Dirge Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 I want to produce a few tracks of my playing but I don't want to get 'into' the business of setting up (or learning to use, or paying for) a full recording setup. Earlier in the year I had a session in a recording studio and at the end of it felt that I had not done myself justice. At the moment I have to pay to get access to a studio, and given past experience it doesn't look like good sense. I would like to be able to routinely record myself at home while practicing so that when I get each track absolutely right (well, in my terms...) I have recorded sufficient information to pass on to an Electronic Cleverclogs to adjust into something good. Is that realistic? Can I buy a couple of mic's and plug them into the PC and use audacity? Or is that too much to hope for? In the unlikely event that this would serve, what sort of mic's should I look for? Bottom line, I suppose, is that I am looking for the cheapest and at the same time simplest route for a non-believer to record a single concertina at home with good results, given that I know people who can polish up the end result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boney Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 (edited) Well, that's a huge can of worms. I've done amateur recording for a while. The first thing I'll say is: it's unrealistic to think you can use consumer-level equipment with little or no training, and expect to hand the results over to any engineer (no matter how good) and get back professional results. I'd spend at least a couple hundred (US dollars) for a good audio interface, at least a hundred each for a pair of good large-diaphragm condenser mics, and do a lot of reading, experimenting, and practicing. A good pair of headphones is also almost mandatory. Stay away from processing the sound at all if you know someone who can master your recordings. It takes a skilled ear to do well. Use no gain control, compression, equalization, and definitely no reverb. The friend of yours will probably be able to help you. Send them raw files (not MP3s), 24 bits preferably. Then you might get something professional sounding. If you want go quicker and easier, something like this might give you a decent mono recording: USB Microphone Edited November 17, 2009 by Boney Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Kruskal Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 What Boney suggests would sound very good. When you throw in the cables and stands for the mics you're talking 5 or 6 hundred dollars and a steep learning curve. If you want to record with sound almost as good, much less expensive and pretty much plug and play get one of these, Edirol R-09 or Zoom H4. Search the web for discussions on which would be best for you. I use my Edirol all the time and am very happy with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirge Posted November 17, 2009 Author Share Posted November 17, 2009 Perhaps I should have said at the start that not only do I not understand this stuff, but I am REALLY uncomfortable with it. I don't understand a word, and whereas most things I don't understand I will get to grips with, electronics makes me frustrated and cross. Don't know why, and I grant you it's not helpful (or particularly impressive), but it just makes me want to switch off. It's important that I produce something decent but this is definitely NOT why I play the squeezebox, if you see what I mean. So what you are both saying is that what I'm suggesting isn't really possible, because it will get pricey and complex? Or are you saying, Jeff, that that single usb mic' might do it? And Jody, those implements you've mentioned are usually talked about by people trying to record session tunes they want to learn. I'd assumed they were a bit scratchy. Are they actually capable of producing a decent recording? And if so that would presumably separate me from the pc, which has got to be good, I think. Sorry, it's hard work isn't it, but I appreciate the help... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jody Kruskal Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 (edited) Dear Dirge, No they will not be scratchy. Get the Ederol. It is easy peasey. Push the button twice and record. Then put the files on your computer with the usb. If you want more help, I'll walk you through it. Since you have no interest in recording tech this is the box for you because it is so simple and a very high quality sound. You make the recordings and your tech person does any editing you want. Edited November 17, 2009 by Jody Kruskal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Fly Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 If you want to do reasonably simple recording, can I suggest that you investigate a Zoom H2 Handy Recorder. Zoom H2 They're not too expensive and, used with some practice, will give you amazingly good results. I won't go into all the details of them here, but there's lots of info out there on the web about them. In the UK, they cost round £150 - possibly slightly less in the US. I've used one quite a lot recently and it's a worthy opponent of my very expensive 8-track Roland digital recorder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Day Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 If you want to do reasonably simple recording, can I suggest that you investigate a Zoom H2 Handy Recorder. Zoom H2 They're not too expensive and, used with some practice, will give you amazingly good results. I won't go into all the details of them here, but there's lots of info out there on the web about them. In the UK, they cost round £150 - possibly slightly less in the US. I've used one quite a lot recently and it's a worthy opponent of my very expensive 8-track Roland digital recorder. I agree with Will, I have an H4, but with my limited knowledge of electronics(about your level Dirge)even I can cope with it. An H2 would have been equally suitable for me. All my MP3 recordings are by using the H4 once it is set up for recordings, two pushes on the red button and your there. I use it in conjunction with a card reader which enables me to delete those recordings I am unhappy with and use the ones I am. It helps to find a recording spot which is noise free,unlike here where I have to record between planes going over, phones ringing, people asking the way etc. Gaps before and after, false starts and sound differences between your recordings and another persons recordings can all be sorted by a good sound engineer (Graham is one). Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 I want to produce a few tracks of my playing but I don't want to get 'into' the business of setting up (or learning to use, or paying for) a full recording setup. Earlier in the year I had a session in a recording studio and at the end of it felt that I had not done myself justice. At the moment I have to pay to get access to a studio, and given past experience it doesn't look like good sense. I would like to be able to routinely record myself at home while practicing so that when I get each track absolutely right (well, in my terms...) I have recorded sufficient information to pass on to an Electronic Cleverclogs to adjust into something good. Is that realistic? Can I buy a couple of mic's and plug them into the PC and use audacity? Or is that too much to hope for? In the unlikely event that this would serve, what sort of mic's should I look for? Probably the only way that any of us can stand back and assess the quality of the music that we produce is to record that music in some way and play it back to ourselves. The results can be as encouraging as they can be alarming, in much the same way as hearing one's recorded spoken voice for the first time can be a somewhat unsettling experience. I find that my simple little desk-top tape recording machine, purchased many years ago from a high street office equipment retailer, a more than adequate guide as to whether I should discard forthwith any dreams of ever becoming a Concertina virtuoso. I shall know if I ever reach the unlikely stage when advanced electronic wizardry beyond my comprehension will be called for ! Bottom line, I suppose, is that I am looking for the cheapest and at the same time simplest route for a non-believer to record a single concertina at home with good results, given that I know people who can polish up the end result. I posted a 'reply' to Dirges opening topic but it failed to materialise on the screen. No great loss ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirge Posted November 17, 2009 Author Share Posted November 17, 2009 If you want to do reasonably simple recording, can I suggest that you investigate a Zoom H2 Handy Recorder. Zoom H2 They're not too expensive and, used with some practice, will give you amazingly good results. I won't go into all the details of them here, but there's lots of info out there on the web about them. In the UK, they cost round £150 - possibly slightly less in the US. I've used one quite a lot recently and it's a worthy opponent of my very expensive 8-track Roland digital recorder. I want to produce a few tracks of my playing but I don't want to get 'into' the business of setting up (or learning to use, or paying for) a full recording setup. Earlier in the year I had a session in a recording studio and at the end of it felt that I had not done myself justice. At the moment I have to pay to get access to a studio, and given past experience it doesn't look like good sense. I would like to be able to routinely record myself at home while practicing so that when I get each track absolutely right (well, in my terms...) I have recorded sufficient information to pass on to an Electronic Cleverclogs to adjust into something good. Is that realistic? Can I buy a couple of mic's and plug them into the PC and use audacity? Or is that too much to hope for? In the unlikely event that this would serve, what sort of mic's should I look for? Probably the only way that any of us can stand back and assess the quality of the music that we produce is to record that music in some way and play it back to ourselves. The results can be as encouraging as they can be alarming, in much the same way as hearing one's recorded spoken voice for the first time can be a somewhat unsettling experience. I find that my simple little desk-top tape recording machine, purchased many years ago from a high street office equipment retailer, a more than adequate guide as to whether I should discard forthwith any dreams of ever becoming a Concertina virtuoso. I shall know if I ever reach the unlikely stage when advanced electronic wizardry beyond