I am set on headphones, monitoring, and instruments. My goal is a
multi-use home studio in a fairly small bedroom where I can do vocal
overdubs and basic single-instrument tracking, but no live multi-track
recording is needed here.

I've got a Roland MMP-2 (2-channel preamp), 2 RNCs, a 32-point
patchbay, 1 AT3035, 1 SM57, 1 58, 1 Rode S1, 1 Studio Projects B-1, a
Sony DPS-V55 multi-effects, M-audio 2496 card, Mackie VLZ 1202, a
control surface I like, software I like, and a fast computer. I have
about $3-500 that isn't doing anything except making me want to spend
it on something useful. Where do you guys see the weakest link in my
studio? Or what am I missing? I don't have any acoustic treatment but
then I'm renting and plan on moving in the next year,a nd I'm skeptical
of acoustic treatment. The MMP-2 is way underrated in my opinion and
compares nicely with the Mackie Onyx preamps I'm used to elsewhere (if
you turn off the dynamics and any plug-in crap on it).

Thanks,
Paul

PK and J wrote:

I am set on headphones, monitoring, and instruments. My goal is a
multi-use home studio in a fairly small bedroom where I can do vocal
overdubs and basic single-instrument tracking, but no live multi-track
recording is needed here.

I've got a -- buncha stuff snipped--.

I have
about $3-500 that isn't doing anything except making me want to spend
it on something useful. Where do you guys see the weakest link in my
studio? Or what am I missing? I don't have any acoustic treatment but
then I'm renting and plan on moving in the next year,a nd I'm skeptical
of acoustic treatment.

I'd say some acoustic treatment is overdue, especially bass trapping,
especially in a small room. Be skeptical if you want, but without it I'd
be skeptical of your monitoring.

I second the nomination for room treatment. If you get, or build your
own, Ethan Winer Bass traps, you can remove them from the room and
take them to your next place. You will always have a use for them,
unless you get a room that has already been built and treated for
audio production.

On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 22:50:56 GMT, Agent 86
wrote:

PK and J wrote:

I am set on headphones, monitoring, and instruments. My goal is a
multi-use home studio in a fairly small bedroom where I can do vocal
overdubs and basic single-instrument tracking, but no live multi-track
recording is needed here.

I've got a -- buncha stuff snipped--.

I have
about $3-500 that isn't doing anything except making me want to spend
it on something useful. Where do you guys see the weakest link in my
studio? Or what am I missing? I don't have any acoustic treatment but
then I'm renting and plan on moving in the next year,a nd I'm skeptical
of acoustic treatment.

I'd say some acoustic treatment is overdue, especially bass trapping,
especially in a small room. Be skeptical if you want, but without it I'd
be skeptical of your monitoring.

PK and J wrote:

I am set on headphones, monitoring, and instruments. My goal is a
multi-use home studio in a fairly small bedroom where I can do vocal
overdubs and basic single-instrument tracking, but no live multi-track
recording is needed here.

I've got a Roland MMP-2 (2-channel preamp), 2 RNCs, a 32-point
patchbay, 1 AT3035, 1 SM57, 1 58, 1 Rode S1, 1 Studio Projects B-1, a
Sony DPS-V55 multi-effects, M-audio 2496 card, Mackie VLZ 1202, a
control surface I like, software I like, and a fast computer. I have
about $3-500 that isn't doing anything except making me want to spend
it on something useful. Where do you guys see the weakest link in my
studio? Or what am I missing? I don't have any acoustic treatment but
then I'm renting and plan on moving in the next year,a nd I'm skeptical
of acoustic treatment. The MMP-2 is way underrated in my opinion and
compares nicely with the Mackie Onyx preamps I'm used to elsewhere (if
you turn off the dynamics and any plug-in crap on it).

www.realtraps.com

--
ha

You need a good DAW - http://www.pcDAW.net :-)

You'll still have money to spend when you're done.

Mike
http://www.pcDAW.net

"Mr Soul" wrote in message
oups.com...
You need a good DAW - http://www.pcDAW.net :-)

You'll still have money to spend when you're done.

Mike
http://www.pcDAW.net

The suggestions for acoustic treatment are right on, but I'd spring for a
hi-end preamp. I doubt the Roland will make your dynamic mics come alive the
way a Great River, Neve, etc. would. I *KNOW* those are way out of your
price range, but you can save some more and maybe get a mono Grace unit. In
your range, I'd pop for an RNP, but I wouldn't put it in a class with those
in the previous sentence. Save $ for a great pre - you won't regret it.
You'll also get good resale value if you change your mind.

Mikey Wozniak
Nova Music Productions
This sig is haiku

Mr Soul wrote:

You need a good DAW - http://www.pcDAW.net :-)

You'll still have money to spend when you're done.

Mike
http://www.pcDAW.net

You need to ignore this shill.

