Home recording basics - part one

by Graeme on April 22, 2009

Why choose home recording for your musical efforts? Going to a commercial recording studio right away can be expensive (though not necessarily as expensive as you think..) and you will only have limited time in which to get your tracks. Home recording needs an initial outlay of cash, but you can tinker around to your heart’s content. Music techie Graeme Allen looks at your options.

So you can play a musical instrument?

Then there’s no doubt that you’re the next Jimi Hendrix, Daniel Barenboim or Craig David. However, nobody else yet knows this fact, and if you’re going to achieve the fame and fortune that Mr. David is currently revelling in you’re going to need to start creating that Number One album.

There are three basic stages to recording, whether you’re doing it in a professional studio or the cupboard under the stairs:

1.    Recording (or tracking)
2.    Mixing
3.    Mastering

The recording stage is when you record all your parts and instruments to different tracks in your entire song.

Mixing is when you set all the volume levels, pan them left or right (or anywhere in between) and add any effects you want. This is where a lot of the intricacies of music production come into play. It can take a very long time before your mixing starts to sound professional - mostly it comes down to practice, but in the near future we’ll be posting some tips on how to create a great mix.

Mastering is the final stage. Subtle effects such as EQ and compression are added to the entire song rather than individual tracks to basically ‘polish’ the whole thing, and to make it all sound like a nice, loud commercial recording. Mastering is seen as a bit of a dark art, and not something you will need to worry about if you’re just starting out with home recording.

When you’re  getting started you can just deal with recording and mixing all in one, adding effects and sorting out your volume levels as you go along. In fact this is actually a method used by a few professional producers, so you won’t be in bad company.

What do I need?
In this day and age it isn’t really practical (or economical) to record to tape any more. Most top studios do in fact still use big, expensive tape machines in the final stages of the mixing process, but, until you get your deal with EMI, a laptop will suffice. Either a Mac or a PC will do at this stage. I’ll go into the software you’ll need a little later on.

You will also need something to get the sound in and out of your computer. This can take the form of a soundcard or an external box, known as an audio interface. There is a vast array of these devices out there, ranging from big consoles covered in faders and knobs with 32 inputs and outputs to USB stick sized devices with just a couple of inputs and outputs. Naturally your computer will already have its own soundcard, but plugging something straight into its line input and recording is generally seen as a bit of a rubbish idea. The specialised soundcards or audio interfaces will have the necessary electrical gubbins (pre-amps, connections etc) to get a decent signal from whatever you’re plugging in.

Below are a couple of shots of a typical, budget-priced home recording audio interface, the Edirol UA-4FX:

Top view of the Edirol UA-4FX home recording audio interface. Sockets for jackplug line-in are on the front. Around the left-hand side, just out of sight, is a three-pin DIN connector for a studio-quality microphone.

Rear view of the Edirol UA-4FX home recording audio interface. Stereo input/output is on the right. There are MIDI inputs for data connections with a digital instrument (typically a keyboard). On the far left is the USB-out socket for connection to your PC or Mac.

What you need next…

… depends on your instrument. If it’s some kind of acoustic instrument (acoustic guitar, oboe, didgeridoo) then a microphone is needed. Again, there is a massive range of microphones out there. The two basic types are dynamic and condenser. Dynamic microphones are more rough and ready and good at dealing with loud noises. They will not generally yield as detailed a recording as a condenser mic, though. Condensers are a bit more fragile and require what’s known as “phantom power”. This is just a power supply that’s sent through the cable you use to plug it in. If you go for one of these make sure your soundcard or interface has a phantom power option (it may just say ‘48v’, which is what phantom power is). For home recording I would personally recommend getting a large-diaphragm condenser microphone such as the Rode NT-1 or Se Electronics SE1. These will be great for any acoustic instruments and vocals.

In the next post, we’ll look at electric and VST instruments and headphones/speakers.

Graeme Allen is the MD of Amati Studios, a company that works with some of the best mid-sized recording studios in the country.

