Please Review - my first home studio set up

Woofer

Hi everyone, I am currently starting to build my first home recording set-up. I have gotten some great info from the stickies here so thanks a lot. I would love some further feedback on my rig (correct term?:P) below.

I have played guitar, bass for years - never as a band. I rarely even jam with other people, let alone as part of a band. It dawned on me one day as I was about to fork over 300euro for a guitar looper pedal (just so i could layer some guitar and have something to jam along to) that maybe I should start to put together a home studio, so I could jam along with myself, overdub, get creative etc. My goal is to record on my own, not as a band... Be able to lay down some songs, probably vocal w/ acoustic initially, overdubbing some electric guitar, bass, program some drum beats ( I dont play), maybe a little bit of keyboard and/or midi control of other instruments available in DAW. Add some samples for "ambience", not necessarily in that order!.:pac:

Computer - Apple MacBook Pro Hi-Res Antiglare 17" Quad Core i7 2.3GHz 8GB 750GB Notebook Computer

DAW - Apple Logic Express 9

Audio Interface - Any advice here? I will really only need to record 2 inputs (w preamp) at one time (like acoustic and vocal). I'd love something like the Apogee Duet but at $600 its out of my budget. I was thinking more like euro200 max! Based on sticky advice, I was think I should be looking for 96Khz sample rate, 24 bit depth, <12ms latency, and preferably with phantom power. I guess MIDI input too.

Microphones - Initially, i only see a need for a vocal microphone and maybe a mic to pick up acoustic guitar. Are there any good value mics out there that could do both, maybe a good value large diaphragm condenser MIC with a pop filter? Also, do I really need a seperate mic for acoustic, or can I expect reasonable results if I plug the acoustic directly into audio interface (acoustic has a pick-up)?
I am assuming I wont need to mic my guitar amp, I was planning on using Logics amp models, EQ and effects. They look pretty comprehensive, and seem to sound good (according to internet reviews and some youtube videos). Anyone see any issues with this approach? Also, planning on using programmable drum beats rather than micing up a drum kit.(which i neither have nor can play )

Monitors - can i just use a good pair of neutral headphones to start with? Any suggestions?

Midi Controller - do I really need one of these, im not sure what they add, or how much I would use it. So I was thinking of leaving this out at the start and then figuring out if/when I want to add it in. If anyone has any opinions/experiences, please let me know

Dedicated Hard Drive - again, do I really need one or would the HD on my mac book do? (750GB ,5400rpm HDD). If i really need a dedicated HD, I have a 3 yr old Lacie 1TB USB2.0 lying around that I could use - would this be OK or would it be too old/slow at this stage? Should I fork out for a super quick, super silent SSD firewire hard drive?

Any advice and tips welcome - thanks for reading

i57dwun4yb1pt8

why would you put this gear together then attempt to get a cheap interface -

the most essential part of the whole lot ?


the three most essential things are

1/ interface

2/ room treatment

3/ monitors ( useless without 2 )

if you dont go with montors then 2 and 3 becomes a good set of phones - expect to pay over 100 - 150 for these.

Woofer

Hi DaDumTish,

Thanks for your response. Maybe I am underestimating the importance of the interface so. Based on my needs, should I be looking at something like Apogee Duet? Or are there other options you would suggest? I really have no experience in using an interface.

As regards room treatment and monitors, the reason I am holding off on this is because I will be moving house at some point in the next 12 months. I'll be making sure there is a good space I can treat there, but dont see the value in doing it right now if I can replace treatment and monitors with a good set of frequency neutral headphones for the interim.

Robin Ball

THere are some killer deals on adverts these days.... take advantage.

http://www.adverts.ie/recording-equipment/brand-new-apogee-duet-2-audio-interface/1030784

DamagedTrax

a 5400rpm drive wont be up to the job. you'll need 7200rpm minimum to transfer datat quick enough.

TelePaul

Nicer set-up than what I started with! Amateur recording suits modular systems, so you can upgrade and replace as your aims evolve. If you're looking for an interface on a budget, I'd consider something in the Presonus FW range, they tend to have decent on-board pre-amps. For a condensor mic, I'd go with an SE2200 A. As for a midi controller, it depends on the extent to which you'll be using virtual instruments, and your propensity for playing vs programming. On the basic end of the scale, they're pretty cheap , and handy for fleshing out simple ideas. Logic looks like a really great sequencer, I kinda want it.

