Help: Setting up a studio

[charic]

The Mackies are definately not old technology! These are part of their flagship line. Remember without automation means less to go wrong aswell

Please, please, please dont buy blind. Always sit down with both (even unplugged) and just play with the controls. Which one puts a smile on your face, feels like quality and makes you want to work. Three very important things. If you dont enjoy using your desk then you aren't going to want to record.

For me the mackies have that quality feel, the heavy controls feel rugged and makes me feel like im working with pro kit. Light sliders to me feel cheap and really make me dislike using desks.

Think of a mixing desk as an instrument instead of a tool, try before you buy and follow your gut. Another important note is depreciation. Im fairly sure that mackies will hold their value well. Im unsure about Maudio, maybe someone else will know.

[ShergoldSnickers]

I can't fault anything Charic has said. Really great advice that appears to come from direct experience, an awful lot of thinking or both.

[Beedster]

[quote name='charic' post='922288' date='Aug 12 2010, 08:20 AM']The Mackies are definately not old technology! These are part of their flagship line. Remember without automation means less to go wrong aswell

Please, please, please dont buy blind. Always sit down with both (even unplugged) and just play with the controls. Which one puts a smile on your face, feels like quality and makes you want to work. Three very important things. If you dont enjoy using your desk then you aren't going to want to record.

For me the mackies have that quality feel, the heavy controls feel rugged and makes me feel like im working with pro kit. Light sliders to me feel cheap and really make me dislike using desks.

Think of a mixing desk as an instrument instead of a tool, try before you buy and follow your gut. Another important note is depreciation. Im fairly sure that mackies will hold their value well. Im unsure about Maudio, maybe someone else will know.[/quote]

Thanks mate

Don't get me wrong, I didn't mean to suggest that the technology is old, simply that the way the M-Audio works with the DAW is perhaps the way things will move in the future whilst the way the Mackie works is quite traditional (remember, I like traditional). I totally agree that the desk should feel like an instrument, couldn't have put it better myself.

Re depreciation, unfortunately the Mackies seem to go pretty cheaply at the moment (30-40% new price) on eBay whilst the M-Audios seem to hold their value (selling for as much as 70% new price in some cases, although one went for less than 40% last week). This however could be a function of a number of factors, not the least of which being size.

Thanks again for your help, as I said above, I'm definitely leaning towards the Mackie.

Chris

[Beedster]

[quote name='ShergoldSnickers' post='922296' date='Aug 12 2010, 08:27 AM']I can't fault anything Charic has said. Really great advice that appears to come from direct experience, an awful lot of thinking or both.[/quote]

Thanks SS, sounds like both to me, really helpful input from everyone on this thread

[charic]

[quote name='ShergoldSnickers' post='922296' date='Aug 12 2010, 08:27 AM']I can't fault anything Charic has said. Really great advice that appears to come from direct experience, an awful lot of thinking or both.[/quote]

Just experience with mackie (analogue) / soundcraft (analogue) and digital yamaha mixers really but I expect they wouldnt vary THAT much. I also use a Korg D888 myself although these days it tends to be just 1 or 2 channels. I refuse to get rid as a JUST IN CASE. Only have one mic these days too as they werent getting any use.

All based on experience really, Ive worked on around 20 different studio setups so I know what I like. Though most were during my time at uni doing audio music tech.

Music tech is still a passion of mine but with learning stupid amounts of programming languages I dont really have time lately. Maybe oneday I'll work with a big microphone or music tech manufacturing company which would be a dream come true

[cheddatom]

Just a little question- What's the point in using the PC like a tape machine (IE routing the mix back to individual channels on the desk) if you have a controller for your DAW?

We used to do this at uni using hard disk recorders, but with Pro Tools we always used the controller - it just seems simpler and means your desk can be half the width.

[Beedster]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='922404' date='Aug 12 2010, 10:11 AM']Just a little question- What's the point in using the PC like a tape machine (IE routing the mix back to individual channels on the desk) if you have a controller for your DAW?

We used to do this at uni using hard disk recorders, but with Pro Tools we always used the controller - it just seems simpler and means your desk can be half the width.[/quote]

It's a good question and one which my lack of experience means I can't answer, hence, in part, this thread! I must admit, whilst I like the vibe of more traditional methods, I do worry that I'm committing to greater expense, greater size and less long-term adaptability if I opt for one. It certainly seems foolish to have the power of Pro-tools and to leave many of these untouched by using a traditional mixer as opposed to a dedicated controller (which is how I understand the key difference between the M-Audio and the Mackie, please correct me if I'm wrong here). Like I said, if the M-Audio was 16 channel it would be a no-brainer!

What I will say for certain is that the responses on this thread are certainly helping an awful lot so please keep them coming!

C

[Beedster]

[quote name='charic' post='922349' date='Aug 12 2010, 09:26 AM']Just experience with mackie (analogue) / soundcraft (analogue) and digital yamaha mixers really but I expect they wouldnt vary THAT much. I also use a Korg D888 myself although these days it tends to be just 1 or 2 channels. I refuse to get rid as a JUST IN CASE. Only have one mic these days too as they werent getting any use.

All based on experience really, Ive worked on around 20 different studio setups so I know what I like. Though most were during my time at uni doing audio music tech.

Music tech is still a passion of mine but with learning stupid amounts of programming languages I dont really have time lately. Maybe oneday I'll work with a big microphone or music tech manufacturing company which would be a dream come true [/quote]

Ah, two channels, one mic. I wish! As I learned from my Music Technology course in the early 80's (one of the first of its kind), it's a hard path to follow, and not unlike the discipline in which I teach (Sports Psychology), there are always far more graduates than jobs! It's often the passion that makes the difference though, so keep the dream alive mate. The reason I'm doing this studio is, and as I was telling some friends only last night, I took my eye off the ball sometime in the mid 1980's and somehow my life took a path very different to that I'd planned and studied for. If I could have my time again, I'd have pursued my music career with far more passion, diligence and hope than I ever did at the time.

Apologies for the lecture!

Chris

[cheddatom]

I've used that behringer rack of pres with ADAT output, and it wasn't that bad - it's a cheap way to turn the m-audio into 16 channels.

It might be cheaper to get a seperate controller and interface. I was just going to have a look for you but i'm not sure if you've decided on a DAW? Some controllers are DAW specific.

[BigRedX]

I've come this thread late and I see that you've already made a lot of decisions.

However...

ProTools is a great piece of software if it matches the way you like to work. But IMO you only get the best out of it when it's paired with whatever is the current top-end ProTools hardware (HD at the moment). Anything less than that introduces compromises which may make the software less effective. If you're not going for an HD system, I'd at least be looking to get a good guided hands-on demo on Logic and/or Digital Performer with a good quality AD interface too before deciding on a system

While keeping the computer you have chosen for your DAW off the internet is sound advice (especially for a Windows machine) if you start getting into 3rd-party plug-ins this will get harder to maintain as some will expect an internet connection for authorisation. There are ways around this but it's not as straight-forward or instantaneous if you rely on these.

The best investment you can make for a serious home studio, is employing someone else to do the engineering. I've been recording at home pretty much since I started playing back in the 70s and results are always better when there's an extra set of impartial ears in the mix and you can concentrate on the playing rather than having to worry about the technical aspects of the recording too.

Edited August 12, 2010 by BigRedX

[charic]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='922404' date='Aug 12 2010, 10:11 AM']Just a little question- What's the point in using the PC like a tape machine (IE routing the mix back to individual channels on the desk) if you have a controller for your DAW?

We used to do this at uni using hard disk recorders, but with Pro Tools we always used the controller - it just seems simpler and means your desk can be half the width.[/quote]

Or you could just do the mixdown in the computer without sending it back to the desk at all.

