Microphone upgrade

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Is there some mixer or interface I can use which would allow me to keep
everything hooked up like I have it on the Mackie and at the same time
not ruin the Eureka's quality? The Eureka has an XLR out and a TRS jack
for outputs. I have my monitors, speakers, headphones, rca outs from my
soundcard and rca ins to my soundcard all hooked up to the Mackie...how
would I hook all of them up without the Mackie there? The Eureka
doesn't have any head phone jacks either. Is there a way to hook up the
Eureka to my Mackie and bypass the EQ or some mixer or interface which
would work like the Mackie but not jeopardize my quality?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Are there any mixers out which would improve the sound quality once I
run the Eureka through them? I have my monitors, speakers, headphones
and rca outs from my soundcard and rca ins to my soundcard all hooked
up to my Mackie...getting the Mackie out of the way would really be
hard for me. Is there a good replacement? Some mixer or interface which
would allow me to get all those things hooked up like the Mackie does
and not ruin the Eureka's sound? There are no headphone outs in the
Eureka...I see a TRS out in the back and an XLR out...then it has
insert send and return. I use the XLR out and plug it into my Mackie's
XLR in for mics. What would I do to get the Mackie out and still have
all my stuff organized and hooked up?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Okay, I did what you said immediately... I got the adapter and got the
Mackie out of the way. Then I recorded the same thing through the
Mackie without touching any settings on the Eureka. Here are the
results:

With Mackie:

http/www.abnoticrecords.com/mackie.mp3
http/www.abnoticrecords.com/nomackie.mp3

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Sorry, I made a mistake...

With Mackie:

http/www.abnoticrecords.com/mackie.mp3
No Mackie:

http/www.abnoticrecords.com/nomackie.mp3

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <vPOzd.24819$yv2.13740@fe2.texas.rr.com> machovox@jam.rr.com writes:

> Your vocals are muddy and have inconsistent level, so you need to work on
> your EQ and compression.

How about working on microphone position and vocal technique? I see
nothing that could be instantly improved by changing gear.
Experimenting with compressor settings (and learning what each change
does to the sound) would be quite helpful, too. A good way to learn
about this is to record the vocal with no compression, being careful
to set the level so that it doesn't clip and not worrying about the
level being visually low on the DAW. Then put the compressor in the
signal path on playback and playing with the knobs until things start
sounding better.

> You don't need a new mic, and you don't need another channel strip. The K2
> and Eureka will get you there IF you learn how to use them. It just takes
> patience and practice.

Yup. And even with the best equipment, it takes a good singer to make
a good sounding recording of a singer. As you listen to your
unadultereated vocal recordings, you'll eventually turn out better
recordings. But it takes months or even years, not just the time to go
to your local music store and buy something.

> And finally. The importance of good monitors cannot be overstated. A $3000
> channel strip or more expensive mic will be worthless if you can't hear what
> you're doing.

Also, a $3,000 monitor system will not be much better than what you
have if there is an acoustical problem in your listening room. But
even with less than stellar monitoring you can make a reasonable
comparison between your recordings and commerical recordings that you
like. It's not a good single way to make final judgements, but you can
learn what the knobs do by listening this way.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1104137013.169466.74080@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> AbnoticCo@aol.com writes:

> Okay, how do I get the Mackie out of the way if I'm using its RCA outs
> to go into my soundcard? Do I get a new, more versatile interface with
> XLR and 1/4" jacks or is there another way to do it?

