 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: Betsy
Date: 2000-04-11 23:54
Any suggestions on affordable but relatively high quality home recording equipment for instrumental music? I like to record a substantial amount of my practice but I'm not satisfied with the "Radio Shack" options for portable audio recorders and mikes.....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2000-04-12 00:05
Betsy,
The MiniDisc recorders along with a good mike make a reasonable combination for recording. My little setup set me back about $500 and sounds "not bad".
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 'nifer
Date: 2000-04-12 00:06
I have a sony minidisc recorder and a radio shack boundary mike which works EXCELLENT for clarinet.. i am not sure how it does it, but it records CD quality and i can transfer the info directly to a cd burner adn stuff.. it cost me about $300 dollars for the whole setup and it was well worth it and has paid for itslef by not having to hire people to make audition tapes for me and things like that
'nifer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2000-04-12 00:08
'nifer wrote:
-------------------------------
i am not sure how it does it, but it records CD quality and i can transfer the info directly to a cd burner adn stuff..
------
Not quite CD quality, and not directly movable to CD (you can't rip the tracks - you have to move the stuff over in an audio format), but reasonable. A DAT tape is the next best thing, and there goes a much bigger wad of cash.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: 'nifer
Date: 2000-04-12 00:12
really.. i have an optical output on my minidisc and it goes directly to a burner
'nifer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Bob Gardner
Date: 2000-04-12 01:32
where did you purchase the set up and what are the model numbers?
Thanks this sounds good!!!!!!!
'nifer wrote:
-------------------------------
really.. i have an optical output on my minidisc and it goes directly to a burner
'nifer
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: J. Butler
Date: 2000-04-12 01:35
I use a Foxtex high speed track cassette recorder and Audio Technica microphones. I can record on 1,2,3, or 4 tracks and then layer (bounce) on to the other tracks if necessary. It does real well for recording 3 lines of a quartet and then playing which ever line you choose not to record for practice. I use it a lot for playing duets with myself also. I got the whole setup for around $500.
J. Butler
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2000-04-12 01:50
'nifer wrote:
-------------------------------
really.. i have an optical output on my minidisc and it goes directly to a burner
----------
So do I - I've got the MZ-R55 - but the output is only a simulation of the input. The way that MiniDiscs work is by altering the input signal (lossy compression) and recording the <b>compressed</b> signal on the disc. That's how you get 74 minutes on a little disk - by throwing out lots of data. Luckily our ears don't complain too much - but it isn't a pure digital reproduciton of the input. It's like comparing an original TIFF file with a JPEG file - there's a loss of information, and sometimes it's pretty drastic (go to a very, very quiet area, turn on the recorder with a mike, and then say something - you'll hear a change in the background noise level a bit after you start speaking). When you listen to a MiniDisc (or send the output through the optical connector <b>or any other connector</b> it uncompresses the digital signal and sends it out. In other words - there's no practical way to get the information from the tracks directly. It isn't a pure digital reproduction of the input. That's why you can't directly "rip" tracks. I can convert a CD to WAV at about a 4 or 5 to 1 ratio on my computer (a 10 minute selection takes about 2 minutes to convert to WAV) - because what's on the CD is totally digital. To get a 10 minute selection off of a minidisc takes me 10 minutes - I have to play it. The only thing the optical connector gets me is the eliminaiton of an analog to digital conversion from line in to CD.
It's not bad - but it isn't CD quality. A bit better than MP3.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Joris van den Berg
Date: 2000-04-12 09:05
Even if output from minidisc is transferred to CD burner directly, it isn't really CD quality. The sample-rate of a MD is only 38kHz whereas 44.1kHz for the CD. It MUST be adjusted in the run.