my comprehension will be called for ! Bottom line, I suppose, is that I am looking for the cheapest and at the same time simplest route for a non-believer to record a single concertina at home with good results, given that I know people who can polish up the end result. I want to produce a few tracks of my playing but I don't want to get 'into' the business of setting up (or learning to use, or paying for) a full recording setup. Earlier in the year I had a session in a recording studio and at the end of it felt that I had not done myself justice. At the moment I have to pay to get access to a studio, and given past experience it doesn't look like good sense. I would like to be able to routinely record myself at home while practicing so that when I get each track absolutely right (well, in my terms...) I have recorded sufficient information to pass on to an Electronic Cleverclogs to adjust into something good. Is that realistic? Can I buy a couple of mic's and plug them into the PC and use audacity? Or is that too much to hope for? In the unlikely event that this would serve, what sort of mic's should I look for? Probably the only way that any of us can stand back and assess the quality of the music that we produce is to record that music in some way and play it back to ourselves. The results can be as encouraging as they can be alarming, in much the same way as hearing one's recorded spoken voice for the first time can be a somewhat unsettling experience. I find that my simple little desk-top tape recording machine, purchased many years ago from a high street office equipment retailer, a more than adequate guide as to whether I should discard forthwith any dreams of ever becoming a Concertina virtuoso. I shall know if I ever reach the unlikely stage when advanced electronic wizardry beyond my comprehension will be called for ! Bottom line, I suppose, is that I am looking for the cheapest and at the same time simplest route for a non-believer to record a single concertina at home with good results, given that I know people who can polish up the end result. [ /quote] I posted a 'reply' to Dirges opening topic but it failed to materialise on the screen. No great loss ! Sorry, just trying out the Multiquote. I think your reply is now being quoted as part of my question, if you look Rod! But thank you everyone, I think I know what I'm after now. Time to look at a few prices, I think. Thanks again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hjcjones Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 Home recording is an area where you can find yourself spending even more money than on concertinas. Good mics can cost thousands, and you can never have enough gear - there's always something just a bit better. Also, as you've already realised, there's a huge set of skills to master. So unless you're really intending to get into it (which clearly you're not) then keep it simple. You don't say why you are wanting to make recordings. If it's with the intention of releasing a commercial CD, then I would say you should use a proper studio, which not only has far better equipment than you could ever afford but also people with the knowledge to use it. You could use a simple set-up at home to become more accustomed to recording (I always feel I'm under pressure to get it absolutely right the moment the record button is pressed, and it takes time to learn to relax). However, if you're just planning a small-scale CD-R release for friends, or if it's just for your own archives, then there are some relatively cheap solutions which will be perfectly adequate. The Edirol or Zoom digital recorders are excellent for these purposes, besides being extremely portable. Forget the old cassette recorders or dictaphones, these will record good-quality digital stereo sound which should be perfectly fine for all but the most demanding requirements. I have a Zoom H4 which will record MP3 or .wav files*at up to CD quality. It has built-in stereo condenser mics which aren't bad, and can be mounted on a camera tripod. It also has jack and XLR inputs so you can connect 2 external mics (which allows for better mic placement). You can set it up as a 4-track recorder but this looks a bit fiddly and I've never tried it. It comes with an adaptor which allows it to connect to a PC so you can record direct into that (and also back up files onto the PC's hard disk). Mine came with a copy of Cubase Light, which is software which turns the PC into a multi-track recorder, so if I want to multi-track I use that. My only criticism is that the H4's menu screen is rather small and the display was clearly designed for younger eyes than mine! *MP3 files are compressed, so they lose some sound quality. The files are smaller, which is why they're used for downloads. You can play them on ipods and computers, but not all CD players can handle them. CDs use .wav format, which is uncompressed and therefore produces larger files, and the H4 can record at several settings up to 96kHz, which is CD quality (the higher the quality, the bigger the file). I would suggest you record at the highest quality available, you can then use Audacity to convert them to MP3 if you want them in that format. If you know someone who can process the sound then record "flat" with no EQ or reverb and leave that to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 If you want to do reasonably simple recording, can I suggest that you investigate a Zoom H2 Handy Recorder. Zoom H2 They're not too expensive and, used with some practice, will give you amazingly good results. I won't go into all the details of them here, but there's lots of info out there on the web about them. In the UK, they cost round £150 - possibly slightly less in the US. I've used one quite a lot recently and it's a worthy opponent of my very expensive 8-track Roland digital recorder. I want to produce a few tracks of my playing but I don't want to get 'into' the business of setting up (or learning to use, or paying for) a full recording setup. Earlier in the year I had a session in a recording studio and at the end of it felt that I had not done myself justice. At the moment I have to pay to get access to a studio, and given past experience it doesn't look like good sense. I would like to be able to routinely record myself at home while practicing so that when I get each track absolutely right (well, in my terms...) I have recorded sufficient information to pass on to an Electronic Cleverclogs to adjust into something good. Is that realistic? Can I buy a couple of mic's and plug them into the PC and use audacity? Or is that too much to hope for? In the unlikely event that this would serve, what sort of mic's should I look for? Probably the only way that any of us can stand back and assess the quality of the music that we produce is to record that music in some way and play it back to ourselves. The results can be as encouraging as they can be alarming, in much the same way as hearing one's recorded spoken voice for the first time can be a somewhat unsettling experience. I find that my simple little desk-top tape recording machine, purchased many years ago from a high street office equipment retailer, a more than adequate guide as to whether I should discard forthwith any dreams of ever becoming a Concertina virtuoso. I shall know if I ever reach the unlikely stage when advanced electronic wizardry beyond my comprehension will be called for ! Bottom line, I suppose, is that I am looking for the cheapest and at the same time simplest route for a non-believer to record a single concertina at home with good results, given that I know people who can polish up the end result. I want to produce a few tracks of my playing but I don't want to get 'into' the business of setting up (or learning to use, or paying for) a full recording setup. Earlier in the year I had a session in a recording studio and at the end of it felt that I had not done myself justice. At the moment I have to pay to get access to a studio, and given past experience it doesn't look like good sense. I would like to be able to routinely record myself at home while practicing so that when I get each track absolutely right (well, in my terms...) I have recorded sufficient information to pass on to an Electronic Cleverclogs to adjust into something good. Is that realistic? Can I buy a couple of mic's and plug them into the PC and use audacity? Or is that too much to hope for? In the unlikely event that this would serve, what sort of mic's should I look for? Probably the only way that any of us can stand back and assess the quality of the music that we produce is to record that music in some way and play it back to ourselves. The results can be as encouraging as they can be alarming, in much the same way as hearing one's recorded spoken voice for the first time can be a somewhat unsettling experience. I find that my simple little desk-top tape recording machine, purchased many years ago from a high street office equipment retailer, a more than adequate guide as to whether I should discard forthwith any dreams of ever becoming a Concertina virtuoso. I shall know if I ever reach the unlikely stage when advanced electronic wizardry beyond my comprehension will be called for ! Bottom line, I suppose, is that I am looking for the cheapest and at the same time simplest route for a non-believer to record a single concertina at home with good results, given that I know people who can polish up the end result. [ /quote] I posted a 'reply' to Dirges opening topic but it failed to materialise on the screen. No great loss ! Sorry, just trying out the Multiquote. I think your reply is now being quoted as part of my question, if you look Rod! But thank you everyone, I think I know what I'm after now. Time to look at a few prices, I think. Thanks again. Yes, Dirge. The computer has seen fit to pollute the middle of your message with my 'reply'. You win some, you lose some. Probably my fault. I may have started my reply in the midst of your posting ? Glad I'm not the only one drowning in the world of electronic technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boney Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 Yes, I meant the USB microphone is probably the cheapest way, and should work well. The standalone recorders mentioned cost a bit more, but they're stereo. Their built-in mics are not really pro quality, but far from "scratchy" or bad in any way. It just won't have the transparency and "sparkle" a good large-diaphragm mic would. Of course, if people are playing them back through a standard car stereo or computer speakers, it won't really matter anyway. If there's one technical thing you have to understand, it's setting levels. If they're not right, your recording may be unusable. First make sure you have any "auto gain control" turned off -- that will play havoc with your dynamics. Then set the input level for a good strong signal, but make sure it never peaks out. Play the loudest passage vigorously and make sure the red "peak" light doesn't go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Rogers Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 Yes, I meant the USB microphone is probably the cheapest way, and should work well. I've got one of those Samson G Tracks and it certainly does everything I want - it does away with the need for a separate mixer too. Comes with Cakewalk recording software (although I got mine a bit cheaper as it lacked the Cakewalk disc - which I didn't need anyway as I prefer using GarageBand, which is included with all Macs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael sam wild Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 (edited) Thanks for raising this one Dirge . I'm at the same point as you . There's a lot of good info here. There's also a good discussion on melodeon.net on the same thing. There's a link there to a Samson (Zoom) video and audio recorder that looks good too ( for YouTube etc) The sound quality sounds pretty good but maybe not for what you want. A few years ago I had a very nice Sony DAT tape recorder and my son's band used it for a promotional CD that did pretty well so i've got high hopes of these new recorders. There was a chap at our local carols on Sunday with a Zoom H2 which he reckons was fine. About the size of a tin of sardines!I'm looking on eBay. Edited November 17, 2009 by michael sam wild Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Harrison Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 (edited) Just bought a Zoom H4n last week. Maybe not the cheapest recorder available (Cnd $369 +tx) but I am so pleased with it. Dead easy to use and is a pocket recording studio. It can be used with condenser mics so you can use four tracks (I haven't done this yet). The LED screen is much bigger than the previous Zooms. I also got a wired remote which I'm finding useful. THAT SAID............I think anything that interfaces with a PC requires that you spend some time learning how to use it. If that seems an obvious statement I am constantly surprised how few things are truly plug and play.As I said this unit is fantastic and very easy to use but I did spend a considerable amount of time with the manual figuring out all the many functions. However no different than working out all the functions on a new digital camera,probably. Robin Edited to add.....I used it at a session for the first time on Sunday...........I often wonder how well my concertina is heard.(Blush..it sounded great!!) and the quality is audio CD quality Edited November 17, 2009 by Robin Harrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cplayer Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 Hello all I have a tascam dr-07 which will do mp3 and wave files it can also reduce the playback speed down to half without key change and key change wihtout speed change if you see what I mean,hope this helps cplayer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Timson Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 Be warned, if the recording bug bites badly, you can find yourself landed with an expensive interest (nearly as espensive as concertinas!). I find myself hanging around on the Sound on Sound forums as much as I do here, involved in religious wars (such as "in the box" v. "out of the box") that have as much vehemence as anglo v. English! For your own sanity, stick with something simple like the Edirol or any of the other field recorders suggested, or find a friend who is already obsessed and get them to do the necessary. It's a hard life with two monkeys on your back! But for those who have already fallen victim, this mic makes superb recordings of concertinas, the titanium diaphragm seems to handle the complex waveform of the concertina particularly well. It's not being produced any more, so these remaindered examples being sold at over £700 less than the original price are a huge bargain! Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tootler Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 I use an Edirol R09 to record myself playing and it produces perfectly usable recordings for putting on to the web. I record in *.wav and convert to MP3 using Audacity. I also apply a little effect as I record in a bedroom which is pretty dead acoustically so I add just a little bit of reverb to give the recording more life. I am going to be cheeky and suggest you read all the don'ts and then experiment and see what works for you. There are several in this thread and I entirely agree with them if you are going to send your recordings to a professional for processing, but for simple home use why not try things out for yourself and aim to produce something you are satisfied with. After all I assume you are not aiming to produce professional quality recording but simply something that is acceptable for your own purposes. That is certainly what I am aiming for. My recordings are no way up to professional standards but they serve my purposes. Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now