if you're making a cd to be sold around the world, spend you 100 to 200 US dollars... but if you're just messing around, you can buy one for about 10 US dollars at any computer store.
There is a really good Home Recording For Dummies book in most big stores, or on Amazon.
For home recording, solo fingerstyle guitar, I have used a Lexicon Omega. I like it because it was about $250 and has phantom power and the capability of recording four tracks at once. Many cheaper interfaces have just two inputs, which is limiting. You may find you want to have a few people record with you and may quickly outgrow a two input machine. It comes with Cubase, limited edition, but it does a lot. I prefer the simplicity of Audacity though, which is a free download. And for effects, a program called Diamond Cut, I find more versatile than audacity. You have to buy DC though.
If you get only one mike, a large diaphragm condenser mike is best, so I was told by a few recording engineers. It doesn't have to cost a fortune, mine were in the $100 range and I got pristine clear sound. Keep it a foot or more away from you as a rule. Turn off all other machines, printer hum, refigerator hum etc, you will hear it in the recording, these mikes pick up EVERYTHING!
You will have to do a lot of experimenting or talking to more experienced people, on how to place the mikes for each instrument, each room you may be in, it's something that is very elusive until you find that perfect spot. Just be patient.
You can also get a small mixing board, like a Behringer, very reasonably with many more inputs, and they either plug into the USB or the sound card. Again, pristine results on a $100 machine with about eight inputs. You can get them with effects, but technically you should record without effects and add them later. It is very hard to remove too much bass for example... and sometimes even if it sounds great in the headphones you will get a different sound, maybe muddy, when you put it on CD and play it. So safer to add effects later and just keep your original tracks intact.
For outside recording,mainly to create monthly fundraiser CDs for our IAANJ sessions, I use a Fostex MR8HD. At $379, i am very happy with this machine. It has four inputs, but you can piggyback a mixer like the one above to it, and get many times more, plus better preamps in the mixer. You plug people into the mixer, which then plugs into the Fostex porta studio.
Have we confused you yet? Just jump in, even the real entry level machines have great sound quality, with a decent mike. I was advised not to waste money on really high end mikes with this sort of machinery, if you had a $3000 or more board for example it may be worth going whole hog, I was advised the finer points of the high end mikes wouldn't come through on a cheaper machine. True or not, I don't know, but I do know my just OK equipment is pretty darned good.
All I know is when I recorded my solo guitar CD, I used the cheap Lexicon, a $100 condenser mike, found a spot with some nice natural reverb, just a little, and got amazing quality. I used audacity too, I had a few quirks in Cubase I didn't like, not to knock the program, it is good, you may like it.
I sent the CD out for mastering and feel I wasted my money, I heard very little difference in quality from my original, and now that I know the little further EQ they did, feel I can handle it myself. Others will benefit greatly from mastering.... in my case I was just lucky, had three different engineers advising me, and they all said you need it to sound great as is, doctor it up as little as possible after. So you need the right room and the right mike placement, and you need to get a pleasing sound before any EQ, there should be as little EQ needed as possible, ideally, none. That is hard though! But it is very hard to make a bad recording and then hope to fix it afterwards. You can't remove too much reverb or bass, or fix an extremely shrill fiddle without making the other instruments (if recorded the same time in the same room) muddied or muffled.
it's not that hard. I could show you the basics in a few hours. Maybe you can find a friend who has done this before. That is more valuable than a book, it will save many frustrating hours and days. It is hard if you try it alone, just at first. Once you find that spot and the placement for the mikes, you're really cooking!
PS.... Samson makes a UBS mike that's pretty decent, I think it's a CO1USB or something, under $100. If you just need one input and want to experiment.
My recording engineer let me in on a little secret. The SM 57 and 58 us the same dynamic element, the only differernce between the two of them is the windscreen/ball on the end (the 57 doesn't have it, the 58 does). It keeps a vocalist about an inch or so away from the element and creates a different sound through what's known as the proximimity effect- the sound changes depending on how close you are to the mic.
I just released a fingerstyle guitar CD, and I found mastering to be worth every cent I paid for it. And my rec engineer carefully worked with the room and the mics to capture a good sound from the start.
Yep, the 57 and 58 are the same, except for the windscreen. A well-known "secret".
I've engineered and produced lots of concerts and radio broadcasts and I've had to use SM58's for fiddles in a fast-changing show where the next act would use them for vocals, but I always use a condenser mic for fiddles (and other instruments) when I'm not in that bind. If you test them side-by-side, you can hear the difference immediately. The 57 and 58 are widely used in live gigs for the reasons explained by others above - not for their sound quality, which is merely adequate. In the studio, the 57 is often used for its particular coloring, not for its accuracy or responsiveness. And its main use in the studio has been for miking an electric guitar amp.
I hate to think of Aly Bain settling for an SM58. Sigh...
And Iris is spot on about the right room and mic placement. That's your acoustical foundation.
Hi Snakefingers.... I'd love to hear your CD! Having heard a little of your very nice playing!
Yes mastering can work magic. I think I was just lucky in having gotten it pretty right, and had great advice as to placement, equipment etc. Mastering brightened mine up a touch, but hardly, I think for some reason my cold cement floored basement and low ceilings just added the right amount of life to the recording.
if you record even with a minidisc, as someone mentioned, those little stereo mikes are insanely powerful and very realistic. The ones I have heard, including my own, for some reason sound great in the headphones, but once on CD are very treble. I bring them into Audacity for a bass boost. You can edit the recordings into some pretty good sounding CDs. With these too, same deal, mike placement is important.
A friend and I, flute and guitar, we play weddings now and then, O'Carolans and such, I like to run the minidisc and edit it and give the recording to the couple. I also include the words from the ceremony. They love this! Many have a photo album, but this way they can have the music too.
There are sooooo many subtleties. For example, if you are near a wall, or in the middle of the room, or if the door is open or closed etc. These are all things you can have fun playing with and experimenting with.
I am no expert but have gotten pretty decent at editing and EQ, and learn something new each time I put out one of our session CDs. I have so much fun with it, the discovery factor, improving each time, learning to make seamless edits and such. I love the way you can fix peoples' goofs on their solos and make them sound great. It is tedious and time consuming but I find the time to do it because it is really fun and very satisfying. It is addictive, so go have some fun with it.
PS..... one thing I found really important is to get decent and very unforgivingly realistic speakers, instead of the usual computer speakers. I got some small Bose speakers, no sub woofers, no controls for bass/treble etc. Once things sound good on those, I think they sound good on any player, even crappy car players, they sound OK on.
Recordings will sound different on different players. I got not the best but a pretty decent car player, I check sound on that a lot, since many people listen in the car. I want it to sound good without having to adjust the car player's bass or treble, just all EQs set to zero. It's a good starting point. Some peoples' players will be bassier, some more treble, depends on the player and the speakers, but they shouldn't have to adjust things too much either way.
Even headphones, surprisingly, may not be totally realistic sounding. I have had playback sound great through really good headphones and sound awful on CD. The Bose speakers were not very expensive either, about $150 for the pair. You can also get some good quality studio speakers if you get serious with this. there are surely better ones made than my Bose speakers, but I am used to them and can hear and know how the sound will translate into a boom box or a car stereo. You can get this knack too with headphones...you will quickly learn the difference between their sound and whether it will translate more bass or treble once on CD.
Ron P - yes, it was at concerts with Phil Cunningham. Obviously Aly's attitude to mics in the studio would be different.
In live situations with amplification and natural reverb (which can sometimes be too much) the poorer sound reproduction of dynamic mics is not so noticeable.
"Aly was offered AKG or Rode condensers. He went for the 58."
Were the AKG and Rode large diaphragm mics? In that case, in a live gig, I'd probably go for the 58, myself. A big condenser mic on a live stage can be a big pain to manage. Even the condenser spot mics are a bit more prone to feedback problems than a dynamic, but they can usually be managed. Live sound is always a balance of compromises.
Of course, there's always the possibility that Aly really prefers the sound of the 58, in which case I graciously grant him leave to disagree with me. This time. :P
Anyone tried the SAMSON C-01U, which is a condenser mike, but with a USB connector. Does away with pre-amps, boxes, mixers etc. and costs less than €100? http://www.thomann.de/ie/samson_c01u.htm
Thanks for the advise guys! What i meant to say I was going to buy was one of those USB mixing boards. I've seen them for around $100. I just bought a new flute, so im probably gonna stick with the mics i have for a while. So the order I should go in is laying down the beat first, right? Then what? Should I record the melody on whistle, then build the harmony off of that? thanks!