If true CD quality is needed (you don't in practice because the quality of te microfone is usually much worse than that of the recorder) than you need either a DAT recorder of (if you can find one, they must be really cheap now, a DCC recorder)
Joris (doing some occasional semi-professional recording) van den Berg
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Geoff
Date: 2000-04-14 16:04
If you use a MiniDisc recorder, how do you play this back through speakers? Can you connect it to an amplifier and play it back?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2000-04-14 22:00
Geoff wrote:
-------------------------------
If you use a MiniDisc recorder, how do you play this back through speakers? Can you connect it to an amplifier and play it back?
-----
It has 3 outputs:
1) Headphone
2) Regular line out (works on just about any amp)
3) Optical output ( for newer amps/cards that accept optical interfaces)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jerry
Date: 2003-04-20 01:21
Mark:
In comparing the audio quality of Mini-disk recordings to MP3, you said:
"It's not bad - but it isn't CD quality. A bit better than MP3."
I am old enough to have worked with Ampex and similar reel to reel recorders 30 or 40 years ago (that were probably priced in the $600 to $1,000 range in 1960's dollars). So my point of reference is how those recordings sounded. How would you compare Mini-disk quality to those devices (assuming everything else is equal - miking, especially)? Of course, you may not have been born back then - I don't know how old your are. If that's the case, maybe someone who "remembers when" can fill in.
Hearing all the complaints about the effects of compression on the quality of recordings, it almost sounds like bang for the buck has gone backward in 30 years. Your thoughts.
Jerry
The Villages, FL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2003-04-20 01:53
Jerry wrote:
> Mark:
>
> In comparing the audio quality of Mini-disk recordings to MP3,
> you said:
>
> "It's not bad - but it isn't CD quality. A bit better than
> MP3."
>
> I am old enough to have worked with Ampex and similar reel to
> reel recorders 30 or 40 years ago (that were probably priced in
> the $600 to $1,000 range in 1960's dollars). So my point of
> reference is how those recordings sounded.
Resurrecting a very old thread ...
I bought my 1st reel-to-reel in 1967 with paper route money ... a mono Radio Shack, recorded Neil Armstrong landing on the moon with it ... very old memories now ...
The only thing that bothers me is the background "rushing" noise. The adaptive compression techniques used in making all that music fit on a small disc are just audible, and once you hear it (especially using good headphones), it becomes annoying.annoying. You can hear the noise when the music goes from loud to dead silence pretty easily. MP3s are a little worse in most cases.
In most listening situations it's not noticable.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: jbutler ★2017
Date: 2003-04-20 02:32
Alesis ML9600 is the newest toy along with Shure PG81 microphone. It has a built in hard drive and records to CD. Older models (20 gig hard drive) can be bought for a little over $500. The newest model with a larger hard drive is just under $1000. It's great for transferring old LP's to CD through the analog input.
jbutler
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: cyso_clarinetist
Date: 2003-04-20 04:04
Sony MZ-707 MiniDisc Player with a Sony MS-907 mike. These days you can get them both at a site like electonics.com for under three hundred dollars. Since it's easy to move around I take it to record all my concerts and such and it is great quality.
Hope this helps,
James
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rene
Date: 2003-04-20 07:56
I have the same equipment as cyso and it just fine. Since there is no digital output, I have to remove noise on the computer, if I wanted it on CD (not that I wanted my own stuff on on CD really).
I bet there will be cheap and good recording machines using MP3 soon. MP3 at 192 B/sec is certainly good enough for everything that has to go through a amateur mike.
Rene
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phat Cat
Date: 2003-04-20 12:29
Another alternative is the ARCHOS Jukebox Recorder. This is an MP3 player that has an internal 20GB hard disk, but unlike other hard-drive MP3 players it also records directly to MP3. This unit can sample at up to 160khz from the stereo line-in jack. While the Jukebox Recorder has a built-in recorder for voice, you'll want to use an external mic which will have to be level-matched to the line input.
It is very easy to transfer the standard MP3 files created to a PC via the unit's USB connector. The device looks like a removable hard drive to Windows Explorer so you can simply drag and drop files to/from the PC. You can then edit the MP3, or send it to your friends who can play it on any MP3 player, or even post it to an music download site for all the world to hear your masterpiece. By the way, this unit is also good for backups and file transfer since it can store any file types, not just MP3.
