| Author | Message | ||
| olieoliver
Senior Member Username: olieoliver Post Number: 2140 Registered: 2-2006 |
Need some input from my Alembic brothers. Have any of you guys/gals done much home recording with a Mac/PC? If so I need some advice on which format to record. I've been recording at 44.1hz-16 bit which is what CD format is. But my system can record at 96hz-24 bit just fine. And if I do record at the higher level what problems will I have when I get ready to Mixdown to 44.1hz-16 bit and I assume I will need to use some sort of dithering plugin. Or can most companies that burn the cd's for me dither and convert to CD format? Or is 96hz-24 bit overkill. I want this CD I am doing to be of good quality. My Hardware/Software, Mac-Pro Dual core 2.66 mHz 9 gig ram 1 terabyte firewire external drive Presonus FirePod and Fader Port. Leopard OS Cubase 4.5 Any and all input is welcome, (Dave you're a pretty smart guy, what do ya think?) OO | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2108 Registered: 6-2002 |
For non-acoustic source material, where dynamics are limited to the loud end of the spectrum, silence is a rare commodity, and there's not much happening over 6 kHz, even 44.1 kHz sampling at 16 bit is essentially overkill. I doubt you would hear much of a difference. Perhaps on a high-end audio system, certainly not on the average mac/pc audio debauchery. One thing though: any downward conversion you can apply after the fact will invariably eat away at the sound quality. | ||
| davehouck
Moderator Username: davehouck Post Number: 7631 Registered: 5-2002 |
Thanks Olie, but all of my past recording experiences suggest that I'm not very good at recording. | ||
| lbpesq
Senior Member Username: lbpesq Post Number: 3562 Registered: 7-2004 |
Olie: FWIW I went through this dilemma when I first got my Zoom H2 which has numerous recording rates to choose from. After some research, talking to people whose opinions I respect, and some good old experimentation, I settled on the 44/16 CD standard. Bill, tgo | ||
| olieoliver
Senior Member Username: olieoliver Post Number: 2141 Registered: 2-2006 |
I realize that 44/16 is the standard for audio CD and most MP3's aren't that high but I want the best possible WAV file to work with while mastering (I will master the project myself probably using Bias Peak)before dithering down to 44/16 and burn my Red Book cd for duplicating. I did speak to a Professor at Berklee that teaches a course on Recording with Cubase and he even suggested using 32 bit floating and trying out different sample rates lower than 96. HMMM choices, choices choices... OO I do know one thing for sure..... ......I need MORE cowbell! | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2110 Registered: 6-2002 |
Agreed - you can't have enough cowbell. | ||
| kenbass4
Advanced Member Username: kenbass4 Post Number: 325 Registered: 10-2003 |
Olie, I do alot of PC recording, and I find that while my music (Rock) does not have a huge amount of dynamic range, I still record at 24 Bit, because when you start adding effects (like reverbs and choruses) the tails get "jagged". A bigger problem is sample rate conversion, where if you are going to be burning an audio CD, you want your sample rate to divide evenly by 44.1k. So, if you want to start with a higher rate, you're better off starting at 88.2k instead of 96k, because once you "downsample", you'll have more noise starting at 96k. I just stay at 44.1k, because my converters only go up to 48k (hey, my Laylas have been flawless for 10 years!) Ken (TEO) | ||
| adriaan
Senior Member Username: adriaan Post Number: 2111 Registered: 6-2002 |
To avoid the "tail jagging", you could use analog effects, preferably up front instead of after the fact. The funny stuff happening on the tail end of notes in the digital domain is one of the reasons why I won't have a digital piano in the house to replace our old German upright, with all its glarious dings and scratches. | ||
| staemius
Member Username: staemius Post Number: 88 Registered: 12-2004 |
I've been very interested in the Zoom H2 - Bill (or others), how do you like it? | ||
| davehouck
Moderator Username: davehouck Post Number: 7636 Registered: 5-2002 |
James; I have an H4 and love it. I plug it in, turn it on, press record twice, and start playing. When I'm done I plug it in to the laptop with a USB cable and move the file over. It will record to a wav file or MP3. There are three recording levels to choose from. Pressing record once puts it on standby while you play a little to see which level works best. I think it's an easy tool to use. I think the recording quality of the built in mics are pretty good, and with the right memory card, it will record an entire show. The only downside is that it feels fragile. You wouldn't want to drop it. | ||
| jack
Intermediate Member Username: jack Post Number: 192 Registered: 11-2005 |
James, all these folks around here told me to go for the H2 (or H4 - but I got the H2) and it's great. I record every gig, rehearsal and concert I go to. Excellent quality, easy to use. Olie, apologies for the theadjack, but I'd wanted to thank everyone for their advice back when, and that thread disappeared into the archives before I got around to it. Thanks. -Jack | ||
| olieoliver
Senior Member Username: olieoliver Post Number: 2142 Registered: 2-2006 |
I've looked at the H2 or H4 myself, may just have to get one. No probelem on the jack, Jack. I've been guilty of that a few times myself. OO | ||
| kenbass4
Advanced Member Username: kenbass4 Post Number: 326 Registered: 10-2003 |
Olie, I guess what it boils down to is what are you recording, and what are you doing with that recording. I'm recording a full band, 24 channels simultaniously, and then doing overdubs, so recording with effects is not really a good idea. If you're just recording yourself, or you and one other person with no additional tracking after the fact, then using an H-2 or H-4 would be a better solution, and putting the effects in front would probably work out better. Just remeber that whatever effect you use, you're stuck with it from that point on... | ||
| lbpesq
Senior Member Username: lbpesq Post Number: 3563 Registered: 7-2004 |
Another rousing plug for the H2. I absolutely LOVE it. For years I recorded rehearsals with my old trusty Sony ProWalkman. When that finally gave up th ghost, I got a minidisc. Hated it. PITA. Couldn't even tell if the thing was recording or not without looking at the "display" under a microscope (and this was before I needed glasses). Lost many a great jam that way. Got the H2. It's close to perfect. Easy to use, great sound, convenient, and I love the two sets of mics that allow 90, 120, or 360 degree recording. I put it in the middle as we play in a circle facing each other at the studio. Also works well for bootlegging concerts. I believe they just came out with a new version of he H4. I looked at the old H4 and it had too much stuff I didn't need. I can't recommend the H2 highly enough. Bill, tgo | ||
| olieoliver
Senior Member Username: olieoliver Post Number: 2143 Registered: 2-2006 |
Multitrack Ken is what I am doing. I have all the gear for it now and have been doing some recording. Everything I've done so is at 44.1/16 and has sounded fine. The CD we are starting we will end up burning around 1500 copies and wil use an outside company for that and I wanted to get the best quality possible. I was thinking of the H-2(4) for recording rehearsals so I can listen to new songs as the band plays them. OO | ||
| kenbass4
Advanced Member Username: kenbass4 Post Number: 327 Registered: 10-2003 |
Olie, Sounds like you're doing pretty much the same thing as me. (WARNING, SHAMELESS PLUG COMING) You can hear our results on our CD "Floating Holiday" (announcer voice) Available at Amazon, CD Baby and other retailers (end announcer voice) Good luck, and don't forget to let us know where to get it. Ken (TEO) | ||
| olieoliver
Senior Member Username: olieoliver Post Number: 2144 Registered: 2-2006 |
Will do Ken..uh I mean......"COMING SOON TO A STORE NEAR YOU".....  |