You get adapters or cables that match the connectors on the Eureka
output on one end and match the connectors on your sound card on the
other end. I would suggest a patchbay as a good solution that will let
you easily experiement with various pieces of gear in different
arrangements. That way, you only need to make or buy cables to connect
each piece of gear to the patchbay. Then, you need only one kind of
cable to connect between patchbay jacks.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich Dec 27, 1:32 pm show options

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: walki...@thegrid.net (hank alrich) - Find messages by this author

Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 21:32:56 GMT
Local: Mon, Dec 27 2004 1:32 pm
Subject: Re: Microphone upgrade
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse


www.HassanAnsari.com - Teen Prodigy <Abnoti...@aol.com> wrote:

> Are there any mixers out which would improve the sound quality once I
> run the Eureka through them? I have my monitors, speakers, headphones
> and rca outs from my soundcard and rca ins to my soundcard all hooked
> up to my Mackie...getting the Mackie out of the way would really be
> hard for me. Is there a good replacement? Some mixer or interface
which
> would allow me to get all those things hooked up like the Mackie does
> and not ruin the Eureka's sound? There are no headphone outs in the
> Eureka...I see a TRS out in the back and an XLR out...then it has
> insert send and return. I use the XLR out and plug it into my
Mackie's
> XLR in for mics. What would I do to get the Mackie out and still have
> all my stuff organized and hooked up?


Speck LiLo mixer.

http/www.speck.com/lilo/lilo.shtml


--
ha



Very funny...will you buy it for me? lol. The thing does look pretty
interesting though.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>
>Okay, how do I get the Mackie out of the way if I'm using its RCA outs
>to go into my soundcard?

Take the output of Your Eureka directly into the sound card. Don't use the
Mackie for the recording part.

Do I get a new, more versatile interface with
>XLR and 1/4" jacks or is there another way to do it? I tried using a
>m-audio Fast Track to get the Mackie out of the way and tried to follow
>your recommended settings the best I could (even though I didn't get
>some of the stuff you said)....the results were tragic. :-/ I don't
>mean to sound dumb, but...
>
>Here is a picture of the Eureka:
>
>http/www.musiciansfriend.com/srs7/g=live/content/doc_id=91865/base_pid=
184130

That looks like a pretty decent piece of gear, and you should read the manual
thoroughly and learn what each of the functions does.


>
>You might start with 4:1 and 10 db of
>compression, with attack and release as fast as possible



A starting point, but not the end point. That will provide compression that you
can hear, but the best compression is usually very transparent.

>
>Okay, I turned the attack and release knobs all the way to the left
>because that's where is says "fast". I don't know what you mean by 10db

10dB of Gain Reduction Yoour unit has a button for GR to meter.

>and 4:1..hopefully not 10db of gain on the compressor...cuz that kills
>the sound....4:1...I have no clue what knob to touch and where to put
>it.
>

>Then if that
>sounds too smashed, increase the threshold so that you're compressing
>about
>6dB and listen again.
>
>Okay, I put thresh knob to number 6.
>
>Or, if it doesn't sound like enough, lower the
>threshold a little or increase the ratio to say 6:1
>
>Um...what...I see the ratio knob, what number do I put it to?

Start with 4 then turn to 6 and see what it does

>
>You just need to learn
>how to use your EQ and compression; I don't think you've got the
>controls
>down quite yet. Note that what I said is a STARTING POINT, not carved
>in
>stone.
>
>Yes, I think you're right about me learning to use the EQ and
>compression better. My method is, keep the low end low, mid a little
>higher and the high end usually as much or a little higher than the
>mids. Then mess with all the knobs one by one seeing how the sound
>changes....then put each knob to the place where it sounds the best to
>my ears. Some knobs honestly make so little of a difference to my ears
>(and my friends' ears) that I don't really know where to put them.

First, you need to actually listen to what you are hearing. Setting EQ knobs
and compressors requires a great deal of practice in order to obtain a decent
sound, and that is only useful after you have obtained the best sound available
from microphone choice and placement.

Many of the people who post here could make a very professional recording using
SM 57's with a decent preamp. (Probably not Mackie because they don't work well
with 57's) They could make stellar recordings with your microphones and Eureka
channel strip.

You can't mix or record according to a formula and you won't learn how to do it
in a couple of days on RAP.

Buy Bobby Owinski's book on engineering and attemp to understand what he is
teaching.