Paolo_M

DamagedTrax wrote: »

a 5400rpm drive wont be up to the job. you'll need 7200rpm minimum to transfer datat quick enough.

+1,000.



As you're using a laptop that means an external drive of at least 7,200 rpm.

Gear like the M-Audio Fast Track etc. would be as good as the Apogee and cost less.
+1 on not skimping here though, given the budget you've already dropped.
Latency and driver stability are key here, especially if your LT is on Lion.
Also consider expandability.
I know you've said two channels but I guarantee you that if you plan on sticking with it (I hope you do considering the money you've spent already) you'll want to add more channels.


Montiors are a waste of money unless you're planning on treating your room properly. Treating a room properly costs.
If not then very good reference headphones would be a "best of a bad situation" solution.

MIDI controllers are only a nice to have, unless you want keyboard/synths too, in which casea MIDI keyboard could be a very good buy.

For microphones, as a start pointy you simply cannot beat a Shure 57 or 58. They're reasonably priced and will still be working even if we get hit by a meteor next year.
At your stage spending big money on mikes is not wise as you don't know what sounds you actually want.

godfrey

Paolo_M wrote: »

Montiors are a waste of money unless you're planning on treating your room properly. Treating a room properly costs.

As a professional with 31 years experience I feel compelled to rubbish this blanket statement. A pair of good compact nearfield monitors will do more for you in any room, treated or not, than any headphones, in terms of overall balance of frequencies and the ability to represent the mix balance with the necessary degree of accuracy to be able to make good balance decisions.

Paolo_M wrote: »

For microphones, as a start pointy you simply cannot beat a Shure 57 or 58. They're reasonably priced and will still be working even if we get hit by a meteor next year.
At your stage spending big money on mikes is not wise as you don't know what sounds you actually want.

This I'm afraid is poor advice, for many reasons, starting with the fact that 57's and 58's are popular for their attributes on stage, but do not make an all-round good choice mic for studio recording of voice or acoustic instruments.

I would suggest a reasonably priced condensor mic by Rode etc which will do a very good job recording voice, acoustic instruments and more without the presence peak which 57's and 58's are designed to produce, and without the proximity effect which all dynamic mics produce.

I hope this is not insulting to anyone and is of benefit to the OP.

g

madtheory

godfrey wrote: »

As a professional with 31 years experience I feel compelled to rubbish this blanket statement. A pair of good compact nearfield monitors will do more for you in any room, treated or not, than any headphones, in terms of overall balance of frequencies and the ability to represent the mix balance with the necessary degree of accuracy to be able to make good balance decisions.

This is kind of true, but I think it is at best only a slightly better generalisation that Paolo's. The speakers need to have excellent transient response, a roll off from 60Hz (otherwise bass will excite room modes excessively) the room needs to be fairly dry, and the lack of treatment will cause listening fatigue as your brain compensates for the confusion caused by room reflections and, ironically, the lack of bass.

I would also agree that Shure dynamics are not a good start. There is any number of decent condensers available for similar money. Personally I prefer Audio Technica's products to Rode's- I dislike their top end boost.

I'd also add that room treatment need not "cost" as Paolo asserts. 8 rolls of Rockwool/ Isover, two in each corner, is a good start in most rooms. The stud partitions will often take care of low bass, and a nice carpet or rug gets rid of one of the biggest first reflection points- the floor! Set up the speakers in an equilateral triangle and observe the 33% rule.

Audio interfaces- if the MacBook has an audio input, it's probably very good. As good as any two channel AD below €700ish. All you need is two mic preamps (ART tube MPs are nice) and a cable to go to the minijack input. I guarantee you'll have less noisy mic pres than the M Audio Fast track, and a warmer tone too! Another minijack to TRS cable to go out to the monitors, job done 'til you can save for an Apogee or whatever.

Finally, I sincerely hope this is not insulting to anyone and is of benefit to the OP.

Welease

madtheory wrote: »

Finally, I sincerely hope this is not insulting to anyone and is of benefit to the OP.

As a spelling/grammar Nazi, I am extremely offended by your misspelling of the word "than"

madtheory wrote: »

This is kind of true, but I think it is at best only a slightly better generalisation that Paolo's.

madtheory

Welease wrote: »

Last edited by Welease; Yesterday at 19:12. Reason: Edit - Bad spelling

Hahahahahahaha! And you forgot a "." there.

godfrey

madtheory wrote: »

This is kind of true, but I think it is at best only a slightly better generalisation that Paolo's. The speakers need to have excellent transient response, a roll off from 60Hz (otherwise bass will excite room modes excessively) the room needs to be fairly dry, and the lack of treatment will cause listening fatigue as your brain compensates for the confusion caused by room reflections and, ironically, the lack of bass.

Let's start with "The speakers need to have excellent transient response". Yes, we'd like this, but what makes you pick such a parameter over, let's say, frequency response, size, pleasing sound to the user, or any other more critical quality? Theory? Is there such a huge load of speakers out there who's transient response is, in your opinion, so bad as to make this sweeping statement? I'd love to know which ones...

"a roll off from 60Hz (otherwise bass will excite room modes excessively)". If the speaker doesn't reproduce sub audio, how will you know you have problems in this range? Whether your room can reproduce these frequencies is entirely another matter. Ask any mastering engineer about the awful low-end in the mixes he gets from so-called engineers who have no idea what is in their mixes at low and sub frequencies.

The room needs to be fairly dry, and the lack of treatment will cause listening fatigue as your brain compensates for the confusion caused by room reflections and, ironically, the lack of bass. Listening on headphones is far more fatiguing even in the best of circumstances. Also please note, an overly dry monitoring environment is unrealistic, given that listeners do not have such environments. Stereo imaging and effects balance will be completely distorted (the perception of same) in a dry acoustic, which will not translate into a good mix.

Theories are great, and necessary, but only when applied correctly and realistically. Let me give you a great example:
The person hired a few years ago by the Irish contingent at SXSW to look after the sound needs of the Irish bands insisted that the 12" PA speakers on stands be placed no higher than 4' from the ground, to avoid reflections from the ceiling.

She placed no importance in the FACT that the majority of the audience would be more than 5' tall, and none of her precious sound would pass the 1st row of sweaty punters. Spare me!! Straight out of some expensive sound course given by some lecturers who have nothing better to do than create hair-brained and false theories. I gave her a few hours off while I did the decent thing and made sure the band was heard.

I could go on, but I already have...

g

TelePaul

This took a turn for the interesting. Godfrey, your views intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

madtheory

godfrey wrote: »

I'd love to know which ones...

It's not merely an opinion, it is a fairly well established fact but not as widely known as it should be- here's a paper by Newell et al. detailing the issue. So because of that, if you read John Watkinson in Resolution magazine, you'll see he bangs on about the infinite baffle rather a lot.

godfrey wrote: »

"a roll off from 60Hz (otherwise bass will excite room modes excessively)". If the speaker doesn't reproduce sub audio, how will you know you have problems in this range? Whether your room can reproduce these frequencies is entirely another matter. Ask any mastering engineer about the awful low-end in the mixes he gets from so-called engineers who have no idea what is in their mixes at low and sub frequencies.

Note that I said a roll off, which means there is some bass, it is not totally absent, particularly in the near field. The real cause of "awful low end" is the blurring of detail caused by room reflections. Our perception can work around each of these issues, but it requires concentration (conscious or not) which burns up energy. I've done plenty of mixes on NS-10s in non treated rooms, and the mixes translate, they're great. I wanted to kill everyone at the end of the session though (I get very cranky when I'm tired).

godfrey wrote: »

Also please note, an overly dry monitoring environment is unrealistic...

You quote me saying "fairly dry" and then make a big point about the fallacy of "overly dry". so I think we probably agree, within the fuzzy definition of what exactly "fairly" and "overly" means. Maybe we need to put them on some kind of RT60 scale? I'm kidding, but do you see my point? I agree there does need to be some reverb, but in essence the issue is that its spectrum needs to be "controlled".

In all likelyhood the OP is mixing in your average small domestic room which is probably a cube, so there will be horrendous room modes which need all the absorption they can get. It's unlikely that the simple steps I recommended will make such a room "overly dry".

godfrey wrote: »

Theories are great, and necessary...

Theories always need to be tested, tested and tested. Applying a poorly or non tested theory (which makes it merely a hypothesis actually) on the day of rigging is rather nieve, I agree!

I sincerely hope that this is still helpful to the OP!!!!!