"Agent 86" wrote in message
...
Mr Soul wrote:

You need a good DAW - http://www.pcDAW.net :-)

You'll still have money to spend when you're done.

Mike
http://www.pcDAW.net

You need to ignore this shill.


Haha!

I have
about $3-500 that isn't doing anything except making me want to spend
it on something useful. Where do you guys see the weakest link in my
studio? Or what am I missing? I don't have any acoustic treatment but
then I'm renting and plan on moving in the next year,a nd I'm skeptical
of acoustic treatment.

Don't be skeptical. First, take some of that money and get the F. Alton
Everest book on small studio acoustics. Read it all, then consider
spending some of it on whatever acoustical treatment is appropriate for
your room.

Even with low-end gear, the room and the monitoring is always the weak point.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Don't be skeptical. First, take some of that money and get the F. Alton
Everest book on small studio acoustics.

Which one is it ? "Sound Studio Construction on a Budget" or "How to
Build a Small Budget Recording Studio from Scratch ..." or "Acoustic
Techniques for Home and Studio" ?

Right now I have a recording room, about 6 by 3 meters, which is mostly
dead... carpet on the floor, fiberglass on the walls, and in the
suspended ceiling (I didn't build it). It's used to record drums, bass,
guitar (acoustic & electric), vocals, for a pop/rock band. The drums
for example sound like the room, mostly dead ;-)

Would that book help me improve the room ?

Thanks
Beru

I'd get a sunburst, rosewood-fretboard Fender Telecaster if I were you.

Scott Fraser

In article .com,
wrote:

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Don't be skeptical. First, take some of that money and get the F. Alton
Everest book on small studio acoustics.

Which one is it ? "Sound Studio Construction on a Budget" or "How to
Build a Small Budget Recording Studio from Scratch ..." or "Acoustic
Techniques for Home and Studio" ?

I was thinking of the second one. I haven't seen the first one. The
third is pretty good but not what you want right now. Likewise the
Master Handbook of Acoustics is wonderful but not what you want.

Right now I have a recording room, about 6 by 3 meters, which is mostly
dead... carpet on the floor, fiberglass on the walls, and in the
suspended ceiling (I didn't build it). It's used to record drums, bass,
guitar (acoustic & electric), vocals, for a pop/rock band. The drums
for example sound like the room, mostly dead ;-)

Would that book help me improve the room ?

It might help you figure out what you can do with the room. If you are
stuck with a very small room, your choices might be either deadness or
boxiness, but you need to sit and figure out how to make the compromise
between the two.

If I were you, though, I'd pull all the panels from the drop ceiling and
see if that didn't make you a little bit more happy. It might make things
sound small and closetlike because you're getting close-in reflections and
no later ones, but it's not a lot of effort to find out.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

You need to ignore this shill
Execuse me?!?!

I do not "pretend" to be part to be part of this forum. I don't have
the expertise to comment on alot of the posts but when it comes to
computers/DAW or gear in general, I have & will post.

Mike
http://www.pcDAW.net

It might help you figure out what you can do with the room. If you are
stuck with a very small room, your choices might be either deadness or
boxiness, but you need to sit and figure out how to make the compromise
between the two.

Ok, thanks Scott, I'm going to try that book and see if I can improve
the room in any way...

Mr Soul wrote:

You need to ignore this shill
Execuse me?!?!

I do not "pretend" to be part to be part of this forum. I don't have
the expertise to comment on alot of the posts but when it comes to
computers/DAW or gear in general, I have & will post.


The OP said he has a fast computer & software that he likes. Maybe he does,
and maybe he's a newbie who wouldn't know a fast computer & good software
if it bit him on the ass. But your response, without any effort to find out
about his current hardware/software setup, was that he NEEDS a computer.
And SURPRISE, you just happen to sell computers.

That makes you a shill.

Scott Dorsey wrote:

If I were you, though, I'd pull all the panels from the drop ceiling and
see if that didn't make you a little bit more happy. It might make things
sound small and closetlike because you're getting close-in reflections and
no later ones, but it's not a lot of effort to find out.

Interesting. Ethan recommends a soft ceiling (& hard floor) to try &
simulate a higher ceiling. Is your perspective different, or is pulling
out the ceiling tiles just the easiest thing to try?

Agent 86 wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:

If I were you, though, I'd pull all the panels from the drop ceiling and
see if that didn't make you a little bit more happy. It might make things
sound small and closetlike because you're getting close-in reflections and
no later ones, but it's not a lot of effort to find out.

Interesting. Ethan recommends a soft ceiling (& hard floor) to try &
simulate a higher ceiling. Is your perspective different, or is pulling
out the ceiling tiles just the easiest thing to try?

I'd rather have a soft ceiling than a hard one, sure. But pulling out the
panels is going to do a couple of different things. First of all, it gets
you a more live room, which might be good. Secondly, it gets you a larger
room, which is very, very good. And thirdly, right now you have this big
sealed resonant chamber up above the ceiling that is coupled to your studio.
You want to get rid of that before anything else.

You'll find the drop ceilings cause a lot of low end problems because they
are very well coupled to the main room at low frequencies.

You'll also find that the bigger the room, the longer reverberations take
to decay, and the less "boxy" the reverberations sound. A small room that
is too live will sound like a closet, but with a big room, the liveness
makes sounds feel... like they're in a big room. The smaller the room, the
more dead you're going to have to make it to avoid that boxiness.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey wrote:

I'd rather have a soft ceiling than a hard one, sure. But pulling out the
panels is going to do a couple of different things. First of all, it gets
you a more live room, which might be good.

OK, I'm with you so far...

Secondly, it gets you a larger room, which is very, very good.

But aren't acoustic ceiling tiles mostly transparent at low frequencies (so
the effective room height is really the height of the hard surface above
anyway)? and absorptive at high frequencies (effectively lowering the HF
reverb time & making the room seem bigger)?


And thirdly, right now you have this big
sealed resonant chamber up above the ceiling that is coupled to your
studio. You want to get rid of that before anything else.

You'll find the drop ceilings cause a lot of low end problems because they
are very well coupled to the main room at low frequencies.

So what's the best way to make a soft ceiling? Bare fiberglass between the
bare rafters? Carpet stapled to the rafters with fiberglass behind? Hang a
parachute or fishnet? I always figured the best thing about a dropped
ceiling was that you could stuff 26 inches of fiberglass in there even if
your rafters were only 2x10s.

Agent 86 wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:

I'd rather have a soft ceiling than a hard one, sure. But pulling out the
panels is going to do a couple of different things. First of all, it gets
you a more live room, which might be good.

OK, I'm with you so far...

Secondly, it gets you a larger room, which is very, very good.

But aren't acoustic ceiling tiles mostly transparent at low frequencies (so
the effective room height is really the height of the hard surface above
anyway)? and absorptive at high frequencies (effectively lowering the HF
reverb time & making the room seem bigger)?

It does lower the HF reverb time, but that doesn't make the room seem bigger
at all. Just more dead on the high end.

And they are enough not transparent at low frequencies that you can consider
the whole ceiling as a diaphragm between two resonant chambers. All kinds
of weirdness.

So what's the best way to make a soft ceiling? Bare fiberglass between the
bare rafters? Carpet stapled to the rafters with fiberglass behind? Hang a
parachute or fishnet? I always figured the best thing about a dropped
ceiling was that you could stuff 26 inches of fiberglass in there even if
your rafters were only 2x10s.

The best way depends on whether you also need some bass trapping up there,
or just a little deadening on the top end. I tend to be a believer in foam
for the top end and upper midrange, but without measuring the room or
listening carefully you don't know what it needs. And if you need to add
substantial bass trapping, you might be able to suspend that up there and
take advantage of the top end absorption up there too.

Maybe the room is live enough on top, but it has a slap echo problem from
right above. Then what you want is diffusion, to break all the echoes up
into smaller ones.

Take down some tiles and listen to how different it sounds and see for
yourself.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Sorry - I missed the computer part (it was at the end of his long
list).

However, I still take exception to being called a shill. This is the
definition I found:

"A house employee who bets money and pretends to be a player to attract
customers".

Yes - I love customers but I am a player.

Mike
http://www.pcDAW.net

Agent 86 wrote:

So what's the best way to make a soft ceiling? Bare fiberglass between the
bare rafters? Carpet stapled to the rafters with fiberglass behind? Hang a
parachute or fishnet? I always figured the best thing about a dropped
ceiling was that you could stuff 26 inches of fiberglass in there even if
your rafters were only 2x10s.

Mine control romm is 11 w. x 9' h. by 17' l. The ceiling is white fine
linen over another layer of linen fit over 3" cotton batting which
covers 6" acoustic fiberglas stuffed into the 2 x 12 rafters.

--
ha

"hank alrich" wrote in message

Agent 86 wrote:

So what's the best way to make a soft ceiling? Bare
fiberglass between the bare rafters? Carpet stapled to
the rafters with fiberglass behind? Hang a parachute or
fishnet? I always figured the best thing about a
dropped ceiling was that you could stuff 26 inches of
fiberglass in there even if your rafters were only
2x10s.

Mine control romm is 11 w. x 9' h. by 17' l. The ceiling
is white fine linen over another layer of linen fit over
3" cotton batting which covers 6" acoustic fiberglas
stuffed into the 2 x 12 rafters.

If that's the control room, what's the studio like? Carnagie Hall? ;-)

About that "acoustic fiberglas:. Are you saying something rigid like 703?