It
>would really be a nice lesson if you could tell me a little more about
>these things....Eureka is my first compressor....I never used a
>compressor personally before this...I just used a preamp straight into
>the interface with some eq.


You don't necessarily need to compress and you can use your Eureka as a preamp
straight into your interface.


>
>When I go to a studio, they have everything setup, and I just stand
>there and say check as they fix the knobs. I really can't see what
>they're doing. When I come home I need to learn everything by
>experimenting or of course, asking you guys.
>
>BTW, I was listening to the old recordings and some new recordings, and
>yea, the acoustication did make an improvement...thanks for the advice
>
>
>I don't know what I would do without the internet and people like you
>helping people like me out with these questions. Yesterday I must have
>been on google groups for about 5 hours straight reading questions and
>replies. lol....I've learned a lot.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

www.HassanAnsari.com - Teen Prodigy wrote:
> Are there any mixers out which would improve the sound quality once I
> run the Eureka through them? I have my monitors, speakers, headphones
> and rca outs from my soundcard and rca ins to my soundcard all hooked
> up to my Mackie...getting the Mackie out of the way would really be
> hard for me. Is there a good replacement? Some mixer or interface
which
> would allow me to get all those things hooked up like the Mackie does
> and not ruin the Eureka's sound? There are no headphone outs in the
> Eureka...I see a TRS out in the back and an XLR out...then it has
> insert send and return. I use the XLR out and plug it into my
Mackie's
> XLR in for mics. What would I do to get the Mackie out and still have
> all my stuff organized and hooked up?

I believe that the title "Prodigy" is one best left
bestowed on one by someone other than one's self.

RD

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Yes, and if you noticed, I changed it to Writer / Singer / Rapper /
Producer before you even posted. In addition, I have several emails and
mails from fans telling me I'm a teen prodigy...

What I'm posting on this board is nothing but trash I'm recording in 20
seconds to get a feeling of the recording quality. You should hear some
of my studio recorded tracks if you like hip hop or r&b...they are as
good as any mainstream artist my age...and again...those aren't my
words...I've been told that by hundreds, if not a few thousand people.

But that's not what this post is about...I'm seeking help to gain more
knowledge from more experienced people than I and improve sound quality
in my own studio.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hassan,

Let me start by saying, anyone who makes ignorant statements like my
Shure SM-7 smokes his U87 or my $275 ART pre-amp blows away your $2000
Universal Audio 6176 etc. etc. are fools to be ignored! There are
100's of big time releases done on Shure SM57's! If you're only
cursing into it and melody, arrangement and vocal intimacy aren't an
issue why blow your money? If you're recording a Marshall stack you
might not find a better mic than a $75 SM57! If Sting comes to your
studio to record a vocal track, he's not even going to let you pull out
a Shure! He's going to want to hear the mucous on his lungs dripping
down into his bowels and he's knows he's always gotten that with his
U87.

As for your comparison between the Eureka and the Avalon 737. I can
tell you now, the Avalon like the UA 1176, or the UA LA2A or the
Pultec Eq are no longer up for higher criticism. As long as you have
Sony Records, Disney Productions, The Record Plant, MCA Records and all
the giants they've recorded standing behind the sound quality
delivered by these vintage pieces of gear, our opinions don't much
matter when stacked up against their results!

If I were you, I would focus on creating inspired music with the best
equipment I could afford. Buy fewer pieces of higher quality. And
most of all, be different! Only fools have idols and use their own
life to emulate another's persona! If singing through a toilet paper
roll for compression works for you, do it! And if you ever wonder if
something is of any value, go to Ebay and type it in. Type in any
major microphone name or pre-amp. You'll get a pretty good gage on
what's vintage and what chipmunk hype!







