Recording Live

[Moon Zero Two]

Hopefully someone can provide some guidence....

 

I have been doing very small gigs for about a year now - trios and duos - Keys and Vocals - or Keys and Sax - or Keys Sax and Vocals - every two or three months I do a quintet gig - adding drums and bass to the vocal sax keys line up.

 

In case you haven't guessed it's all jazz or jazzy version of pop tunes.

 

I have been using my Mackie VLZ1202 and different powered speakers depending on the gig.

 

I need to add some effects to sweeten the sax and vocal - just some reverb.

 

I record the gigs using a Zoom H4 just sitting on a chair next to me and would like to upgrade to a simple multi track hard disk portable recorder that can double as a mixer w some effects - and it needs to have Pan knobs - because a lot of times one speaker is used as a monitor and one speaker is for the audience.

 

So I need a double duty recorder that can double as a mixer - suggestions? It doesn't have to be fancy - I will bounce it all to Cubase at home and fine tune and burn to CD - I won't say money is no object cause I know how expensive things can get but just a reasonable unit.

 

THANKS!

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

I'm not a fan of stand-alones, because they are really just computers with limitations, that cost as much as computers.

 

A cheap laptop and a cheap interface would work for you for recording.

 

Trying to mix your recording and PA into one device can be done, but it would not be my first choice. Tying the two together makes upgrading harder in the future.

[Steve Nathan]

I'll have to disagree with Bill on this one.

This is exactly the kind of situation that calls for the simplicity of a small self contained recorder. I have an old Korg D16 that would be perfect (but there are a number of similar boxes that would work well). Small, light weight, decent sound and above all else, it's ridiculously easy to set up and record.

Nothing prevents you from taking the audio from it into a computer later for more extensive processing, but for bread and butter recording on this kind of gig, I don't know why anyone would rather drag their computer, cables, interfaces, and all that, when you can just set something small on top of a bar stool, plug in your mikes, arm the tracks and go.

[ProfD]

Yep. Find a new or used self-contained Hard Disk Recorder (HDR) as Steve mentioned above.

 

Just make sure that it has enough inputs (XLR or line) and more importantly, that it can record enough individual tracks simultaneously.

 

For example, some HDRs can only record 8 individual tracks at a time. That would be a problem if someone wanted to record 16.

 

OTOH, the 'limitation' shouldn't be a problem especially when a 2-track recorder has been sufficient.

 

At any rate, look for the maximum number of inputs and recordable tracks. That makes it easier to mix later i.e. get a better balance between the sources.

[Moon Zero Two]

Exactly why I want a better recorder - the two track thing results in bad mixes - so I wanted at least four tracks at once - keys - sax - vocal - spare.

 

Do HDR's make decent mixers that can be used live?

 

The laptop thing scares me - I use M audio Fast Track or Mackie U490 at home but they are not great mixers - pan would have to be done via software and I would worry about things going to pieces live.

 

These are just small restaurants and wine bars so less is more. less is more all the time. But I don't want a mixer then use channel outs into a separate recorder I just want to do the whole thing in one box.

 

thanks for the feedback

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

again though, he doesn't get his extra effects, which he is trying to incorporate into the system. Budget recorders don't usually supply enough outputs to double as live mixers, too.

 

Meanwhile, all of the RME HDSP and later devices have discrete individual mixes for as many inputs and outputs as they support. a 16x16 RME has 16 totally independent mixes for monitoring or recording, plus the stereo output. Many softwares offer multiple output groups, often as many as the computer can handle, though I find that adding effects in the box leads to uncomfortable latencies.

 

Anyway, the recording and the PA should, in my opinion, be kept separate. And there are many way to skin the recording cat. For many years I supported the notion of the stand alone, as affordable and sturdy and great for remotes. I had a little 8 channel Korg that serve me well. But with the introduction of the RME Digiface and Multiface, I moved into computer laptop remote recording. The Fireface 800 made it even easier. These devices have each lasted longer for me that the Korg did, and were easier and quicker to work with, in that the tracking was done in the same program with which I would do the editing... sometimes even on the same machine. So work flow was better for me.

