Tracking with EQ, I changed my mind !

[Tony Prior]

So in the beginning (decades back) we all tracked with whatever tone we could muster up, our Porta-studios and Reel to Reels reported what it "heard", either from a mic'd amp or whatever signal we could modify ahead of the recorder...that was the norm, then came the DAW's with on bd everything so the new norm was to not print EQ or effects to the track. For the past decade thats what I have been doing, and in many cases chasing tone...

My current setup uses an ART MPA II preamp, although very nice for my personal needs it does not have any EQ other than low freq roll off. My process is to feed it thru an outboard compressor , very gentle with a fairly high threshold, ahead of the DAW. Results are fine but the house isn't shaking.

A few recent threads with regard to "printing "to tracks had got me thinking so of course, I grabbed another tube preamp and gave it a shot. Well, with just a few short moments of session time I am going back to old school...I picked up a DBX 376 Channel strip, EQ, 75 HZ Roll Off, Compression and De Esser...I record pretty much direct with the exception of Dobro and Mandolin...dialing in a tone for both the Steel and Guitars ahead of the DAW with the 376 is quite a wake up call !

I'm returning to old school...now that doesn't mean I'm doing this 100% of the time but certainly "most" of the time. The option is there. Yeah I know, printing to the track leaves little room for changes with on bd. DAW EQ's and such..but if it already sounds good and where you want it..well ?

I use Pro Tools, it has plenty of power for effects and processors, my interface is old school Maudio 4 x 4 PCI Card. I do not use a USB/Firewire interface but could.

Some of the rules we learned way before DAW's was to play your best, be in tune and record with the best quality tone you can find...I'm thinking those rules probably still apply.

The DBX376 is an over $500 item but can be had for much less on the used market, as I found...NO it does not have a USB connection but it does have a digital conversion with variable sample rate. It also does come in a dual channel model. If your system allows for a digital inputs, then all would be good...

The 376 is on the top, not rack mounted yet...

[Jack Stoner]

I have a Pro MPA II Preamp. I use it with my studio condenser mic for singers and for miking acoustic instruments. I feed that to my Roland Octa-Capture recording interface unit.

I don't have any other external signal conditioning equipment. Everything else is plug-ins, in Sonar X3.

[Tony Prior]

Jack, the Octa Capture is a nice unit, no doubt. The MPA II for the money is hard to beat, especially with a pair of quality 12AX7's. Real meat and potatoes home studio preamp for under $300. Ok, not an Avalon..agreed.

Although I have a few outboard pieces I generally use at best 2 at one time..Preamp to Compressor, now when using the 376 I would use 1.


I keep the extra pieces for other needs, such as the Tascam/Antaras unit which I loop for "vocal fixes" if need be and the 2nd ART Dual preamp should I want to track 4 mics at one time, very rare for me...plus I only have 4 inputs ! I did track drums a week or two back, (4 mics) haven't done that in a very long time... I prefer not to !

It's just stuff..may use it or may not...you never know. I also have around here an old Marshall SS 9000 preamp, killer for the totally OD tones.

STUFF !

[Tony Prior]

oh yeah..forgot..I also acquired this Behringer MIC2200 HI Gain Preamp a while back on a blow out. Supposed tube preamp, (it does have a tube) and dual channel with paramteric EQ both sides. I used it and to be honest it worked out just fine . Behringer gets a bad wrap on may items, probably deserved but I have had good luck with the few items I have owned. I have been using a 4 channel B'ringer headphones amp for several years, all is good...no complaints.

I have very little in the B'ringer Mic 2200 preamp so I'll just keep it around.


Actually, in truth, the results I obtained with the MIC2200 preamp is the reason I went searching for a more robust unit and came across the DBX units which sell for 5x the price, new...

For a very low cost unit for simple home recording, with parametric EQ,this unit ain't bad !


On top of the stack...

[mtulbert]

Tony,

Agree with you 100%. I always try to get the best tone and record it that way. In the old days adding highs after the fact also added tape hiss so we had to do it especially in a non dolby setup.

I still will not record reverb or heavy compression. These can be added later with no destructive tone changes.

When possible I approach every recording session as though it were a live gig. If you are stacking an entire tune I would lean more to neutral until you see where the song is going.

Regards,

[Jack Stoner]

The Octa-Capture has built in Limiters and Compressors. I've never used the Compressor function but I do use the Limiter, especially on singers. As I can't watch the volume level and play an instrument at the same time. Setting a maximum volume level the singer can do what they want and it won't go over the preset level. I record 24 bit (44.1Khz) and that also allows for headroom.

I have POD Farm 2 and I've been using that quite a bit lately, post recording. The Echoplex model is nice for old style echo. The Bass models also are very good.

[Rick Schacter]

I have POD Farm 2 and I've been using that quite a bit lately, post recording. The Echoplex model is nice for old style echo. The Bass models also are very good.

+1

The Echoplex is great and I really like the Ampeg Portaflex model.

[Earnest Bovine]

.. printing to the track leaves little room for changes ..
I use Pro Tools,

If you use Eleven Rack with Pro Tools, you can do both. One audio track is your "Rig" with amp modeling & efx, and the other is raw signal from the guitar so you can change your mind later and use a different rig (re-amping made simple).

[Tony Prior]

Yes Ernest I am aware, thanks ! There are multiple ways to skin that cat.I guess for me exploring has come up with the OLD WAY of doing things ! Although I love the DAW and it's capabilities( Pro Tools ) I have come to the conclusion that I spend more time fudging the tracks than I do recording the tracks.

The next coupla' projects I am going with the old school approach. We'll see what happens.

[Les Cargill]

I still might print a dry direct track as a safety. I've had cases where I didn't find a problem until I was mixing; having the safety was a time saver.

[Jack Stoner]

That's a good idea, two tracks, one dry and the other with whatever.

[Tony Prior]

You can record an entire project dry then save it as another project name and edit away ! I save projects each session under a new designation/date. So I'm pretty much never without an original track somewhere , dry or wet... I save all of those projects on an ext BIG stinkin' drive ! PLUS, that ever so famous "PC crash" cannot take out an entire project...

lots of ways to skin the cat...

[Les Cargill]

You can record an entire project dry then save it as another project name and edit away ! I save projects each session under a new designation/date. So I'm pretty much never without an original track somewhere , dry or wet... I save all of those projects on an ext BIG stinkin' drive ! PLUS, that ever so famous "PC crash" cannot take out an entire project...

lots of ways to skin the cat...

Far too many ways to skin that cat. Your point about "quit fitzing around and print something" is completely right on the money.

As to "PC crash", look up some software to view the onboard instrumentation of your drives - the S.M.A.R.T stats ( I use HDTune ) and keep backups.

With NTFS ( or even better ext4 but good luck using ext4 with Windows ) a computer crash won't be very likely to take out a drive.

I keep projects on the (second internal physical ) E: drive because I can swap out an E: drive over a short weekend. Hard drives don't cost much. And when even a good drive is three years old, it gets swapped out. I oughta cycle my backup drives ( the big USB drives ) annually. And I should have three of them; I only use one.

Think of it as changing strings on your computer.

[Walter Killam]

My approach to recording is to have the band rehearse the songs well ahead of time, so that when they/we set up to record, there is already a finished product ready for recording.

I always encourage musicians to get the sound the are looking for, then record all the instruments at the same time with a scratch vocal track.

The only reason I would try to capture dry tracks is if the talent/producer doesn't have a clear idea of what the finished product should be. Then you have the ability to rework tone & effects in post. GIGO is the name of this game.

In my experience too much work in post production creates an unnatural sounding product. That said my approach requires musicians that can play together with feeling AND precision, and a lot of the younger musicians I encounter simply don't have the experience to pull this off.

my point? - Tony, I'm with you, if it sounds good when you record it, it will probably sound good when you play it back.

[Jack Stoner]

I just finished mixing and mastering (using Ozone 5) a CD project for a singer (using Karaoke Tracks). I have my OS and recording software on an SSD, the Sonar Projects are on an internal 1TB hard drive. I copied the finished (at least initial mix) project to a USB 3.0 connected external drive. Thus the backup.

(I know about Karaoke, but it "pays the bills"). I have another Karaoke singer session tomorrow. A Gospel CD for a 12 year old female singer.

[Tony Prior]

My approach to recording is to have the band rehearse the songs well ahead of time, so that when they/we set up to record, there is already a finished product ready for recording.

I always encourage musicians to get the sound the are looking for, then record all the instruments at the same time with a scratch vocal track.

This process/workflow is actually becoming more popular these days, referred to as LO FI recording...bands are wanting to sound more punk'ish..garage'ish etc....if you think about it this is what we did decades back...we didn't know any better ! Sometimes we even used a tuner !

[Timothy Foster]

I've definitely been heading in this direction the past two or three years. Not so much in trying to obtain a lofi "garage" sound -- although I do love that stuff -- but in relying on outboard to mold the sound in broad strokes while tracking.

It's always a subject of debate on the recording forums and has long since been beaten to death, but as I've slowly accumulated better gear over the years I find my preference leans towards hardware over software for most things. And if I can avoid the additional round trip through the converters during mixdown and print the track in the ballpark of what I want, all the better!

[Tony Prior]

It's always a subject of debate on the recording forums and has long since been beaten to death, but as I've slowly accumulated better gear over the years I find my preference leans towards hardware over software for most things. And if I can avoid the additional round trip through the converters during mixdown and print the track in the ballpark of what I want, all the better!

Ha ! +1

[Walter Killam]

Hey Jack - no need to apologize for paying the bills! My Dad used to say:

"You owe it to yourself to work when the work is there, there'll be plenty of times when you're wondering where your next meal is coming from"

Carry on and eat well my friend.

[John Macy]

Love shaping it on the way in...here is my toolbox...

[Bill Terry]

I'm getting sick of that photo John...

[Tony Prior]

John, do I see a missing knob in that photo ?

[Earnest Bovine]

John, do I see a missing knob in that photo ?

If it's missing, how could you see it?

[Mark van Allen]

It IS great to have a whole palette of choices for treating stuff on the way in, I'm of the same mindset John is... but there are some very low dollar answers to the quest that may serve very well at far less than the cost of the ubiquitous Avalon Tony mentioned. In fact, I'm pretty sure I see a couple of those in John's wall o' fun...
... the G.A.P. (GoldenAge Preamp) Neve clones are juicy goodness for low $. Not pristine and clear, but fat and beefy. Steel, guitar, vocals all sound great through those. The ART Pro VLA compressor is a real sleeper for a couple hundred $. (Is that one of those or a Pro MPA pre in your rack, John? Either one a fine unit. I know a very high end studio on the left coast that WILL NOT track vocals unless through the VLA.) And some of the JoeMeek stuff, particularly earlier units like the VC1, are really sweet on some sources. The first generation Meek Eqs are fat sonic gold. Loads of great stuff out there for reasonable outlay.
It's a great time to be a studio nerd.

[Mark van Allen]

And John, do you have any comments on using 500 series gear? Power supply/interface issues or connectivity glitches? I haven't made the plunge but with the proliferation of do-all lunchboxes and the amazing variety of 500 series modules, just a matter of time. Kind of like the renaissance in guitar foot pedal processors!