You need to be looking at the input meter on your interface, rather than getting too caught up in what your amp volume should be set up.
I notice you didn't mention an interface in your post. Are you using one? Or MacGyver'ed some way to get into your PC's regular soundcard?
EDIT: Just reread your post - laptop soundcard. Gotcha :)
If you've got no input meters on the soundcard, then perhaps Audacity could be set up to display input level on the track meters while monitoring.
FAILING THAT. If you do a test recording with a given level, and it's too soft - turn up a bit and try again. If you're making the best use of the tools you have, you might need to be able to trial-and-error you way through it.

You were given good advice on the other forum: the Blackjack preamps are actually way beyond beginner level and can give totally pro results in the right hands.

What is more, the Blackjack is ALSO an audio interface: it will solve your other problem as well.

Hey one of you guys mentioned input in your post. By that do you mean, how much volume is coming in through the microphone? So if I want the input to be louder I should increase the gain or something? I'm a little confused. Is there a way to increase the volume without raising the gain so high it sounds bad?

Raising volume and raising gain are two separate things, and yet often they are the same.
By input, I meant input into your recording system. That is a separate issue from how loud your amp is (although if the amp is turned up/microphone moved closer, then the input gain needs to be less - and so they are connected...dig?)
You sound like you need a primer on gain structure. Google is your friend, as well as the search function on this forum...
10 seconds on the intramanet returned these - I haven't read through them all but doubtless they contain some good info to get you started.
[="http://www.recordingreview.com/articles/articles/181/1/The-Basics-Of-Setting-Gain-Structure/Page1.html"]The Basics Of Setting Gain Structure | Music Production[/]="http://www.recordin…"]The Basics Of Setting Gain Structure | Music Production[/]
[[url=http://="http://www.soundons…"]Gain Structure For Soundcard Recording[/]="http://www.soundons…"]Gain Structure For Soundcard Recording[/]
[="http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr98/articles/gainstructure.html"]Ins & Outs Of Gain Structure[/]="http://www.soundons…"]Ins & Outs Of Gain Structure[/]
[[url=http://="http://www.musicthi…"]The importance of gain structure when recording and mixing music. - MTT Open - Music Think Tank[/]="http://www.musicthi…"]The importance of gain structure when recording and mixing music. - MTT Open - Music Think Tank[/]

IIRs, post: 375788 wrote: the Blackjack preamps are actually way beyond beginner level and can give totally pro results in the right hands.

Hmmmm, My differing opinion:

Local musician friend has used onyx preamps, since their debut. I have used his board along with his older VLZ Pro board at his request in tracking. I even own one myself, but don't ever use it anymore.
Even my FMR RNP, totally destroys the onyx preamps sonically and I wouldn't put the RNP as pro level either.

Unless you are a Tom Dowd caliber engineer and doubtful that any of us are..... Those preamps are just not anywhere near pro level, PERIOD!
Very good in that price range for what they do, but not accurate that they could give pro results, unless maybe they were by far the weakest link in the chain with pro level gear all around them & the Tape Op is extremely competent.

Just don't put them in that "Pro level" category...

Ignoring for the moment the fact that you are talking out of your arse, what are you doing with my avatar?

Well, it seems my moderator powers don't extend to deleting your stolen avatar.

FYI that gif you nicked from me is the gain reduction meter from my FL4TT3RY compressor plugin, now superceded by [[url=http://[/URL]="http://platinumears…"]FL4TT3RY2[/]="http://platinumears…"]FL4TT3RY2[/]

I designed the compressor algorithm from scratch, then created the graphics myself, then created my own animated avatar from it, and I do NOT give you permission to use it, especially not with your elitist anti-Mackie attitude, and snobish "I don't use plugins" signature.

Honestly, some people... "~100% OTB NOW~ (UNPLUGGED THE PLUG-INS)" ... except your avatar is the 100% digitally generated graphics from a 100% digital plug-in (Windows only btw. Bet you're a mac snob as well?). :rolleyes:

treidm, post: 375849 wrote: Hmmmm, My differing opinion:

Local musician friend has used onyx preamps, since their debut. I have used his board along with his older VLZ Pro board at his request in tracking. I even own one myself, but don't ever use it anymore.
Even my FMR RNP, totally destroys the onyx preamps sonically and I wouldn't put the RNP as pro level either.

Unless you are a Tom Dowd caliber engineer and doubtful that any of us are..... Those preamps are just not anywhere near pro level, PERIOD!
Very good in that price range for what they do, but not accurate that they could give pro results, unless maybe they were by far the weakest link in the chain with pro level gear all around them & the Tape Op is extremely competent.

Just don't put them in that "Pro level" category...

This whole statement is pretty ridiculous IMO. What exactly is "pro level" then?

Anybody who has experience and knows what they are doing can get any preamp that isn't broken to work wonderfully in a recording. You seem like you've been spending too much time around clueless wannabe's that don't know a thing about actual recording. Or, perhaps gear snobs that justify their decisions by denying that anything contrary to their "level" of kit can get the job done.

I just happen to have recordings made with what you would probably consider "pro level" gear and what you would undoubtedly not consider such. Care to try a double blind test?

Right now you're definitely spouting some pretty misleading stuff. I think it would do you good to know the truth.

Exactly. If you can't get decent results from Mackie Onyx pre-amps you suck as an engineer.

To the OP: buy the Blackjack, its a great choice and should serve you well. Don't pay attention to the treidm idiot above, who's opinion was no doubt obtained the same way as his avatar.

IIRs, post: 375853 wrote: Ignoring for the moment the fact that you are talking out of your arse, what are you doing with my avatar?

I got the avatar from another forum site, where it is being used by another person. He didn't say anything about you. I don't know if he came here to get it, but I assure you I didn't know you had a trademarked avatar. I will switch it out for another and pass your thoughts on to the gentleman I acquired it from.
I've got 30 or 40 meter avatars, if it's yours, and I'll take your word for it, it is a nice one, but when I got it, it wasn't mentioned that is was trademarked, so I will now assume he didn't have your permission for the trademarked avatar either.

As for the "talking out your....etc..." type comments?
They are rude and uncalled for.

I have my opinion, which is why I started with, "Hmmmm, My differing opinion:"
And I'm sure like anyone else, my opinion is based on my experiences.

I didn't start with, your talking out your ass, your a dumb ass and your opinion is crap, you hang around clueless idiots etc....

You are very rude for a moderator....Calling me names for what I posted? Are you kidding?
Are you the main moderator?
How old are you? You are acting VERY young to say the least...
Please pm me with who runs this site, thanks

Not even sure what a mac snob is?

You are being an ass in so many directions, I can't really respond to all.

"IIRs Exactly. If you can't get decent results from Mackie Onyx pre-amps you suck as an engineer."
You didn't say decent, you said PRO RESULTS

If you think mackie onyx preamps are pro level, that's great. Others including me may have a differing opinion and only consider them mid level preamps, that's all. Don't take it so personal if someone disagrees with you.....

EDIT: Ahhhhhh, I get the snob thing now. No I don't use a mac computer. When I did track, mix and if you can call it mastering, on computers, I did it on PC running Windows. Everything I do now is standalone OTB.

The trouble is in thinking in terms of "pro level" gear.

The only people I know that truly think like that are amateurs that don't know what they're talking about or "pros" that have some vested interest in spreading nonsense.

There is gear and there are pros. They are not the same, nor do they have anything really to do with the quality of each other. A skilled "pro" can use whatever gear they have available (especially these days) and create professional sounding results.

I have never given anyone permission to use that animation, what's more I have never been asked.

treidm, post: 375861 wrote:
"IIRs Exactly. If you can't get decent results from Mackie Onyx pre-amps you suck as an engineer."
You didn't say decent, you said PRO RESULTS

Pro results in the right hands...

Mirrormix, post: 375863 wrote: There is gear and there are pros. They are not the same, nor do they have anything really to do with the quality of each other. A skilled "pro" can use whatever gear they have available (especially these days) and create professional sounding results.

I still have a different opinion.

As an example:
You have THIS gear available, by YOUR premise:
Shure PG57 mic
Alesis 3030 compressor
Behringer Minimic MIC800 preamp
TASCAM DP-004 Digital 4-track recorder
Behringer Xenyx 1002 mixer
Behringer HPM1000 headphones

Your opinion as stated above would be that with "whatever gear they have available" a "skilled pro" could get "professional sounding results"
IMO I would have to see (Hear) that to believe it.

My differing opinion is to a certain degree the level of gear does matter.
The level of experience an engineer has, may very well far outweigh the above.
But the 2 (Working as a living in real studio friends) engineers I know have probably been instrumental in what my opinions are now. It is fortunate that I can try gear that I cannot afford to buy. I myself am NOT what I would call a "pro".
I make a main living out of the music industry.
I have tracked, mixed & mastered our bands music for years.
I also do paid projects for other bands.
By no means does that make me a pro.

I mostly have (To me) mid level gear
some examples....
FMR RNC's
FMR RNP
FMR RNLA
Revox PR99 MKIII
with some pro level gear mixed in.....
AKG C414 B-ULS
Dynaudio BM 6A MKII (Maybe they are high/mid grade?)

Just a few examples.

I'm thinking also that many posters here trying to get advice are NOT "pro's", or they would probably be giving the answers not asking them (In general)
So if these posters that may not be pro level engineers, have lower level gear and may not know the technics needed to get "pro" level results.

If they don't have the skills or gear, not sure what results they would get.
I know what poor results I myself got with lack of experience & skills combined with beginner level gear when I first started.
In my case what skills I learned only took me so far, then personally I needed to raise the level of my gear, then learn that gear...
I wish I had skipped a few of the steps though, but just didn't have good advice at that time & hadn't met my engineer friends yet.
I just kept making gear baby steps in beginning

So you're saying that by listening to the end product you can tell what "level" of gear something was recorded on?

I can definitely put that assertion to the test.

I do this stuff for a living. I have all kinds of "bling" gear. But I would have no problem using all of that Behringer and other stuff you mentioned and I could definitely make recordings that would sound professional with it.

What you apparently (and not all that surprisingly) misunderstand is the fallacy of the argument that asserts that gear has some kind of absolute intrinsic "level" of professionalism. Who would determine something like that anyway? It's not the gear that makes the recordings professional sounding or not. It's the skill of the people involved with the production and the decisions they make when using whatever gear they have available. That you and whoever you've been "learning" from don't know this is too bad.

I don't buy gear because it costs a lot or because the name on it is what people like to associate their productions with. I buy it because it works and it fits the needs of the project at hand. As I have become more experienced as a professional I have found that I prefer a certain level of feature and build quality, mostly because it's more reliable and because it can do some of the esoteric things that I might want to be done. But really most of the low budget gear these days is perfectly capable of sounding fantastic, when used properly and skillfully working within the limitations of the gear. It's that good. Never before has it been more true than now that if you can't get a great recording it's not the gear's fault.

You might have a differing opinion, but it's obviously not founded in direct experience at the professional level.

I tell you what, I'll put my recordings on "cheap gear" against your recordings on your "mid-level" gear and we'll see who's sounds more professional. How about that?

Mirrormix, post: 375866 wrote:
I tell you what, I'll put my recordings on "cheap gear" against your recordings on your "mid-level" gear and we'll see who's sounds more professional. How about that?

I'm not looking for a battle of words with you, I offered my opinion without making disparaging or rude comments about you or the other posters character or abilities or their friends.

I will tell you this though and it's a FACT, you wouldn't speak to me in this manner in person, I GUARANTEE IT!!!!!!
You are safe behind your keyboard.............

I have tried to not stoop to name calling and rude comments, and so you know..it doesn't make you sound REAL professional.

It makes you sound childish.

I hope the OP reads all posts completely and takes all with a grain of salt and can glean something useful.
I still don't believe onyx preamps are "pro level" and I own a mackie board w/ them (It's actually the best thing about the board if using them bypassing the mixer)

Mirrormix, post: 375866 wrote: So you're saying that by listening to the end product you can tell what "level" of gear something was recorded on?

Please show me where I said anything of that sort?
You can try and twist to make an argument if you wish, I hope readers notice what I have actually posted. Looks like you want a safe internet forum fight.
You will win this because I will soon give up trying to talk civilized to you.
I wish we could have this discussion in person....

If you could do the same with any gear, there would be no need for anything but the cheapest gear. Why do you have a Grace, UA, & Neve preamps? Just for color and a transparent one?
Wait you can use any gear and get pro results, so why not just use onyx preamps instead of the higher priced ones you use?
I hope the OP sees what is being said.

I've only said that in my opinion the onyx preamps are not pro level, nothing more.
Good for what they are. With my mixer (which I don't use anymore), they are the best feature.

Are you kidding me?

Nobody has insulted you. What I've done is decided to argue against your assertion that there is such a thing as "pro level" gear aside from the "pro" that might be using it. I've also argued that a skilled and experienced professional can make professional sounding recordings with whatever gear they have available. I then asked a question to clarify what you were saying about "pro level" gear. My question is based on the implication that goes along with what you have been arguing.

You say gear has to be "pro level" to make recordings that sound professional. That implies that there is a sound that is intrinsic in the gear itself that is professional, which implies that you can hear the sound of the gear quality based on the sound of the recordings made with it. I question if that's what you're suggesting and I challenge you if you actually are suggesting that with my last post.

That you have decided to get upset is on you. Besides that, what difference would it make if we were in person? I'd say the same thing. What would you do, try to fight me like an animal or a child that can't get their way? THAT'S childish. Physical intimidation is hardly proving your point. If anything it makes it look as though you don't know what you're talking about and have gotten caught in your own nonsense. Which to be honest with you is what I've suspected all along. You have yet to say anything that suggests otherwise to me.

Why don't you pay attention to what you're arguing and try to present a cogent, sound argument? Or can you not do that?

Mirrormix, post: 375871 wrote: Are you kidding me?

Nobody has insulted you.

Looking back at posts it wasn't you, it was IIRs. So I am sorry if I got wrapped up in what he said and blew off at you.
But he did insult me, my friends etc....

Sorry again, I blew off at you by mistake.

I still have my opinion and will freely discuss it, if you like. I would much rather discuss thoughts and opinions, leaving out all the personal attacks

But, you have been trying to read into and twist or add things I never said in your argument, like....
"You say gear has to be "pro level" to make recordings that sound professional" [Just one example]

Never said it. Please show in any of my posts where you saw this........

I will discuss, but you need to refrain from using things I DIDN't say, as if I said them

As far as this:
"Besides that, what difference would it make if we were in person? I'd say the same thing. What would you do, try to fight me like an animal or a child that can't get their way? THAT'S childish. Physical intimidation is hardly proving your point."

Since it wasn't you, but the other poster, it is a mute point. But yes as childish as it may sound to you, if someone attacks me verbally and with warning continues, I will have no problem getting it in the gravel!

Guess that means you are pro level engineer, but beginner level fighter? IT's A JOKE :)

treidm, post: 375865 wrote:
But the 2 (Working as a living in real studio friends) engineers I know have probably been instrumental in what my opinions are now.

As I said: you got them the same way you got your avatar.

(Why would anyone even want to do that anyway? Your avatar is supposed to say something about you, right? If you don't have the abilities to create your own animated VU meter you could simply upload a photo, right? What kind of person would want to steal someone else's personality like that?)

treidm, post: 375873 wrote: ...But, you have been trying to read into and twist or add things I never said in your argument, like....
"You say gear has to be "pro level" to make recordings that sound professional" [Just one example]

Never said it. Please show in any of my posts where you saw this........

I will discuss, but you need to refrain from using things I DIDN't say, as if I said them

Fair enough. Those words you did not type. But you did argue their meaning when you said this:

treidm wrote: Unless you are a Tom Dowd caliber engineer and doubtful that any of us are..... Those preamps are just not anywhere near pro level, PERIOD!
Very good in that price range for what they do, but not accurate that they could give pro results, unless maybe they were by far the weakest link in the chain with pro level gear all around them & the Tape Op is extremely competent.

Just don't put them in that "Pro level" category...

That statement does say that Onyx preamps are not accurate "that they could give pro results..." Further you go on in the thread to assert this notion of "pro level" gear. So while I did extrapolate your argument and rephrase it. I wasn't distorting it's meaning at all. Unless you are now suggesting that you didn't mean what you originally appeared to argue.

Mirrormix, post: 375875 wrote: Fair enough. Those words you did not type. But you did argue their meaning when you said this:
That statement does say that Onyx preamps are not accurate "that they could give pro results..." Further you go on in the thread to assert this notion of "pro level" gear. So while I did extrapolate your argument and rephrase it. I wasn't distorting it's meaning at all. Unless you are now suggesting that you didn't mean what you originally appeared to argue.

You just did it again, look at my post closer, I didn't say onyx preamps are not accurate.

I said, "Very good in that price range for what they do, but not accurate that they could give pro results"

meaning the assertion that they can to me is not accurate. I was saying nothing about the accuracy sonically of them.

You continue to take things out of context...

Are you a female?

?

Okay,....

In any case, assuming I misunderstood you. Why don't you just say now what you really think?

Onyx preamps: "pro level" or not? and why?

Does gear need to be what you call "pro level" to get professional sounding recordings? and why?

Mirrormix, post: 375878 wrote: Does gear need to be what you call "pro level" to get professional sounding recordings? and why?

So many variables that I don't think there is one black or white answer.
In relation to the OP, he stated he knew very little and was really new to this.
I'm not sure really high quality gear would make as much of an affect as more experience would.
At some point in the evolution of experience, I believe it will make a noticeable affect though

"Professional sounding recordings"
That's a tough term to know the meaning?
Do you mean, recordings that sound like commercial releases?
If so, it might be an advantage to have some high quality compressors/limiters to match that super compressed sound most new stuff has especially if you will be layering compression.

I think all levels of gear have their place.
You have the home recorder to the professional working engineers & all in between.
You have low income buyers to those with no end to their disposable income & all in between.
I think that's why manufactures make all levels of gear, to cover as much of the market as they can.
I do think much is overpriced, but sometimes you do get what you pay for.
Whether it be better op-amps, caps or whatever.

I will stay away from the word "pro" if I can. I guess I can substitute "Higher quality"

For example:
The first time I got to hear a Great River Pre, I was taken aback.........
I have been able to work some at a local small studio (For Free, No pay) and has allowed me to see, hear & use some high quality gear for comparison
I started recording many years ago on a TASCAM 244 cassette recorder, still have a 424 mkIII, I got before they quit making them.
And yeah I know the Nebraska album by Bruce Springsteen was recorded on a 144 recorder then mastered in a studio. But hey listen to it, you can tell it wasn't recorded on a Studer.
In my opinion, sometimes higher quality gear can make a difference.
But before you read anything into it, let me followup by saying..
The level of experience the TapeOP, mixing & mastering engineers have may very well far outweigh the difference in quality levels in gear.
But to me it still doesn't change the fact that there is a quality difference in gear manufacturing. If there wasn't no one would pay for the more expensive gear.

To the onyx preamps:
I personally put them in mid level quality and good for what they are in that price range
I still don't consider them as High level quality
I do put them well above beginner level quality, but just not high level.
I have loaned mine out to a musician friend who uses it with his Alesis ADAT for tracking and mixing
But it certainly served it's purpose for me in it's time.

SIDE NOTE: The preamp s to me by far are the best part of the mixer though......

EDIT:
Sonically, I guess when pushed to me they get brittle (I know that's an overused term, but for me it fits) I am very happy sonically with my FMR RNP's for now.

What the OP said he was told, "good beginners level preamp" I would totally agree with, in fact would say they are good mid level & being an interface may be helpful as well.

IIRs, post: 375874 wrote: (Why would anyone even want to do that anyway? Your avatar is supposed to say something about you, right? If you don't have the abilities to create your own animated VU meter you could simply upload a photo, right? What kind of person would want to steal someone else's personality like that?)

I've got 30-40 animated Meter avatars, probably more than 200 total

They don't mean a thing to me.

They don't define me as a person.

They have nothing to do with my personality.

I didn't "steal it", I was given it upon request from another forum. It's out there being used. (I did swap it out for one of my many other meter avatars)

You really believe an avatar used online at a forum site defines your personality?
You should re-think what yours is then.....

Maybe you can sue them for copyright infringement?
Or stealing your personality? LOL Don't think they would want your personality....

weber.595, post: 375785 wrote: Hello all. I am quite new to the art of recording and I was wondering if anyone could help me out.

Right now I am using a Shure SM57 mic to record guitar. I am placing it directly (1in away) in front of the center cone on the amplifier (a Laney). My question deals with how to get a fuller, warmer sound on the guitar. I want it to sound like Sufjan Stevens gets on his recordings (the guitar right at the beginning of this song [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.youtube…"]Sufjan Stevens - Futile Devices - YouTube[/]="http://www.youtube…"]Sufjan Stevens - Futile Devices - YouTube[/]) because I am arpeggiating a chord, I want each note to ring out clearly.

I know little about native decibel levels and what I should be aiming for. I know (think) the mic is -20dB below native level. Does this mean I really do need a preamp to boost it that 20dB? If so, what kind of preamps should I be looking for. Someone on another forum recommended a Mackie Onyx Blackjack as a good beginners level preamp. I don't know if this is true or not but it seems like a good price range for me.

My troubles indeed lie in the fact that my recordings are very quiet, so I have to use a digital amplification (I use a plugin in Audacity to do this) on the track for it to be a good volume. However, when using this method it also amplifies the white noise in the background. So I use a white noise remover plugin to remove the excess noise, but then the noise is only gone during silence (any time the guitar is played the white noise is not removed and is still audible. So it's jumping back and forth between being there and not! Sounds terrible) Would a preamp fix this?

As you can probably tell, I don't have much of a setup on my computer. I use Audacity to record my tracks. Will this seriously hinder the quality of my recordings, or can I get a good sound while still using Audacity. To me it seems like as long as I record it well (eg. mix it "naturally" on the amplifier, my playing volume, and eq settings) it shouldn't matter what program i use to record. However, I know I am probably dead wrong on this. Tell me why I am wrong (give me some concrete examples here, like some awesome plugins I don't even know about)

Another thing is my sound card. I would think that sound card is pretty important for the quality of a recording. Right now I am just using the crappy sound card which came with my laptop. Will this make a big difference on my recording quality? If so, what are some good mid-range soundcards I can get below $100? Is the sound card more important than the preamp?

How much should I amplify the guitar when recording? I normally put my amp at about 2.5/10 and my guitar at 7.5/10. Should I increase the volume if I want a better sound?

tldr;
I need to know more about preamps, how/why they are used. I need to know more about soundcards, programs, and digital recording in general.

WOW!!....SO this got pretty sidetracked with Mackie products. Which is pretty weird.....Mackie makes pro level equipment and there's nothing wrong with there stuff...if anything their preamp designs are too clean and transparent. But they do the job
To the OP:
How much are you willing to spend to achieve this ultra quiet low noise tone that you posted by Sufjan Stevens?
I don't think that guitar was recorded with a mic and amp.
I'm pretty sure that was direct into a console or interface, there's a digital ping pong delay effect on there with maybe a little light reverb.
Any of the newer interfaces are quiet enough to get that sort of recording. Trying to use an amp and SM57 mic will be noisy.
Laptop internal soundcards are not adequate at all. They are noisy! Get a decent interface....USB or Firewire!
If you don't need to record and track that many inputs at the same time the BlackJack would be fine...or a Duet or Babyface would also suffice.
I'm pretty sure you don't have the type of isolation room or mics you need to get that sort of sound acoustically so going direct into your interface/laptop and then recording into a DAW is the way to go....use the instrument input, set a clean input level (-16dfs on the DAW meters), track it, add your sauce, listen on headphones and get that ping pong delay and verb going and I think you'll get what your after....
Hope that helps....
I don't know what's going here with the other peoples advice so I'll leave them to whatever their opinions or avatars are...

treidm, post: 375883 wrote:
They don't mean a thing to me.

They don't define me as a person.

They have nothing to do with my personality

No, because you just lifted them from other people. If have nothing original to upload, why not just leave it blank?

