Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default Microphone and vocal - chain preamp opinions sought

I just picked up a new apogee mini-me, which has two mic preamps. In
the headphone mix, each preamp is panned hard left or right ... it
cannot be centered. This is awkward while recording vocals. Apogee's
solution was to route the audio through the DAW and reference the
"processed" sound ... my DAW cannot do this.

I am a musician not a studio. I sing hard rock vocals similar to tool,
maiden, nails. I will be in many different rooms of varied size and
dimension.

I was considering picking up a portable all in one solution like the TC
Voicelive, which has a stereo audio output. However, I am suspect of
the quality of the whole chain within the machine: preamp, limiter et
al. I had a finalizer plus for a while, but once a bought an Apogee
Rosetta, the TC quickly found a new home. I like TC's reverb (I own the
MOne) but I'm not so sure about the rest of the electronics. Some
companies seem to be able to make one great machine and then totally
screw up the next. Does anyone have an opinion of this box?

I was also considering two microphones. I could simply sing stereo
tracks with two mics. (That is, instead of dropping 700 bucks for the
TC voicelive just to a/d my voice then d/a and then a/d it again at the
Apogee.)

I have one neaumann tlm103. I was thinking about buying another or
perhaps coupling it with another mic that I already own ... kinda like
how guitarists use an sm58 and sm57 on their amps. The cost of an
aditional neumann is less than the cost of the voicelive. I own a rode
nt1 (crappy I know, but it has it's own character). Has anyone
personally had any good results experimenting specifically in this way?
Will you talk about it a little bit?

Do you pros find that you usually have your singers double up the
tracks naturally? Or do you usually just use a doubling effect?

I really need to be portable. I will be traveling and working in Asia
for the next few years. I want to be able to record songs on the road
and drop cdrs thta of decent quality into local college radio, record
stores and clubs. For portability, I am staying away from 19" racks at
this point.

(I plan to use a couple of goosneck microphone cables to connect the
mics to the mini-me ... I cannot even lug a mic stand around with me!)

If you can talk about a personal success or failure regarding the idea
and equipment mentioned, I would greatly appreciate the insight.

Best regards to all,
J.

  #2   Report Post  
Paul Stamler
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
oups.com...
I just picked up a new apogee mini-me, which has two mic preamps. In
the headphone mix, each preamp is panned hard left or right ... it
cannot be centered. This is awkward while recording vocals. Apogee's
solution was to route the audio through the DAW and reference the
"processed" sound ... my DAW cannot do this.


Well, if your DAW can't do this, how will you use it to do overdubs? I
suspect there's a way to rig up your DAW.

Meanwhile, if you just want to hear a single microphone in the center of
your headphones, that's not hard. Wire up an adapter that drives both
channels of your headphones from one channel of the mini-me's headphone
jack.

Peace,
Paul


  #4   Report Post  
Mike Rivers
 
Posts: n/a
Default


In article .com writes:

I just picked up a new apogee mini-me, which has two mic preamps. In
the headphone mix, each preamp is panned hard left or right ... it
cannot be centered. This is awkward while recording vocals. Apogee's
solution was to route the audio through the DAW and reference the
"processed" sound ... my DAW cannot do this.


If you can't monitor a mix of the input and previously recorded
tracks, how do you expect to do overdubs? This is a basic function of
any combination of sound card and software that deserves to be called
a "DAW." If you can't work with it, it isn't a "workstation."

I am a musician not a studio.


Then why are you trying to create your own studio? Are you willing to
learn how to use your system (or get proper software and/or hardwre)
or do you want to continue to be just a musician and leave the
technical stuff to someone else? That's a viable alternative - it has
been for years. But today, it's pretty common for a musician to add
recording to his list of skills, and that might mean learning
something new, and even buying a new "instrument."

I was considering picking up a portable all in one solution like the TC
Voicelive


It sounds to me like you've collected a lot of equipment but never
really understood it, or the recording process. Have you considered
picking up something like a TASCAM DP-01FX?

Do you pros find that you usually have your singers double up the
tracks naturally? Or do you usually just use a doubling effect?


Singers typically sing the same part twice (or more) to double a part.
They don't do it with electronics, or by recording two tracks with two
mics.

I really need to be portable. I will be traveling and working in Asia
for the next few years. I want to be able to record songs on the road
and drop cdrs thta of decent quality into local college radio, record
stores and clubs. For portability, I am staying away from 19" racks at
this point.


Again, look at a self-contained unit like the DP-01FX. Record and mix
on that, then transfer the mixed file to a laptop computer, do your
final editing, volume adjusting, tweaking, and then make CDs. Sure,
there are better mic preamps and converters, but when you travel and
you're improvising a "studio" everywhere you go, subtle improvements
are lost in the process. You're much better off eliminating as much of
the haywire and loose pieces as you can. Plug in a mic and a set of
headphones and you're recording. What could be simpler? Probably the
greatest disadvantage of the DP-01FX is that you can record only two
tracks simultaneously - voice and guitar, two singers, and so on. You
can't bring around a drummer and put six mics on the kit. But it does
have two XLR mic inputs with phantom power so you can use just about
any mic with it.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  #5   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

My DAW cannot pump audio through my computer in realtime. I can listen
to previously tracked audio, yes. Therefore, I can pump my sequenced
audio in. It's just that when I record my vox, they are panned hard
left or right. I cannot listen to my vox post computer processed
realtime. It doesn't stream the audio through like that. I do have a
new copy of the software ... so maybe I missed this realitme monitoring
post cpu, but I don't think so.
Best,
Jason



  #6   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You know, I just remembered that Apogee has a headphones mix to mono
feature. I'd forgotten that. ****. I just got the unit a week ago and
have spent all my time tracking music. Your post triggered my memory.
Thanks. Jason

  #7   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

To answer your question respectfully, I stated that I was a musician in
defference to pros like you. I obviously am willing to learn how to use
my system .. I posted here didn't I? Learning has hardly ever been an
exercised in solitude during my lifetime ... I've always learned in
classrooms or with a mentor. Sure, I hang out alone and work on stuff
all of the time. I rarely reach to this newsgroup, but I did on this
occasion.

My DAW does not stream the audio through to the headphones to monitor.
I have to listen to the audio on the front side of my converter: that's
just the way it is. So, I play back the wav data that I've recorded and
overdub to this information. But my overdub is referenced before the
cpu/computer/DAW.

Thanks a lot guys!!


Then why are you trying to create your own studio? Are you willing to

learn how to use your system (or get proper software and/or hardwre)
or do you want to continue to be just a musician and leave the
technical stuff to someone else? That's a viable alternative - it has
been for years. But today, it's pretty common for a musician to add
recording to his list of skills, and that might mean learning
something new, and even buying a new "instrument."

  #8   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In response to my own iquiry:

It seems Apogee forecast precisely my problem, and hidden away under
the dir/usb mix knob is a "push" value that creates a "mono" headphone
mix. This will alleviate the panning problem, although I will have to
record mono reference in the headphones.

In terms of learning about my gear: the criticisms seemed quite
strident. I AM trying to learn: that is why I posted. I thought this
was a newsgroup capable of handling questions from those that are
insterested in learning? There are many, many things that I know
absolutely nothing about. I am a musician / songwriter with an interest
in recording my own music. This was meant in humble deference and
respect to those that have 40 years of experience as solely audio
technicians.

I am truly appreciative of your help. Best to you all Jason

  #9   Report Post  
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:
I just picked up a new apogee mini-me, which has two mic preamps. In
the headphone mix, each preamp is panned hard left or right ... it
cannot be centered. This is awkward while recording vocals. Apogee's
solution was to route the audio through the DAW and reference the
"processed" sound ... my DAW cannot do this.


It can't? If that's the case, how can you hear anything useful in the
phones? If you are tracking, you want to hear a mix of several sources,
not just the output of the preamps. Otherwise how can you play along
with the cue tracks?

I am a musician not a studio. I sing hard rock vocals similar to tool,
maiden, nails. I will be in many different rooms of varied size and
dimension.

I was considering picking up a portable all in one solution like the TC
Voicelive, which has a stereo audio output. However, I am suspect of
the quality of the whole chain within the machine: preamp, limiter et
al. I had a finalizer plus for a while, but once a bought an Apogee
Rosetta, the TC quickly found a new home. I like TC's reverb (I own the
MOne) but I'm not so sure about the rest of the electronics. Some
companies seem to be able to make one great machine and then totally
screw up the next. Does anyone have an opinion of this box?


It's okay, but wouldn't it just be easier to make a headphone adaptor
so you heard a mono headphone mix that came from one channel?

I was also considering two microphones. I could simply sing stereo
tracks with two mics. (That is, instead of dropping 700 bucks for the
TC voicelive just to a/d my voice then d/a and then a/d it again at the
Apogee.)


This is great if you can hold your head in one position for a long time
without moving it a fraction of an inch.

I have one neaumann tlm103. I was thinking about buying another or
perhaps coupling it with another mic that I already own ... kinda like
how guitarists use an sm58 and sm57 on their amps. The cost of an
aditional neumann is less than the cost of the voicelive. I own a rode
nt1 (crappy I know, but it has it's own character). Has anyone
personally had any good results experimenting specifically in this way?
Will you talk about it a little bit?

Do you pros find that you usually have your singers double up the
tracks naturally? Or do you usually just use a doubling effect?


Sometimes folks will track a vocal several times over in order to
layer them. Putting two mikes up at once, though, is not useful.

I really need to be portable. I will be traveling and working in Asia
for the next few years. I want to be able to record songs on the road
and drop cdrs thta of decent quality into local college radio, record
stores and clubs. For portability, I am staying away from 19" racks at
this point.

(I plan to use a couple of goosneck microphone cables to connect the
mics to the mini-me ... I cannot even lug a mic stand around with me!)

If you can talk about a personal success or failure regarding the idea
and equipment mentioned, I would greatly appreciate the insight.


You _have_ to be listening to a return mix from the DAW, otherwise you
won't hear anything useful. That's what you need to fix.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #12   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I suppose that is what they must do. The poor ears. I have always used
a mixing board setup where I route the computer audio to a tape return,
which I reference while over dubbing vocals and guitar.

I suppose my first post was crazed. I woke up thinking about this
problem and posted before I had any coffee.

Acid does not seem to offer the routing scheme that allows for realtime
monitoring of audio streamed through the computer. If 5 does offer
this, I have had the software for only a week or two. I have been
anxious to track as many of my songs as possible and haven't explored
many pf the new features. I only use software to record audio. I
sequence on dedicated hardware sequencers.

I am not trying to build a commercial studio seeking profits. I am
trying to ultimately burn cds that I can drop off to promoters and
college radio shows. I hope this doesn't **** you off. I have always
read your postings here with great interest .

  #13   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The mini me will play back previously recorded files, which one can
blend with a live input. However, my software cannot take the live
input and process it and stream it out realtime to the headphones.
Sorry to have been so confusing. Like I stated to Mike, I woke up
thinking about this trouble and posted before any coffee. It still
reads okay to me: I must be crazed or something.

My software will playback an audio file that I can monitor while
overdubbing. However, I cannot stream audio realtime through my
computer software. If the new version of my software (acid pro 5) can
do this, I am unaware of it (I have only owned it for 2 weeks now.)

I was simply wondering about the dual microphone setup or stereo
solution. I did discover/remember the mono headphone switch as a result
of someone's post here (thanks!) ... this feature was an aside in the
manual ... which, at the time, I thought was completely bizarre ...that
is, until now. I will still have to record the initial take of the vox
with a mono monitor mix. But after that, I can punch the headphones
back to stereo and sing along with initial vocal take.

So the stereo setup would require that I hold my head in one position?
Interesting. I never hold my head in one position for a really long
time while singing. Never once in twenty years. Although, I bet I could
if I had to! Better to switch to mono headphone mix. I might have
written: Jason, with a stereo mic setup, you would have to mitigate any
head movement that might create asymmetries in the audio signal, thus
ruining the quality blah blah blah. I figured it out though. Irony is
rarely ever lost on me .... living in this vicious hell hole of a city
has clued me in to the utter edge of my existence.

I only asked about the dual microphone setup because I saw that Neumann
sold pairs of the TLM103. I just assumed .... it was was hypothesis. A
dumb one now that I think about it. Upon peer review, my hypothesis was
shot down before I could setup an experiment. Thanks for the time and
$$ saver!!

Yes, the return mix! After it has already been recorded. On the way in,
I am listening to the signal before the it hits the computer. Apogee
recommends listening after it hits the computer, but my software
doesn't route audio this way.

I'm using acid pro.

Before everyone freaks out on me, I have an excuse: First one is, I'm
asking, not telling.
I used acid 2.0 and then recently bought 5.0.
I have had it for only 2 weeks. I haven't attempted vocals until last
night, I posted this morning.
I was just wondering if some of you veterans might offer some useful
information.

I have used software since before VST even existed. But I jumped around
a lot due to bugs in the software. I have, for the last couple of
years, settled on hardware for sequencing (RS7000, MPC and Korg) and
the one DAW that never let me down: Acid pro (which was at 2.0 when I
last used it).

  #14   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks a whole lot Kurt. Much appreciated. Best to you, Jason / TAS

  #15   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I am not trying to create a commercial studio that is open to the
public and intended for profit. This is what I meant to convey when I
stated that I am a musician not a studio. This is what I meant. I am
such an ass. I didn't mean to offend anyone. I didn't want you guys to
think that I was pro audio studio jock. I wanted to make it clear that
I spend more time writing music and some time recording it. I thought
you might enjoy helping out a musician friend. I want to learn more
about your craft ... your art. This why I posted my questions. I have
always made learning a communal thing. Learning, as a rule, has never
been a lesson in solitude for me. I went to school with other students
and teachers for most of my life. Solitude is more spiritual for me and
less academic .... although Sartre or Camus might have thought
differently. I have found solitude excellent for study. But learning
is about mentoring, wisdom, lecture, advisement etc. I endeavoured to
recruit the experts here as adjunct professors. I am sorry. I will
never ask again. Still, thank you so much for all the incredible
dicourse here. This newgroup is a gem. I have followed it for years.
Best to you all!



  #16   Report Post  
GWM
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Just to cover some the bases, ACID is a *looper* and a bit of a sequencer,
not a multitracker and does not allow for monitoring while recording. Vegas
is Sony's multitracker and allows monitoring while recording (but has no
midi/sequencing capabilities). There are a lot of people who would like to
see these two apps merged, but Sony has indicated on their forums that is
not likely.

Thanks,
Greg

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message
...
wrote:

I really need to be portable. I will be traveling and working in Asia
for the next few years. I want to be able to record songs on the road
and drop cdrs thta of decent quality into local college radio, record
stores and clubs. For portability, I am staying away from 19" racks at
this point.

(I plan to use a couple of goosneck microphone cables to connect the
mics to the mini-me ... I cannot even lug a mic stand around with me!)



http://www.sounddevices.com/products/7.htm

Great preamps, beautifully built, excellent headphone amp. Uses
rechargeable lithium Sony camcorder batteries.



  #17   Report Post  
Mike Rivers
 
Posts: n/a
Default


In article .com writes:

The mini me will play back previously recorded files, which one can
blend with a live input. However, my software cannot take the live
input and process it and stream it out realtime to the headphones.
Sorry to have been so confusing.


Just a couple of tips about things other than your recording
situation.:

You keep referring to "my software" but only once in your string of
messages (and that was in the second or third round) did I see that
your software was Acid. This is indeed not designed for that kind of
work so I'm not as surprised as I was initially that you couldn't
monitor the input through it.

Second, when you post a reply, include enough of the message to which
you're replying so that we know what you're talking about, and even
who you're talking to. Just about every newsreader (another "your"
software) has the ability to quote the original message. Use it, but
edit judiciously so that you don't include the entire message all in
one gulp.

So, is the Mini-Me a satisfactory solution now that you've found the
right button, or will you be looking for different software that's
more suitable for multitrack recording? It's not at all uncommon to
use more than one program for a project. If Acid is the right tool to
get the background parts arranged, then by all means use it. But when
you're ready to record vocals and acoustic parts, import the Acid
tracks to a more suitable program and you'll be a happy camper.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
  #18   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You keep referring to "my software" but only once in your string of
messages (and that was in the second or third round) did I see that
your software was Acid.


MY REPLY:
I avoided naming the software that I was using in order to mitigate a
long debate on software, when I was clearly asking about hardware ...
I've seen truly enigmatic digressions result from too much information
on this newsgroup. In the end, the software wasn't what I was asking
about: I am committed to my current software and converter. I was more
interested in hardware solutions toward the end of solving my panning
problem -- the solutions that I did uncover, due to all of the excited
replies! Thanks again everyone!!


In terms of intent of design or the teleology of the software chosen I
have no comment to answer that would not be construed as defensive or
argumentative. However, intent and empiricism have a dubious
correlation. Wasn't this debate coverd in the 18th century? Rhetorical
question ....


Just a couple of tips about things other than your recording
situation.:


MY REPLY:
I will, of course, take all of your tips regarding netiquette to heart.
Thanks a million for the insight.

more suitable for multitrack recording? It's not at all uncommon to
use more than one program for a project. If Acid is the right tool to
get the background parts arranged, then by all means use it. But when
you're ready to record vocals and acoustic parts, import the Acid
tracks to a more suitable


MY REPLY:
I can't be jumping around from application to application as an MO any
longer. I'm sticking with tracking loops in Acid. The interface works
well for me. It was just something that I missed while researching the
A/D converter.

Thanks again. I have always admired and looked forward to receiving
your wisdom.

  #19   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Acid does a great job at recording audio and I have used it since
version 1 WHEN IT DID NOT OFFER MIDI SEQUENCING. I record loops 99% of
the time, because my hardware sequencer is a LOOPER!!!! It works out so
nicely ... IT'S AS IF THERE WERE AN INTELLIGENCE TO ITS DESIGN.
Although, I am sure, Sonic Foundry and then later Sony, never consulted
with Yamaha on their RS7000 sequencing OS, so that they might be able
to more intelligently design the software toward the end of
facilitating their marriage on a binary level.

I thought VEGAS was more like Premiere or Final Cut Pro? I thought it
was all about video editing? Rhetorical question again .... I will
investigate further.

PLEASE DO NOT WASTE ANY MORE TIME ON MY OBVIOUSLY ANNOYING POSTS.
PLEASE DESIST IN REPLYING.

Thanks again for all of the information!

  #20   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

YOU WROTE:
Just to cover some the bases, ACID is a *looper* and a bit of a
sequencer,
not a multitracker and does not allow for monitoring while recording.
Vegas
is Sony's multitracker and allows monitoring while recording (but has
no
midi/sequencing capabilities).

MY REPLY:

I have used it since version 1 when it did not offer midi sequencing.

I record loops 99% of the time, because my hardware sequencer is a
LOOPER!!!! It works out so nicely.

I thought VEGAS was more like Premiere or Final Cut Pro? I thought it
was all about video editing? Rhetorical question again .... I will
investigate further.

Thanks again for all of the information



  #21   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

YOU WROTE:
You keep referring to "my software" but only once in your string of
messages (and that was in the second or third round) did I see that
your software was Acid. This is indeed not designed for that kind of
work so I'm not as surprised as I was initially that you couldn't
monitor the input through it.


MY REPLY:
I avoided naming the software that I was using in order to mitigate a
long debate on software, when I was clearly asking about hardware ...
I've seen truly enigmatic digressions result from too much information
on this newsgroup. In the end, the software wasn't what I was asking
about: I am committed to my current software and converter. I was more
interested in hardware solutions toward the end of solving my panning
problem -- the solutions that I did uncover, due to all of the excited
replies! Thanks again everyone!!
In terms of intent of design or the teleology of the software chosen, I
can offer no comment to answer that would not be construed as
defensive or
argumentative. Intent was covered in the 18th century by Kant and his
so-called peers. Humankind was born without wings, yet still humans
fly. Our human form never intended for us to fly, however the design of
our brain makes it possible. I find that using lots of things
interpretively highly effective in terms of producing new knowledge ...
using analogues or frameworks intended for or derived from other arts,
disciplines, subjects, objects has always been what humans are best at.
This whole line of thinking is deeply philosophical. Intent of design
and the actual resultant practice or use is the ironic story of human
history. Gun Powder was never intended for cannon cylinders ... but
there went Constantinople to the Turkish guns in the 15th Century. And
so on and so forth ...

Simply innovating and thinking outside of the BOX.

Thanks again Mike! You are so very helpful.

YOU WROTE:
Just a couple of tips about things other than your recording
situation.:


MY REPLY:
I will, of course, take all of your tips regarding NET'iquette to
heart.
Thanks a million for the insight.


YOU WROTE:
more suitable for multitrack recording? It's not at all uncommon to
use more than one program for a project. If Acid is the right tool to
get the background parts arranged, then by all means use it. But when
you're ready to record vocals and acoustic parts, import the Acid
tracks to a more suitable


MY REPLY:
I do not want to jump around from application to application as an
operating method. I find this to be fatiguing, as well a fine
opportunity for error to creep into the equation. I'm sticking with
tracking loops into Acid. I missed something while researching the A/D
converter. However, Apogee knew that this would be trouble and built in
the mono switch. Excellent!

Thanks again.

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some Recording Techniques kevindoylemusic Pro Audio 19 February 16th 05 08:54 PM
Recording Lead Vocals- PDF available on request kevindoylemusic Pro Audio 1 February 13th 05 10:42 PM
OT Political Blind Joni Pro Audio 337 September 25th 04 03:34 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:25 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"