Re: [MLUG] multitrack digital recording

["Vern Green" <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

Hiss on cassette can be caused by the equipment used, but most of the hiss comes from the tape itself.

 

It has to do with the amount of iron-oxide that is available at any given point to record on. The more iron oxide that is available, the better the sound. Since a cassette tape runs at around 1.8 inches per second. Some upper end cassette four tracks allowed you to speed up the tape to around 3 inches per second. Additionally, the cassette tape is only .125 inches wide and contains 4 tracks.

 

Conversely, good reel to reel recorders will run at 7 - 15 - 30 inches per second and the tape width could be 1/4 for four tracks, 1/2 inch for 8 tracks, up to 2" for 16 and 24 track machines, allowing for more iron oxide usage and better fidelity.

 

On 1/12/07, Fallert, Adam Christian <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:

While I agree that reel to reel is better than the cassette.  I think a lot of that hiss and lack of fidelity is caused in large part by the recording equipment used.  Is that a fair statement?

I merely listed the cassette as an example previously as that is the predominant form of analog media found today.

_______________________________________
Adam C. Fallert
IML
University of Missouri - Columbia
Columbia, MO. 65202
Phone: (573) 884-5611
mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED
----------------------------------------------------------------------

________________________________

From: EMAIL:PROTECTED on behalf of Vern Green
Sent: Fri 1/12/2007 11:09 AM
To: MLUG Members
Subject: Re: [MLUG] multitrack digital recording


I have to disagree, at least with one of the statements. While I tend to agree that recording the initial program signal through analog equipment can result in more desirable results to some people, there is no way on earth you can get an acceptable sound through a cassette tape media. Cassette tapes simply create too much hiss to create an acceptable recording.

Cassette tapes do not allow enough saturation, even at the higher recording speeds, to deliver the fidelity and clarity that can be achieved in a digital medium. If you are lucky enough to get an older 4 track reel to reel, or even an older 24 track 2" reel to reel then your results can be far superior. Finding those machines and the media for them is a much more expensive endeavor however. Additionally, you will also want effects and mixing capabilities which is going to then require even more expenditure.

Having good microphones is one of the most important aspects of getting a good recording, especially if you are recording a predominately acoustical instrument like acoustic guitar, or vocals. One does not necessarily need a phantom powered microphone per se, however, the best mic to use on these types of instruments is a condenser mic which typically are phantom powered in some way, either from the equipment, by batteries, or by being plugged into the wall.

There are some decent mics out there for not a lot of money, these are the ones I have in my collection:

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/9da35d460627c96c/index.html

This is a vocal mic, but it also works very well for acoustic guitar.

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/198fc1e1b1ff2c2f/index.html

I have two of these and these are some of the best all purpose condensor mics, I use them for everything. I have even used them to close mic snare drums without any issue of overload. All of these require phantom power to use, so any equipment you buy should have a phantom power supply, or you will have to get an external mic preamp that has it built in.

I just bought a new one that I am very impressed with, but unfortunately at the moment I cannot remember the name of model number, it cost me around $900 though and retails for $1100 and change.

I have a number of dynamic mics as well and if you don't have $400 to spend on a mic, then one of the best multipurpose dynamic mics is the Shure SM-57. You can record almost anything with this mic and get acceptable results. It really is better for instruments like drums and electric guitars, but can be used for other things as well.


On 1/12/07, Fallert, Adam Christian <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:

       > 2) analog might be better than digital.
       > This seems to be one of those religious questions thought.

       I would definitely agree with that statement.  Just be sure to have some good placement of phantom powered microphones, and top quality cables for guitars and other instruments with electronic pickups and I believe an analog original recording can be far superior.   With a good CD recorder component  (preferably one with record on the fly functions) it is easy to mix your original recording down to a digital format.

       The only problem now is obtaining high quality analog media (i.e. cassettes), which becoming more difficult to find and purchase.

       --Adam

       _______________________________________
       Adam C. Fallert
       IML
       University of Missouri - Columbia
       Columbia, MO. 65202
       Phone: (573) 884-5611
       mailto:EMAIL:PROTECTED
       ----------------------------------------------------------------------

       ________________________________

       From: EMAIL:PROTECTED on behalf of Matt Klaric
       Sent: Thu 1/11/2007 8:53 PM
       To: MLUG Members
       Subject: Re: [MLUG] multitrack digital recording


       On 1/11/07, Mike Miller < EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:

              I don't know how many of you guys are into this, but I think some of you
              are, so I'll post my question here.  This isn't necessarily a Linux
              question, but I would definitely be interested in Linux answers.

              I want to get some kind of digital recording equipment.  Maybe it can all
              be done on a good computer with appropriate software and a good sound
              card.  I have no idea.  I guess I would lean toward more some sort of
              stand-alone device.




       Although I can't say that I know all that much about the topic, I'll throw in my two cents.

       I actually recently ran into an article that talks about somethings that might be relevant.  Check it out:
       http://www.comomusic.com/comolibrary.php?todo=read&articleid=15

       The summary of it is this:
       1) if you're doing digital recording/mixing you might be better off with a software solution because it's easier and cheaper to upgrade.
       2) analog might be better than digital.  This seems to be one of those religious questions thought.

       That's all I've got.

       --matt


       _______________________________________________
       members mailing list
       EMAIL:PROTECTED
       http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members







--
Thanks
F Vernon Green

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members

-- 
Thanks
F Vernon Green 
_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members