 

And I also used to agree about dragging computers to gigs, but computers are a standard part of most gigs now, one more or less won't make any difference. The RME Fireface 800 plus into my laptop via firewire, not a big deal. The cables, excepting the firewire cable, are otherwise identical to what would be needed for a stand alone recorder. And many of not most of us already own a laptop. The stand alone costs about what a good interface costs, and usually cannot be upgraded or improved. (and the mic pres pretty much sound like ass, but that is a different discussion...)

 

[Sven Golly]

Important to note that, in the larger gigs, you're (probably) not mic'ing the drums, therefore your recording of the signals going through the board won't include anything but the drums bleeding through the other mics on stage.

 

(I'm stating this because it's often the forest that gets missed when looking at the trees )

[ProfD]

IMO, those popular standalone HDRs of the late 90s/early 00s are perfectly suitable for live recording especially considering the prices on the used market.

 

The mic pres are sometimes weak but the effects are decent. A mic pre or mixer could fix that. Overall, a standalone HDR should be fine for a jazz quintet.

 

Considering how early Jazz records were made, it isn't a stretch to think those 'board' recordings could capture magic.

[clpete]

I use a Tascam 2488 recorder to record live. I have never used it as the bands mixer, but it can be done. I use unused monitor outs and the inserts on the PA board to get the signals as well has separate feeds from mics or direct out on amps. I have used the recorders mixer at home for various things besides just recording. It has onboard effects and will burn CDs.

 

Limitatiion as live mixer: 1) This recorder is a 24 channel, but will only accept 8 inputs at one time. Of coarse, tracks can be added. I usually have to mix drums or vocals down using another mixer. 2) The outputs are limited so its not set up for a separate main/monitor mix. But, the mix sent to the PA would not have to be the same recording mix. So, you could record the guitars or drums, but not send them out to the PA.

 

I have not used any other digital recorders, but assume they are all similar in function. You can download the manuals for the ones you may be interested in and check out the capabilities. I think you can get a good used digital recorder for $300 to $500. A new Tascam is $700.

 

TASCAM RECORDER

[Sven Golly]

Considering how early Jazz records were made, it isn't a stretch to think those 'board' recordings could capture magic.

 

Yep, assuming one does an 'out front' mic; otherwise, if he's close-miking everything, then he'll be missing the drums as a separate channel.

 

Yes, obvious, but sometimes these things need to be stated.

[InWalkedBud]

does anyone know anything about this thing: http://bit.ly/9JTYy8 ? came across it right after reading this thread. functions as both an interface and a stand-alone. i guess my questions would be:

 

--are there many other products like this that people are aware of?

--would the pre-amps/effects be garbage?

--how would it compare to an older stand-alone?

 

and, above all: should i buy it?!??! yeah but for real, interested in hearing some thoughts on this little guy.

 

 

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

Most of the Zoom stuff that I have encountered, except for the little 2 channel recorder, have been cheaply made and flimsy, and with really uninspiring sounds. Your milage may vary... my preamps are mid-level studio stuff (Hardy, GReat River, and like that)and my entire monitoring setup is pretty far out there, very high end mastering stuff. But I would hate using those preamps, certainly. If the rest of your rig is low budget, or you just want to get something economical that works, then this box might work for you. But if you are a sound-quality freak, you will likely be unhappy.

[bhodaway10]

Read this article :

 

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep09/articles/zoomr16.htm

 

"When it comes to expandability, flexibility and sheer processing power, theres really no contest. Yet even to the hardcore PC user, there is undeniably something attractive about a portable, stand-alone recording system. I have two laptop rigs, and both are technically portable; but actually porting them anywhere involves packing up and untangling a mares nest of USB and Firewire cables, dongles, hubs, interfaces and external hard drives. Whats more, like most laptops, they generate infuriating fan noise, and running them away from a mains power supply is rarely a realistic option."

