Music Recording

February 24, 2009 4:03 PM

Where do I start when it comes to buying recording gear?

I'm looking to start getting into music recording, actual decent recordings instead of most the lofi stuff I've been doing but I don't know where to start. I'm looking to get gear that won't break the bank but is decent enough where I won't have to replace it for a while, not totally professional but still decent.

Stuff I've already got
-A 13" Macbook
-A Toneport UX2
-A few decent Condensor Mics
-A decent dynamic mic (it's a ripoff the SM58 but from what I've read some people think it's as good, some people think it's a POS)
-Plenty of XLR cables, mic stand, pop filter, and next year a nice big open air room
-Musical equipment (drum set, amps, guitars, bass)

So far I've stayed away from buying anything pretty high value, I don't know where my money would be best spent so I've gone through the year collecting miscellaneous stuff I know I'll eventually need like mics, cables, stands, etc.

I'm thinking the Toneport is the first thing I'm going to have to replace, it's only got two mic inputs and two instrument inputs, I'd like to have 4 or more mic inputs at least. I'm using Garageband right now and I've gotten to learn it pretty decently but not great, from what I hear Protools would be a better program to use but I like the simplicity of Garageband. Should I start learning another program other than Garageband? I'm not looking to do drum programming or music production, I'm more looking to do live recording.

I'm wanting to get decently serious about this, eventually offering in-house recording studio, nothing that will rival the pros but good enough for some kid with 50$ to come in and lay down a few songs. I've seen some pretty good amateur setups with huge racks full of equipment and I've come to learn that these are called rack mounts? Do I need one of those? I've come a long way in the past few years from recording with Sound Recorder and laptop mic to actually using an interface but now I need to take it a step up, just wondering where to start.

Sorry to make this such a complicated post but a few related questions
-What's the standard way to record a song, lay down a drum beat first and than instrument/vocals or lay down the instumentals with a click track and come in later with drums?
-Right now when I lay down vocals I wear headphones and have my output volume through the headphones turned up as high as posible than adjust the levels of the mic, is that right?
-What exactly is mixing and compression? My idea of mixing is adjusting the volumes of each track and also adjusting the frequencies of each track, is this correct? I know people out there offer mixing services and I really don't understand why it costs hundreds of dollars to adjust volumes.
-What is the next interface I should get?

Whew that was a lot, I know that was a lot so thanks in advance for any help.
posted by BrnP84 (15 comments total) 3 users marked this as a favorite

Just picking a few things; there's a million "right ways":

What's the standard way to record a song, lay down a drum beat first and than instrument/vocals or lay down the instumentals with a click track and come in later with drums?

I mostly put drums on last, just because I don't usually have the foreknowledge of where stuffs gonna go, the whole structure of the song, where I want some fills, etc. Sometimes I record to a click, sometimes not (if it's an acoustic-y strummy kind of thing.) Clicks can be good if you think you might be shifting stuff around later or chopping out a verse or something, but they can also kill a vibe. Often times my quick demos are better than when I try to record something "for reals" and with a click, because it's just more organic and energetic the first time you do it instead of being a slave to a plinky plonky 120bpm in your ear.

Right now when I lay down vocals I wear headphones and have my output volume through the headphones turned up as high as posible than adjust the levels of the mic, is that right?

You should be able to adjust the level of your mic independent of your monitor level, if I'm understanding what you mean. I usually have my headphone volume somewhere in the middle, not too loud, and actually I only put the phones on one ear, so I can hear what my voice is really doing instead of just in the mix. A tip I read years ago that has proven really helpful is, if you have a bass track already recorded, mute it when you're recording your vocal. The idea is that hearing the bass in the playback makes you sing a bit flat.
posted by chococat at 7:35 PM on February 24, 2009 [1 favorite]


Woah thats a lot of questions!

The Toneport looks pretty handy for messing around but its not really a serious Audio Card.
and well how exactly can you record drums with only two inputs?

1. You might want to get a Cheap 12-16 channel Mixer with a 4 or 8 channel Sub Bus.

this will be useful as it gives you a bunch of Mic Pre-Amps (not the best but ok for now) and some flexibility on recording things with your current card. You can do a drum mix down to two channels on the Mixer and then record that with the Tone Port perhaps. or you can have a bunch of things plugfed into the mixer and use the subs to controll what is going to the Recording


2. A better Sound card with say 8 inputs. with or without Mic Pre-Amps built in. *you will probably want Mic-Pres bult in if you are mostly recording a traditional Band set-up.


3. Garageband is not a serious program. I've used Garageband once or twicve and there really seemed to be nothing to 'learn'. its like taking Pro-Tools or Cubase etc and stripping out all the complications. if you are intending to record local bands you will probably need to upgrade to a more serious Digital Audio Workstation Software App. (DAW)

Pro-Tools, Cubase, Logic, Nuendo, Cakewalk there are even Freeware Apps



4. Recording bands. - generally the Drums are done FIRST. so that everyone else has something to play to.

Alternatively you may record a rough guide track of the whiole song with everyone playing simultaneously and then overdub everyone after that. Vocals usually recorded after most of the instrumentation. (well except fro fills and random overdubs)

There is no correct way, but there are ways that will help you ensure that each 'layer/part' is in tune / in time.

