Basic EQ and Effects Question

Hi Colonel, welcome to the forum!

it is always better, IMO, to record dry and EQ, compress, add reverb, etc, using the software inside MC.  when you EQ on the way in then you can't change it if you decide later you don't like it or that the EQ doesn't fit the mix.  then you'd have to re-record to get rid of the EQ you printed.

BTW - "what's the matter Col. Sanders?  Chicken?" 



(know the movie reference?)

P.S.  If you agree that all I need is an audio interface, can you recommend one that'll do the trick?  (e.g. Tascam US-800)?   I am a singer songwriter, and so all I need is to connect two decent condenser mics plus the pickup from my acoustic.

Thanks!

you were typing at the same time I was. 

check my website for some recommendations and then ask questions if you have any before you purchase.  I'll be glad to answer anything I can.

which browser are you using and which operating system?

I can't access it from work (where I am now) but I would be happy to email it to you when I get home tonight if you'll send me an email requesting it.  my contact information is on the website for sending me an email.

P.S.  I know that I can only do 2 tracks at a time in MC5, but my goald would be to mic the guitar and use the guitar pickup, and pan both to one side (one track), and use a second mic for the voice and pan that to the other side (on the second track), so that I could individually e.q. and run fx on guitar and vocals separately.

Well, turns out the Tascam would cost approx $250, which is not a lot of savings, so I will try out he A&H tonight with MC5 (will be my first attempt at this, as I have been recording direct to external mic input of camcorder to date).  I biggest fear is some sort of driver issue with the A&H, but from what I see on the web, it should be compatible with Windows XP.

Will let you know tomorrow.

Thanks for the input.

Beagle


if you already have the A&H then I'd certainly go ahead and use it.  A&H makes excellent equipment!

let us know how it goes.

That's what I was thinking. If the A&H is doing the job nicely, why bother changing it?

In response to you both, I had been using the A&H to get sound from my mics and guitar to the external mic input of my camcorder.  A friend told me that it would sound a lot better if I ran the sound through the USB port into a DAW.  So I have not used the A&H for that purpose yet (and picking up the MC5 software tonight).
 
So, based on Beagle's advice, the A&H will sevre mainly as a mic pre-amp and D/A converter, since he advises to record a dry signal and add effects in the DAW.

Colonel Sanders


In response to you both, I had been using the A&H to get sound from my mics and guitar to the external mic input of my camcorder.  A friend told me that it would sound a lot better if I ran the sound through the USB port into a DAW.  So I have not used the A&H for that purpose yet (and picking up the MC5 software tonight).
 
So, based on Beagle's advice, the A&H will sevre mainly as a mic pre-amp and D/A converter, since he advises to record a dry signal and add effects in the DAW.

OH!  I didn't realize that!  I thought you mean the A&H mixer had USB connection!!!
 
in that case I do NOT recommend you continue using it that way and DO recommend you get a USB sound interface (soundcard) to use.  you can still use the A&H if you want like I described above the way I use my Mackie - but the USB on the camcorder is very poor for recording.
 
from your description above you only record 2 channels at the same time, right?  1 for the guitar pickup and one for the mic on the guitar and then the vocals are recorded via mic later, if I understand correctly.
 
so if you just get something like the m-audio fast track mkII would work fine for that scenerio.
 
http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.com/product/M-Audio-Fast-Track-MKII-USB-Audio-Interface?sku=703669
 
 

And, Beagle, the answe to your last question is no: I record the following way:

mic for guitar and line from guitar's pick-up and mic for voice, simultaneously, to two tracks.  I use the A&H mixer to add reverb, to e.q. each input, and to pan the three inputs left and right as needed.

So, using the USB out from the A&H to the computer for recording in MC5, I would pan the guitar hard one side (for recording onto 1 track), and pan the voice hard to the other side (for recording onto a second terack).  I will then use MC5 to add e.q., effects, and then mix down to a stereo track, which I will then attach to the video

Beagle,
 
One final question about basic recording and mixing technique.  I assume that one purpose of recording dry and then sending to an FX is to get cool effects like a stereo reverb (in my case, to widen the sound of the acoustic guitar).  Is that accomplished by having the dry signal go to the final mix (panned to one side), and having the wet signal (i.e., with reverb) panned to the other?
 
In other words, what's the proper way to widen the sound of an acoustic guitar using an fx send?  (I know this is something I'm supposed to discover for myself, but I'm like the guy who jumps from the middle of the book to the end to see if I figured out whodunnit).
 
Steve

I will then

 
?
Somebody cut you off?

Stupid forum software!

I will then...
...put compression on the two panned tracks, and maybe a light compression on the main track and I'll send reverb from the main track only so that it doesn't start getting muddy with verb.

Colonel Sanders


Guess Beagle had to go out for a walk . . . .

I'm not sure I understand quite what he's saying.  Is he recommendin that I do three takes to three different tracks and then pan them middle, left, and right?  That is not what a singer-songwriter would do the studio.  You'd have a single guitar take, and hopefully, the combination of natural room acoustics and some effects and e.q. will help spread the sound for two track stereo.

My problem is that I don't know how to do that in any music software. 

 
 
I'm not sure how to say this without sounding like I'm a smarta$$.  but you asked me and I gave you some advice which I have been given from other forum members, a couple of books I have read on mixing, and even some commercial studios.  if you don't agree with it, then you are by no means bound to it! 
 
as far as doing a single guitar take and getting natural acoustics of the room - you can do that if you wish and that certainly is a valid way of recording.  what they would do in that case is use at least 2 mics, maybe 3.  1 will be a large diaphram mic near the soundhole, the other near the middle part of the fretboard pointed back toward the soundhole and the 3rd might be over the guitarits' shoulder to capture some of the room.  (do you have a studio treated room to record in?).  (or if it's an acoustic/electric they'd use the DI instead of one of the upclose mics).  with 3 mics they still have 3 tracks to blend into the stereo field.  this is just a different way to do it (but if your room doesn't sound good then this is not a good way to do it because the room capture will cause you a lot of problems in your mix!)
 
then adding the FX - this is going to be very dependent on your room that you're recording in, your mic and preamp equipment and what it sounds like in the mix.  there's no "formula" for creating FX in a mix.  it's going to be on a case by case basis.  yes, there are starting points for certain situations and a book on mixing will be a very good start.  but it's really more than I can explain in a forum thread.  I can give you some mixing book recommendations if you want.

Cubase talks about effects that are applied to the track (presumably as it records), and other effects that are applied after recording (by creating an FX bus). . .

I actually find it hard to believe that Cubase would talk about FX applied to the track as it records.  that doesn't make any sense for a software DAW.  the only way to do that would be with hardware, such as your A&H.  you can't apply software FX to the track as it records - it's not possible, nor is it desirable anyway.  you can put FX on the FX bin and use the INPUT ECHO button (in MC) if you want to monitor with the FX on to see how it sounds, but it doesn't get printed to the final recording until you mix down to a stereo output track.  that's by design to keep you from printing the FX without being able to change them.
 
Cubase works exactly like MC and every other DAW.  FX put into the FX bin of MC or the track FX of Cubase are not "printed" on the recording.  they can be changed.  I'd have to see the reference you're talking about and I suspect that you may be misunderstanding what it's saying.

Ok, I'm back.  I misspoke.  You can add effects to individual tracks after they're recorded, or do an FX send to an FX track.  I'm trying to figure out the difference, but it seems that applying to the track gives you issues with wet dry sound, and using the FX bus allows you to route several tracks to a single effect, and then have only the wet signal sent to the final mix.

I am a purist, so I believe very strongly in recording what I'm playing and singing at the same time.

Here's another question then: since I need three simultaneous tracks, and since MC5 gives me only two, can I upgrade from MC5 to a more robust Cakewalk product, or do I have to purchase a new full version.  I need something pretty basic but that can handle at least 3 input tracks at once.

Thanks,

Steve

As a registered customer (assuming you have registered MC5), you can upgrade to Sonar Home Studio7 for $49.
It will support your I/O requirements.
The user interface is the same as MC5, so you would be in somewhat familiar territory.