Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Battery Boxes, Preamps, Mixers, ADCs, and Processors => Topic started by: OldNeumanntapr on September 07, 2015, 05:18:12 PM
-
I have been experimenting lately with doing matrix recordings. Whereas in the past when I would record at say, SLO Brew in San Luis Obispo, I would either do a soundboard or an audience recording with my Neumann KM-140s. I have a friend who owns a pro sound company and he has let me borrow some gear to try out. I borrowed a Mackie 1202 VLZ PRO mixer from him to record Dave & Phil Alvin at SLO Brew in January:
https://archive.org/details/da2015-01-21.matrix.flac16
I liked the end results a lot, because it really gives you the best of both (soundboard + audience).
My friend Dennis suggested that I get a four channel recorder and mix in the computer, but I'm really not much of a computer guy. I'd rather mix it live and record with my two channel Tascam DR-100mkII.
I am also the archivist for Cuesta Ridge, a local bluegrass fusion band, that my brother in law plays drums for. When I have recorded them in years past (except for the SLO 'Concerts In The Plaza' shows), I had the choice of either doing an audience recording or taking the output of their PA, but they don't mic the drums. I used the Mackie 1202 to record Cuesta Ridge a couple of nights before the Dave Alvin show and I was able to mix their PA with my Neumanns and get a good mix including drums.
https://archive.org/details/cr2015-01-17.matrix.flac16
My question is this:
I think the 1202 is more mixer than I need. I looked online at the Mackie 402, which seemed a little too basic. The 802 looked nice and is $200. Would that work well for me with what I am doing? I don't want to spend a lot on a piece of gear that will not be used all that much, but I like the ability to pan the inputs and also have an XLR output because my DR-100mkII has XLR line ins.
Thanks for the advice,
-ONT
-
Should do what you want.
Then, as an alternate approach, you might consider recording both your mic pair and the soundboard as separate channels on a four channel recorder, and use the mixer to dial in the matrix of the two once you get home. That way you'll be able to hear what's going on much better, taking as much time as you like to dial in the adjustment of things just right. At that point you can run a real-time transfer from the four-channel recorder through the mixer to your 2-channel recorder as you sit back and enjoy how incredible it sounds once you have everything dialed in perfectly, using the level, pan and EQ controls of the mixer. No computer required.
-
The disadvantages of any of the Mackies is you would be tethered to a source of 110v power, they are relatively large, it's one more piece of gear to haul, and the resulting two track mix is final. If it was a one shot recording and you already had the mackie, that's an understandable reason to record like that.
Since you would be buying the Mackie, I encourage you to look at the other option.
Tascam 70d will run for hours with an external 5v cell battery, is compact, one box, and you can adjust levels in the four tracks after recording or not if you don't feel the need.
-
I agree with the four-channel recorder suggestion. Live stereo mixing is difficult for most people to do reliably over headphones; a pair of loudspeakers you know in a listening room that you know, and the chance for do-overs if necessary, really helps.
-
Additionally, are you able to apply a time delay for 2 of the channels on the mixer? Sometimes you will notice a latency between the audience source and the soundboard source. However, depends on the size of the venue. The speed of sound through air vs speed of electric signal through cable.
I have not done many sbd and audience mixes but someone asked me to record the soundboard for their festival. I though it was cool I was able to measure the distance from the stage to the mics, derived by the latency of the 2 source (recorded on same recorder).
-
They dragged me out last night to record Doyle Bramhall II and CC Adcock. I did a sbd and audience (terrible setup location) matrix. I didn't even bother recording the stereo mix channels and it was a good thing because it would have been a useless track. Even in the a smaller club, the audience source is delayed just enough to dirty up the sound of the matrix. The place already had enough reverb and the recording didn't need anymore. Adjust the timing of the audience source and it cleans it up a lot. However, they still had to much reverb on the vocals, which I hate nowadays.
-
They dragged me out last night to record Doyle Bramhall II and CC Adcock. I did a sbd and audience (terrible setup location) matrix. I didn't even bother recording the stereo mix channels and it was a good thing because it would have been a useless track. Even in the a smaller club, the audience source is delayed just enough to dirty up the sound of the matrix. The place already had enough reverb and the recording didn't need anymore. Adjust the timing of the audience source and it cleans it up a lot. However, they still had to much reverb on the vocals, which I hate nowadays.
You found out why it is better to record to 4 channel and then mix in post if matrixing is your thing. I listened to the first recording posted by oldneumanntaper. It drives home for me why I like Aud recordings with a little SBd mixed in verses a Sbd recording with a little Aud mixed in. There isn't enough spatial/dimensional information recorded for me...
Peace OOK