I have the original 6GB version (which pre-dated the first iPod by a year) and it works fine. I have recorded cassette tapes to MP3 but have not used an external mic. If you sample at 128k or 160k it is difiicult to hear any artifacts of the MP3 compression on most music.
The MSRP of this unit is $279 and the street price is under $250. See the archos site www.archos.com for details and other products.
Post Edited (2003-04-20 13:32)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2003-04-20 17:54
I'm old-fashioned --- I like open-reel tape decks for making live recordings --- since the technology is obsolete the equipment can be had for a song on eBay, but with the better decks, decent microphones and maybe a dbx noise-reduction box in-line, it's fairly easy to make CD-quality recordings for just a few hundred bucks investment.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Synonymous Botch
Date: 2003-04-20 21:03
Spend the money on the microphones... they're the limiting step.
You can step up the recorder at a later date.
Have a look at the ART line of gear - very high signal quality and reasonably priced. If you're clever as well as cheap - eBay will offer bargains.
If not, try 'Full Compass'.
The Radio Shack stuff is almost as expensive as the high qualit recorders.
One proviso - Avoid the 'ADAT' recorders that use VHS or Beta video tape.
The Alesis Masterlink is a beaut, and does a brilliant job of capturing EVERY sound in the microphone field, but has no limiter or compression to even things out...
Me? I would find an older LapTop and get an aftermarket recording card.
http://www.sonicsense.com/computer.htm
Ah... for the days of 3/4" BASF on the Studer....
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jerry
Date: 2003-04-21 00:39
Phat Cat ...
When you say "you'll want to use an external mic which will have to be level-matched to the line input", how complex a deal is that. Does "leve-matching" mean there needs to be an in-line attenuator between the mike and the input, or does it mean that one needs to be sure the impedence of the mike is compatible, or what?
Jerry
The Villages, FL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phat Cat
Date: 2003-04-21 10:00
I'm not an expert in microphones. The Archos Recorder input is a standard line level minijack (stereo). Archos sells an external stereo mic designed for their unit but I haven't tried it. The professional mics I've seen have a large plug for balanced input.
I would think that any mic setup that can plug into a normal stero system, as in the minidisk posts above, would work. You'd best contact Archos to be sure.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: msloss
Date: 2003-04-21 12:51
Studer 820 and Dolby SR running at 30ips, Neumann U47s, Avalon tube preamps. OK, maybe not.
Mark C's rec is a great solution for a practice setup. You might also consider the computer-based solution (avoids ATRAC or MP3 issues). M-Audio has a variety of sub-$500 cards for PC or Mac, some of which even include mic preamps. Octava and Rode both make some pretty decent and very inexpensive mics you can snag for a song if you hit the right sales from Sam Ash or Guitar Center. The audio cards usually come with basic recording software, so you are in the recording biz for half a kilobuck!
On the level and impedance matching question, this is a clarinet bboard so I'll spare the technicals. Suffice it to say that condenser mics need to be powered, dynamic mics do not, and most all mics require significant preamplification to step them up to the "line" level connections you will find on the back of consumer audio equipment. Exception -- there are a few mics (at least there used to be) out there that have built-in amplification as an alternative. A lot of audio gear used to have built-in mic pres (older cassette and open reel decks, walkman recorders) but most do not any more. If you go the MD or other route, be sure there is a path to get from the mic to the recording medium.
Feel free to email me if you have any more detailed questions.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: diz
Date: 2003-04-22 00:56
I so agree with S. Botch on the microphones issue - the more money you can spend the better.
Years ago when I played in the ABC Sinfonia (a now defunct professional orchestra in Sydney), we were recorded on several occasions both in the studio and in the concert hall. Interestingly, the sound engineer's comment always stuck with me:
In the concert hall (in our case it was at the Opera House Concert Hall) they used only two mics - a third of the way back and positioned equidistant. This, he reasoned, was true to the ear for stereo recording. It was a simple set up and worked very well.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Sylvain
Date: 2003-04-22 11:58
If you have a computer at home with a decent size hard drive then all you need is a good microphone.
You can record at even higher sampling rates than a CD if you really want, burn to CD, convert to MP3.
If you're looking for a portable solution, the Minidisc with a reasonable mike is probably your best bet.
I have a SONY ECM-MS907 stereo mike, about 100US. It's probably not the best but does the job for me.
Best,
-Sylvain
--
Sylvain Bouix <sbouix@gmail.com>
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Phat Cat
Date: 2003-04-22 18:07
Recording music on a PC is viable for someone who is computer adept, but a few clarifications before you turn your home PC into a recording studio.
For digitally recording music, the PC must have a sound card that does digital sampling/recording. And some music editing software wouldn't be a bad idea either. The software bundled with sound cards is pot luck and is often minimally functional and hard to use for the novice. That is, if you even got any with your PC.
Recording with CD sampling rate will eat up disk space quickly, at roughly 1 GB per hour of recorded music. The individual song files will be large: 5 minutes of music will be on the order of 50MB. You won't be attaching that to an email and sending it to your friends! The most practical way to move such files is to burn a CD, which requires a CD burner.
Also be aware that there are two distinct types of digital music files. There are digitally sampled files which includes CD sampled (no compression) as well as files with compression such as MP3 and minidisk. These files represent the actual physical waveform digitally. The other category is MIDI files which are a form of musical shorthand in which just the pitch, start and end of the note are represented. These two types of music files are completely different and pretty much incompatible.
Recording music requires a modest level of computer and audio sophistication. My kids could learn it in a weekend and my father, never.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jerry
Date: 2003-04-29 18:05
I am looking for a portable recorder to occasionally record practicing progress, not necessarily tied to the room my computer is in. I've recently discovered multi-tack recorders, reasonably priced. This opened up opportunities in my mind for layering 2 to 4 part harmonies. I also hope to record some parts of our band practices or small ensemble performances.
I am focusing on digital as opposed to cassette tape for several reasons: 1) Even with good quality cassette machines, clarinet flutter is noticable (I'm sure $500 plus cassette recorders minimize it, but too pricey), and 2) Ease of locating, framing, and repeating song segments, and 3) to allow me to e-mail snippits.
I have a good computer (processor speed, RAM and hard drive size), but it lacks a high quality sound card (or at least one sensitive enough for a good mike without a preamp) and a CD burner. I don't have any current reason to burn CDs. I tried several mikes and with my sound card I apparantly need a preamp (or a better card).
I've been reading recent and older posts about various recorder options. I believe posts older than a year or two have been overcome by new technology.
There appear to be two primary option categoris for digital recorders:
1) Medium of data storage: MD, CD, Memory Stick, Hard drive (computer-based or built into the portable recorder)
2) Type of data/conversion relating to amount of compression, e.g. WAV, MP3 (compared to CD quality - something we can all relate to)
Storage Media: MD is the preferred compromise format as expressed in previous posts (e.g. Sony MD). DAT provides better sound quality, for 3 to 5 times the price. HARDDRIVE in a small portable unit is another option (e.g. ARCHOS Jukebox Recorder - an MP3 player/recorder w/20 gig hard drive). Memory stick (MS) is an option likely to have been dismissed a year or two ago that has recently changed in accessibility and capacity. For example, check Korg Pandora PXR4, Zoom MRS4 and Fostex 8-track; all in the $200 to $300 price range. All but one sample at 31.1 Khz - the Fostex samples at 44.1Khz.
Now 256 and 512 MEG sticks are available for as little as half the price of what 32 meg sticks cost a year ago. This provides easy USB transfer too and from computers.