In addition to his technical skills, Graeme is a first class musician in his own right, playing rock, blues and jazz guitar and classical violin. Visit his website at www.amatistudios.co.uk.

{ 4 trackbacks }

Home Recording Basics from Jamcast! | MicControl
July 7, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Home recording basics - part two
July 8, 2009 at 9:32 am
Home recording basics - part three
July 8, 2009 at 9:33 am
Home recording studio overview video
July 8, 2009 at 9:34 am

{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }

Keeb July 15, 2009 at 7:17 pm

Hello!

First I’d just like to say that this is a great website!!

I have a question regarding microphones. Right now I’m just using a Shure PG57 and I’m actually happy with the sound that I get when I’m recording my acoustic guitar - i.e when I record it actually sounds like the guitar.

However, when I attempt to record my electric guitar amp, I can NEVER get a sound that I like. I’ve tried EVERYTHING - I’ve tried three different amps, all of my guitars and a mixture of guitar pedals. I’m very happy with my guitar tone which I get through the amp and just want to record the sound I hear. I’m aware that this is probably easier said than done. But I was wondering what microphone you would recommend for recording a very distorted guitar sound. Do you think I should still go for a condenser mic, such as the ones you mentioned?

Kindest regards! :p

Bill July 15, 2009 at 10:03 pm

Hey Keeb, thanks very much for your kind words. We’re working really hard to make Jamcast as reader-friendly as possible, so any questions, comments or ideas for posts you have, just let us know.

Re: microphones. Really, this is a Graeme question, and he’s currently lying on a beach in Spain, where he’s going to be until Sunday. When he gets back, I’ll ask him to post an expert reply.

Meanwhile, here’s the inexpert one…

A dynamic mic like the Shure PG57 is going to deliver a varying response across the audio spectrum - in other words, it’s going to deliver slightly varying signals at different frequencies, especially at the extremes of high and low. As an amped guitar with lots of effects is going to deliver a rich range of overtones and undertones as part of its sound, a mic like the PG57 isn’t going to deliver a really accurate picture - hence the sound coming out of your mix being different from the one coming out of your amp.

It’ll be great for stage work - that’s what dynamic mics are best for, because they’re cheap, simple and robust - and according to the Shure literature it has an extended dynamic range to deal with instrument micing. Even so, it’s not going to deliver the same results as a condenser when it comes to recording.

Condensers don’t have to cost a fortune. Just as soon as G gets back and divests himself of the Spanish chicks/Sangria/STIs he’s doubtless picked up out there, I’ll get his recommendation for you.

Keeb July 16, 2009 at 12:02 am

Hey! Thanks for the reply!! So condensors sound like the way forward most probably!

Please let me know what Mr G thinks when he gets back! I’d be happy to do a short recording using my PG57 and the new mic (which I’ll definitely get once I’ve heard Mr G’s opinion naswell) and send them down to you - maybe people out there would like to hear the comparison between them! :p

Regards! :p

Bill July 19, 2009 at 10:32 pm

Yep - that would be cool - a great topic for a post, in fact!

Graeme July 20, 2009 at 4:30 pm

Ola, Keeb. This is a very familiar problem you’re having! Let me guess - your recorded sound is very thin and fizzy? I bet you’re using a solid state amp as well, right?

I’ve not come across a Shure PG57 before but I would imagine it’s similar to an SM57. In which case it will be quite good at dealing with high volumes and picking up the power of the guitar sound, and is a decent enough mic for recording electric guitar. However, as it is dynamic it may sound a bit tinny and fizzy. To combat this I would use a condenser as well. Put them both about 5 or 6 inches away pointing directly at the speaker cone. Make sure they are both the same distance away from the speaker otherwise you’ll have phasing problems. The condenser should pick up a more even frequency response while the dynamic will help capture the power of the sound.

In terms of your actual guitar sound, try knocking the distortion down a bit. Loads of noise sounds great when you’re live, but when it’s recorded it can tend to come across as a bit mushy. I’m afraid the difference between a valve amp and a solid state amp becomes a lot more noticeable when recording too. Valves distort across the whole range of frequencies, giving a nice thick, warm distortion. Transistors (as found in solid state amps) tend to only distort across the higher end, giving a more fizzy distortion. This is especially noticeable when you’ve got it cranked up as far as you can go.

If you like, send me a recording that you’ve done so far and I could give you a few pointers. Also. let me know what amp, guitar etc you’re using.

Hope this helps, I’ll be doing a blog about recording electric guitar fairly soon, so keep checking back!

Keeb July 25, 2009 at 4:29 pm

Wow!!! This is great information! And yes, you are correct - I’m using a solid state amp mostly these days!

I think it’s time I invested in a condensor mic then! Thank you so much for all the information. You guys are running a great site!!

Regards! :)

Keeb August 15, 2009 at 6:48 pm

Hello!! I’m back and have yet another question! I recently picked up an Edirol UA-4FX, but I didn’t realise that it has only one XLR input. However there is a jack connection on the front for either a guitar or another mic.

What do you guys think of using a jack for a mic input? I’m not planning on using a phantom powered mic with the jack input, so I’m not too concerned about that.

Kindest regards! :)

Bill August 16, 2009 at 11:36 am

Hey Keeb:

There is a solution to this, apparently, but Graeme is struggling to post a comment at the moment for some technical reason I’ve yet to get to the bottom of. We’ll get back to you ASAP!

Graeme August 16, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Good afternoon, Keeb. The main difference between XLR and Jack sockets is that XLRs are what’s known as balanced, and are less noisy.
However, you can get XLR to jack cables which, if they aren’t particularly long, shouldn’t be too noisy. As you say though, you won’t be able to use them for phantom power.
Hope this helps.

Bill August 16, 2009 at 7:06 pm

Keeb, our comment problem seems to be based on sharing links. Until we get it fixed, you can find one of the adapters Graeme’s talking about by heading to Dolphin Music and searching for the Lynx Professional 6.3mm mono jack to (M) XLR 6m.

Hope that does the job!

Keeb August 18, 2009 at 7:50 pm

Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!

I’m slowly getting all the bits and bobs I need together!! Can’t wait to start using a condensor mic!! :)

Regards!

Bill August 18, 2009 at 8:42 pm

No worries Keeb - make sure to let us know how you get on :)

Jimmy August 22, 2009 at 5:47 pm

Hay there fellaz..
I’ve got this issue with my microphone and i;m getting sooo tired of it..:(
the thing is..i’ve just bought an rode nt1-a condense mic..
also got an US-122L audio midi interface..which is phantom powered;)
software is installed (i see it in my sound preferences)
XLR cable is connected with the interface and the mic..
the usb 2.0 of the interface is plugged in 2 my iMac usb port,

then now the problem;

in my sound preferences of my Imac i hav the next things :
input: by that interface
(i can see that the mic is working cuzz when i speak in the mic)
output: the built in imac speakers..

now i;m opening GarageBand!
i put an instrumental track in it..
i play it..and i can hear the instrumental playing trough the built in speakers..
now i wanna talk in the mic and record somethang..!!
BUt i don;t hear anythang and i hav NOOOO clue what’s wrong…
has anyone got an idea how this is possible??
cuzz everthing is connected:(

i really hope some one can help me out with this stupid problem ..i think it’s a small thing that has 2 be done..but i really don;t know what!

please hit me on my email:
delaney222@hotmail.com

Bill August 22, 2009 at 9:42 pm

Hey Jimmy:

Go to GarageBand > Preferences > Audio/MIDI and make sure the inputs/outputs match the ones in your OS X preferences - this is a really common problem, mostly because people (quite reasonably) assume that GarageBand will pick up audio preferences from the OS X control panel - but it doesn’t. You need to make sure they match manually.

Try that - if it still doesn’t work, come back to us!

Leave a Comment