2 questions about home recording...

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 3:51 pm

first of all, what are the advantages of bouncing MIDI data into a digital audio track for the final product? why not just leave it as a MIDI track?

secondly, when recording acoustics through a mic and into a processors, then into a computer, why do some recommend running the sound back into the processor and THEN into the speakers? why not just go from my computer directly to the speakers?

thanks in advance for any help,
alex

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:25 pm

I'll take the first one, it's the easiest Smile

You do not bounce the midi data. And you can do this at whatever stage of the production you see fit.
You arm a track to record and then use the midi track as the source for the armed track.
If you do not do this, the recording of the midi track, when you export your mix it will not include the sound produced by the midi track.

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:00 pm

The reason I like to bounce MIDI tracks (which I usually only do when I have to) is because MIDI tracks take way more processing power to play back than a wav. file.
I can get reduce the load on my computer by about 10-15% by bouncing, thus allowing me to run a few more plugins

I don't even understand the 2nd question
Actually I am not sure I even understand the first question.
Oh well.

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:00 pm

oh i guess Logic does this automatically when bouncing the final mix because i've never recorded any of my MIDI sequences into audio before a final mix down and my songs include them still. so bouncing MIDI data is only necessary when your DAW doesn't do it automatically?

do you have any input for the second question?

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:05 pm

you got the first question just fine haha : )

ill try and rephrase the second question...

my setup for recording acoustic guitar or vocals is as follows: Microphone<Pod xt Live (processor)<computer<speakers

tweakzheadz guide recomments the following setup: Microphone<processor<computer<processor<speakers

im just curious why i should go back into my pod before going to the speakers.

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 8:51 pm

MarkG wrote:

The reason I like to bounce MIDI tracks (which I usually only do when I have to) is because MIDI tracks take way more processing power to play back than a wav. file.
I can get reduce the load on my computer by about 10-15% by bouncing, thus allowing me to run a few more plugins

I don't even understand the 2nd question
Actually I am not sure I even understand the first question.
Oh well.

For me, when I hear or read the word bounce in relation to audio recording I think "combining two or more audio tracks because I am out of room here!!!."

So if this is the term, bouncing, now a days for converting midi data to audio data, then that is my ignorance showing ;)

dinkydkmgshred:

also, when I think of midi, I think of external hardware. This will not "bounce" as to your understanding of this word. OK, you can bounce midi tracks I reckon'...but bouncing data does not produce, from an external machine, the corresponding audio.

That's my understanding and I'm sticking to it ;)

Posted: Sun Jul 27, 2008 10:28 pm

dinkydkmgshred wrote:

my setup for recording acoustic guitar or vocals is as follows: Microphone<Pod xt Live (processor)<computer<speakers

tweakzheadz guide recomments the following setup: Microphone<processor<computer<processor<speakers

I am wondering how on earth you are able to plug a mic in to a POD xt in the first place?!

I checked the specs all over for this unit and found NO mic inputs.

I did discover that you are not the only person to do vocals through one. (I suppose running vocals through guitar amps isn't exactly a new thing)
Are you just putting and XLR-1/4 adapter on the cable?

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 6:40 am

MarkG wrote:

The reason I like to bounce MIDI tracks (which I usually only do when I have to) is because MIDI tracks take way more processing power to play back than a wav. file.

MIDI should take less processing power than audio, if you choose to use a simple module/soundcard/keyboard sounds while you are recording audio, and don't get fancy with too much controller data, etc. If you pick and choose virtual instruments right off the bat, then that statement may become true, the more tracks and instruments you use. I start with the barebones number of instruments. When the audio is recorded, I may even clone tracks with a different MIDI sound to mix'n'match sounds. I may like the combination of the woody tone of that snare, with the crispness of attack of this snare, and a bit of of this snare's spring rattle just underneath. but, i wait until after all audio that is planned is recorded. then I start piling up MIDI tracks, and turning them into audio. Those three snare tracks will eventually get mixed, and soloed to record to one audio track. Same with horns, keys...whatever...except a lot of the latter may be in stereo.

It makes more sense to just use small, onboard GM/GS/XG sets (as lacking in quality as they may be), while recording audio. This takes less power from the computer, leaving more for the audio. It also allows you to choose MIDI instrument sounds (onboard/VSTi/combination, etc) to fit around your carefully recorded vocals and real instruments. They can be changed and tweaked more easily and less destructively than trying to make an audio track fit into a MIDI composition, and trying to change the audio. Don't fall in love with something that can easily be replaced/tweaked.

Use simple MIDI as the timing and arrangement cues, then when you have finished your recording, start finding MIDI sounds to fit with your recorded sounds to eventually turn into audio.

Also, if running into MIDI problems, make sure any controller data is thinned. MIDI is a serial protocol, and can really only do one thing at a time. I've even gone through and moved individual notes a tick or two just to keep them from triggering at the same times. Your ears can't tell that small of a timing offset for a note, except that the notes all now play.

The second question makes NO sense. I doubt anyone is saying to run a processor from out of the computer to the speakers. The only reason one MIGHT want to do that is to run an unprocessed recorded signal through a processor to the speakers to record the processed sound with a mic from the speakers. They do this with guitar tracks through guitar amps. Many times, a guitar will be recorded direct, AND with a mic on an amp. If a different sound is then desired after listening, the unprocessed, direct track can be run back out of the computer, through processors and/or guitar amps to record the same exact performance...new sound.
Nobody runs a mix through an external processor. Everything that should be done to the mix should be in the mix already. Otherwise, you can't get a true representation of what that tune sounds like.

Kapt.Krunch

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:58 am

Kapt. I bow to your mastery of MIDI!

I am going to peruse your post again later to gain some more insight into using midi tracks. Currently I am limited to using midi for simple Piano, Strings and organ sounds. I record through a controller then plug in a virtual instrument (usually Miroslav Philharmonic) for playback.
A lot of the stuff you talked about was way over my head, but if I can gain a little more power by tweaking the way I use midi then I will be in much better shape.
Thanks

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:20 am

MarkG wrote:

dinkydkmgshred wrote:

my setup for recording acoustic guitar or vocals is as follows: Microphone<Pod xt Live (processor)<computer<speakers

tweakzheadz guide recomments the following setup: Microphone<processor<computer<processor<speakers

I am wondering how on earth you are able to plug a mic in to a POD xt in the first place?!

I checked the specs all over for this unit and found NO mic inputs.

I did discover that you are not the only person to do vocals through one. (I suppose running vocals through guitar amps isn't exactly a new thing)
Are you just putting and XLR-1/4 adapter on the cable?

i was trying to find out if its worth doing vocals through a pod because i have 3 months to produce a song and a music video and i dont have any pre amp for recording vocals (i've never had to do it before) and the only thing i have close to a pre amp audio interface is my pod...i just dont know if i have enough time to get the money to buy a mic and a MOTU interface.

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:27 am

your input was very helpful kapt.krunch thanks...i've just never recorded live instruments through a mic, mostly because i dont have one : )...im not sure what is necessary to produce crystal clear acoustic and vocal recordings with a black Macbook, Logic Pro 8, an Axiom 49 controller, and a Podxt Live...if anyone could give me any advice on what i should buy to get a high quality sound out of what i already have....i just need to record one vocal track and one guitar track for this song.

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 9:40 am

You should be able to get reasonable quality out of what you already have but if you want to record acoustics, you will need to either buy or borrow another audio interface. There's really no way around it. If you're looking to get approval for using the built in or soundbasher card, you're not going to get it. I'm afraid you either have to spend a bit of money or borrow gear and hopefully have someone around that knows the gear. Pretty tough to get it all right in just three months.

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:29 am

im obviously new to the whole microphone recording part of production, but i just want clarification on the signal path for recording just 2 tracks...this is what i understand so far:

ok so i record my vocals through a microphone which must run into an audio interface or pre amp (i thought the pod would work because it is a pre amp) and then the phantom power and gain can be adjusted through the audio interface and then come out of a direct out? im not sure what out im supposed to use. then it runs into the line in or microphone input of my macbook, then into logic where its recorded and has all the nifty reverb and pre delay effects, then it comes through the headphone output of my macbook through head phones and onto my ears so i can hear my song and voice while recording???

this is what i have so far, please let me know if im missing something or have unnecessary steps for producing quality vocals.

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 10:59 am

If you are in a rush and just need something that works, Blue has a usb mic called a Snowball. I don't know what the quality is like, though their other products are well spoken of. Samson and other company's also make USB mics but the quality of these is only as good as you can expect from an entry level budget mic.

To answer the question though, it depends on the interface. The most logical way to go is to buy a USB or Firewire interface that has a built in mic preamp. There are plenty to choose from. Many for under $200. Just remember, you get what you pay for. Mic into inteface which goes to your software via usb. As far as mics are concerned, get an sm57 and you have an industry standard that you'll likely have for many years to come.

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 2:46 pm

as far as actual mics go, i wasn't sure whether to go with the studio project B1 condenser mic or the shure sm57 dynamic. from what i understand, condensers are better for guitar and most vocals and dynamics are better for loud singers and drums.

This topic sponsored by: