Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
|
Home recording studio for poor
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
kominak
Posts: 135
Joined: Apr. 20 2010
|
 RE: Home recording studio for poor (in reply to gounaro)
|
|
|
OK, this is a big hobby of mine so this will be a little longer ;)
There are many inexpensive mics that sound good, for example:
Studio Project B1 (large diaphragm condenser)
Studio Project C1 (large diaphragm condenser)
Shure SM57 (dynamic)
Oktava MK-319 (large diaphragm condenser)
Oktava MK-012 (small diaphragm condenser)
AKG C1000 (small diaphragm condenser)
and various models from Rhode, Audio Technica, SE atd... not /better/worse, they all are a little different, it's a matter of taste.
What do you want to record? Only a guitar? Buy small diaphragm condenser. Also a voice? Large diaphragm...
You can spend some time listening to these clips and choose what you like best:
http://www.thelisteningsessions.com/sessions.htm
External mic preamps, EQ, compressors: sorry, the good stuff will cost you 1000EUR a piece. If you're handy at DIY electronics you can save some bucks, look here:
http://www.gyraf.dk/gy_pd/gyraf_diy.html
I've built their G9 tube mic preamp and G1176 compressor and they sound great, they cost me in parts about 300 eur a piece.
If not, then just buy external usb or firewire device from M-audio, Edirol, Tascam, PreSonus or Lexicon that fits your bill and your needs (number of mic preamps, number of line inputs, headphone outputs etc...).
Software: you'll likely get some basic version of recording software with your audio device (my m-audio card came with Ableton Live Lite that let you record max. 8 audio tracks); if not, download the above mentioned Reaper.
Monitor speakers:
the good ones are expensive and you'll need the acoustic treatment for your room to get good results, which can be even more costly(it's a total nonsense to put expensive monitors in un-treated room). That's why I would rather mix on good quality headphones than 200Eur monitors and listen for stereo problems on your Hifi stereo.
Here's a short guide to the headphones from people who know:
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan10/articles/studioheadphones.htm
If I would be starting again and only wanted to record flamenco guitar I would buy something like this setup (german ebay prices):
Mic: Oktava MK 012 - EUR 150 (or stereo pair for eur 300)
Audio Interface: M-Audio Fast track Pro EUR 170
Headphones - closed back for tracking: Sennheiser HD280 - EUR 60
Headphones - open back for mixing: Beyerdynamic DT880 Pro - 260 EUR
Software: Reaper - free
You'll need some computer and some stereo speakers but I suppose you already have them.
For roughly 650 EUR you'll have professional setup which will leave you with no excuses as to why your recording's don't sound pro :)
You can save something on cheaper mic and audio interface and you can postpone buying expensive headphones until later and for now mix on sennheisers ( =total costs will be below 400 EUR) - but it's important to hear what you really recorded.
The next thing is to make the best out of the space that you have - to block any unwanted noise and find a place in you room where to place your mics and a place where to put your guitar to make her sound the best. If you won't be able to make a high quality recording (without EQ, compressor and other effects) it's time to work on your recording skills - there are many ways to record acoustic instruments...
Best of luck to you - recording is a great hobby!
Martin
_____________________________
Martin Kominak
Slovakia
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 20 2011 15:13:16
 |
|
avimuno
Posts: 598
Joined: Feb. 9 2007
From: Paris, France
|
|
RE: Home recording studio for poor (in reply to gounaro)
|
|
|
Hola gounaro,
My teacher recorded both his albums with an interface made by MOTU... it's called the UltraLite Mk 3 Firewire/USB Hybrid... check it out. I' m going to get one soon.
It's a preamp that's good for both recording and playing live... it's onboard effects like reverb and compression are really good (you want to use those when playing live, not for recording though - when recording it's better to use the effects provided on the software), and so is the EQ.
It's very affordable considering the quality (around USD 500) and it is also compatible with many systems like ProTools, Cubase and even GarageBand...
Recording is an art in itself, and having the best equipment does not necessarily mean the best sound so try before buying if possible... my teacher got an amazing sound on his albums with this little baby but he has spent a lot of time experimenting and educating himself on the art of recording.
I have tried it in a live situation and it sounded awesome... really added a lot to the original PA system.
The other main factor in recording is mic... here you have a world of possibilities, it has always given me headaches! Generally it's true that small diaphragm condenser mics are better suited for acoustic guitars (as well as flamenco guitars), but a good large diaphragm mic will always be better than a bad small diaphragm one... here again, there are many many options... and if you want something really nice be ready to spend at least USD 600 (more than twice that amount if you want to do what most pros do by recording with 2 small diaphragm condenser mics)... but only one will get you started just fine!