Joe Sensor wrote:
> Jim Kollens wrote:
>
>
> > You, unquestionably, are the greatest teen prodigy I know. It is a
great honor
> > to know you and I don't even know you. There should be a song
written about
> > knowing you. If I knew you, I would offer you my finest cognac,
but then, you
> > are, after all, a teenager. Pity.
>
> A teenager with a big head. Seems like there are too many of those
> lately. I think talent is a better trait.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"www.HassanAnsari.com - Writer / Singer / Rapper / Producer"
<AbnoticCo@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1104172691.151656.186970@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Is there some mixer or interface I can use which would allow me to keep
> everything hooked up like I have it on the Mackie and at the same time
> not ruin the Eureka's quality? The Eureka has an XLR out and a TRS jack
> for outputs. I have my monitors, speakers, headphones, rca outs from my
> soundcard and rca ins to my soundcard all hooked up to the Mackie...how
> would I hook all of them up without the Mackie there? The Eureka
> doesn't have any head phone jacks either. Is there a way to hook up the
> Eureka to my Mackie and bypass the EQ or some mixer or interface which
> would work like the Mackie but not jeopardize my quality?

Here is the dirty little secret of audio engineering: Every piece of active
circuitry you put into the audio chain degrades the signal. Everything.
Sometimes the degradation is subtle enough to be inaudible (but it's usually
measurable), sometimes it's audible. The tradeoff is that sometimes the
piece of gear that's causing the degradation does enough good things to the
sound (like compressing the way you like, or EQing the way you like) to
outweigh the degradation. Sometimes it doesn't. Most of the time, I'd put
the Mackie in the latter category. The only thing it's gaining you is a
semblance of convenience. It's losing you lots of sound quality.

Yes, there are boards out there which degrade the sound much less than the
Mackie. They cost a lot more -- a LOT more -- than the Mackie, and it's
worth noting that these days many studios, even though they have boards
(consoles) that cost more than the average house, still run from the
microphone preamp directly into the recorder or computer, bypassing the
board completely.

To go from your Eureka to your sound card, what you need is a cable. That's
all. Well, since TRS is a balanced circuit and the soundcard you have is
unbalanced, you need a bit of adaptation. So do this: Go down to Radio Shack
and buy an adapter with a stereo 1/4" male plug (that's TRS) and two RCA
female jacks. Connect an RCA-RCA cable from the white RCA jack to the input
of your soundcard. Don't connect anything to the red jack. You now have the
Eureka connected as cleanly as is possible in this imperfect world. Keep an
eye on the meters in your recording program, making sure you don't overload
the sound card by driving it too hard; the meter on the Eureka, in this
application, is useful for indicating gain reduction on its compressor, but
as far as output level is concerned, believe the meters in your software,
not the one on the Eureka.

You can, if you like, keep using the Mackie for monitoring. In the long run,
though, you may decide to run the outputs of the sound card through
something like a passive volume control to the power amp for your monitors,
and use the Mackie only as a headphone amp. But start out by connecting the
Eureka to the soundcard as outlined above. My guess is that your sound
quality will suddenly improve dramatically.

Peace,
Paul

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"www.HassanAnsari.com - Teen Prodigy" <AbnoticCo@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1104172199.631882.150660@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Are there any mixers out which would improve the sound quality once I
> run the Eureka through them? I have my monitors, speakers, headphones
> and rca outs from my soundcard and rca ins to my soundcard all hooked
> up to my Mackie...getting the Mackie out of the way would really be
> hard for me. Is there a good replacement? Some mixer or interface which
> would allow me to get all those things hooked up like the Mackie does
> and not ruin the Eureka's sound? There are no headphone outs in the
> Eureka...I see a TRS out in the back and an XLR out...then it has
> insert send and return. I use the XLR out and plug it into my Mackie's
> XLR in for mics. What would I do to get the Mackie out and still have
> all my stuff organized and hooked up?

Oh yeah, that's another thing. The XLR out on the Eureka is at "line level",
which is way the hell hotter than the Mackie is expecting to see at its mic
input, so you're probably causing horrendous distortion in the Mackie by
doing this. But you really don't need to have the Mackie in the recording
chain at all; see my other post in this thread.

Peace,
Paul

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

www.HassanAnsari.com - Writer / Singer / Rapper / Producer wrote:


> What I'm posting on this board is nothing but trash I'm recording in 20
> seconds


Well thanks much. Now I am glad I didn't take the time.



> You should hear some
> of my studio recorded tracks if you like hip hop or r&b...

Guess I'll have to pass on that as well. Besides, you already been told
100's or 1000's of times. I am but just one lowly opinion.



> But that's not what this post is about...I'm seeking help to gain more
> knowledge from more experienced people than I and improve sound quality
> in my own studio.

Trial and error. And of course ears. You gots em or you don't.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

So, can you hear any difference? If not, it doesn't matter.

Al

On 27 Dec 2004 12:33:51 -0800, "www.HassanAnsari.com - Writer / Singer
/ Rapper / Producer" <AbnoticCo@aol.com> wrote:

>Sorry, I made a mistake...
>
>With Mackie:
>
>http/www.abnoticrecords.com/mackie.mp3
>No Mackie:
>
>http/www.abnoticrecords.com/nomackie.mp3

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

www.HassanAnsari.com - Teen Prodigy <AbnoticCo@aol.com> wrote:

> Are there any mixers out which would improve the sound quality once I
> run the Eureka through them? I have my monitors, speakers, headphones
> and rca outs from my soundcard and rca ins to my soundcard all hooked
> up to my Mackie...getting the Mackie out of the way would really be
> hard for me. Is there a good replacement? Some mixer or interface which
> would allow me to get all those things hooked up like the Mackie does
> and not ruin the Eureka's sound? There are no headphone outs in the
> Eureka...I see a TRS out in the back and an XLR out...then it has
> insert send and return. I use the XLR out and plug it into my Mackie's
> XLR in for mics. What would I do to get the Mackie out and still have
> all my stuff organized and hooked up?

Speck LiLo mixer.

http/www.speck.com/lilo/lilo.shtml

--
ha

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Thanks for the help Mike...I appreciate it a lot. I will try to get
someone who knows about wiring to make me something like that. And
while reading your post I was thinking...there are 2 chanels on the
Mackie where you can pretty much bypass the eq and they have 1/4"
inputs. I can take my Eureka's TRS, put it into those jacks without any
eq so the sound is nuetral and get it out to my soundcard....I don't
know if that's the same thing you said, but while reading your post I
kinda got that in mind.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I can deffinetly hear a difference...the sound going into my Mackie
sounds better on singing and without the Mackie it's more fuller and
better for my hip hop vocals....well that's how it sounds to me.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

And thanks playon, these guys are making a big deal out of nothing...

I'm not thick headed people, I just have a lot of confidence in my
talent.

When was the last time a 15 year old came by and posted a thread like
this and took all the advice given asking one question after another
and showing respect to all the people helping him out? I'm just trying
to learn.

AND OF COURSE I AM NOT GOING TO RECORD TRACKS FOR 2 HOURS EACH JUST TO
HEAR THE QUALITY OF THE RECORDING! I'm recording the vocals raw without
adding any adlibs, reverb, eq, compression, etc in my software. If I
took those recordings I posted the links to, made a nice instrumental
to them and polished them up with VST plug-ins...of course they gonna
sound much better. This is my raw work...what do you expect? Yea, I'm
talkin to you Joe....do you want to hear my vocal abilities or my
studio's quality? My studio's quality is easily heard with these
"trash" recordings...and no, they are not my best work...they are just
recordings to get a hint of the sound quality...not a hint of my talent.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>Sorry, I made a mistake...
>
>With Mackie:
>
>http/www.abnoticrecords.com/mackie.mp3
>No Mackie:
>
>http/www.abnoticrecords.com/nomackie.mp3
>
>

The Mackie sounds a lot thinner. It's brighter, but that I would expect.

Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty