how do you record quiet stuff?
em411.com forums : Hardware recording, mastering : hardware based recording and mastering Page 1 | 2
thread starter i want to record myself making weird throat noises but my main recording device has a pretty high noisefloor. a lot of the music I like includes really clean recordings of quiet sounds. how do you do it?
Recent blogs: ring mod idea
Replies
i have a matched pair of RODE NT5s and i am quite satisfied with them but haven't done extensive testing.
i strongly suggest (even if it's not exactly cheap) those microphones: link
i bought a matched pair of those MK012 and i'm really in love with them. they are really good for low level stuff. Shure now makes some cheap large diaphragms mics that are also good, but not as good as Oktava. After my initial investigations, the Audio Technica AT3031 and AT4041 look really really nice.
I stayed away from their large diaphragm condensers in favor of a cheaper Chinese made model (Studio Projects B1 - which is actually really nice, especially for $80), but their small diaphragms seem to be much more sensitive at 20 mV/Pa than the competition (NT5, Peluso CEMC6, various Shure's, etc. all around 9~12 mV/Pa), and the noise floor seems to be about the same level, which would make them great for recording quiet sources. The best thing about them (from the specs at least) is that the frequency response curves stay pretty much flat up to 20khz (the competition seems to dip after about 15~18khz), so they seem perfectly suited as a companion to a large diaphragm, to add a little in the high end. That said, for high sensitivity and low self noise nothing beats a nice large diaphragm condenser, and I think at least one large diaphragm condenser should be involved in any low SPL recording session, even it is augmented by a small diaphragm condenser to reveal a little more in the high frequencies. I'm thinking about acquiring an AT3031 for use in this way. I was thinking about placing it right next to the large diaphragm, then synchronizing the two recordings to avoid any phasing issues. I was thinking that there must be a VST crossover out there so I can use the lows and mids from the large diaphragm and take the highs from the small. If not, I guess that's a good Reaktor project to attempt in an evening. After a lot of obsessive researching I've ordered a CAD E100S. The recordings I've heard with it are excellent, very detailed, natural sounding, and the noise level is unbelievably low. The few reviews I could find are very positive. It should be ideal for very quiet recordings.
Hopefully it works out for me. I'll need to sell my old mic and some other stuff (sound card, mixer, various computer parts, kidneys) to pay for it. It was $400 - not a bad deal, but easily the most I've ever paid for a piece of gear. It's about a weeks pay for me, or two weeks after expenses. I think I'll have something that will last a good long while, and hopefully retain most of its value. I'll make a blog when I start recording with it, but that probably won't be until the fall/winter, since I like recording when the air is cold and dry, and I don't like exposing my mics to humidity. Have you considered renting the gear you would need in order to achieve a low noise floor.
Also consider renting some studio time to do it. While the studio time may end up costing you as much as a cheap-ass microphone.. you're pretty much guaranteed to do a decent recording. Will be able to use a large number of different microphones and acoustic setups (depending on how well the studio is setup). One may even have an engineer on staff for the hours you're working so you won't even need to figure any gear out.. and the engineer will know how to push the gear and what to use to get the sound you desire. Then you also don't have a bunch of expensive gear you don't use sitting around collecting dust, nor do you need to go insane trying to make a silent recording environment with acoustic treatments SSD hard drives, fanless cases, and a million dollars. The amount of money all of that would cost you.. would get you a lot of time in a professional studio. @Spark
Now what's the fun in that? The DIY method is more versatile, much more informative, and provides you with a better background, and more experience for future projects. Sure, studio time may be more cost effective for the first project, but what about for the second, third, etc. projects? Also, there's the problem of artistry. One never knows when inspiration will strike, or even where the project is ultimately headed. I would think that anyone with an artistic process would far prefer being able to set up an impromptu recording session than scheduling a recording session (and possibly earning enough money to do so). Ultimately, there's an amount of uniqueness and originality that is displayed in projects when they are created with a process and technique tailored to their creation. For me, part of the appeal of electronic music isn't just being a musician, it's being a recording engineer, mastering engineer, performer, composer, sound designer, DSP programmer, etc. I enjoy refining a broad set of skills and finding the interplay between them. @eyesnine. I see where you are coming from, just allow me to elaborate on a few points
The fun in doing it this way is Being able to focus your effort allows for more creativity, not less. Having a plan and executing it demands more of your talent, turns out better results which are more cohesive to your vision than following whims in the moment. Whims are great, but Flies has a whim already and needs the best solution. In this case, Flies wants some weird very quiet vocal samples (I think they're male porno grunting samples). Why wouldn't you want to get the highest quality possible? Rather than what you could "make do" with what you could accomplish with lower quality gear/environment on your own. Particularly if there are many uncontrollable factors (such as a noisy environment) that may adversely impact the vision of his endeavor. By the time he gets all that gear sets it up, the whim is gone. Get into the studio. They have the gear, the mics, the environment, and someone who knows how to work it all. You need some Vocal samples. Why is this "not fun". You ever done work in a real studio? IT IS FUN. How does this addition to the process make it not unique? Using 100% gear you own somehow inherently makes your project more unique? Even though most of that gear is lower in cost, and therefore purchased by a wider number of consumers, each with a unique setup, and unique processes. If Flies has a unique idea, he doesn't need a unique process to then make it more unique. He needs pristine recorded sex-grunts for his solo sex grunt album. What he does with those pristine recorded sex-grunts after recording them is his business. He mess them up all he wants after that.. and still have a high quality source to revert back to. DIY is good, I wasn't saying DIY isn't an option. Why is working in a professional studio not an option? Working in a studio is ALSO informative, provides you with a better background, and more experience for future projects. I don't think that those things are inherent only to DIY project. Why are these two things mutually exclusive? I wouldn't want to practice in a pay per hour studio, unless I somehow wasn't paying for it, or was paying very little. I think I would also have difficulty experimenting for the same reason. I would only consider going to a studio if I had prepared material, in which case it does make a lot of sense.
The studio scenario is ideal, true, but I think unrealistic for non professional or low paying projects. (Actually, the ideal is to have unlimited access to a private studio, which is where the DIY path eventually leads.) i'm all for going in a pro studio.
it's a really good experience and it's not so expensive in the end (+ you spend a good day working on really good gear). Page 1 | 2
Signup to comment
|