The Recording Thread * methods, equipment, tips, experiences *

[prana]

Back in the day when other DAWs sucked, having protools was more of an issue imo. Now a days it doesn't really matter. Protools has lost a lot of respect in certain circles I've come to realize since getting back into this stuff. I had a PT setup in my home studio in college.

[DC11GTR]

As long as you can consolidate the tracks on whatever HDR you are using, it's no problem at all getting it into PT's.

The first incarnation of the above studio (back in '05) was a Mackie HDR. There was roughly 4 hours of stuff on 9 HD's, a lot of which had all 24tracks being used (some were almost an hour for each track). I consolidated the tracks in the Mackie, made a bunch of PT sessions at 44.1/16, then drug all of the Mackie's files into the sessions. Didn't take long at all.

A few years ago, that was easily the best method of recording a full live band on location cheaply. To get 24 inputs you would've had to spend thousands upon thousands and you would've had to deal with a computer, monitor and 6-10 spaces of rack gear. Plus a console (unless you take the direct of the venue's console) or a huge rack of external mic-pres.

The newer gear is getting much better much faster. The converters in the old Mackie HDR's were a lot better then any of the pro-sumer PT's stuff in that time. And the 888's in my pic above have better converters then the PTHD stuff up until the Accel's came out. Now, even the cheaper stuff smokes anything that came before it. As long as you have a great summing box, there's hardly a for analog decks, but the analog outboard gear is irreplaceable. And consoles are just about there as well (unless used as a front end)

[nunnehi]

I wasn't planning on commenting on this thread, but as Mitch says, pushing .wav files back and forth, in low budget, non studio environments (and with music that is not played live in studio environments), is typically how the DAW interchange is done for music, these days, and this has been going on for a long time. Doing it that way is an extremely time consuming process, though (for the musician), and it's much better to just be able to save to a format and send it to whoever needs to work with it, who can then open up a file, when given the opportunity. Pro Tools is not known for playing nice with others, so the .wav file solution tends to be the best option, if the original work is not done on Pro Tools (which it almost never is).

As for Prana's statement, Pro Tools is definitely not irrelevant for music, and it has been the DAW of choice, for as long as I can remember in major recording studios (1997 or 1998 was when they became prevalent, I think), as they began to wean themselves off of tape machines. It's just that its price point isn't as competitive as some other software that allows musicians to create stuff, and get it really close to a pretty good sounding mix. 12 years ago, you were a slave to the quality of your samples and keyboard's input into your DAW. These days, with some of the virtual instruments I've heard (and virtual drums, which used to be a huge problem), you have completely clean sounds just about everywhere. It makes it a lot easier for laypeople to just roughly mix a song, put Ozone on it, and have it competitive with professional stuff, at least volume wise. Unfortunately, it's starting a huge loudness war (something the mastering industry has been trying to standardize, at much lower volumes than what the hottest music is being delivered at, these days), again, and I have to say that I'm starting to become part of the problem. EDM is easily the worst offender, and it's a shame that they don't understand that louder does not equal better. But, it's what they want, and most of them are completely bypassing traditional mastering houses, CDs, and records completely, from my understanding.

My favorite DAW is, and always will be, the various incarnations of Fairlight. The recording quality is typically much higher than Pro Tools, but its price point was exceptionally high, for years. Now, you can get a Fairlight for less than what a full blown Pro Tools will cost, but plug-in developers do not care about Fairlight, and nearly all development is geared toward Pro Tools (who is doing a pretty good job at shooting themselves in the foot with the various high cost upgrades over the past two years). Nearly all plug-in developers do some kind of VST plug-in support (McDSP is a notable exception, and a glaring one), which is compatible with all kinds of workstations.

I recently had to learn how to mix in Ableton, because I will be having to mix and master a bunch of stuff using it. I couldn't bring across a couple of important plug-ins, because McDSP offers no VST support, at this time. The money that is getting paid to people doing this stuff is super lol, these days, as well. If you're making decent money doing this kind of work, it's solely because of volume, or that you're a star. $100 to mix and master a song is so lol, on so many levels. The sad part is that there are a lot of people who are willing to do that. It's just not worth the kind of drama that comes along with it.

One of the great things about the modern workflows that are being implemented is that with the ability to just export and import .wav files, I don't have to worry about the A/D and D/A conversions. It allows me to have a relatively low quality interface, and still do high quality work, as I'm never recording anything in, or sending anything out of the outputs. Right now, the price point is great for amateurs to get to be able to create nearly professional work. There's just a lot problems that accompany the barrier to entry being drastically reduced. It's actually kind of a scary time, in my opinion.

I worked at an internet radio station, called Soundbreak.com in 2000, as a live sound engineer (8 hour shifts board opping, doing interviews, and mixing live performances) and we used the D8B for our broadcasts and performances. I liked it, enough, at the time, that when I was planning out a studio, I was going to have the D8B and a Fairlight MFX3+. Looking back, that would probably have been a disastrous decision...lol. I'm not a big fan of Pro Tools, but it has allowed me to continue to work, doing my own thing, for a very reasonable price point, when there isn't a whole lot of work out there right now, to get.

Sometime, this summer, if I can justify it, I'm planning on buying this, once it becomes available for PC, as I already own a bunch of Universal Audio plug-ins that I love:

http://www.uaudio.com/interfaces/apollo.html

It doesn't look like it has midi capability, which is probably about its only drawback (doesn't matter to me, since I'm not a musician). It will probably be my first step from a low end Pro Tools interface to an HDX system, but I'm not really thinking too far ahead, right now.

[DC11GTR]

I've got one of those on reserve and two other studios I helped build are getting one as well.

I really think that Apollo can be a huge game changer. I hope so.

[nunnehi]

Yeah, I would imagine just tracking through a SSL4K Channel Strip, or a Neve 88RS Channel Strip, without any additional treatment, would greatly enhance a lot of recordings. It would be even better for people who have experience on how to drive those consoles on record. You could also buy something like the Studer A800 emulation, or the Ampex emulation. Then, you basically have a SSL board, or a modern Neve board, recording into a high quality, perfectly aligned, analog tape machine simulation (provided you are willing to take that chance on your initial record).

Universal Audio's emulations are truly fantastic. I love the sound of the Neve 88RS, but I can't get many instances on my UAD-2 Solo/Laptop card. So, for now, it's just a console sitting over in the corner, unused. That will change a whole lot if I decide to buy the Apollo, or if Universal Audio makes it so that you don't have to use a card or interface to interact with Pro Tools. My favorite EQ is the Neve 1081, which I use a lot for mastering, vocals, and a few other things. I still can't get enough instances to make that a completely worthwhile plug-in, either. I don't use any of the Universal Audio stuff, when I do post-production mixing, because I don't want to deal with the latency issues of a DSP Accelerator, and I tend to have a lot of channels when mixing TV related stuff.

[rothko]

Easy and inexpensive software for fixing vocals? Pitch problems, etc.

[DC11GTR]

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!

Re-track them.

[DiegoArmando]

First thing I was ever taught in college: you can't polish a turd.

True story.

[nunnehi]

Yeah, but it's part of the audio job requirement. It's still a turd sometimes, but you should always try to make it as pleasant as possible.

[DC11GTR]

Sometimes a fart turns into a turd before you realize you're out of toilet paper.

[deuceFive25]

Great thread idea. Still have to catch up but I can tell I like it already. I think I saw a D8B somewhere back there. Ah yes the glory days, lol.

[nunnehi]

Originally Posted by DC11GTR

Sometimes a fart turns into a turd before you realize you're out of toilet paper.

Sometimes the best thing you can hope for is to turn the turd into a fart, or at least like a cow chip that doesn't smell.

[rothko]

Not trying to work miracles, just do what nearly every recording artist does...on an amateur scale.

[DC11GTR]

If you don't mind me asking, and I don't want to come off harsh, but why didn't you notice it when you first tracked it? Or could the singer just not do it?

Is it a word here and there, or full phrases? Backups or lead?

[rothko]

singer is just mediocre and i'm looking to play around with the vocals a bit. i'm curious how much they can be manipulated and was wondering what software to try. this is just noobville stuff.