Mixdown tutorial
suggestion: record dry as much as possible, so you can post-process later and have options open. If you have to record with FX, don't do much more than compression or EQ.
Also, if you are going to record wet, you'll have to do the following:
Track 1: Input Microphone, Output Track 2.
Track 2: Monitor IN, Record enabled, record Post FX.
Insert whatever effects you want in Track 1. I'd recommend Voxengo's Voxformer or Kjaerhus Golden Audio Channel, as both have lots of options as an all-in-one for vocals (as well as other instruments).
The above setup will enable you to record with the effect. If you recorded on Track 1 only, the recording is totally dry no matter how many FX are inserted.
Also, if you are going to record wet, you'll have to do the following:
Track 1: Input Microphone, Output Track 2.
Track 2: Monitor IN, Record enabled, record Post FX.
Insert whatever effects you want in Track 1. I'd recommend Voxengo's Voxformer or Kjaerhus Golden Audio Channel, as both have lots of options as an all-in-one for vocals (as well as other instruments).
The above setup will enable you to record with the effect. If you recorded on Track 1 only, the recording is totally dry no matter how many FX are inserted.
-
Funkstar De Luxe
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 8:33 am
- Location: Scotland
- Contact:
None. If you need to record WITH compression you need outboard gear. There's no other way of doing it and it's silly to think otherwise.PurpleHaze wrote:yeh i am now just wondering, what plugins will i use and how am i going to use them so that the vocals go through them before being recorded.
Right now, plug-ins are no where near the quality of even modest outboard gear. They are considerably cheaper and much more convenient. But I don't know, I would rather have my Manley Variable MU compressor than the equivalent priced VSTs (albeit I could buy maybe 10-15 VSTs for that money). Sadly, high sound quality still costs lots.
-
Funkstar De Luxe
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 8:33 am
- Location: Scotland
- Contact:
Well, it is 100% impossible to record with compression unless using hardware. Logic.nebulae wrote:lol...I rest my case...there will always be purists...
I'll disagree slightly and say that it's NOT silly to try.
Hardware Signal Flow
MIC - PRE - COMPRESSOR - RECORDING
Software Signal Flow
MIC - PRE - RECORDING - VST EFFECT
not exactly correct, see my post above:
Mic -> Pre -> Soundcard -> Live Track 1 -> Track 1 Inserts -> Record onto Track 2
So long as you're not saturating your mic pre or your sound card...meaning that your raw signal stays below 0db, you're fine with the above method, which I've used for about 5 years now.
But this doesn't in any way negate your argument that hardware compressors are great.
Mic -> Pre -> Soundcard -> Live Track 1 -> Track 1 Inserts -> Record onto Track 2
So long as you're not saturating your mic pre or your sound card...meaning that your raw signal stays below 0db, you're fine with the above method, which I've used for about 5 years now.
But this doesn't in any way negate your argument that hardware compressors are great.
-
Funkstar De Luxe
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 8:33 am
- Location: Scotland
- Contact:
You see...nebulae wrote:not exactly correct, see my post above:
Mic -> Pre -> Soundcard -> Live Track 1 -> Track 1 Inserts -> Record onto Track 2
So long as you're not saturating your mic pre or your sound card...meaning that your raw signal stays below 0db, you're fine with the above method, which I've used for about 5 years now.
But this doesn't in any way negate your argument that hardware compressors are great.
That is recording and then processing. That is NOT recording with compression. What goes into your soundcard IS the recording. What is done after that point is processing.
bah, minor issue, not too different than what goes on inside a box vs. inside Live.
Look bro, I'm not gonna debate a purist, the bottom line is there is an easy way to do it without needing hardware boxes, and it does work well. That doesn't discount how good it can be with hardware boxes...I have them myself, just prefer to use software for convenience. I can get as good if not better results. So it ain't silly to try.
*hugs*
Look bro, I'm not gonna debate a purist, the bottom line is there is an easy way to do it without needing hardware boxes, and it does work well. That doesn't discount how good it can be with hardware boxes...I have them myself, just prefer to use software for convenience. I can get as good if not better results. So it ain't silly to try.
-
Funkstar De Luxe
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 8:33 am
- Location: Scotland
- Contact:
In what way am I a purist? I am only pointing out that your compressor is useless in that chain because it comes after your recording and that it demonstrates terrible signal flow.nebulae wrote:bah, minor issue, not too different than what goes on inside a box vs. inside Live.
Look bro, I'm not gonna debate a purist, the bottom line is there is an easy way to do it without needing hardware boxes, and it does work well. That doesn't discount how good it can be with hardware boxes...I have them myself, just prefer to use software for convenience. I can get as good if not better results. So it ain't silly to try.*hugs*
The only reason to record anything though a compressor is to prevent clipping. Otherwise why not just compress after you've recorded?
People here would argue back was white. Look; here is your arse, here is your elbow.
In this above chain, you don't actually record until the signal goes through the compressor that is an insert in Track 1. You're recording the pos-processed signal onto Track 2. Therefore, the signal IS being recorded AFTER compression.Mic -> Pre -> Soundcard -> Live Track 1 -> Track 1 Inserts -> Record onto Track 2
Also,
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) -
pur·ism /ˈpyʊərɪzəm/
–noun
1. strict observance of or insistence on purity in language, style, etc.
2. neb edit: a strict adherence that hardware compressors are the only way to record and that software is useless
—Related forms
purist, noun
-
PurpleHaze
- Posts: 134
- Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 5:50 pm
-
sweetjesus
- Posts: 8803
- Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: www.fridge.net.au
- Contact:
you two are funny...
funkstar, from my understanding people would compress before going to tape to get the maximum sound levels with the least amount of noise floor.
we still try to get as little noise floor as possible these days, but to be honest it doesnt matter as much as it did back then especially since people have realised that hitting digital signals at very hot levels doesnt sound so good.
so yes you're right funkstar, technically you cant do what you are saying but nebulae is saying that it doesnt matter in the context of digital audio.
funkstar, from my understanding people would compress before going to tape to get the maximum sound levels with the least amount of noise floor.
we still try to get as little noise floor as possible these days, but to be honest it doesnt matter as much as it did back then especially since people have realised that hitting digital signals at very hot levels doesnt sound so good.
so yes you're right funkstar, technically you cant do what you are saying but nebulae is saying that it doesnt matter in the context of digital audio.
Yeah, you can use this method to record onto any track...that's the beauty of Live's routing. Any track can feed signals to other tracks, and any track can record from any other track, or from the master track, or pre or post fader, or groups of tracks. Now if only Live came with a true hardware compressor, it might be worth a damn.PurpleHaze wrote:yeh i would really lkike to hear how good this will sound. It sound great if it really goes good, that means there is money i will save on outboard. Nebulae can i record in any other tracks other than track 2, where the effects will work?
I kid, I jest...I hug the Scottish.