phil, is there something i should ad on

[goodhonk]

my recordings are used for songwriting ideas only, but it would be fun to learn how to make them sound better. is there a cheap ad on i could get for what i'm using? is sonar 4 limiting me, or is it my inexperience?

 

here's what i'm using.

 

sonar homestudio 4 cakewalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

ev nd257b

 

[CME]

Not phil, but the software shouldn't be limiting you. You don't mention what you monitor on or what your room is like. And for most home studio guys (like me) it's the monitoring chain and room that makes the biggest difference. You gotta be able to hear what is going on to know what needs to be done.

[DontLetMeDrown]

From a signal perspective, the software is not limiting you. If those are the only mics you own, that might be. I haven't used those specific mics, but I generally don't use a condenser on dirty guitars, bass, or anything close mic'd with loud transients. It would be good to own at least one dynamic mic (I can't see the EV pic, so maybe that is a dynamic?)

[goodhonk]

for monitoring i've got some cheap akg hp40 headphones. it always sounds much bassier with the "cans" on than it does in the car.

 

i recently discovered that i should not be using the condenser mics for recording guitar; dude at GC sold me them when i bought the software and usb interface.

 

here's the stuff i've recorded with my set-up. the room i use isn't ideal at all; basically i just put a mic in front of the speaker.

 

most of these are just noodling and pedal demos, so nothing too helpful for you to judge by.

 

goodhonk's attempts at recording

 

from the top to "dr q" are the things i've recorded; other stuff is from a previous band that wasn't recorded by me.

[CME]

Fwiw I think you've got pretty good gear. When it comes to recording everything matters. And just my opinion but I think it's your monitoring chain that is your weakest link right now. I've never had much luck mixing on headphones. But maybe there are some better options if treating your room and some good nearfields aren't feasible.

 

And I haven't listened to what you posted, but if you're mainly recording electric guitars get yourself an sm57. Learn how to make it work, then experiment with other mics. Because you can use a LD condenser sometimes. Especially when mixed with a dynamic, but rarely would it be my first choice.

[goodhonk]

^ thanks, i recently switched to the electrovoice, i think it's similar to the sm57.

[Phil O'Keefe]

The EV should be fine for amps. The 990 wouldn't be bad on amps - at least as long as you're not cranking the amp silly-loud. It should be fine for a distant mic / room mic on amps.

 

As far as something "cheap" to add, I wouldn't really bother for demos... if you want to lay down a little bit of money, you already know where you weak link is - your monitoring. Get some decent monitor speakers... and don't cheap out on them, or your room treatments. Your tracking and mixing are all based on what you hear - if you can't hear accurately, your recordings and mixes WILL suffer.

[UstadKhanAli]

That mic is fine for guitar amps. I agree with the others. You just need experience...and a decent monitoring system wouldn't hurt either.

[goodhonk]

does experience come from trial and error, or is there a method i can follow to speed things up?

[UstadKhanAli]

Read books on mixing like the one by Owsinski or Wayne Wadhams. Watch what experienced mixers do if you have opportunity and access (or you want to create that opportunity), purchase and watch DVDs on mixing, search YouTube and websites for good mixing tips, ask really good specific questions on good forums, and tweak while listening, listening, listening. And listen some more. And then tweak some more. And then listen, listen, listen. Understand that some people will mix differently and have different philosophies on how to approach things that are sometimes contradictory, and just absorb it all and create your own style.

[CME]

IMO listening and tweaking are great teachers. Don't be afraid to try something and see what it does, but listen and make sure it's what you want. And for a while try to just use mic placement and maybe some eq to make things work. IMO getting that right is 95% of the battle. Once you get a handle on that compression and such should take care of the rest. I'm also a big fan of the KISS method. There have been times when mixing something that I'd turn off all the effects/plugs I had and start over. I'd somehow forgot to "keep it simple sam" and ended up with a mush of a mix.

[Phil O'Keefe]

The problem with randomly tweaking is that everything is interactive, so definitely spend the majority of your tweaking time with the whole mix playing, and not just soloed in on one instrument. A change to the bass will have an effect on other instruments in the mix, as well as on the mix as a whole. It's learning how those interactions occur that takes time and experience. Listening to what is happening when it's soloed is all fine and good (and you can learn a lot from listening to that), but don't fall to the temptation of soloing it and getting it to sound perfect "by itself"; things are rarely heard "by themselves" - they're heard in the context of the mix.

 

In terms of experience, the more you do something, the better you usually get at it. But you can maximize the time vs benefits ratio by learning from those who came before you and not trying to re-invent the wheel. Books can only teach you so much, but they can teach you so much. Read whatever you can get your hands on, and then go experiment with, and apply the techniques and concepts you just read about. "Book learning" by itself is going to give you an incomplete education. And random tweaking may teach you a lot, but you'll waste a lot of time and be inefficient. You really need both.

 

A good mentor / teacher never hurts either...

 

In a lot of ways, getting good at recording is similar to getting good on an instrument. It takes study. It takes practice. It takes messing up at a gig, and learning from those mistakes. It takes a desire, and the effort involved to constantly better your knowledge, technique, musicality and overall skills...

[UstadKhanAli]

The listening should obviously be for what happens when you tweak things. That is the education. I agree wholeheartedly with Phil's first paragraph, of course. I just wanted to say that the listening is the education.

 

Books have taught me a lot. You read about something, and you know the theory, concept, creativity (if it's a well-written book), the reasons for doing things. Then you go and do it yourself and hear how it sounds. Learn things from watching other people. Try not to exist in a vacuum. There's a lot of information out there, but learning from people and interacting is a great way to learn, and a lot of fun.

[nice keetee]

from the top to "dr q" are the things i've recorded; other stuff is from a previous band that wasn't recorded by me.

 

v.peppermint- clipping, bad levels?

rototrib -vocals nice, sounds fair

rhodes - recorded a real rhodes?

 

advice? ...most of what Phil and UKA/Ken have said. Monitor speakers/room/experience etc.

 

I've heard mucho worse

[nice keetee]

[ Books have taught me a lot. You read about something, and you know the theory, concept, creativity (if it's a well-written book), the reasons for doing things. Then you go and do it yourself and hear how it sounds. Learn things from watching other people. Try not to exist in a vacuum. There's a lot of information out there, but learning from people and interacting is a great way to learn, and a lot of fun.

 

this is true

 

Recording self-contained can be double edged. Interacting used to be the norm with music/recording.