 

 

[InWalkedBud]

bhodaway: cool, thanks. bill: thanks for the feedback. i wouldn't describe myself as a sound quality freak by any means. i'm much more of a musician than a technician. i don't really have any decent recording gear or software to speak of. my Primary Objective is to be able to take over some of the recording duties i otherwise would have had to pay someone else for, i.e. good live recording and basic studio stuff. i'm willing to spend $2000ish. i've been doing some research and what i'm thinking is:

 

a) a decent interface such as the focusrite saffire pro 40

b) a decent program bundle, probably logic since i have a newish macbook

c) 2-3 sm 57s, a pair of decent condenser mics (any suggestions appreciated!)

d) my 2009 macbook (not pro)

e) my yamaha cp33 as a controller for logic, maybe reason if that would be an improvement for

 

i have more questions than answers but the basics are: 1) am i missing something here or is this a comprehensive system? 2) would the setup transfer well between gig and studio? 3)is this going to be enough of an improvement to warrant the cost/hassle? i've been reading up but always end up feeling like i'm missing something. i know a lot of this is subjective, but any feedback would be much appreciated. apologies for hijacking the thread, but it seems applicable.

 

[InWalkedBud]

*oops. "improvement for...use in conjunction with logic." not too sure the difference between the 2 actually, just know a guy who uses reason to supplement pro tools, when he wants to use his keyboard controller to add a bass track.

[Morizzle]

I have only limited knowledge, but your setup ideas sound very reasonable.

For a condenser mic, I'm a happy user of the Rode NT1-A. The sound quality is really clear and there's hardly any noise from the microphone.

[BillWelcome Home Studios]

Read this article :

 

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep09/articles/zoomr16.htm

 

"When it comes to expandability, flexibility and sheer processing power, theres really no contest. Yet even to the hardcore PC user, there is undeniably something attractive about a portable, stand-alone recording system. I have two laptop rigs, and both are technically portable; but actually porting them anywhere involves packing up and untangling a mares nest of USB and Firewire cables, dongles, hubs, interfaces and external hard drives. Whats more, like most laptops, they generate infuriating fan noise, and running them away from a mains power supply is rarely a realistic option."

 

 

I felt that way many years ago I do not feel that way anymore.

 

My guess is that this guy is a Mac user, by the external hard drive comment. I use the 7200 RPM internal hard drives on any of my three PC laptops to record remotely (or I did until a year ago, I'm retired now...) or in house computers, using various combinations of RME products and Mytek converters. And I'm talking about mission critical recordings for multi-million dollar productions like the opera 'The Grapes of Wrath', cast recordings, classical recordings, all sorts of things. The extra cord from the interface to the computer is no big deal, there is no rats nest involved, no hubs, no dongles (depends, but not necessary), all of that is really overblown. If you can hear the fan noise form a laptop in a live musical situation, you've got better ears than I do.

 

We all have to live within our own budgets, and there is more than one way to skin a cat. But seriously, with all of the cabling and gear involved in a normal production, to cry about one extra cable, or even all of the cables you could possibly drag along to hookup anything extra, is really getting a little whiney, don't you think? When laptops were delicate, and connectors were proprietary and expensive, laptops were not suited for live work. But today? No problem, see it all the time, do it all the time, big yawn, easy as pie....

[harmonizer]

....Keys Sax and Vocals - every two or three months I do a quintet gig - adding drums and bass......

 

You want to look at how many separate inputs a device can record from at once (as opposed to the total number of tracks which can be built up one at a time in a studio setting). Let's look at your situation, when you add drums and bass:

1. Keys (line out from a keyboard amp?)

2. Sax (mic to an XLR cord)

3. Vocal mic to XLR cord

4.5.6. drums (three mics to XLR cords) *

7. bass (if it's acoustic, not sure of best way to get signal)

8. You said "vocals" - plural?

 

* To record a drum kit, you probably take at least 3 lines - 2 for overhead mics, and a 3rd for the bass drum.

