Cheaper Solo Recording

Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 2:09 pm

I have been trying to record using a mic and a quarter inch to eigth inch converter. I am attempting to record a piano, guitar, drums, and vocals seperately to get a semi-decent demo. I have not been getting very good results. I am basically looking for a mic that i can use with my computer and without having to spend over 200 or purchase an interface. Does something like this exist and if it does where could i find it?

Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 3:00 pm

Here's some real advice. You need a single decent microphone like a Shure SM 57. Then you need a USB audio interface that can accommodate at least 1 XLR professional microphone input. So you are looking at a total of $250. The audio interface will include a quality piece of software such as Cuebase LE, Cakewalk, something like that. You see, you need a minimum of a few certain factors to make an acceptable demo. The microphone input on a computer is designed for a multimedia headset so that you can make Internet chat calls, talk to your friends, etc.. It really can't be taken seriously for anything else. And because of its completely different kind of configuration, they can actually damage a quality microphone. So don't go there. Go talk to your local music store.

"yes I want to make a cheap demo that will influence my entire careers success or failure for $200." And so when you hear some real demos by people that really care about getting work, what Will you think?

I spent $250 for my system in 1970 one I was 14.
Ms. Remy Ann David

Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 11:19 pm

$200? You could book a 7 hour session in my neck of the woods. If you want a good demo, I would recommend getting your parts wired at home then go to a studio. Let an engineer record you with all the right gear, and more importantly, experience.

Posted: Wed Nov 05, 2008 11:40 pm

GeckoMusic wrote:

$200? You could book a 7 hour session in my neck of the woods. If you want a good demo, I would recommend getting your parts wired at home then go to a studio. Let an engineer record you with all the right gear, and more importantly, experience.

I may be taking this the wrong way. But I read what you typed here as.

You could hook a 7 hour session in my neck of the woods for $200. If you want a good high, I would recommend getting your parts wired at home then go to a studio. Let an engineer do you with all the right gear and more importantly. Experience.

Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:30 am

Greener,
lol. who know pro's and ho's were so closely related?

Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 12:40 am

I was thinking drugs.

Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 6:53 am

Ok
So if i used the things u said remy would u recomend recording all four things at once or doing it individually??
I have been to two different studios and each of them have done it individually but i have heard from some people all together is better.

Posted: Thu Nov 06, 2008 9:52 am

From a performance standpoint, recording all musicians at the same time in the same room is almost always superior. However, for editing, it is nice to have the isolation that individual recording provides.

Track bleed from having the whole group in the same room can make editing impossible. If you have your parts down, that's not an issue, but if you are improvising... you better like what you track.

In my experiance the best tracks are the ones with the musicians playing in the same room where they can feed off each other. However each group will be different. Some projects end up better tracked in separate rooms with just head phones connecting them. It depends on what the musicians are used to, and how well they know the parts.

This topic sponsored by: