recording mediums

Production, hardware & technical - tips and tricks.
Post Reply
Neurotic
Posts: 73
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 5:16 pm

Re: recording mediums

Post by Neurotic »

That's a good idea, going to try the routing to a tape deck thing soon!
http://soundcloud.com/dan-wreck
neuroticwreck.bandcamp.com
Mood music for moodswings.

User avatar
ƧƆỴ†ɧЄ
Posts: 186
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Contact:

Re: recording mediums

Post by ƧƆỴ†ɧЄ »

My ideal would be removing the computer from the equation. Not sure how viable this is though. Tossing around the idea of getting a multi-track recorder for the various elements (synths, drum machine, etc.) then just using a DAW for mastering. To my knowledge, there's no software currently available that allows you to record several instruments simultaneously (on separate tracks), capturing MIDI and audio at the same time.

User avatar
WIK/\N
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:53 pm
Location: Sheffield,UK

Re: recording mediums

Post by WIK/\N »

put stazi wrote:yea i'd like to remove the computer/pc from the process too if possible or keep its use at a minimum.

Try an ADAT
▲▲▲ http://soundcloud.com/wik-n ▲▲▲

▲▲▲ http://wikan.bandcamp.com ▲▲▲

▲▲▲ http://www.facebook.com/THEWIKAN ▲▲▲

User avatar
Mcll
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 11:58 pm
Location: romania via nyc
Contact:

Re: recording mediums

Post by Mcll »

WIK/\N is right. Try a multi-track ADAT set up. You can also get a hardware sequencer like the QY700 or the Roland MC50.

There are some software apps that support multi-track recording [Audacity for example] but you also need a soundcard or audio interface that supports that many analog-to-digital convertors. This is also very processor intensive.

User avatar
Mcll
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 11:58 pm
Location: romania via nyc
Contact:

Re: recording mediums

Post by Mcll »

I recorded on tape years ago. As I used to use manual hardware sequencers with vintage synths, digital synths, ROMplers ,samplers and drum machines. Honestly, I think the process is convoluted now. I want the easiest set up for me to get creating with the least amount of set up time.

Do you mean how it was mastered initially? Or how these recordings were re-mastered digitally?

The process has changed much over the years. Most people that get their material mastered for production and are knowledgeable about the process prefer analog tools and like to sit in on the session to oversee the entire process. This is because of the reasons for mastering audio. On one hand, it is supposed to standardize the music for commercial release. You can get music mastered to radio, to video, to clubs, for vinyl, for cassette. Everything has a purpose and specification.

On the other hand, an artist may want to emphasize things that were lost or obscured during the conversion process of rendering your tracks. With nice dynamic tools you can put a certain colour on your music, add warmth with analog compression, or you can have much more control over how frequencies are represented. Sometimes you never knew there was a problem until you are in the mastering process and a trained set of ears picks it up.

A great deal of mastering studios though just emphasize loudness and overwhelm dynamic range. Loudness creates audio fatigue, but also leaves the perception that your music is excellent because it is so loud and crisp.

IMO, mastering is unnecessary in witch-house music. There is a certain, rawness and overdriven quality that would be ruined if the music was dropped "to commercial standards". Call it "cassette tape culture". This music thrives on what other people would perceive as mistakes and sloppiness. Gives it a sort of vitality that has been missing in other popular music forms.

User avatar
ƧƆỴ†ɧЄ
Posts: 186
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Contact:

Re: recording mediums

Post by ƧƆỴ†ɧЄ »

My opinion is that mastering is an integral part of the production process. By choosing which instrument/track goes at which level is tied into the very existence of the instrument/track itself. Unless you seek to create a flat song of equal levels on each instrument/track, then by nature you are pushing some forward, some back. Personally I wish I had more time and expertise to professionally master. That said, I've invested in some killer software that makes a world of difference. But I'm a perfectionist, and never get fully satisfied...

User avatar
Mcll
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 11:58 pm
Location: romania via nyc
Contact:

Re: recording mediums

Post by Mcll »

@put stazi- You are welcome. I am happy to assist.

@ƧƆỴ†ɧЄ- What you are referring to though is proper mixing. Mastering is a post-production process. It was designed to remove noise and maintain clarity for a recording. Good mastering cannot fix a bad mix. But it can take a good mix and make it great.

Also, I do not recommend mastering your own material. You are just going to reinforce what you were already doing during recording and mixing. You need a fresh perspective on your material and you just cannot give that yourself.Unless say, you put away the mix and come back to them months later.

I am not going to have Mircalla mastered. It just would not add to anything I am trying to do. I like the cassette tape demo approach. Very punk and DIY. I just set Cubase at a certain level and mix everything to that peak. Keep it simple really. This allows me more time to just create. I have not heard any complaints about my finished mixes so I am happy :)

User avatar
ƧƆỴ†ɧЄ
Posts: 186
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Contact:

Re: recording mediums

Post by ƧƆỴ†ɧЄ »

Semantics aside, what I always avoid is setting all instruments at the same level. For me, that creates a very flat mix. And I don't think many on here can afford an outside "masterer". Software such as Ozone 5 do a great job in mastering, as well as helping with the mix; at least for those of us unprofessionals. Especially when using analog/external instruments that come in at different levels and qualities. If all you're using is plug ins, then well, that's fairly straightforward! Again, I'll have to totally disagree that levels are not part of the "creation" process! I spend a fair amount of time fading/in out, for instance, background ambient layers as appropriate, to create a particular mood depending on the track/section. Maybe it's the DJ in me as well. That said, I keep main elements pretty consistent. But to each his/her own. ;)

User avatar
Mcll
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 11:58 pm
Location: romania via nyc
Contact:

Re: recording mediums

Post by Mcll »

Hey man, I am not arguing with you :D Your method is fine and your music proves this. I am a big fan.

Maybe semantics are important in this case because we clearly have a misunderstanding on processes and terminology. When you say "levels", I think you mean volume. Is that correct? and levels in that association are part of the mixing process. Yes mixing is part of the creation process. Volume is important-but so is equalization. You can set all your instruments at the same volume and then modify the frequencies via equalization to get them to work together. Changing the volume of a sound is not always a solution. Sometimes you have to make it "fit", into the sonic character of the mix. You can also use spatialization effects to make sounds fit into the mix. As I was taught, a light flange can really make a pad or string pop! out. And mixing your raw sounds and effects separately [like with group channels or FX sends/returns] can be very beneficial.

Mastering though is meant to be post-production. And when I say it deal with levels, I mean the overall volume per song. Not individual tracks.

eh..i'll add more later. I have to head to work :P Cheers!

User avatar
ƧƆỴ†ɧЄ
Posts: 186
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Contact:

Re: recording mediums

Post by ƧƆỴ†ɧЄ »

Back to the original posting, I recently got a Tascam 112MKII rack mount cassette deck. Sounds amazing. My plan for this is to have the tape on recording the master bus at all times as I play around. This way the computer never comes on and distracts. I can pull loops from that or get ideas for future sessions. I may invest in an N12 for Cubase recording for final takes.

User avatar
FURTHER
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 7:54 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, UK

Re: recording mediums

Post by FURTHER »

I got hold of a reel to reel a few weeks ago, have been thinking of using that for recording, or even better, tape loops, but have got a fair bit of kit I still don't use to its full potential so this is under the desk for the time being.

Anyone had any experience of making tape loops?

User avatar
WIK/\N
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:53 pm
Location: Sheffield,UK

Re: recording mediums

Post by WIK/\N »

FURTHER wrote:I got hold of a reel to reel a few weeks ago, have been thinking of using that for recording, or even better, tape loops, but have got a fair bit of kit I still don't use to its full potential so this is under the desk for the time being.

Anyone had any experience of making tape loops?

yeah loads of em :) make sure you buy proper fixing tape as sellotape will snap/stretch and you get adhesive on the heads.
▲▲▲ http://soundcloud.com/wik-n ▲▲▲

▲▲▲ http://wikan.bandcamp.com ▲▲▲

▲▲▲ http://www.facebook.com/THEWIKAN ▲▲▲

Post Reply