 

So in your situation you could probably do ok with 8 inputs. Make sure the summary of inputs listed above matches your situation, and that you don't think your needs will grow bigger, before you make a purchase. There are lots of dedicated devices available which record 8 tracks at once. Not all of them have 8 XLR inputs however - some might only have 4 XLR inputs, with inputs 5-8 only able to take a 1/4 line input, like what you might get out from a line out jack from some amplifiers. Any mic will need a preamp to process its signal, and if you buy a mixing board (or multitrack recorder) with XLR inputs, it will include separate preamps for each of its XLR inputs.

 

When I did my research 2 years ago, I needed 12 inputs for a 7 person covers band with 4 singers, and the Korg D3200 was the only reasonably priced product that could do 12 inputs at once (8 of these 12 support XLR inputs). We use it as both our live mixing board and as a multitrack recorder. It's a solid reliable machine with wonderful capabilities. It has a useful feature in that it can send one mix to our stage monitors and a different one to the FOH drivers which point at the audience. This is handy if, for example, you don't want to send the noise from your drummer or keyboard amp through the stage monitors.

 

You might not need a Korg D3200 if you can find a cheaper multitrack recorder that can record from 8 inputs at once, supporting XLR inputs for all 8 of those inputs. I did not research machines in that category, so I don't have any specific recommendations.

 

Whatever you get, I recommend you get a battery backup unit. Sometimes someone kicks out a plug, or the venue loses AC power, and without a battery backup unit, you might lose everything you have recorded for that gig since you did your last save.

 

You might also need additional mics you do not yet own, particularly to mic the drum kit. Micing a drum kit is an art unto itself.

 

Those who have said that it may be trickier to do both mixing and multitrack recording on a single device are correct. It may not be as intuitive how to make changes on your "mixing board" when it is a multitrack recorder.

[Steve Nathan]

Shameless Plug.....

After this thread, I realized I really have no use for my Korg D16 anymore. It will be hitting Ebay any day now.

 

[BluesKeys]

A four pc band I play with has recorded most of their demos live using a Zoom 8 channel all in one http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/R16/

 

It gets you 8 simultaineous tracks that you can then load into your DAW to final mix etc. Works great for like $400

[Nillerbabs]

It gets you 8 simultaineous

 

... and 16 if you daisy-chain two units. More simultaneous inputs at a lower price than the D3200. I can easily see two of these on a supersmall stand with the upper unit tilted 45 degrees being a very posh solution.

 

Given that using the same unit for mixing and recording complicates operation, using different units the two purposes I suppose you'd just run the recorder into the main mixer and worry about adjusting instrument and mic levels on the recording until after the gig?

 

/ Niels

[Jim Alfredson]

These days sound quality in all these sub-$1000 interfaces are all pretty much the same. They're using the same a/d converters, basically the same front-ends. The differences are in features and ease of use.

 

And one small niggle:

 

Considering how early Jazz records were made, it isn't a stretch to think those 'board' recordings could capture magic.

 

Yes, but early jazz recordings had very accomplished and knowledgeable engineers at the helm, adjusting levels and EQ on the fly. Kinda hard to do that when you're also playing in the band.

 

I'm always wary of using the same interface to mix your live sound and record unless it's specifically designed for that purpose, like the Presonus StudioLive. Even mixers with direct outputs can be iffy. Experience has taught me that the best solution is to split all signals so the recording device and the FOH is receiving the same, but isolated signals. That means that whatever the FOH does will not affect your recording levels at all.

 

That said, before spending a bunch of money, I'd play with the placement of your Zoom H4. I've heard extremely well-balanced recordings come from those, but usually it requires the device being out front, rather than next to you.

 

[harmonizer]

A four pc band I play with has recorded most of their demos live using a Zoom 8 channel all in one http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/R16/

 

It gets you 8 simultaineous tracks that you can then load into your DAW to final mix etc. Works great for like $400

 

If you buy this product, make sure to get the 32GB SDHC card.

 

The R16 specs state "the unit supports up to 32GB SD cards, allowing over 100 track hours of recording". That's *track hours*, so if recording 8 tracks at once, that would be 12 hours of music with the 32GB card.

 

The standard included card is a "1GB SD card", which by my math would cover something like 20-30 minutes of music if recording 8 tracks at once.