Rob
Backer... I have the CO1 regular condensers, four of them, for outside recording to a porta studio, I have not tried the USB model, but can vouch for the very good quality sound I get from the regular CO1s. Clear as a bell. A little too clear sometimes, LOL, I pick up whispers from the crowd between tunes, you can hear some pretty funny stuff. Nothing bad though...no, not US! Anyway, it's all edited out!
Rob.... I love my little Behringer mixer, it plugs into the sound card, but the USB models are the same, I would advise they are a little easier, there may be some lag time if you have an older computer and older sound card. It works with my laptop, the desktop needed configuration changes. USB is about $50 more but I wish I had gotten it. Still, I am happy with the laptop and the mixer. They make many models, they are all good quality. the cheapest start around $40 with I think four inputs.
I like www.musiciansfriend.com for ordering such things, they are very knowledgeable and allow returns. I ordered one board and realized it wasn't quite what I wanted, so it went back for an upgrade. Free shipping over $100 too!
Recording
Recording
Just a question for those out there who have recorded themselves/others. I'm planning on buying a USB interface, so that my mic's can plug into the computer. After this, where do I start? At first, I'm planing to record myself on whistle and keyboard, with a drum machine. I might have a friend play guitar at a later time. How would I start the whole process? How do I successfully mix the different tracks? I'd appreciate any advise.
Cheers
Rob
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: Recording
I would buy a USB interface that comes with some multitrack recording software such as Cubase. The software will let you record multiple tracks and mix them down to stereo.
If you make sure the interface has a mic input with phantom power, you will be able to use condenser mics which typically sound better than dynamic mics for studio recording. I think a lot of people use stuff from M-Audio, but honestly there is a lot of stuff in the $100 - $300 price range. I would look online at musician's friend or music123 or some such, and also try to find some reviews.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by crazy_fingerz
Re: Recording
Thanks for the reply crazy_fingers. I have a couple of Shure Beta 57's, and some SM58's. I also have a SM57. Why are dynamic mics not good for studio? I thought the SM57 was an instrumental mic. This is sooo confusing!! :-o
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: Recording
You know, some people love recording with SM57s and SM58s in the studio. They aren't terrible. But condenser mics typically have a better response. Dynamic mics will tend to color the sound and be less responsive. In live performance situation, the coloring of the sound doesn't matter as much as it does in the studio, and the lack of response actually can be helpful for preventing feedback. But in a studio, where you can control the environment, a condenser will tend to more accurately pick up the nuances of the sounds you are recording. This is particularly important for un-electrified instruments and often for voice as well.
I can tell you that when I bought a condenser after doing some recording with dynamic mics, I was amazed by how good it sounded in comparison, and it was only a fairly cheap Behringer B-1 condenser mic. Now I am just an amateur at recording, so it's possible that somebody more skilled could have gotten decent results with the dynamic mics.
If I were you, I would not worry about getting a condenser mic right now, but I would try to get an audio interface that supported phantom power to keep my options open for the future. On the other hand, you could always buy a mic preamp or a small mixer with mic preamps in the future if your audio interface lacks phantom, so it's not as if the decision of audio interface is all that momentous.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by crazy_fingerz
Re: Recording
Rob, Crazy Fingers is giving you advice.
1. Get an audio interface with preamps and phantom power, preferably one bundled with recording software. A small 2 channel unit will probably do the trick.
2. Get a condenser mic later on. There are many decent and affordable project-studio quality condenser mics. And he's right about the level of nuance and detail even an inexpensive condenser mic will capture when compared to a dynamic mic like an SM 57 or 58.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Snakefingers
Re: Recording
Oops- giving you good advice.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Snakefingers
Re: Recording
I would always use a condenser mic for recording. Dynamic mics are rugged and only tend to pick up sound in the immediate vicinity (unless you turn the gain way up high) so do not tend to have the same feedback problems as condensers on stage.
But with dynamics, like 57s and 58s, the distance you are from the mic not only affects the volume (so you would need to be pretty stock still in recording) but also affects the tone. So with a 58 if you want to sound like a French crooner you have your lips stuck to the mic, if you want to sound natural you stand 2-3 inches away and if you want a thin sound you stand maybe 6 inches away.
