|
To anyone familiar with Cubase. Is this part of the program itself or is it perhaps a VST plugin I could use with other recording software? I'm limited on recording options but using this with my USB pedal set to clean and using the built in Cubase effects makes it sound pretty awesome. I don't care for the Cubase interface  
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 20:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 19:07 |
|
|
poxin posted:To anyone familiar with Cubase. Is this part of the program itself or is it perhaps a VST plugin I could use with other recording software? I'm limited on recording options but using this with my USB pedal set to clean and using the built in Cubase effects makes it sound pretty awesome. I don't care for the Cubase interface That's the Track Preset window. It is built into Cubase (E: as in part of the program, not a VST or any standalone thing) and allows you to pick from a large amount of pre-set track settings. It's pretty powerful and I've gotten a ton of use out of it recently. For example, I have used this to create a custom setting for the singer in my band. I already have a good idea of what effects settings make him sound good, but adding them individually to his vocal tracks one at a time is a pain, especially if there's multiple takes across multiple songs in a session. Every time I record him it will automatically load up the compressor, reverb, and preamp settings I always use for him so I don't have to load all of those effects manually every time I make a new track. You can do the same thing with any instrument. Another example is that I usually use Soundtoys FilterFreak as a send on my kick drums to give them a little extra punch. I know I'm always going to want to use this plugin with kick drums I record so I could make a custom Track Preset called "filterfreak_kick" or whatever that automatically routes that effect for me with the settings I like and just slap it on kick drum tracks to save me some time. Cubase also comes with a ton of them pre-loaded but I haven't messed around much with the prepackaged ones. E: just realized I didn't really answer your question in my rambling, reading comprehension fail; I just started using it a ton and I'm kinda stoked on it himajinga fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Jun 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2012 22:55
|
|
|
More of a mixing question than a recording question but... Has anybody got any advice for panning? I've never quite got the hang of it and find myself working to a formula rather than giving the track what it probably needs. I've always found it to be a very subtle art, ie: I almost outright refuse to do hard pans unless I doubled mic'd an instrument.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 20:15
|
|
|
Musical Vomit posted:More of a mixing question than a recording question but... Imagine the band is in front of you, where do you hear the various instruments? Pan accordingly. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
Musical Vomit posted:More of a mixing question than a recording question but... Do what works for you and you think sounds good. There are no rules and it all comes down to personal preference. These days I'm more of a hard LCR guy myself except for drums which get panned according to where they sit in the overheads usually. Sure... you lose a guitar if someone only has one speaker hooked up but you get a really nice wide mix when everything is hooked up right!
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2012 22:45
|
|
|
Greggster posted:Imagine the band is in front of you, where do you hear the various instruments? Pan accordingly. I usually try to do this (especially with drums) but my general set up is: 2x guitars, 1 bass, vocalist, drums and piano/synth (sometimes both). I usually double the rhythm guitars, give it a heavy bias both left and right, bass slightly more centred from right (if not dead centre), piano/synth on the immediate opposite to bass. If I'm dealing with multiple instruments such as a piano and synthesised strings on the same track, I'll tend to give them a slight L/R bias respectively. Basically as much as I try, I always feel I should pay more attention to pans. That's probably more a personal issue than it is any technical ability. Hogscraper posted:Do what works for you and you think sounds good. There are no rules and it all comes down to personal preference. See, that's something I was always taught to pay attention to a mono mix in college because that's how a lot of people will be hearing it but my issue was always that a mono and a stereo mix will sound completely different for fairly obvious reasons. What are the advantages of hard LCR? Whenever I start contemplating a hard bias I immediately get concerned that it's going to end up sounding too biased. I suppose a lot of that comes down to experience though. Also just realised that I didn't give you some example tracks to give you a better idea of what I'm talking about. Also, the vocals on that first one is a hastily thrown together scratch using a headset mic and is basically roughly levelled with the track and that's it. Try not to take those into account. Edit: and naturally I notice this thread immediately after exiting this. Oh well, another reason to purchase the platinum upgrade. I won't repost so I'll just keep it here and make note for future reference. Sorry for that guys! Musical Vomit fucked around with this message at 01:37 on Jun 28, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 01:34
|
|
|
I'll try and put together some examples of what I mean but panning hard LCR still works when collapsed to mono. Mono doesn't mean just one side of your mix. Imagine a set of speakers in front of you. You're listening to a very wide mix. Now start walking away from those speakers and you'll noticed the mix get more narrow the further away you get. Eventually the two speakers sum together in a way that the sound seems to be coming from a single source rather than two. That's mono. Now, when you have two sources that are playing an element that's coming out of both speakers but the time (phase) or polarity are opposite of each other that sound can cancel itself out when those two speakers sum together in mono. This is what you need to watch out for. It's more of a problem with delays and verbs than it is with the way you pan things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2012 18:32
|
|
|
I'm stuck and need some help. tldr: Avid is loving me good and hard. I'm currently using a Macbook Pro 8GB RAM running 10.7.4 Lion. I have some old Pro Tools session files I need to, at the very least, mix down and export to stereo waveform so I can hang on to jam sessions/ideas. I've switched to using Garageband and Reaper. I have Pro Tools LE 8.0.3, but of course I can't install that on this machine. I tried installing it on an older Snow Leopard (10.6.8) machine, but it kept giving me some bullshit about not being able to find the install files during the installation, despite the fact that it was running the installation DVD. (edit: I've determined the installation DVD is corrupted. Convenient. And even though I originally registered the software when I first installed it, logging in to my Avid account says that I have no products registered to my name. Awesome!) So I thought I would try just downloading the free trial of Pro Tools 10 and mixing everything down that way, but its forcing me to loving pay $50 for an iLok to authorize a loving piece of demo software. What is the best course of action here? I'm so pissed off from dealing with this, but I don't want to lose these sketches I've got going. edit: Welp, just found this. How the hell can I get 8.0.5 on the Snow Leopard machine then? quote:Pro Tools 8.0.3 supports the following Mac OS X versions, on Intel-based Macs only: Venkmanologist fucked around with this message at 15:04 on Jun 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 02:27
|
|
|
invision posted:go grab Reaper (because it's free) Reaper's not "free"; there's a very generous demo but please don't be a cheap-rear end, and pony up the $60 if you use it regularly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 06:03
|
|
|
Venkmanologist posted:I'm stuck and need some help. And I really don't like using Logic, but not having to eat up both USB ports on my MBP with iLoks to use both Pro Tools and my plug-ins at once was the way for me to go. Especially since I don't own an Avid interface that was going to give me the upgrade price and Logic ended up being cheaper than Pro Tools 9. Anyway, you should be able to download the latest version of Pro Tools that you are licensed for from Avid's website. If you have a registered copy of Pro Tools 8.0.3 you should be able to get the 8.0 installer and any of it's upgrades individually by going to the "Your Products" part of your Avid account management.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2012 21:29
|
|
|
Will an SSD help with latency if I'm monitoring post processing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2012 13:42
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:Will an SSD help with latency if I'm monitoring post processing? There's no added latency from the seek time on your HD, when you drop the playback cursor somewhere in a DAW it buffers the upcoming audio into RAM immediately. Now, if you're working with a monster number of tracks, or if your audio is pretty severely fragmented on the drive, you could certainly hit the sustained transfer max for a slower HD, but that's not really a latency issue because no amount of buffer on your audio interface is going to compensate for that. Plus, if you're talking about monitoring after processing in your DAW with live audio, it shouldn't even hit the drive prior to processing and coming back to the interface.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2012 22:43
|
|
|
I think I'm at the stage where I decently understand my gear, and the basics of my recording program of choice. However, I don't really still understand the parametric equalizer, or how to mix my music. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to learn this stuff? I'm talking about when people say to put the bass drums at x Hz. If it makes any difference I would be mixing guitar, bass guitar, trumpet, piano.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2012 05:47
|
|
|
Edit: Nevermind, fixed.
Dolphin fucked around with this message at 18:13 on Jul 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2012 17:51
|
|
|
coolbian57 posted:I think I'm at the stage where I decently understand my gear, and the basics of my recording program of choice. However, I don't really still understand the parametric equalizer, or how to mix my music. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to learn this stuff? I'm talking about when people say to put the bass drums at x Hz. If it makes any difference I would be mixing guitar, bass guitar, trumpet, piano. Here's a usable basic guide to working with parametric EQs: http://audio.tutsplus.com/tutorials/production/how-to-use-a-parametric-equalizer/ The tips in there are mostly accurate, and written appropriately for newbies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2012 21:10
|
|
|
FWIW, unless I'm mastering I prefer using EQs with just a few fixed frequency bands with a gain knob. I find that while mixing it helps me make a decision faster and move on. Neve style FTW! With a 10-band parametric on every channel you get way too caught up in forcing a tone into something it was never meant to be and you're usually better off going back and retracking something to get the tone closer to how you want it to be in the mix.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2012 21:01
|
|
|
I read through the majority of the thread and hadn't seen this covered (although I am an idiot and could be wrong), but I seem to have run into a snag when it comes to recording. Right now I have a Tascam US-144 MKII module that is hooked up into a Crate amp head (already has built in distortion) which goes into a Crate half stack. The first problem we ran into was that the amp head had only one 1/4" input for the guitar to run through, thus not being able to connection the US-144 into it. I thought I found a solution by getting a 1/4" splitter with two female ends, so I purchased it and it seems to be working... sort of. The guitar itself is recording and sounds great, but it is only playing back with no distortion at all. Now, this is just a theory I have, but I get the feeling that the reason there is no distortion is because of something having to do with the splitter, mainly the fact that we are trying to use just one input channel for two separate tasks. I have tried experimenting with all the settings in the control panel, but the default seems to be the only thing that works just to get the acoustic sound, otherwise nothing comes through at all. We are all pretty new to recording on our own, so is there any solution that I am completely forgetting or overthinking? UPDATE: We just ended up micing the halfstack itself and the recording turned out really good. But still, I would love to know if there is some other type of work around. A TURGID FATSO fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Jul 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
Is there a reason why DAWs don't include notation software? It just seems easier to use than piano rolls. Most forums on the subject are complete wastelands on the subject.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2012 16:50
|
|
|
Turk February posted:I read through the majority of the thread and hadn't seen this covered (although I am an idiot and could be wrong), but I seem to have run into a snag when it comes to recording. Probably because by doing that you're plugging the interface in to the input of the head, and the only sound that's there to be recorded is the clean guitar, so you basically just have a hosed up way of getting DI guitar. If you want to record the distortion you need to plug the interface in to the "out" side of your head. e: This is how your setup SHOULD look.  And if it's already that way then I read your stuff wrong so sorry. invision fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Jul 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2012 21:16
|
|
|
invision posted:Probably because by doing that you're plugging the interface in to the input of the head, and the only sound that's there to be recorded is the clean guitar, so you basically just have a hosed up way of getting DI guitar. If you want to record the distortion you need to plug the interface in to the "out" side of your head. This is how it did look before we went ahead and did it the other way, but upon further inspection last night and earlier this morning I believe something was going haywire with the Tascam's drivers since it wasn't picking up anything from the right input no matter what. After re-installing them it seems to have fixed the problem, so hopefully when we go back to record in a couple weeks time all of our issues will be cleared up. Thanks for the diagram, too, since like I said, we are still pretty new to this, and while it is frustrating as we go on, it is fun as all hell to realize what we are learning. What makes it really fun for me is I seem to be the one that has taken control of the recording process while our drummer prefers to mix everything in post, so we tend to make a good team. It makes me wonder why the hell we didn't just do this ourselves from the very beginning?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2012 21:55
|
|
|
Unless your head has a dedicated line out beyond going from head to cab, you may want to be wary of frying stuff. Your head puts out juice not just signal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2012 22:01
|
|
|
revolther posted:Unless your head has a dedicated line out beyond going from head to cab, you may want to be wary of frying stuff. Your head puts out juice not just signal. Yeah, I screwed up and didn't even think about that, I was too in to drawing poo poo in paint.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 01:13
|
|
|
NC Wyeth Death Cult posted:Is there a reason why DAWs don't include notation software? It just seems easier to use than piano rolls. Most forums on the subject are complete wastelands on the subject. Only easier if you can sight read sheet music. I'd be willing to wager something like 99% of working musicians outside of classical and jazz genres cannot read a note of sheet music and/or may never have taken formal music training. This is especially true of electronic music, which is the style of music you're most likely to encounter people entering music by hand with a mouse on a computer screen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 04:33
|
|
|
revolther posted:Unless your head has a dedicated line out beyond going from head to cab, you may want to be wary of frying stuff. Your head puts out juice not just signal. After talking with my guitarist earlier this evening it turns out this is the case. The only dedicated line is from the head to the cab, so there's no chance we can go any other route than just micing it the stack itself, which I have no issues with since it sounded great.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 06:30
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:Only easier if you can sight read sheet music. After thinking about it, I realized a piano roll allows for a larger range of expression and seeing the keyboard on the left is really handy for chord building. I made the mistake of going to the REAPER forum to see if there was a plugin that would help but it was 100 pages of people talking about how notation was for intellectuals who want to impress people with how much esoterica they have mastered.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2012 11:26
|
|
|
Is there a post in here which outlines the merits of recording via an analogue interface, or are there are none? If there are some, is Craigslist my best option? What brand names should I look out for? If there are none, how can I convince my friends?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2012 09:50
|
|
|
What do you mean by "analogue interface?" Do you want to record straight to tape and never have any part of the recording go digital (until it comes time to distribute it, I guess, unless you are doing only vinyl or, gently caress off right now, cassettes)? Are you recording and mixing everything on your own? How many tracks do you need? Intentionally lovely sounding lo-fi stuff or are you actually trying to make this high quality? If the answers are straight to tape, yes, more than one or two, and high quality, you're looking at thousands of dollars just to remotely approach the sonics you'd get out of a cheap digital system and some plugins. More like $10k+ for a (very) minimal setup that would be more what you'd consider professional quality. The price is probably enough to scare your friends away, if they are trying to get high quality audio out of this. On the other hand if you're going for intentionally lo-fi, easy and cheap enough, go raid your local thrift store for some terrible mics and whatnot and get one of those old cassette based portastudios to record onto. It will definitely sound like poo poo and cost you next to nothing! Even mediocre digital equipment is really good at giving back the same thing that you put into it. It doesn't make things worse, but it doesn't really help you out either. Analogue gear can get you pleasing distortions and the like, but analogue gear that helps more than it hurts is usually expensive. There are very good reasons why so much recording gear is digital nowadays and it's sure as hell not because it's sonically inferior to what the same amount of money bought you 10 or 20 years ago. breaks fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Jul 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2012 03:38
|
|
|
Here's a question... Firstly, here's the back panel of my Mesa Single Recto:  Would it be possible to run the Slave Out into my interface and then use a guitar impulse\cab sim? If so, would it get a good sound? H13 fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Jul 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2012 15:43
|
|
|
breaks posted:What do you mean by "analogue interface?" Do you want to record straight to tape and never have any part of the recording go digital (until it comes time to distribute it, I guess, unless you are doing only vinyl or, gently caress off right now, cassettes)? If he means what I think he means, I had a misguided foray into tape that I should probably recount with a bit of shame to maybe warn him off. First things first, running totally analog is EXPENSIVE. A band I was in until recently played all 70s synthesizers; minikorgs, an ARP, simmons drums from the early 80s, etc. Nothing we owned was made more recently than 1983; 70s Ric 4001 into an old SVT, etc. We decided let's make a "period correct" record, all of our recording gear has to be analog as well. We bought a TEAC 80-8 1/2" 8 Track RtR, and a Tascam 5A mixer, an Otari MX5050 mkII 1/4" mastering deck and some snakes and thought we were set. Not that expensive for analog, all said and done; I think we were into it in total around $2000 at that point. If everything you buy works 100% perfectly (haha yeah right never gonna happen with stuff that old) after the cost of the gear, the tape alone is $80/ half-hour for 1/2", and $60/ half-hour for 1/4". We had to get both tape machines serviced/biased/aligned and the mixer had a dead channel we found out later, so another $450 later we were ready to record. Unfortunately, recording on tape is not as easy as "press record, play rock'n'roll" (unlike digital where it really is that easy). First of all, there's VU meters involved which I'm sure most people don't know how to read (I didn't at the time), and proper gain staging so that the signal going into the mixer is loud enough to hit the tape hard, but not TOO loud so it clips the inputs on the mixer, then loud enough from the mixer to hit the tape hard, but not TOO loud so as to clip the inputs on the tape machine. Recording to tape really is a specialized technique that needs actual practice and expertise completely separate from things like mic placement and amp tone that you have to do either way. So after all this we recorded some tracks, but apparently we didn't do the gain staging thing exactly right, and didn't hit the tape hard enough, so we didn't even get that "tape tone" on our tracks that we paid so much money for and they sounded kind of dead and lifeless. But since nobody involved knew what they were doing, we had no idea we did it wrong until after we'd spent weeks recording. If we would've spent that much money on studio time instead we could've recorded with STEVE ALBINI or something. tl;dr - the cost of getting into analog recording equipment would pay for your studio time like 3x over; don't do it. holy poo poo wall of text, sorry had to vent
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2012 18:20
|
|
|
Hello ML, Got a few questions, hope this is the right place. Situation: Got an Mbox mini 2, and Protools LE 8 two years ago, and used it, to lackluster results on my windows laptop. Upgrading to Win7 did little to help. Eventually just used the mbox with Kristal, a free software. Fast forward to now, and I've got a MacBook, and it seems to fulfill all the system requirements, and so I figure I'll try mbox and PT on the Mac. Problem: Installing PT goes smoothly til the end, when a pop up announces that to use Paceit(?), ill need Rosetta. I abort installation, and turn on the Rosetta plugin (I think; honestly, I'm 2 days in to my reconoitering of Mac processes) then reinstall. Same prompt, but this time, after 15 or 20 minutes, it finishes installing. "Phew," I think, and open PT to start making music. Not more than a few seconds into loading, and I start getting "error 5000" messages for lots of features as they try to load. mowing through them, PT continues to load, till almost complete, it stops at "loading peripherals" and never moves on. I tried searching online, seems like a few people have experienced the same thing, but I haven't found any solutions. I uninstalled and reinstalled, to no avail. So, what do you guys think?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2012 23:20
|
|
|
Hammer Floyd posted:Here's a question... himajinga posted:Long analog story Grunge-era rock albums are probably my favorite sounding albums ever and they were all tracked on tape so I'm willing to agree that tape sounds good. But I don't think there's anything stopping me from getting an even better sound with digital recording setups that cost half of what it would cost to buy a 2" machine and maintain it for a year. The Bananana posted:Fast forward to now, and I've got a MacBook, and it seems to fulfill all the system requirements, and so I figure I'll try mbox and PT on the Mac.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 02:27
|
|
|
Let's say I take the offer on this one-owner-only Behringer MX8000 mixer (pre-lawsuit, ie it's a good Behringer mixer) and give the seller my €100.. Could I mount that 37" by 30" 60lbs monster up at an angle? Got a sturdy concrete wall, seen people carrying things like Yamaha CS50s on IKEA shelves but I want an angle. Been looking at angled floor stands, got access to a quality carpenter and workshop, could maybe DIY something trustworthy as a worst case scenario. (Got my current Roland M240 mixer for €30 and I can't wait to get rid of that one)
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 14:15
|
|
|
wixard posted:Grunge-era rock albums are probably my favorite sounding albums ever and they were all tracked on tape so I'm willing to agree that tape sounds good. But I don't think there's anything stopping me from getting an even better sound with digital recording setups that cost half of what it would cost to buy a 2" machine and maintain it for a year. Yeah, I love those records too, and there's plenty of studios in town that still run tape so if you do want to go that route it's still available and you can just pay your $350/ day or whatever and let someone else deal with op-ing and maintaining a tape machine
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 17:09
|
|
|
MrLonghair posted:Let's say I take the offer on this one-owner-only Behringer MX8000 mixer (pre-lawsuit, ie it's a good Behringer mixer) and give the seller my €100.. The problem with Behringers aren't their designs, per se, it's that they use the absolute cheapest components they can, which makes them noisy and/or prone to failure... no amount of pre- or post- lawsuit will help that, since it doesn't matter whose design you steal if you're just going to replicate it with cheap components. Expensive mixers and gear are (at least in part; usually) expensive because they use better components and construction.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2012 21:11
|
|
|
himajinga posted:Yeah, I love those records too, and there's plenty of studios in town that still run tape so if you do want to go that route it's still available and you can just pay your $350/ day or whatever and let someone else deal with op-ing and maintaining a tape machine Think about $350 a day. That might seem like a good day's pay but as a studio owner (especially tape-based), you aren't booked every day. Most projects don't schedule huge blocks of time any more. Just an engineer with a decent resume and 5-10 years of real working experience charging $30/hr is pretty low, with no gear or studio fees even in the picture (at least in the major east coast and west coast markets I'm familiar with). The place I started as an intern charged $100/hr for their A room, or $750 for 10 hours and even with 12-15 days booked they would barely keep the lights on every month. I got a couple of talks about how the music business worked and they would appreciate it if I could cash my check the week after next, etc while working there. Nobody was milking it or getting rich, it was probably 60-70% owner-operated and he worked his rear end off maintaining as much of the gear as possible himself. Think soldering an XLR cable is tedious, try soldering a 400+ point patch bay or a 48ch passive splitter by yourself because you can't afford to hire anyone else you trust to do it. Think studio time or studio gear is expensive, you should check out an invoice from the gurus who you have to hire to fix your 20yo quadrophonic SSL console and 2" tape machine! Now he rolls in a Pro Tools based mobile recording truck, everything is MADI so 1 tiny piece of fiber carrying 64 channels everywhere and AFAIK most of the maintenance he does is on the vehicle itself and replacing some faders in the digital console he uses. ChristsDickWorship fucked around with this message at 00:25 on Jul 19, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:22
|
|
|
wixard posted:That's cool that you still have them. I imagine there are a couple places in Philly that have a tape machine, but all the places where guys worked on them for decades and really knew the ins and outs have closed. There is still one of the old "analog studios" a bit outside city limits but I'm not sure they still have the 2" machine or any tape stock, I think they just have their Neve mix room. At this point just the room you need to store your tape reels properly would make you tons more money as a small session Pro Tools/mix/hip-hop room, you have to really love it (and have all your gear paid for already) to keep it up. Yeah, the studios that still have Studers and stuff make their bread and butter on Pro Tools or what-have-you and just have the 2" as an option. Also I think I misquoted the prices a bit now that I look at it. Plus most of the engineers I know don't engineer full time, they've got a few other jobs and engineer 2-3 days a week or whenever they have work. Definitely not something you do to get rich, it's a labor of love for sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:The problem with Behringers aren't their designs, per se, it's that they use the absolute cheapest components they can, which makes them noisy and/or prone to failure... no amount of pre- or post- lawsuit will help that, since it doesn't matter whose design you steal if you're just going to replicate it with cheap components. Yep, components that make one tour and nothing more expensive than that. I found out the guy had left it in storage in the original box for ten years so that's a huge red flag, and then it seems a guy with enough cash to build a full Buchla triple-boat and not worry about money has taken it ahead of me. And then I was directed towards a 16:8 Allen & Heath System8 for the same price. Woop
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 14:09
|
|
|
MrLonghair posted:Yep, components that make one tour and nothing more expensive than that. I found out the guy had left it in storage in the original box for ten years so that's a huge red flag, and then it seems a guy with enough cash to build a full Buchla triple-boat and not worry about money has taken it ahead of me.  I did a couple short tours with a group that included Charles Cohen and he used to set up next to me at the soundboard and play along instead of on-stage. That Buchla Music Easel is one of the coolest things I have ever seen or heard.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 14:26
|
|
|
So I have a Lexicon Alpha, and I just got a new SM57 as a gift. When I plug the microphone into the back of the Alpha, I hear everything fine through my headphones, but nothing shows up on the recording (Audacity). If I plug my guitar straight into the mixer, through the instrument input, I record fine. Does this mean I need some sort preamp for the SM57? EDIT: for clarity. Brettbot fucked around with this message at 14:03 on Jul 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2012 23:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 19:07 |
|
|
Brettbot posted:So I have a Lexicon Alpha, and I just got a new SM57 as a gift. When I plug the microphone into the back of the Alpha, I hear everything fine through my headphones, but nothing shows up on the recording (Audacity). If I plug my guitar straight into the mixer, through the instrument input, I record fine. Does this mean I need some sort preamp for the SM57? Just briefly looking at the specs I'm gonna vote yes. You could try an XLR female to 1/4" male cable and plug that into the instrument input.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 04:03
|
|