Check out the AKG C 451 B - really good for flamenco guitars... and not too expensive considering the quality.
If you have the dough, then go for the Neumann KM 184 - costs around USD 800 for one... but it's pretty much the best mic for acoustic guitars on the market... many many pros record with it.
Hope that helped... i am also getting into recording myself and it's a world of infinite possibilities. It's hard to find our way around the different hardware and software at first but you'll learn how to get the sound you want little by little... so enjoy!
Saludos!
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 20 2011 18:01:36
|
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: Home recording studio for poor (in reply to kominak)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kominak
I'm sure 80% of the recording engineers would reach for a small diaphragm condenser (a pair of them, actually).
I claim that preference for condensors partially stems from pre-digital traditions.
Eventhough there exist ( rare ) recordings from the early 20th century already with prisitine HF, the common striving in analog times was breaking through relatively mid- and low range heavy sound stage.
As condensors often deliver hyped HF, the preference came about. That un-linear HF fraction besides is not due to condensor technology, but because most condensor models are being deliberately tuned that way.
Since digital tech, however transimitting HF is no challenge at all anymore.
In fact it is rather the opposite way around. With no HF loss anymore, vintage and retro tech with its linear charts and interpolating MF and LF are highly sought after.
After the initial years of hype about digi tech as the new "stellar medium", it was among classical musicians where the very first critical voices were raised who complained about abrassive HF, especially with violine recordings.
A couple of years later you got to read about guys like Lenny Kravitz who started buying off old fashioned tube and solid state stuff, which REs had tossed out for nada in anticipation of the "superior" 16 bit technology.
These days everyone longs for the old devices for their pre and post circuit and vintage has gone through the roof long since.
For digi technology has no difficukty in conveying the whole FQ range, instead however in how it does.
You do not need peaked HF in your incoming signal anymore, instead smooth capturing to omitt brittleness.
That actually will rather be provided with slightly slower and rounding dynamic mic tech than with hyped condensors.
And even with top of the art convertors that manage to deliver HF rather smoothly, dynamic microphones can be suiting best depending on the source.
As I mentioned before, have you seen how Michael Stipe used a cheap dynamic microphone on REM´s latest album?
You can have brittle crap like the AKG 3000B ( can be useful on kick drum though when you need the snap ) et al, mediocre Sure stuff etc. or much better for similar or less money.
These days there are a number of inexpensive condensor and dynamic mics available that perform quite well.
If they are still up and running check out KEL microphones. Also listen to the demo tracks they made; those will give you a good idea of what can be achieved.
It makes not much sense to invest much higher than into good price to quality ratio like with KELs, unless the rest of the chain was capable of conveying corresponding subtleties.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 23 2011 13:08:03
|
|
at_leo_87
Posts: 3055
Joined: Aug. 30 2008
From: Boston, MA, U.S.A
|
|
RE: Home recording studio for poor (in reply to gounaro)
|
|
|
all this recording stuff can be very addicting and can get VERY expensive, VERY fast.
honestly, if you need a clear, clean recording just to listen to your own playing or for uploading a youtube video once in awhile, any audio interface with a mic level input and a shure sm57 will be fine.
the sm57 is very versatile and can be used for gigs. once you're ready to upgrade, you can sell it in two seconds.
there's a lot you can learn from just using a mic stand, a mic, your guitar, and your fingers.
i'm just trying to save you money. 
quote:
Hope this helps...there are many really helpful sites around with good advice for home recording...try this one...it's a bit of a funky layout but I've found it quite helpful http://www.tweakheadz.com/guide.htm
that's a really good resource. i wouldn't skip over that. here's a quote from his site that i think applies to buying any expensive gear in general.
quote:
You may realize several times--you are Not Ready for this plunge. OK, we understand. Just work on your audio skills. Huh? Again, position the mic better, use a pop filter, set a better useable level, position the monitors better, improve the vocalist's techniques, fix the room with whatever you have to fix it with, learn how to mix a vocal so it stays above the band, learn compression, applying eq, reverb, sends, returns. In a word, experiment. This approach will give you much more sound quality than replacing one mediocre preamp with another. In a way, you guys that can't afford a great preamp now are blessed.
Why do I say that?! When you finally DO get that preamp after working on all these skills, you'll be blown away by your own sound quality. And yep, you'll cross the threshold and you'll know it. Unlike Dudely at the top saying "it's hard to tell", you'll be on a totally different audio landscape where the difference is clear and obvious. You paid, not only with your money but with your time. The gate opens. You are in. Welcome! :)
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date May 25 2011 2:23:25
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.0625 secs.
|
Printable Version
Thanks again for your tips!!! 