For recording practices on minidisc I use a Sony ECM-MS907 condenser mic. It pretty much picks up everything in the room, including the logs crackling in the fireplace and the cat miaowing.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by DonaldK
Re: Recording
Which brings me to another suggestion - if you have a nice-sounding room (one that complements your playing) then that's another part of the battle over. Alternatively, if you have access to a laptop then you can do your recording somewhere where the playing sounds great. That's part of the process which is not so much about the technicalities as it is about "getting comfortable" so you can enjoy the process.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Mark Harmer
Re: Recording
Ableton Live a good program to start with.
Its easier than Cubuse.
Its tricky at first but lets you record straight into the computer then build up tracks as you go along.
Its also good for doing things live.
(as in during a gig...many of my friends use it)
As it lets u manipulate fx and drum sounds in real time.
For example you could play a part on the whistle, have it loop, due some weird keyboard stuff, loop that, add more flute, get the drums going etc etc.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by DubChieftain
Re: Recording
Subsidiary question: I was thinking of getting a mic for the few occasions when I need to amplify mandolin or fiddle - I've got an old, really cheap mic, and a mic stand plus several combo guitar amps kicking around. Would it be an option to plug a mic into a combo (the best one I've got is a Peavey Classic reverb) Presumably from reading the knowledgable stuff above, this would need to be a dynamic mic (I don't know much about mics). What sort should I look for without spending a fortune?
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by RichardB
Re: Recording
Richard:
Most players tend to favour condenser mics for amplifying fiddles - but that's if they're attached to the fiddle. Some players are quite happy to use dynamic mics. Aly Bain usally plays through an SM58 (vocal) mic rather than a 57 (which is designed for instruments). Most sound guys use 58s and Aly knows what sort of sound he will get from them, which makes for more comfortable playing.
A Shure SM58 costs around £80 (?). You're better to pay for something decent rather than shelling out a couple of quid for something that is going to cause you no end of disappointment. But most good mics will use XLR cables so you will need an XLR input on your amp. (An XLR input (female) has 3 small holes to accept the male XLR prongs). You want to set your amp to be as clean as possible.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by DonaldK
Re: Recording
The cheap way is to use Audacity (a free download) http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/
You can record multiple tracks and mix them all down to MP3... you have to also have a <free> program called "Lame" for the MP3 processing... after that, you can just start playing around with the recording features... if you want to spend some money, Cakewalk Music Maker is a step or two better than Audacity but is a little more time consuming to learn... and Cakewalk's MP3 feature only works for 30 days before you have to pony up more money for that program... I got around this by exporting it as a WAV and having Audacity convert it for me. Microphone? if you're making a cd to be sold around the world, spend you 100 to 200 US dollars... but if you're just messing around, you can buy one for about 10 US dollars at any computer store.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by pastrings
Re: Recording
Thanks Donald - that's very helpful
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by RichardB
Re: Recording
There is a really good Home Recording For Dummies book in most big stores, or on Amazon.
For home recording, solo fingerstyle guitar, I have used a Lexicon Omega. I like it because it was about $250 and has phantom power and the capability of recording four tracks at once. Many cheaper interfaces have just two inputs, which is limiting. You may find you want to have a few people record with you and may quickly outgrow a two input machine. It comes with Cubase, limited edition, but it does a lot. I prefer the simplicity of Audacity though, which is a free download. And for effects, a program called Diamond Cut, I find more versatile than audacity. You have to buy DC though.
If you get only one mike, a large diaphragm condenser mike is best, so I was told by a few recording engineers. It doesn't have to cost a fortune, mine were in the $100 range and I got pristine clear sound. Keep it a foot or more away from you as a rule. Turn off all other machines, printer hum, refigerator hum etc, you will hear it in the recording, these mikes pick up EVERYTHING!
You will have to do a lot of experimenting or talking to more experienced people, on how to place the mikes for each instrument, each room you may be in, it's something that is very elusive until you find that perfect spot. Just be patient.
You can also get a small mixing board, like a Behringer, very reasonably with many more inputs, and they either plug into the USB or the sound card. Again, pristine results on a $100 machine with about eight inputs. You can get them with effects, but technically you should record without effects and add them later. It is very hard to remove too much bass for example... and sometimes even if it sounds great in the headphones you will get a different sound, maybe muddy, when you put it on CD and play it. So safer to add effects later and just keep your original tracks intact.
For outside recording,mainly to create monthly fundraiser CDs for our IAANJ sessions, I use a Fostex MR8HD. At $379, i am very happy with this machine. It has four inputs, but you can piggyback a mixer like the one above to it, and get many times more, plus better preamps in the mixer. You plug people into the mixer, which then plugs into the Fostex porta studio.
Have we confused you yet? Just jump in, even the real entry level machines have great sound quality, with a decent mike. I was advised not to waste money on really high end mikes with this sort of machinery, if you had a $3000 or more board for example it may be worth going whole hog, I was advised the finer points of the high end mikes wouldn't come through on a cheaper machine. True or not, I don't know, but I do know my just OK equipment is pretty darned good.
All I know is when I recorded my solo guitar CD, I used the cheap Lexicon, a $100 condenser mike, found a spot with some nice natural reverb, just a little, and got amazing quality. I used audacity too, I had a few quirks in Cubase I didn't like, not to knock the program, it is good, you may like it.
I sent the CD out for mastering and feel I wasted my money, I heard very little difference in quality from my original, and now that I know the little further EQ they did, feel I can handle it myself. Others will benefit greatly from mastering.... in my case I was just lucky, had three different engineers advising me, and they all said you need it to sound great as is, doctor it up as little as possible after. So you need the right room and the right mike placement, and you need to get a pleasing sound before any EQ, there should be as little EQ needed as possible, ideally, none. That is hard though! But it is very hard to make a bad recording and then hope to fix it afterwards. You can't remove too much reverb or bass, or fix an extremely shrill fiddle without making the other instruments (if recorded the same time in the same room) muddied or muffled.
it's not that hard. I could show you the basics in a few hours. Maybe you can find a friend who has done this before. That is more valuable than a book, it will save many frustrating hours and days. It is hard if you try it alone, just at first. Once you find that spot and the placement for the mikes, you're really cooking!
Just go do it and have fun with it.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by irisnevins
Re: Recording
PS.... Samson makes a UBS mike that's pretty decent, I think it's a CO1USB or something, under $100. If you just need one input and want to experiment.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by irisnevins
Re: Recording
My recording engineer let me in on a little secret. The SM 57 and 58 us the same dynamic element, the only differernce between the two of them is the windscreen/ball on the end (the 57 doesn't have it, the 58 does). It keeps a vocalist about an inch or so away from the element and creates a different sound through what's known as the proximimity effect- the sound changes depending on how close you are to the mic.
I just released a fingerstyle guitar CD, and I found mastering to be worth every cent I paid for it. And my rec engineer carefully worked with the room and the mics to capture a good sound from the start.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Snakefingers
Re: Recording
Yep, the 57 and 58 are the same, except for the windscreen. A well-known "secret".
I've engineered and produced lots of concerts and radio broadcasts and I've had to use SM58's for fiddles in a fast-changing show where the next act would use them for vocals, but I always use a condenser mic for fiddles (and other instruments) when I'm not in that bind. If you test them side-by-side, you can hear the difference immediately. The 57 and 58 are widely used in live gigs for the reasons explained by others above - not for their sound quality, which is merely adequate. In the studio, the 57 is often used for its particular coloring, not for its accuracy or responsiveness. And its main use in the studio has been for miking an electric guitar amp.
I hate to think of Aly Bain settling for an SM58. Sigh...
And Iris is spot on about the right room and mic placement. That's your acoustical foundation.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Bob himself
Re: Recording
Aly was offered AKG or Rode condensers. He went for the 58.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by DonaldK
Re: Recording
DonaldK - am I correct in assuming that was for a live situation, rather than for recording?
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Ron P
Re: Recording
Hi Snakefingers.... I'd love to hear your CD! Having heard a little of your very nice playing!
Yes mastering can work magic. I think I was just lucky in having gotten it pretty right, and had great advice as to placement, equipment etc. Mastering brightened mine up a touch, but hardly, I think for some reason my cold cement floored basement and low ceilings just added the right amount of life to the recording.
if you record even with a minidisc, as someone mentioned, those little stereo mikes are insanely powerful and very realistic. The ones I have heard, including my own, for some reason sound great in the headphones, but once on CD are very treble. I bring them into Audacity for a bass boost. You can edit the recordings into some pretty good sounding CDs. With these too, same deal, mike placement is important.
A friend and I, flute and guitar, we play weddings now and then, O'Carolans and such, I like to run the minidisc and edit it and give the recording to the couple. I also include the words from the ceremony. They love this! Many have a photo album, but this way they can have the music too.
There are sooooo many subtleties. For example, if you are near a wall, or in the middle of the room, or if the door is open or closed etc. These are all things you can have fun playing with and experimenting with.