Something like these will allow you to control faders without any affect on the sound
[url="http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/behringer-bcf2000-total-recall-usb-midi-controller-desk--21929"]Behringer Desk Controller[/url]
[url="http://www.dv247.com/computer-hardware/korg-nanokontrol-black--60073"]Korg Desk[/url]

The actual midi control functionality is relatively cheap. You can get keyboards with it built in too!

Edited August 12, 2010 by charic

[Beedster]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='922434' date='Aug 12 2010, 10:32 AM']I've used that behringer rack of pres with ADAT output, and it wasn't that bad - it's a cheap way to turn the m-audio into 16 channels.

It might be cheaper to get a seperate controller and interface. I was just going to have a look for you but i'm not sure if you've decided on a DAW? Some controllers are DAW specific.[/quote]


[quote name='BigRedX' post='922437' date='Aug 12 2010, 10:34 AM']I've come this thread late and I see that you've already made a lot of decisions.

However...

ProTools is a great piece of software if it matches the way you like to work. But IMO you only get the best out of it when it's paired with whatever is the current top-end ProTools hardware (HD at the moment). Anything less than that introduces compromises which may make the software less effective.

While keeping the computer you have chosen for your DAW off the internet is sound advice (especially for a Windows machine) if you start getting into 3rd-party plug-ins this will get harder to maintain as some will except an internet connection for authorisation. There are ways around this but it's not as straight-forward or instantaneous if you rely on these.

The best investment you can make for a serious home studio, is employing someone else to do the engineering. I've been recording at home pretty much since I started playing back in the 70s and results are always better when there's an extra set of impartial ears in the mix and you can concentrate on the playing rather than having to worry about the technical aspects of the recording too.[/quote]

Thanks guys

No, I'm not 100% fixed on a DAW. The guys in the band are using Garageband & Logic on their Macs so that's a possibility, I've been put off Cubase to be honest but would be prepared to be put back on! Like I said in my Mesa Boogie 1516 thread yesterday, whatever approach I choose will have strengths and weaknesses and I accept that. I guess my main concerns right here right now are that I get software that allows future expansion/development of my studio and recording - that is, I don't want to spend months learning a package and then find in two years when I move into a bigger space I need to upgrade to something more complex - and that I buy hardware that allows me to get the best out of the software. In a way, I should perhaps spend a year on deciding what I want, but we've decided as a band that we want to record more and rehearse/gig less (there'll be an element of rehearsing during recording and recording during rehearsing, does that make sense?), and I think this presents the ideal opportunity for me to learn the system. It will also be more economical.

Tom, please feel free to recommend anything you feel appropriate, I've a few days off so have the time to get into the detail that I won't have as of next week!

BRX, agreed, it will be well nigh impossible to do this without an internet connection, I think the clever move however (and perhaps what a few previous guys were suggesting), is to keep that use to software registration and downloads, and unplug and hide the internet cable when there's potential porn-viewing guitarists in the building! I'm also guessing from your post that you don't think the M-Audio is a sufficiently good piece of kit to get the best out of PT (and almost by implication that the Mackie might be as good an option in this respect)?

C

Edited August 12, 2010 by Beedster

[Beedster]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='922437' date='Aug 12 2010, 10:34 AM']I see that you've already made a lot of decisions.[/quote]

I must have missed those......

[charic]

Protools has a relatively shallow learning curve.
I like logic too but it has a rather steep curve.

I dont like cubase

[cheddatom]

I do get the impression that a lot of people "in the know" don't like Cubase. I personally love it. That's because i've been using the same version (SX3) for 5 years now so I know it inside out.

I found Pro Tools pretty easy to get going with. I had a pretty frustrating time on it due to a badly set up mac at uni (and I don't know how to fix macs) so that will bias my opinions.

There's things like the Digidesign 003 which comes with Pro Tools LE and is designed to control it. It only has 4 mic inputs though, so again you'd be looking at a rack of pres with ADAT output.

I've been having a look on studio spares and it all gets a bit confusing. I've just seen a tascam USB interface with 8 pre amps, 6 line ins and 4 line outs for £400 which I thought was pretty amazing, but I don't know if it'd work on a mac.

Anyway, I reckon you need to divide off a certain portion of your budget for acoustic treatment before you decide on hardware, because it'll probably be the most expensive bit. You should be able to build a decent set up for whichever DAW you chose though.

[Beedster]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='922473' date='Aug 12 2010, 11:06 AM']There's things like the Digidesign 003 which comes with Pro Tools LE and is designed to control it. It only has 4 mic inputs though, so again you'd be looking at a rack of pres with ADAT output.[/quote]

It seems odd that the various PT controllers are either very small (8 channel) or much bigger (24 channel). I guess this is a function of the marketplace, people want small home studio or significantly larger pro studio gear? A few decent 16s would be nice though

[cheddatom]

well it's kind of standard to have 8 faders on your controller, and then you just switch up and down your virtual mixer in banks of 8. I suppose that's why. The ADAT input means it's easy to add an extra 8 mic inputs.

But yeh, an interface/controller with 16 mic inputs and 16 faders would be pretty cool - it's just most people who have that kind of cash won't mind spending the extra for 24 channels.

FWIW I hardly ever record more than 16 channels at the same time.

Edited August 12, 2010 by cheddatom

[Beedster]

[quote name='cheddatom' post='922523' date='Aug 12 2010, 11:34 AM']But yeh, an interface/controller with 16 mic inputs and 16 faders would be pretty cool - it's just most people who have that kind of cash won't mind spending the extra for 24 channels.[/quote]



I can't see many advantages of the Digidesign 003 over the M-Audio Projectmix (which has 8 mic I/Ps), despite the price difference of over £500, am I missing something?

Edited August 12, 2010 by Beedster

[BigRedX]

The great thing about ProTools when used with the HD system is that the hardware and software are tightly integrated and designed to work together with each other. It's similar to the reason that Mac OSX works so well because its designed to work with a limited known set of hardware (a Mac) and not have to deal with the near infinite number of hardware combinations that Windows does. (BTW you are getting a Mac to run this on whatever software you choose?)

In theory the M-Audio stuff should be almost as good as they are now owned by Avid/DigiDesign, but for some reason in practice this isn't the case. This is from my own personal experience with people running various ProTools systems over the years. Last time I looked at ProTools for myself was in the ProTools 24 days (over 10 years ago) and I couldn't justify the extra expense so I went with Logic for my software and MotU for the interface.

Also I wouldn't ever consider anything that connects via USB for serious multi-track audio applications. There's simply too much other crap going on over USB. A dedicated bus via a PCI card is best, followed by FireWire for connecting audio interfaces.

And finally it's pointless worrying about the resale value of digital audio hardware. While good quality analogue audio mixers etc. will always be in demand as long as music is being produced acoustically or by analogue electronics, even the most state of the art digital audio hardware bought today will seem hopelessly quaint and antiquated (and not in a good way) in 10 years time. I own a pretty expensive digital mixer that I bought back in 1999. These days I'd be lucky to get a 10th of what I paid for it, and when 96kHz becomes the required standard for recording equipment it will be completely obsolete. While old valve gear has a sound that is pleasing to the human ear, no-one with decent hearing is going to be pining for old digital convertors for anything other than a special effect.

Edited August 12, 2010 by BigRedX

[cheddatom]

[quote name='Beedster' post='922534' date='Aug 12 2010, 11:37 AM']

I can't see many advantages of the Digidesign 003 over the M-Audio Projectmix (which has 8 mic I/Ps), despite the price difference of over £500, am I missing something?[/quote]

No it's just that it's specifically designed for PT.

