Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Microphones & Setup => Topic started by: stevetoney on May 12, 2010, 10:11:17 PM
-
A friend owns a local venue and has asked for my opinions on what gear he should buy. He wants to start recording the music that is performed at his place and wants to run a SBD/Mic matrix nightly. I'll assume that he'd like a rig that's as no fuss as possible, because he already works his ass off and probably doesn't want to be messing with mastering something up on a computer the day after.
He's told me that he's decided to buy a Tascam CD-RW901SL CD Recorder and has maybe $2K budget for the rest of the gear he needs, so lets assume that a hard disc or flash-based recorder is not part of this equation.
Due to my own sluttiness, I could surely pass on some advice on mics, but I'm not really familiar with what gear is needed at the SBD (I'm thinking mics > preamp is it, since the Tascam unit has an ADC), so I'm not really sure how much of the $2K budget would be able to put towards mics.
Any sound engineers able to give me some good feedback/experience on both what gear is needed and what specifically would be heavy duty / quality enough to stand up to nightly use on a $2000 budget? Thanks in advance!
-
I could lend some advice - but I'm sure others will have some
my advice is since he's your friend you should offer to run the gear, at least to start with then get it set so it is no muss no fuss..
:)
--Ian
-
That's a shame he hasn't decided to buy a 4 channel deck instead of a CD burner. Could you convince him otherwise?
-
a CD-burner!? ???
Why not a DVD-burner and a DVD-A compatible player?
Less hassle:
- less discs due to more storage
- accepts 24-bit, more sample rates, channels
- bit perfect extraction (it is a backup as well)
- etc
-
That's a shame he hasn't decided to buy a 4 channel deck instead of a CD burner. Could you convince him otherwise?
Belexes...I don't think he's set on the CD burner. He simply told me that's what he's been looking at, so I decided to convey that in the message. He DID in fact tell me he wants to do this right from the start, so if you have a better suggestion on what he should buy for the back end, please feel free.
Regarding the first comment about setting it up myself/helping out with my gear since he's my friend, that would be a great suggestion if helping him out was the only thing in life I have to do. As it is, he's expressed his gratitude for what I've done so far, getting out as much as I can to promote the club and doing the recording that I have done. Unfortunately, I have a good job and can't be out at the club until 2am nightly minding my gear as a goodwill gesture to help a friends club succeed, as much as I'd love to. :-\ Also, he has his own sound engineers that he employs, so offering to broker (for free) the gear purchase does neither him or me any good. I don't want to be responsible for whatever bad (or good) decisions are made when it's not my money that's involved. I'm just trying to respond to a friend that asked for some advice, nothing more nothing less.
-
a CD-burner!? ???
Why not a DVD-burner and a DVD-A compatible player?
Less hassle:
- less discs due to more storage
- accepts 24-bit, more sample rates, channels
- bit perfect extraction (it is a backup as well)
- etc
I'm pretty sure that the guy is probably just going off what he knows...perhaps what he's seen at other clubs. This part of the equation is new to him.
Please consider this an open canvass. I'd like to know what sound engineers might suggest is needed for a house system...mics to recording device...for capturing a good sounding matrix live on location for $2k on the front end and perhaps $1k at the back end...$3k total. Thanks!
-
CD burner sucks for several reasons. I would tell him to buy a used R4 or R-44. He should hang mics over front of stage aiming towards back towards where drums go.
This fostex unit is only 229. it is a minimal amount of money to invest and he can start recording for under $500 with an inexpensive pair of mics which can be powered from the 2 mic inputs. Plus it has removeable CF card so he can easily transfer his 2 channel 16/44.1 files for consumption.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/414598-REG/Fostex_MR8_MKII_MR8_MKII_8_Track_Portable.html#specifications
If he actually likes all the post work he can upgrade at a later date.
(http://www.fostexinternational.com/images/product_img/mid/MR-8MkII-Front.jpg)
and for other people who want to tape he can add a patch bay for $135
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/357741-REG/Henry_Engineering_PATCHBOX_II_Patch_Box_II_.html
(http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images345x345/357741.jpg)
-
Well I think the guy needs to get his priorities straight. If he wants quality recordings, it will take time to understand the recorder and take time to understand mic placement so if he doesn't have time for that, he should have someone else help him out or have someone else help run the bar with him. We didn't become great tapers by just buying microphones and putting them on stands, we had to listen in the club and figure out the best place for the mics not to mention all the research done.
The fostex unit is nice but what if he wants more inputs? Have you looked at the Zoom R16?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/600773-REG/Zoom_R16_R16_Multi_Track_Recorder_.html
-
^ Thanks Rasta. Although I'll likely withhold lectures on priorities (LOL ;D) I'd be more than happy to pass on to his sound engineer any helpful/informative experiences you may have with mic placement, gear suggestions, mics that aren't rugged enough for daily use, etc. Thank you for the gear link.
-
If he already has a console, I don't see why he'd have to spend $2k to
get a "good recording".
The club I record at frequently, I use a pair of Behringer C-2 for ambience
and a pair of TRS out from the console to my R4. I get a secondary mix
from the house engineer (IOW, I'm not taking the house mix). I don't
see the need for an expensive pair of mics for ambience alone.
I do dump the tracks to a PC and mix them in post but I'm guessing you
could do this on the fly to a burner of some sort if he doesn't want to
mess with the "post production".
-
This response is more in line with I think what the goals of the owner are. I was also thinking along those lines...that a top notch set of mics aren't necessary for a great sounding matrix. However, I'd also probably tell him that he might want to err on the side of better mics so that he could get a good sounding recording if, for some reason, the SBD side of the equation doesn't work out.
I appreciate the input that folks are making that the CDRecorder might not be the way to go, but I was wondering how much that might be neglecting what I'd initially said, where the guy probably won't want to mess around with the computer in post and he probably wants to get a good sounding recording with minimal effort, so I'm not so sure at this point that it makes a difference to him about getting 24bit DVDs because he's probably just wanting something quick and dirty after each night's music is over, but that still sounds great...although I'd definitely remind him that DVD recorders might be a way to go because of higher resolution.
If he already has a console, I don't see why he'd have to spend $2k to
get a "good recording".
The club I record at frequently, I use a pair of Behringer C-2 for ambience
and a pair of TRS out from the console to my R4. I get a secondary mix
from the house engineer (IOW, I'm not taking the house mix). I don't
see the need for an expensive pair of mics for ambience alone.
I do dump the tracks to a PC and mix them in post but I'm guessing you
could do this on the fly to a burner of some sort if he doesn't want to
mess with the "post production".
-
For ruggedness, there are a number of rackmounted, solid-state (e.g., SD card) recorders -- see Marantz and Tascam for example. I haven't looked into it that much, but it seems the problem with these is they a 2ch devices for the lower cost ones, or if you want multi-channel units they can be several thousand.
Then there are lots of multitrack recorders that have control surfaces more like the Zoom linked above. Must say, I know nothing about them.
If a portable recorder would work and rugged rackmount isn't needed, the new Tascam DR-680 might be worth considering. He can record up to 6 channels, and then record the final 2 tracks as a mix track. So with the one recorder he can record 3 sets of 2ch inputs (say stereo soundboard, on-stage mic pair, audience mic pair) and then record a mix-down of them all. All the raw files are there if he gets an itch to really play around with post production, and he has a 2ch mixdown done at the time of the recording with no fuss. The mixdown can be set to relative amounts of each of the L-R input pairs, so he can preset it for mainly soundboard and onstage, and a smaller amount of audience -- or whatever.
Get that and a few 16gb/32gb cards that can later be dumped to a computer. Leave some money in the budget for some TB drives, at 8ch recording, he'll be racking up the data. ;)
The question of mics is a lot easier, since we all pretty familiar with them. For cost vs performance, without necessarily the need for multiple caps and active cables and whatnot, I'd give a vote for some Audio-Technica mics. Get a pair of AT4022 omnis for onstage and a pair of AT4021/AT4041 cards for aud mics. $1000 for 2 pairs of high-quality, excellent sounding, and rugged mics. Not to say that a couple pairs of Marshall MXL603's for a $100 a pair wouldn't do the trick if he is mixing in mainly a board feed.
-
^^^
This
-
the guy probably won't want to mess around with the computer in post and he probably wants to get a good sounding recording with minimal effort,
If he finds a way to make consistently good sounding recordings with minimal effort and without doing any post work with a computer, he ought to publish a book on how to do it. I can't imagine being able to do that myself.
-
Keep it simple for him if thats what he wants. Get him an R-4 or R-44 with 2 AKG 414 XLS to run onstage to pick up what isn't put through the board along with pulling the mix from the board and whala.
If he wants to do a little more to get a little better pull, go for the 680 and add in two more mics (I like bright mics to to contrast the warm 414's) to add some width and depth to the recording.
I'm also going to tell ya that no matter what, to get a good polished sound, there is going to be post production work.
Shoot me a line sometime and we can chat, I am working on a project that may be a perfect fit for for his situation.
-
the guy probably won't want to mess around with the computer in post and he probably wants to get a good sounding recording with minimal effort,
If he finds a way to make consistently good sounding recordings with minimal effort and without doing any post work with a computer, he ought to publish a book on how to do it. I can't imagine being able to do that myself.
He dials it in to something that usually works in that room, with that sound sytem & which takes minimal effort to save, burn for the band/artist, etc. It all depends on his expectations of sound quality and of desired effort. I'd consider aoaching it like the guys above. I think the (6+stereo mix) Tascam is a great idea, even if he only wants to deal with a mostly hands-off stereo recording:
ch1/2 record a stereo board feed, or better a dedicated mix or maye a 4 channel board sub-mix on chs1234
ch3/4 record an on stage omni pair
ch5/6 record a room/FOB or wide stage crowd facing pair
--and the clincher--
ch7/8 record an internal mix of the 6 channels above.
ask Tonedeaf's advice on initial placment of non-SBD mics in the room, dial in the board mix + internal recorder matrix over the first weeks. this might be the only time I'd actually consider using the recording effects on my R-44.. If I dialed in playback eq / whatever on the recorder then used those same settings as recording effects. . similar features on the DR-680 I assume.
Then he's to the point where he's got a quick, easy, usually quite nice sounding stereo mix. He can keep the other 6 channels if space isn't an issue, if he want's to mess with it further, if it's an especially important night.. or toss those and not have that burden if he's got other things to worry about or enjoy. He also has options for changing things around if he gets into the recording aspect.
-
I'm also going to tell ya that no matter what, to get a good polished sound, there is going to be post production work.
Exactly.
-
I can see the goodness behind a CD burner... the guy is busy... while he is running around doing everything else, he wants to pop a disk in, let it run, pop it out at the end. The problem is that it's a one shot deal... and what happens if it runs over 80 minutes?
I would suggest an R4 (used stock one is fine) with 2 channels of mics, and 2 channels of SBD, and patch a CD burner out of that via SPDIF (or analog if necessary). Record into both. 90% of the time he will use the CD that comes out and be happy with it. If something happens to the CD (runs over time, bad disk) then copy the files off the R4 to a computer, or even just hit "Play" on the R4 and run it into the CD burner again which is already hooked up. If someone wants to take the raw files out of the R4 and mix them more carefully, they can. Get in the habit of formatting the drive on the R4 once a week to make sure it doesn't fill up. Other recorders besides an R4 would work, but I think a hard drive that will hold a week's worth of stuff is easier than flash memory (also avoids "Oh Crap! I left the flash card at home!").
Put the mics overhead, mounted to the lightbar, that way no one spills beer on them. Run the mics through the snake, and on the SBD end of the snake, run them right into the R4, and not the SBD. 2 reasons for this...
- if they are condensers they need phantom power, and since probably nothing else on the SBD is using phantom power, they won't have phantom power turned on.
- if the mics go into the board, the sound guy will accidentally mess with the levels or something. Run them into the R4 and forget about it.
If the mics are fairly close to the stage/stacks the time delay is low (10' is OK), and mixing on the fly is not a big problem. Ideally, though since you know where the mics are permanently mounted X distance from there should be some little black delay box you can add in the SBD patch line to add an equal delay to that chain, then the on the fly mix is timed correctly.
Mics don't need to be exotic... that debate could go on and on. One thing I wouldn't recommend is bright mics, or ones with a big "presence hump" because mics mounted overhead will already tend to get more than their fair share of cymbals, and mics with a big presence hump would tend to overemphasize that. Something with a good bass response would be good, especially if the sound guys don't run the bass guitar through the SBD. If these mics don't pick it up, it won't get in the recording.
-
By the way... most of us taping different stuff, different places all the time, and nothing is consistant. This isn't going to be like this.
I go to the local bar every Wednesday night and record "Open Mic Night". After doing this many times I can walk in there, put the same mics up in the same place, plug into the board, put all my gain settings the same as last week, and hit record. Several times have run SPDIF out of my R4 (which is an "on the fly mix") into a laptop or H120 and used that mix to burn CDs rather than spending the time to mix in post. It becomes a question of "how good is good enough for the amount of time I'm willing to put into it". If I record music in an evening, and then have to spend 2 more evenings mixing, that becomes too much work and I get burned out and quit, especially if it isn't music that you particular like. :P Going right to the CD burner instead of to a computer, and then burning a CD is the next logical step... I just don't happen to have a standalone CD burner.
Bottom line... an on-the-fly mix that takes 5 minutes work that is 95% as good as one that takes 2 extra hours... it becomes a no brainer . You only kill yourself doing the post work on special occasions.