I am no expert but have gotten pretty decent at editing and EQ, and learn something new each time I put out one of our session CDs. I have so much fun with it, the discovery factor, improving each time, learning to make seamless edits and such. I love the way you can fix peoples' goofs on their solos and make them sound great. It is tedious and time consuming but I find the time to do it because it is really fun and very satisfying. It is addictive, so go have some fun with it.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by irisnevins
Re: Recording
PS..... one thing I found really important is to get decent and very unforgivingly realistic speakers, instead of the usual computer speakers. I got some small Bose speakers, no sub woofers, no controls for bass/treble etc. Once things sound good on those, I think they sound good on any player, even crappy car players, they sound OK on.
Recordings will sound different on different players. I got not the best but a pretty decent car player, I check sound on that a lot, since many people listen in the car. I want it to sound good without having to adjust the car player's bass or treble, just all EQs set to zero. It's a good starting point. Some peoples' players will be bassier, some more treble, depends on the player and the speakers, but they shouldn't have to adjust things too much either way.
Even headphones, surprisingly, may not be totally realistic sounding. I have had playback sound great through really good headphones and sound awful on CD. The Bose speakers were not very expensive either, about $150 for the pair. You can also get some good quality studio speakers if you get serious with this. there are surely better ones made than my Bose speakers, but I am used to them and can hear and know how the sound will translate into a boom box or a car stereo. You can get this knack too with headphones...you will quickly learn the difference between their sound and whether it will translate more bass or treble once on CD.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by irisnevins
Re: Recording
Ron P - yes, it was at concerts with Phil Cunningham. Obviously Aly's attitude to mics in the studio would be different.
In live situations with amplification and natural reverb (which can sometimes be too much) the poorer sound reproduction of dynamic mics is not so noticeable.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by DonaldK
Re: Recording
"Aly was offered AKG or Rode condensers. He went for the 58."
Were the AKG and Rode large diaphragm mics? In that case, in a live gig, I'd probably go for the 58, myself. A big condenser mic on a live stage can be a big pain to manage. Even the condenser spot mics are a bit more prone to feedback problems than a dynamic, but they can usually be managed. Live sound is always a balance of compromises.
Of course, there's always the possibility that Aly really prefers the sound of the 58, in which case I graciously grant him leave to disagree with me. This time. :P
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Bob himself
Re: Recording
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Bob himself
Re: Recording
They were small diaphragm. I was told he prefers to work with 58s.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by DonaldK
Re: Recording
I, like yourself Bob, would have gone for the condenser.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by DonaldK
Re: Recording
Anyone tried the SAMSON C-01U, which is a condenser mike, but with a USB connector. Does away with pre-amps, boxes, mixers etc. and costs less than €100? http://www.thomann.de/ie/samson_c01u.htm
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Backer
Re: Recording
A fiddle player I play with now and again, for live work, will generally go for a 58 in preference to other mics - including condenser mics.
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by Ron P
Re: Recording
Thanks for the advise guys! What i meant to say I was going to buy was one of those USB mixing boards. I've seen them for around $100. I just bought a new flute, so im probably gonna stick with the mics i have for a while. So the order I should go in is laying down the beat first, right? Then what? Should I record the melody on whistle, then build the harmony off of that? thanks!
Rob
# Posted on January 30th 2007 by rob_handel
Re: Recording
Backer... I have the CO1 regular condensers, four of them, for outside recording to a porta studio, I have not tried the USB model, but can vouch for the very good quality sound I get from the regular CO1s. Clear as a bell. A little too clear sometimes, LOL, I pick up whispers from the crowd between tunes, you can hear some pretty funny stuff. Nothing bad though...no, not US! Anyway, it's all edited out!
Rob.... I love my little Behringer mixer, it plugs into the sound card, but the USB models are the same, I would advise they are a little easier, there may be some lag time if you have an older computer and older sound card. It works with my laptop, the desktop needed configuration changes. USB is about $50 more but I wish I had gotten it. Still, I am happy with the laptop and the mixer. They make many models, they are all good quality. the cheapest start around $40 with I think four inputs.
I like www.musiciansfriend.com for ordering such things, they are very knowledgeable and allow returns. I ordered one board and realized it wasn't quite what I wanted, so it went back for an upgrade. Free shipping over $100 too!
# Posted on January 31st 2007 by irisnevins