Data conversion/compression: My limited understanding is this - WAV is uncompressed - like a photo TIFF file; MP3 is somewhat compressed with some artifacts, like "whooshing" on dynamics. CD sampling rate is 44.4 Khz MP3 is typically 31.1. But I'm not sure what sampling rate has to do with compression, except that higher generally equates to less compression equal better sound.
Does anyone have experience recording on any of the multi-track memory stick devices listed above? Is a sampling rate of 44.4Khz likely to make much of a difference in sound quality compared to 31.1?
I'm not techno enough to ask this stuff on a technical audio bulletin board, so I hope you pardon my straying into this on the Clarinet Board - hope others can use this info, too.
Jerry
The Villages, FL
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2003-04-29 18:23
Jerry,
MD isn't really suited for editing:
It's a digital storage format, but not a simple digital "sampling" format. There's an equation to compress it, and an equation to decompress it. In other words, you need to run it through a sound card to create a digital impression of what it might have been (even with a digital output on the MD). So we go from an analog mike, to an equation, to a digital storage system. To get back we go from a digital storage medium, to an equation, to eitgher a digital or analog input on your sound card (depending on the MD). If digital, direct to the hard drive. If analog, it'll be resampled yet again to create a digital image.
A digital tape system or recording to hard disk involves fewer steps and tradeoffs: an analog mike, sampled to a digital system. If you used a DAT, then you'd want a digital input on your sound card so that nothing except bits get recorded on the drive. If you use a sound card to record to the disk, then you'd want a sound card with a very good Analog to Digital converter (DAT tape drives typically come with good ones already. Sound cards differ widely in quality).
The cheapest way for you to go would be to find a used DAT tape drive on eBay- a Sony D7, D8 or D100 are pretty common and more than up to the job.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Scorgie
Date: 2003-04-30 07:56
Mark (and others) --
Thanks ever so much for this discussion. It is of great help to us old timers who want to get into modern digital recording but don't know where to start.
Once upon a time, I was able to produce good quality recordings on my RtoR tape decks -- a nice 3 motor Sony and a Tandberg with a cross field head which was a very quiet non-Dolby machine. Some time ago, I foolishly sold them off along with several old amps and other audio stuff.
I have also tried to record live music on various cassette tape decks but all of them had serious problems with tape saturation and high flutter. I have dubbed several hundred old LPs and EPs onto cassette tape but the technology was barely adequate even for this simple application.
Would someone please tell me --
if I buy a "CD burner", can I run my mikes directly into it or do I need a mic preamp or an Analog to Digital converter or both?
also can I dub LPs or audio cassettes onto CDs thru a "CD burner" simply by running Line Out from my amp to Line In on the CD burner, just as if the CD burner were a tape deck?
FYI, my remaining mikes are a pair of AKG dynamics and (for vocals) an old condenser mike with its own battery. All are low impedance (600 ohm) altho the AKGs are terminated with XLR5s which I could rewire for high impedance (50K) if necessary.
Any assistance will be greatly appreciated.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2003-04-30 11:21
John Scorgie wrote:
> if I buy a "CD burner", can I run my mikes directly into it or
> do I need a mic preamp or an Analog to Digital converter or
> both?
Both.
> also can I dub LPs or audio cassettes onto CDs thru a "CD
> burner" simply by running Line Out from my amp to Line In on
> the CD burner, just as if the CD burner were a tape deck?
I haven't seen a "line in" on anything except an audio CD burner, not a computer one.
You'll need a preamp that matches your mike & an A-D converter to record to the CD. Many soundcards have both - of varying quality, of course. Check specs carefully.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Rene
Date: 2003-04-30 13:32
I guess he's talking about stand alone CD burners (not related to computers). I fear those do not have a mic input, but will have a line in for cassette tapes, CD players and radio tuners. An LP input jack is another problem, but older amplifiers still have one.
The cheapest solution still seems to be a MD recorder, at least for microphone recordings. Those do have a mic preamplifier.
BTW, for LPs to computer there is a software, which comes with a preamplifier plugging into the computer line in. Forgot the company name (Steinway or Magix).
Rene
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