That avatar does actually have some meaning to me: it represents a compressor algorithm that I spent ages tweaking and now use all the time. It also represents the best looking plugin gui I have so far managed to make, having little talent in that area. I am proud of that avatar and the achievments it represents. And I would be interested to know where else it is being used without permission incidentally?

Anyway, back on the subject of Mackie Onyx preamps: they actually outperform my DAV BG1 in terms of high gain with low noise floor.

10 of them form the basis of my mobile rig. I sometimes bring others as well depending on the job, but often rely on just the Mackies. As such I have used them to record countless rock bands, for spot mics in orchestral recording, with ribbon mics for choirs or horn sections, for hot line level direct outs from the FOH desk for live recordings, and to boost the signal from a pair of ribbon mics in order to get it down 100m of multicore without excess noise.

My clients happily paid my fee on all of those occasions, which is really the only defintion of "pro" that makes any sense.

IIRs, post: 375887 wrote: No, because you just lifted them from other people.

I have hundreds of avatars, none of which I made. Most are just online for the getting, some I trade or get from other internet users.
I haven't knowingly stolen any avatars that were trademarked.......

They have about as much meaning to me as a smiley face avatar.
But, I see how important they are to you......

I didn't "lift" anything. I asked about it at another forum and was "given" it, and added it to my large collection. I have many animated avatars, some of which are meters.

I happily switched it out with another animated one immediately after you commented about it. I also deleted it, if that helps to make you feel happier? It is out there though....

Not sure everyone shares your feelings about internet avatars.

Already mentioned this at another forum to the one I was given it by, he laughed and said, "avatars are public domain unless they are trademarked and if they were they would carry a symbol" He also said, he's already given it out to at least 20 or more that commented on it, not just me.
And lastly he did say, He would consider not giving it out anymore, but the animal is already out of the cage...........

I don't know, since it's a trademarked avatar, maybe you could include a trademark symbol?
That's what companies do, so the public knows it is trademarked and only for their use.....

It's already out there now, but maybe just take it as a compliment on your avatar style ability?
Or, after adding your trademark symbol to it, you will still need to find everyone online that uses it, or has it on their computer (And their versions won't have a trademark symbol, so they won't know) and inform them, so they can stop using it.

I will lastly say unlike onyx pre-amps (which I personally consider mid-level), your avatar was PRO-LEVEL. (JOKE)

treidm, post: 375890 wrote:
I didn't "lift" anything. I asked about it at another forum and was "given" it, and added it to my large collection.

So you keep saying. Which forum, and which user?

There aren't that many recording/music forums, you can find it with searches.
Hint: maybe use my forum name "treidm" in search. I use that same name on that site.....

He has hundreds of posts (Plenty in current dates), so won't be hard to spot. (No deep searches needed)
The others he says he gave to, have no idea who they are or what forums they frequent. You can search for them at your leisure (I'm sure they are on recording/music forums).

You can find him and have your battle yourself........I'm not the avatar police nor do I care to get in the middle of or start a fight over an avatar.
After your comment, I switched it out for a different animated avatar. Done deal for me...

He did say he would consider not using it and wasn't going to give it out anymore when I pm'ed him about it, but was still using the avatar as of last night..... So if you need to, start your searches today....

And If it's trademarked, add the symbol? This could prevent this down the line for you.

I'm not going hunting for him. If you won't tell me who or where he is I will just continue to believe that he doesn't exist, and that you simply right-clicked my avatar and helped yourself.

I know nothing of trademarking avatars: that's the only one I've ever made, and I've not used it anywhere else.

What I did offer was a way, I think you could find it yourself, without me outing anyone.

Glad it's not that important and your satisfied...............

Ok, lets see if we can redeem this thread at all.

weber.595, post: 375785 wrote:
Right now I am using a Shure SM57 mic to record guitar. I am placing it directly (1in away) in front of the center cone on the amplifier (a Laney).

Good start. This would usually give the brightest tone: you can then experiment with moving the mic out towards the edge of the cone (or angling it off axis) to get a warmer "woodier" tone.

weber.595, post: 375785 wrote: because I am arpeggiating a chord, I want each note to ring out clearly.

This comes down mostly to playing technique! But you could use compression to increase the apparent sustain, assuming the playing is good.

weber.595, post: 375785 wrote: I know (think) the mic is -20dB below native level. Does this mean I really do need a preamp to boost it that 20dB? If so, what kind of preamps should I be looking for. Someone on another forum recommended a Mackie Onyx Blackjack as a good beginners level preamp. I don't know if this is true or not but it seems like a good price range for me.

My troubles indeed lie in the fact that my recordings are very quiet, so I have to use a digital amplification (I use a plugin in Audacity to do this) on the track for it to be a good volume. However, when using this method it also amplifies the white noise in the background. So I use a white noise remover plugin to remove the excess noise, but then the noise is only gone during silence (any time the guitar is played the white noise is not removed and is still audible. So it's jumping back and forth between being there and not! Sounds terrible) Would a preamp fix this? .

The mic will not always be 20dB below line level: it depends how loud the source is, and how close you place the mic. But as a general rule microphones ouptut levels much lower than line level, and amplifying them up to line level is always the first thing you need to do. This requires a decent quality mic preamp, with a balanced XLR input: anything less is likely to give disappointing results, as you have already discovered.

Anyway, as discussed already: the Mackie is an excellent choice and will easily amplify your SM57 to line level with no noise other than that coming from the guitar amp itself. What's more I think it also offers high impedance (Hi-Z) instrument inputs, so you also get the option to plug your guitar directly into your computer and use amp simulators instead of your Laney... this can be really handy if you have neighbours and want to record in the early hours!

weber.595, post: 375785 wrote: As you can probably tell, I don't have much of a setup on my computer. I use Audacity to record my tracks. Will this seriously hinder the quality of my recordings, or can I get a good sound while still using Audacity. To me it seems like as long as I record it well (eg. mix it "naturally" on the amplifier, my playing volume, and eq settings) it shouldn't matter what program i use to record..

Audacity is fine for now. The recording quality will be the same as any other software. As you get in deeper you may find you want more options for mixing and editing, but as you say: if you get the arrangement and the tracking right the mix should really sort itself out anyway!

weber.595, post: 375785 wrote: Another thing is my sound card. I would think that sound card is pretty important for the quality of a recording. Right now I am just using the crappy sound card which came with my laptop. Will this make a big difference on my recording quality? If so, what are some good mid-range soundcards I can get below $100? Is the sound card more important than the preamp?

Yes the soundcard is important. No more or less important than the pre-amp: they form a chain, and any weak link will compromise the result. The good news is, the Mackie Blackjack already referred to is also an audio interface: simply plug it in with a USB cable, install the drivers, and set your DAW software to use the Mackie interface instead of your built-in soundcard.

weber.595, post: 375785 wrote: How much should I amplify the guitar when recording? I normally put my amp at about 2.5/10 and my guitar at 7.5/10. Should I increase the volume if I want a better sound?.

The level you set your amp at should be determined by the sound you are after, the feel of the guitar (assuming you are playing in the same room) and the thickness of your walls / tolerance of your neighbours.

You should then set the pre-amp gain so that you get a good healthy level on the input meters in your DAW software, but the peaks are no-where near full scale: aim to leave at least 6 dB headroom.

Back on topic......

djmukilteo, post: 375885 wrote: WOW!!....SO this got pretty sidetracked with Mackie products. Which is pretty weird.....Mackie makes pro level equipment and there's nothing wrong with there stuff...if anything their preamp designs are too clean and transparent. But they do the job
To the OP:
How much are you willing to spend to achieve this ultra quiet low noise tone that you posted by Sufjan Stevens?
I don't think that guitar was recorded with a mic and amp.
I'm pretty sure that was direct into a console or interface, there's a digital ping pong delay effect on there with maybe a little light reverb.
Any of the newer interfaces are quiet enough to get that sort of recording. Trying to use an amp and SM57 mic will be noisy.
Laptop internal soundcards are not adequate at all. They are noisy! Get a decent interface....USB or Firewire!
If you don't need to record and track that many inputs at the same time the BlackJack would be fine...or a Duet or Babyface would also suffice.
I'm pretty sure you don't have the type of isolation room or mics you need to get that sort of sound acoustically so going direct into your interface/laptop and then recording into a DAW is the way to go....use the instrument input, set a clean input level (-16dfs on the DAW meters), track it, add your sauce, listen on headphones and get that ping pong delay and verb going and I think you'll get what your after....
Hope that helps....
I don't know what's going here with the other peoples advice so I'll leave them to whatever their opinions or avatars are...

Thank you this post was very helpful. Yea medium-low reverb, and connect directly into the interface -> Adobe Audition 1.5. I only need to do one input at a time so it's perfect. Any recommendations for how to learn to program drums? I open up FruityLoops and i'm just so overwhelmed and confused I have no idea what to do. I've heard good things about EZdrummer but I'm not even sure how it works.

Hey, I'm a guitar player, and if I do say so myself I'm actually starting to get pretty good (been practicing a few hours a day for about 5 years now) but I honestly don't even know what delay does. I'm young and a cheapskate so I never got into any effects (pedals) or anything like that. Just a classical player mostly.

While were at it if someone could explain how midi works to me it would help me so much. So much. I'm a computer guy, but this stuff still confuses me greatly (I have read no less than 10 tutorials on line carefully, but they jump into advanced topics too fast) . If someone could just give me a step-by-step on how to make a song using midi, that would be great. Like I just don't even know where to start. I guess I need to get a newer modern keyboard (i was looking at the $200 range Casios), a midi out plug, and a program on my computer to read the inputs from my keyboard.

weber.595, post: 376117 wrote: ...While were at it if someone could explain how midi works to me it would help me so much. So much. I'm a computer guy, but this stuff still confuses me greatly (I have read no less than 10 tutorials on line carefully, but they jump into advanced topics too fast) . If someone could just give me a step-by-step on how to make a song using midi, that would be great. Like I just don't even know where to start. I guess I need to get a newer modern keyboard (i was looking at the $200 range Casios), a midi out plug, and a program on my computer to read the inputs from my keyboard.

MIDI stands for Musical Instrument Digital Interface. All it happens to be is a data format that carries information about specific notes to be triggered, how fast they are triggered and for how long they are held. No audio is transferred via MIDI, only data. It's an old data transfer format that comes from the early 80s.

How it works is pretty simple. Say you have a keyboard that generates it's own audible sounds and that is also MIDI capable. What that would mean is that your keyboard has the ability to not only make keyboard sounds all by itself, but it also has the separate and independent ability to send data information about which keys you press, how fast you press them and how long you hold them. That information can be passed via MIDI out jack (or a USB jack that carries MIDI data) to the MIDI (or USB) input of another MIDI capable device so that you, from your original keyboard, can trigger the audio output of the destination device. This process can also be used to trigger the audio output of software instruments within a computer program. Instead of your original MIDI capable keyboard being connected to another hardware audio device it can be connected to a computer and you can trigger the audio output of software instruments using your physical MIDI capable keyboard.

MIDI can also be used to send control surface data to a computer to allow you to manipulate the functions of an audio sequencing program. In that case the hardware MIDI device would be your MIDI capable control surface and it would connect to your computer and be configured to control your sequencer, or whatever else is MIDI capable that the control surface works well as a controller for.

Making a song in your computer with MIDI is a matter of having software instruments open and configured to receive MIDI data on specific channels in your audio sequencing program and then inputting controller data from your hardware MIDI capable device (most likely a keyboard) into your sequencer. That way you can trigger software instruments in real time as you listen to their audio playback or you can actually record the controller data and assign it to trigger various software instruments of your pleasing.

There are some MIDI capable keyboards (and other instruments) that are not able to produce audio by themselves. These are known as keyboard (or other instrument) MIDI controllers. They are strictly for either controlling other hardware MIDI devices that can produce audio or for triggering the audio output of software instruments. But again they do not output audio by themselves, only MIDI data. It's important to remember that MIDI isn't audio. It's data. They are not the same. Just because a device is a keyboard in form (or whatever form of instrument) and MIDI capable doesn't mean that it will output any audio.

I have an older Casio Keyboard that has 100 different Midi Instruments on it. You are saying that if I get the connector USB cable, I can use this keyboard to control Midi on my computer instead of the sounds from my keyboard? In other words, I can use the keyboard to play a Midi file I downloaded off the internet instead of one of the crappy ones they gave me on the keyboard? If I got this connector cable, how would I add Midi drums to a song (in Adobe Audition 1.5) ? Thank you for the post it reaffirmed some of my knowledge about Midi.

weber.595, post: 376618 wrote: I have an older Casio Keyboard that has 100 different Midi Instruments on it. You are saying that if I get the connector USB cable, I can use this keyboard to control Midi on my computer instead of the sounds from my keyboard? In other words, I can use the keyboard to play a Midi file I downloaded off the internet instead of one of the crappy ones they gave me on the keyboard? If I got this connector cable, how would I add Midi drums to a song (in Adobe Audition 1.5) ? Thank you for the post it reaffirmed some of my knowledge about Midi.

Not sure what Casio model you have and I've never used Adobe Audition but any MIDI keyboard can control any MIDI sound in computer software. There are all sorts of MIDI instruments (including drums) that can be loaded and the sounds triggered from your keyboard keys.
I'm sure you have manuals for your Casio that explain how to set that up.
I'm sure Adobe has instructions on how to add a MIDI track and how to select the Casio as the controller.
Here's a link to some tutorials for Adobe
Hope that helps...

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.vtc.com/…"]Adobe Audition 1.5 Tutorials[/]="http://www.vtc.com/…"]Adobe Audition 1.5 Tutorials[/]

Tube preamp will provide warmth .But a little EQ tweaking will go along way but just minute adjustments should be made adjust it in small increments.Try moving your mic back that will warmup the sound as the closer it is to the amp the more treble you receive .But experiment until you warm it up to your liking.Also use your tone knobs on your guitar in small increments that is a big problem with getting the right tone and warmth move them a little bit and adjust those things it's tedious but it will help you find what your looking for.

Sorry to bring up this thread from the dead, but I'm still having trouble getting a good guitar tone when recording. Here is a reverbnation page with some songs on it... i really only care about the song sing along. Its just simple chord progression and melody, guitar and voice. How can i get my guitar tone to... not suck? It sounds wimpy, metallic, and straight cold no warmth at all.

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.reverbna…"]The Chron Party | Columbus, OH | Other / Classical Rock / Jam Band | Music, Lyrics, Songs, and Videos | ReverbNation[/]="http://www.reverbna…"]The Chron Party | Columbus, OH | Other / Classical Rock / Jam Band | Music, Lyrics, Songs, and Videos | ReverbNation[/] click on the song sing along, and wait for it to play.