MOTUnation.com

Tonio wrote:Cool James, do tell how the ASP8's do ya!! I have them in my purchasing
"scope".
BTW, what was the bill?
T

I finally have some better impressions of the ASP8's... I posted them here. Short answer: buy all means buy these things YESTERDAY!!!

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=66337

MONITORS:
The room you choose to mix in and where you put your speakers are the most important things. NS-10s are fine if you check your mixes on a more full range system before sending it out for mastering. I use Mackie HR 824s and they work for me. I also use and like the NS-10s/Hafler amp combo for dialing in midrange. I have had trouble mixing with Events in the past, mainly because they flatter the midrange. I need to hear what's going on there.

DRUMS:
Well. This is tricky, isn't it? I like your idea for using the electric kit, especially as a way to get ideas in. I'm not sure if it will really nail it, though, even though it sounds really good. For most rock stuff, you can really loop quite a bit of stuff (MIDI even) so you could record and then edit in DP. With quality samples most stuff holds up pretty well (and due to declining standards in rock these days, you're almost required to conform to a grid...but I digress), and I agree that good cymbal sounds (even as overdubs) add a lot. I will often record live drums last, after deciding that I need the real thing after all. Or I'll mix live and sampled.

BASS:
I use an Avalon sp737. I'm not going to try to defend this unit (I don't think it requires that) but I will say that for bass, it's a monster. The Avalon U5 is a good alternative, but with no pre or compressor. To call this Avalon's Low End unit is not a mistake in the sense that it truly delivers the goods in that freq range like very few others. You could cut a Dub record with it and not need to add any sub bass. It's that solid. The SansAmp Bass DI is a killer box with an amp cab sound built in (reminds me of a SWR redhead), but for the same dough, you could get a countryman or radial DI. With DIs, think active for passive sources and vice-versa. Might want one or two. I would recommend not compressing the bass all that much, and instead, record in at 24 bit with peaks at -10 or so. That way you retain all dynamics. I can't stress this enough. You can't get it back once you've flattened it, and drums are already at a disadvantage in the digital domain. Record safe and add some 1176 from your UAD. By the way, I think the UAD-1 plugs sound better than most of the outboard compressors under a grand (and having to mix out of the box). And you have multiple instances to work with.

GUITARS:
I dislike somewhat the sound of 57s on guitar amps and favor larger diaghram mics from a couple of feet away. The AT 4050 (and I imagine it's bretheren) is a little monster with mutiple patterns, but it's even better in "better" sounding spaces since it picks up more room ambience (give it some room to breathe between it and the source). Most large diaghragm condenser mics with a -15 pad will do a good job placed correctly. A ribbon mic might be a good choice for amp recording, but unless you want to spend 1/9th of your budget, a cheap chinese one might be a good thing to try. I have tracked an entire album with practically just an AT 4050 and a 4041 with great results. The Baby Bottle is another mic worth looking at for all around use. I will track guitars through a Bad Cat mini with a 4050 and split the signal to a DI and use the UAD-1's Nigel amp/cab sim for almost infinate tonal choices. I get a choice tone up front with the recording amp, and then add to it with the UAD plug-in. I have A/B`d stuff I recorded in the past with a Fender amp/57 comination versus the Nigel Plug-in and Nigel almost always sounded better. Oh wait, what's wrong with your 414? I'd use that and then maybe get a cheap ribbon mic for another kind of color and response.


VOCALS:
The question to ask about your voice is it hard or soft sounding, not of "smoothing it on the way in" in my opinion, although I know what you mean. It's the edges that contain the music and uniqueness. Choose a mic of opposite hardness to the source and this provides the best balance. I have a high, soft voice, so I need a crisp, hard mic. The 4050 gives that to me. The baby botttle does too. Both add warmth too.

CONVERTERS:
I use a 1224/2408/828 combo. I think it sounds fine, but there is better. Not to mention better clocking. This might be an area to think about upgrading, but I would think about emerging technology as well. Make sure to get something that works with your Mac and the next one too. And check out that mod - (could you post a link for that?).

FX:
I think there is no question in my mind that (especially) if you are mixing in the box). Those compressors and all the new plug-ins are really too good to be true and the best $700 I spent in my studio. Besides my Bad Cat and the Avalon of course. Can't speak to the Altiverb, I've heard good things but that it's a CPU resource killer. I will often record outboard reverb (e.g. Roland SRV 3030, Lexicon, etc.) while tracking on separate channels because I think often it sounds better than what Performer gives me. Even the UAD-1 verb is a little dense but I use it for some things. Reverbs are one area that are really personal. A decent multi-effect unit might do the trick. Buss stuff out and push it through real outboard gear for more dynamic effects and blend the results with the straight tracks.

Hope this helps.

Chris

_______

brushcl wrote:MONITORS:
The room you choose to mix in and where you put your speakers are the most important things. NS-10s are fine if you check your mixes on a more full range system before sending it out for mastering. I use Mackie HR 824s and they work for me. I also use and like the NS-10s/Hafler amp combo for dialing in midrange. I have had trouble mixing with Events in the past, mainly because they flatter the midrange. I need to hear what's going on there.

Have you heard the new Events yet? The Precision 8s? All I can tell you is that they seem to be less fatiguing and my mixes are translating better than they ever have before. I'm pretty sold on them.

DRUMS:
Well. This is tricky, isn't it? I like your idea for using the electric kit, especially as a way to get ideas in. I'm not sure if it will really nail it, though, even though it sounds really good. For most rock stuff, you can really loop quite a bit of stuff (MIDI even) so you could record and then edit in DP. With quality samples most stuff holds up pretty well (and due to declining standards in rock these days, you're almost required to conform to a grid...but I digress), and I agree that good cymbal sounds (even as overdubs) add a lot. I will often record live drums last, after deciding that I need the real thing after all. Or I'll mix live and sampled.

Actually, I was thinking of doing this and recording MIDI which is then routed to Drumkit From Hell Superior which is sounds really great to my ear. They cymbals are nice too... you can hit a crash and it's ringing 15 seconds later if you let it. Although, I'll probably have my friend Jim Watson continue to do drum replacement with his real kit. I send him my file with a stereo track of my sequenced drums to give him an idea of the direction I'm looking for, and a stereo track of everything else. He can then turn on a click and play along on his real kit. It's worked fairly well on the last couple of songs we've done this way.

BASS:
I use an Avalon sp737. I'm not going to try to defend this unit (I don't think it requires that) but I will say that for bass, it's a monster. The Avalon U5 is a good alternative, but with no pre or compressor. To call this Avalon's Low End unit is not a mistake in the sense that it truly delivers the goods in that freq range like very few others. You could cut a Dub record with it and not need to add any sub bass. It's that solid. The SansAmp Bass DI is a killer box with an amp cab sound built in (reminds me of a SWR redhead), but for the same dough, you could get a countryman or radial DI. With DIs, think active for passive sources and vice-versa. Might want one or two. I would recommend not compressing the bass all that much, and instead, record in at 24 bit with peaks at -10 or so. That way you retain all dynamics. I can't stress this enough. You can't get it back once you've flattened it, and drums are already at a disadvantage in the digital domain. Record safe and add some 1176 from your UAD. By the way, I think the UAD-1 plugs sound better than most of the outboard compressors under a grand (and having to mix out of the box). And you have multiple instances to work with.

The U5 was a suggestion of my good friend Jim Watson who said it was the best thing he could think of in my price range. This is in keeping of course with the idea as you pointed out of tracking in 24 bit and compressing AFTER the fact.

GUITARS:
I dislike somewhat the sound of 57s on guitar amps and favor larger diaghram mics from a couple of feet away. The AT 4050 (and I imagine it's bretheren) is a little monster with mutiple patterns, but it's even better in "better" sounding spaces since it picks up more room ambience (give it some room to breathe between it and the source). Most large diaghragm condenser mics with a -15 pad will do a good job placed correctly. A ribbon mic might be a good choice for amp recording, but unless you want to spend 1/9th of your budget, a cheap chinese one might be a good thing to try. I have tracked an entire album with practically just an AT 4050 and a 4041 with great results. The Baby Bottle is another mic worth looking at for all around use. I will track guitars through a Bad Cat mini with a 4050 and split the signal to a DI and use the UAD-1's Nigel amp/cab sim for almost infinate tonal choices. I get a choice tone up front with the recording amp, and then add to it with the UAD plug-in. I have A/B`d stuff I recorded in the past with a Fender amp/57 comination versus the Nigel Plug-in and Nigel almost always sounded better. Oh wait, what's wrong with your 414? I'd use that and then maybe get a cheap ribbon mic for another kind of color and response.

My weapon of choice is my 1979 Marshall 100-watt Mk II Master head which is custom modified into a 4x12 cab with Vintage 30s. I have actually gotten pretty decent results close micing with a 414. I tend to like less of the sound of the room with my guitars... rather just a really nice punchy up close sound. The pre my friend recommended was the Millennia HV-3C and the guitars he tracked with them sounded really good. If you go to http://www.jamessteele.com/music.html and listen to "The Way It's Goin' Down" the rhythm guitars were tracked using this pre... I forget what mic though... LOL... that's sort've critical huh? Any way I had an inclination toward a tube pre, but my friend Jim said he's really come to value the good solid state designs.

VOCALS:
The question to ask about your voice is it hard or soft sounding, not of "smoothing it on the way in" in my opinion, although I know what you mean. It's the edges that contain the music and uniqueness. Choose a mic of opposite hardness to the source and this provides the best balance. I have a high, soft voice, so I need a crisp, hard mic. The 4050 gives that to me. The baby botttle does too. Both add warmth too.

I would say it's hard. I prefer actually a mic that is less edgy. This is sort of an issue of contention between my friend and I, because I feel he's capturing far more detail in my voice than I'd like. I need something to soften it out a bit.

CONVERTERS:
I use a 1224/2408/828 combo. I think it sounds fine, but there is better. Not to mention better clocking. This might be an area to think about upgrading, but I would think about emerging technology as well. Make sure to get something that works with your Mac and the next one too. And check out that mod - (could you post a link for that?).

Here's the link to the mod:
http://www.blacklionaudio.com/motu_firewire_mod.html

It mentions the Audiowire interfaces as well. I may go with a HD192 and have it upgraded on top of it. The upgrades mention an improved clock... I've heard good things about these and some on this site have had them done.

FX:
I think there is no question in my mind that (especially) if you are mixing in the box). Those compressors and all the new plug-ins are really too good to be true and the best $700 I spent in my studio. Besides my Bad Cat and the Avalon of course. Can't speak to the Altiverb, I've heard good things but that it's a CPU resource killer. I will often record outboard reverb (e.g. Roland SRV 3030, Lexicon, etc.) while tracking on separate channels because I think often it sounds better than what Performer gives me. Even the UAD-1 verb is a little dense but I use it for some things. Reverbs are one area that are really personal. A decent multi-effect unit might do the trick. Buss stuff out and push it through real outboard gear for more dynamic effects and blend the results with the straight tracks.

I've done that with hardware reverbs and tracked the reverb return back into a stereo track and then just mixed it in later with the source. Problem is my outboard reverb is not very good... we're talking an MPX100. Altiverb would kill it. I know there's a processor hit on Altiverb, but I'm running a dual G5 2.3ghz so I think I'll be alright there as I don't need many instances of it. I'm interested to hear what the UAD verbs are like. I'm sort of old school and would probably like something like a PCM70 or 80 cuz it's retro. Geez... I can remember back in the day recording at a studio that had an SPX90 that this engineer liked one program on it for vocal reverb. I did try the Nomad BlueVerb which purports to sound like 80s digital reverbs or something, but didn't care for it except the small room patches.

Hope this helps.

Chris

Sure did! Thanks for taking the time and for all these good suggestions!

James Steele wrote:I know there's a processor hit on Altiverb, but I'm running a dual G5 2.3ghz so I think I'll be alright there as I don't need many instances of it.

You should have no problem at all, James. I run 2 to 3 instances of Altiverb on my Dual 1.8 G5 with no problem. It seems to be the buzz that Altiverb is such a CPU hog, but if you've bought a CPU in the last 2 to 3 years you should have no big issues with it. And now with ADC you can even run Altiverb in high latency mode which reduces CPU consumption while DP makes up for the delay.

James Steele wrote:The U5 was a suggestion of my good friend Jim Watson who said it was the best thing he could think of in my price range. This is in keeping of course with the idea as you pointed out of tracking in 24 bit and compressing AFTER the fact.

I imagine you'll be happy with the U5. I've heard good things.

I don't think that saving all compression until after you've tracked bass is the best way to go though. I think it works better to at least control some peak levels and minimize some dynamics going in. I'm talking rock/pop bass guitar here.

My weapon of choice is my 1979 Marshall 100-watt Mk II Master head which is custom modified into a 4x12 cab with Vintage 30s. I have actually gotten pretty decent results close micing with a 414. I tend to like less of the sound of the room with my guitars... rather just a really nice punchy up close sound. The pre my friend recommended was the Millennia HV-3C and the guitars he tracked with them sounded really good. If you go to http://www.jamessteele.com/music.html and listen to "The Way It's Goin' Down" the rhythm guitars were tracked using this pre... I forget what mic though... LOL... that's sort've critical huh? Any way I had an inclination toward a tube pre, but my friend Jim said he's really come to value the good solid state designs.

Just to comment on the other guy's post: If you get the UAD-1 -- which I think you should -- I seriously doubt you'll want to use Nigel, its cab sim, as a substitution for amp mics. It's a cool effect plug, but it doesn't really approximate any amp mic-ed with a 57 or whatever IMO.

I've mic-ed my amp with a LDC mic. It can sound really good on clean guitar sounds. With overdriven guitars, though, I think you get a more immediate sound placing a dynamic mic up against the grill (or close to it). Just my opinion. You kind of need to back off a condenser mic with high amp volumes and that can add more "air" than you might care for.

chrispick wrote:Just to comment on the other guy's post: If you get the UAD-1 -- which I think you should -- I seriously doubt you'll want to use Nigel, its cab sim, as a substitution for amp mics. It's a cool effect plug, but it doesn't really approximate any amp mic-ed with a 57 or whatever IMO.

I've mic-ed my amp with a LDC mic. It can sound really good on clean guitar sounds. With overdriven guitars, though, I think you get a more immediate sound placing a dynamic mic up against the grill (or close to it). Just my opinion. You kind of need to back off a condenser mic with high amp volumes and that can add more "air" than you might care for.

You play guitar, of course! Yes, I still have a love for the REAL DEAL. I have yet to hear an emulation or plug-in that really satisfies me the way my amp does. I haven't played for 25 years and paid my dues experimenting with strings, tubes, pickups, mods, speaker types, cabling, etc. etc. to perfect the whole signal chain. I've learned my amp... and my guitars. I know hot it responds and how to elicit what I want from it. Being a guitarist you know that one's guitar sounds is the result of many, many different factors that all interact to produce the end result... again... string guage and brand, type of pick, how you hold a pick, pickups, the instrument's resonance... then a whole heap of variables when you finally arrive at the amp.

I'm stickin' with my beloved 79 Marshall... you'll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands!!! LOL

James Steele wrote:I'm stickin' with my beloved 79 Marshall... you'll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands!!! LOL

Amen. I've got a '70-something Plexi (jumped) that I'll carry around as a homeless person, if necessary. Of course, the Pod XT Pro emulation through a good preamp... terrifyingly close!

MT

MT wrote:

James Steele wrote:I'm stickin' with my beloved 79 Marshall... you'll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands!!! LOL

Amen. I've got a '70-something Plexi (jumped) that I'll carry around as a homeless person, if necessary. Of course, the Pod XT Pro emulation through a good preamp... terrifyingly close!

MT

Somehow I just got this weird picture of us pushing around our Marshall heads in shopping carts. Yep Marshall heads and lots of aluminium cans.

Okay... just ordered the HD192 today... so far on track...

Event 20/20p........REPLACED BY........Event ASP8 Precision 8s
MOTU 1224...........REPLACED BY........MOTU HD192
Mackie 8bus Pream..........REPLACED BY.......... ??????

James Steele wrote:You play guitar, of course! Yes, I still have a love for the REAL DEAL. I have yet to hear an emulation or plug-in that really satisfies me the way my amp does. I haven't played for 25 years and paid my dues experimenting with strings, tubes, pickups, mods, speaker types, cabling, etc. etc. to perfect the whole signal chain. I've learned my amp... and my guitars. I know hot it responds and how to elicit what I want from it. Being a guitarist you know that one's guitar sounds is the result of many, many different factors that all interact to produce the end result... again... string guage and brand, type of pick, how you hold a pick, pickups, the instrument's resonance... then a whole heap of variables when you finally arrive at the amp.

I'm stickin' with my beloved 79 Marshall... you'll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands!!! LOL

I absolutely know what you mean. Electric guitars player work heir amps almost as much as they do their guitars. And yeah, those elements you listed factor in too.

And every guitarist has their own idiosyncrasies that define they're playing style. Myself, I'm all about heavy picks, hybrid Slinky .09s, Fender amps with Celestians and tube overdrive (although I'm sure I'll pick up a Marshall head some time because I like those too). My gospel is blasphemy to other guitar players (especially the hybrid 9s). But it's all a part of how I do what I do.

I think modeling technology will come around to better emulate existing analog gear. It's just a matter of proc power evolving to handle algorithms of greater complexity.

But, for now, amps rules.

Just a little update on my upgrade progress...

HD192 is installed. So far it sounds great. I can't say for certain, but even on track that were recorded via the 1224, my low end seems to have "tightened up" a little bit. I don't know if that's just psychological on my part, or just better D > A or circuitry in the HD192, but it sounds improved.

BUT THE BIG NEWS TODAY...

My Millennia Media HV-3C Preamp arrived today. Unfortunately, my 414 is out being upgraded by Audio Upgrades, so I can't hear this combo, but I took my SM58 that sits by my console and I use for scratch tracks and hooked it up thusly:

SM58 > HV-3C > HD192 Input

Just with the SM58, I'm hearing a difference over the pres built into my Mackie board.. much more realism and transparency. Also, I think going "uncolored" for a preamp was a good move as I can tell that I can stack the hell out of backing vocals and they don't "smear." I'm anxiously awaiting my 414 to come back.

At Jim Watson's suggestion, I purchased an AKG451B that should get here soon and also an Audix i5 which he calls a "57 killer." I'm anxious to see what sort of guitar tones I will be able to get using the 414, the Millennia, and some various mics. Thus far, I think it's going to make a difference. Also, learning what is probably obvious to many of you that some differences seem "subtle"... but when multi-tracking music the cumulative effect of many "subtle" differences (put simply multiple tracks, each recorded *slightly* better) is noticeable.

It seems that in *some* ways, recording a dense mix with many tracks is a tougher test than recording a lone acoustic guitar & vocal. Sounds weird maybe... but many mic/pre combinations may sound good isolated, but when multiple tracks recorded with this combo are mixed together it can get a little "foggy."

That's not to say that pre-amps that impart a color are bad. I know many of you use them to good effect and I'm sure I could too. However, I think if you can only afford ONE really good mic pre (and that was my situation), you're best off going with a clean, transparent one.

Pardon my poor desciptive skills. I know many of you with more experience will have gone through this learning already and understand what I'm trying to describe.