Ie it can be good to record the Bass and drums simultaneously so they can 'Lock together' into a tighter groove wheere they feed back on each other.


5. Mixing / a Mixer
Yes you are right that Mixing / a Mixer basically takes all the individual recordings and mixes them together to ouput a final Stereo (or 5.1 say) Audio Track that can be played on your Stereo.

You are however wrong to think this is a trival Exercise. And does generally involve a lot more than adjusting the relative volumes.

However the complexity does depend quite a bit on the complexity of the music you are trying to 'Mix'.


6. Vocals. - yes usually people record the Vocals whilst wearign headphones. you should be able to adjust independently the levels in the headphones of A) the playback of the Song
B) the Montioring level of the singers vocals.

this is usually done in either the soundcard setttings or the program Record Monitor settings.
posted by mary8nne at 7:25 AM on February 25, 2009


That sounds like good stuff but I didn't quite understand all of it. When you say sound card do you mean my Toneport? Let's say I have an 8 track mixer, could I than do 8 simultaneous recording tracks if I hook up that mixer to the Toneport? I've done a little homework and I think eventually I want something like this Alesis. If I'm saying this wrong correct me but the Alesis would be functionally similar to my Toneport except that I could now do 8 simultaneous recordings? If that's true would I still need a separate mixer? If I don't get the Alesis I was thinking of getting something like this Korg D888, which would do all the recording w/o the computer. This is a big commitment for me, I like the convience of not having to use the computer to record but it seems like I would be missing out on some opportunites by not using my computer in the recording process (like right now with my Toneport I can use my computer to add effects in real time and I like having all those effects). Are these two reasonable buys for someone in my situation or would my money be better spent somewhere else?
posted by BrnP84 at 11:28 AM on February 25, 2009


I have that exact Alesis but the io14 version, which is 4 xlr inputs instead of 8 because it's just me and I don't need 8 mic inputs. But I got it for the same reason, I wanted to record drums on 4 discreet tracks instead of having to premix the drums to 2 tracks everytime I recorded them. The Alesis is great for the money, I've had it for about 2.5 years and never had a problem. At the time it was the only alternative to a Presonus Firepod which was way out of my budget.
You don't need a separate mixer, it comes with a sort of virtual mixer in the software, which is okay. I don't use it a ton, but you can do things like assign different mixes to different headphones which is handy. Plus I use the midi sometimes now that I have a good keyboard.
I would say the Alesis and a good condenser mic were the 2 most important things I've bought.
posted by chococat at 11:36 AM on February 25, 2009


This may be heresy, but I think Pro-Tools is not all its cut out to be. It seems like people are just familiar with it, or they associate the hardware with the experience. Try out a few different apps to find one you like -- I prefer Cubase, for example.
posted by spiderskull at 1:28 PM on February 25, 2009


ah yes sorry I have a habit of thinking of the Soundcards = Audio Interface = Audio Card = External Audio Box = something like the Tone Port = Alesis io 26/24 = RME Hammerfall Multiface (which I use).

ie they are Audio Interfaces (they convert Audio to your harddrive - in a sense).

That Alesis io24 looks useful - can it do 24 tracks simulataneously ? (from any of input/output / ADAT channels?) at some point you will probably want to record more than 2 discrete channels simulataneously. 8 is generally a good starting point. it gives you some flexibility.

I personally like to have a hardware mixer as I guess i use it as a kind of patchbay as I have some hardware Synths and FX units. - this way I can simultaneously record a clean track + a Effected track o fthe same instrument. then decide on the mix o fthe two later on.
posted by mary8nne at 2:41 PM on February 25, 2009


Also having 8 input channels allows you to develop working patterns. ie for me RME channel 5 input is the direct output of my good Pre-amp, Channels 7 & 8 ar the respective Direct outs of my mixer.
posted by mary8nne at 2:45 PM on February 25, 2009


first of all, you've got more equipment than i do - often it's not what you have, it's how you use it

what i would suggest is that you start reading UK music magazines - computer music - future music - and sometimes musictech - they tend to be much more tech orientated than u s magazines and even though they deal a lot more with electronica/techno type music, most of what they talk about is transferable to other kinds of music

you don't mention whether you have a midi keyboard or controller - i think you might find one useful, even if you don't play keyboards - if you're really serious about it, you should learn, even if it's just to dink out little one-note melodies - there are people who actually put out records not knowing how to play any better than that

-What's the standard way to record a song, lay down a drum beat first and than instrument/vocals or lay down the instumentals with a click track and come in later with drums?

some kind of drum beat needs to go first - click tracks can be a lot harder to play with as they don't have a groove to them - at least i can't seem to play with them well

Right now when I lay down vocals I wear headphones and have my output volume through the headphones turned up as high as posible than adjust the levels of the mic, is that right?