The last pro studio I was in used one, but only as a controller. He had other Digi interfaces for his inputs, and these all came off a huge old valve desk.

[Beedster]

[quote name='BigRedX' post='922536' date='Aug 12 2010, 11:40 AM']The great thing about ProTools when used with the HD system is that the hardware and software are tightly integrated and designed to work together with each other. It's similar to the reason that Mac OSX works so well because its designed to work with a limited known set of hardware (a Mac) and not have to deal with the near infinite number of hardware combinations that Windows does. (BTW you are getting a Mac to run this on whatever software you choose?)

In theory the M-Audio stuff should be almost as good as they are now owned by Avid/DigiDesign, but for some reason in practice this isn't the case. This is from my own personal experience with people running various ProTools systems over the years. Last time I looked at ProTools for myself was in the ProTools 24 days (over 10 years ago) and I couldn't justify the extra expense so I went with Logic for my software and MotU for the interface.

Also I wouldn't ever consider anything that connects via USB for serious multi-track audio applications. There's simply too much other crap going on over USB. A dedicated bus via a PCI card is best, followed by FireWire for connecting audio interfaces.

And finally it's pointless worrying about the resale value of digital audio hardware. While good quality analogue audio mixers etc. will always be in demand as long as music is being produced acoustically or by analogue electronics, even the most state of the art digital audio hardware bought today will seem hopelessly quaint and antiquated (and not in a good way) in 10 years time. I own a pretty expensive digital mixer that I bought back in 1999. These days I'd be lucky to get a 10th of what I paid for it, and when 96kHz becomes the required standard for recording equipment it will be completely obsolete. While old valve gear has a sound that is pleasing to the human ear, no-one with decent hearing is going to be pining for old digital convertors for anything other than a special effect.[/quote]

Thanks, and agreed

Yep, Mac for sure. USB is out, but I am surprised how many units still use it? Resale value isn't really an issue in the long term, in discussing it I was kinda worried that I might need to upgrade in a year, although I suspect that the Mackie would be better both short and long term in this respect.

HD is beyond my budget unless I go for used gear, and that is, to my mind, simply too risky?

C

[BigRedX]

IMO HD is one of the few bits of 2nd second hand digital audio equipment I'd be happy about buying provided I knew something about where it had come from and what sort of environment it had been used in.

If you're not going for HD then the main reason for buying ProTools over either Logic or Digital Performer is because you like the software better. If you haven't already you need to get some serious hands-on time with each. the choice of DAW software is a personal as the choice of bass and only you can decide what's best for you.

[clauster]

If the guys in your band are using Logic, I'd consider going Logic too just for compatibility's sake.

EG - Our singer has a nice Logic set-up. I don't have all the i/o and mixing facilities, but I do have the ability to bring projects home with me once the guide tracks and drums are done and work on the bass tracks at my leisure before taking it back to the singer.

Edit - yes, it's not necessary, I could just bring home a stereo mix and record the Bass as a wav in any audio rcorder. But its nice to be able to boost the drums I want to hear

Edited August 12, 2010 by clauster

[clauster]

Regarding the point of why buy protools (or any DAW) and use an external mixer for mixing when you could use the built in automation - it's giving the computer less to do. So better latency, more tracks and more stability. The commercial studio my band uses when we want better results than we can manage on our own has 48 channels of Protools HD, but they still use a Neve analogue desk for recording and mixing and hardware dynamics and EQ porcessors.

[BigRedX]

I hadn't noticed that you might need to share files with other band members when working on recording projects. Yes it is possible to swap projects between different software systems but it's extra complication that gets in the way of the important thing which is making and recording music.

When bought my first system I would have ended up with Performer which was the one I liked best from a features/usability PoV. However the other main songwriter in the band I was in at the time was a Logic user so it made far more sense to have the same software as him.

However if you do go for compatibility make sure that you're both on the same version of whatever software that you're using and that you'll only upgrade if you both (all?) do it at the same time.