my m-audio fast track can adjust the overall volume as well as the mix between what one is singing and playing and the track one is doing it with - not only does that vary a great deal from song to song, but it's often useful to adjust the individual parts of the mix so one can hear what one needs to play with

What exactly is mixing and compression? My idea of mixing is adjusting the volumes of each track and also adjusting the frequencies of each track, is this correct?

yes, but that's not all - one needs to consider effects - would some delay help? - what about reverb? - perhaps flanging or chorus ... you are painting a picture in sound and you have many brushes and colors to do it with - and frequencies are often more important than volumes - you do not want a lot of instruments fighting for the same bandwidth of frequencies - and on the low end, you want your kick drum and your bass to each have "their" frequency and not be fighting each other

compression is a way of smoothing out the sound so that the volume is more constant - basically, you are making the loud parts softer so the softer parts will sound louder - it's something that is necessary for a lot of parts, but it is also something that can be badly used if one isn't careful

I know people out there offer mixing services and I really don't understand why it costs hundreds of dollars to adjust volumes.

you're not paying people just for what they do - you're paying for their equipment and what they know

i do windows, so i can't really tell you what to get for a mac - but, as i said before, it's a matter of knowing what you have and using it well more than it is a matter of getting the latest and greatest
posted by pyramid termite at 9:55 PM on February 25, 2009


Thanks for the advice everyone, it sounds like I need to do some more research and reading. While I still have a side post for a while I'd like to get some advice on one more thing. I've known for a while now I've needed to graduate from Garageband but I'm kinda stuck on what to use. I've ruled out Pro Tools b/c from what I understand you have to use DigiDesign hardware with it. A friend of mine has told me Cubase, he said he used it a while back and liked it but he's got pretty limited experience with recording. I'm thinking about Logic Express, from what I understand it's kinda like Garageband but with more features. I figure as long as I know the program well enough either of these would be good to use but is there any real good reason why I should pay the extra cash for Cubase or Logic Studio?
posted by BrnP84 at 12:11 AM on March 2, 2009


please add ableton to your list of software to consider - it's a great compositional tool as well as a fully powered recording/mixing desk. check the ableton forums for a user group near you and get a tour of the software, or check the tutorials online. you can also start to use it for free, recording both individual tracks and mixdowns, although you can't save your settings (if that's not dealing crack, i don't know what is)

pro-tools is like the wordperfect of audio software, they were there first, they didn't adapt, they suck now.

i love all of my alesis gear (keyboards, monitors, effects)

when you first get all of your new gear together, it might be worth your while to re-record an old track, or a cover. this way, you're not trying to create and learn simultaneously.

once you've got it all sussed, then reading the books and magazines is good, but recording something every night is better.
posted by kimyo at 1:31 PM on March 2, 2009


Ha, I think its telling that Kimyo the Ableton Evangealist would claim that Pro-Tools sucks. I would actually claim that Ableton SUcks for Recording Music / Writing "Songs", (except for loop based Techno - at which it excels: but a lot of people are not interested in writing loop based dance music).

I think it depends a lot on exactly what you want to record.

Traditional Band Set-UP = Pro-tools is best.
More Midi stuff = then perhaps Cubase or Logic Audio - which are programs that started out as Midi 'Composer' type apps.

Repetitive Dance Music = Ableton.
posted by mary8nne at 2:20 AM on March 3, 2009


It looks like there's a few different opinions on what programs to use but what really makes one better than another? With Garageband I can record multiple tracks at a time, I think up to 8 which is plenty I figure. I know how to adjust the levels of each track, I can compress tracks, add effects, fade in and out, loop tracks, do some dirty mixing, and overall it's just easy to use. I know that it's not pro level stuff and I've always had it in my head that eventually I'll switch to a more advanced program but now I'm kinda wondering why I really need to. What makes these other programs so much better than Garageband?
posted by BrnP84 at 4:38 PM on March 3, 2009


And World Famous thanks for explanation on Pro Tools, I think that has pretty much ruled out using Pro Tools. You lost me when you said "The biggest issue with a Pro Tools system for what you (the poster) have in mind is that an interface with lots of inputs is going to be more expensive with Pro Tools" but the info was still good to know. While I'd like to be using industry standard stuff I just don't think I can afford it.
posted by BrnP84 at 5:32 PM on March 3, 2009


You are probably right - stick with Garage band for now. Compared with the old tape based 4tracks / 8 tracks you can certainly do alot more with garage band (EQ, Effects, Non-linear Editing)


Issues for me with Garage Band

it lacks support for high-end plugins / Effects. Compressors, Reverbs, Etc are not as good. Do you even have fine control over the effects in Garage Band? I remember it being a bit 'Presety'

No Sub-Busses (are there?)

Can it use third party VST instruments?
posted by mary8nne at 12:05 AM on March 4, 2009


Digital Performer is a mac program and is very good. Not sure how much it costs but it will definitely do what you need it to do.
posted by awfurby at 12:59 AM on March 5, 2009


« Older Experimental Long Form, sixty minutes six...   |   Recording, Mixing, Mastering Reference Books Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments