Recording Live

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,RML
Date: 23 Dec 05 - 08:53 PM

Any thoughts about the Sony PCMD1 Portable Audio Recorder?

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,RML
Date: 23 Dec 05 - 08:35 PM

koolness. will research and compare. again, thank you.

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: JudyB
Date: 23 Dec 05 - 08:27 PM

We're fond of the R-1, though it is a bit pricier than the minidisk recorders. The internal mics are perfectly adequate if all you want is a listenable recording of the show (we do high-quality MP3 for personal recording of song sessions, though you can also do WAV - but that's more quality than we need for our purpose); if you're planning to use what you record, I'd recommend getting it as a feed from the sound board if possible, or else a good pair of mics. Good luck!

JudyB

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: AKS
Date: 23 Dec 05 - 06:02 AM

I'd go for flash (memory) recorder; Roland's Edirol R-1 is one - others exist, too.

AKS

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,RML
Date: 22 Dec 05 - 01:26 PM

Thanks x infinity.

Layman here. Just really needed a place to start. You gus rock.
Appreciate it.

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: Amos
Date: 22 Dec 05 - 10:31 AM

In addition to minidisk recorders, there are a number of portable, battery-operated sound studio devices out there, which allow you to monitor and equalize the incoming sound streams. Some of these use minidisks, and some have built-in hard disks.

Only thing I have used myself is a Sony MDR which works very well up to a point.

A

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 22 Dec 05 - 10:09 AM

High quality microdisk recorder. A number of models, read up and get the best.

Subject: live comedy
From: GUEST,RML
Date: 22 Dec 05 - 09:56 AM

Seeking the best and most economical way to repeadetly record live stand-up comedy. Is there a portable device that is also high quality and sound? What's the choices? merci.

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 28 Sep 01 - 03:39 PM

Well, we recorded and out still working on the mix down. From three nights in a row, we have a fair amount of tape with only a few "mysterious" blank spots. As the ADAT has now broken, we're waiting to get that back to finish.

In the weeks prior to recording, one of our members recorded our performaces directly from the board stereo. The session from the week before was particularly good and we are now considering developing a "bootleg" from that,just to tide things over until we can get our act together for the real deal. We somehow got it up to MP3 here

This is one cut of many from a night where we were relaxed and not burdened with the worries of recording. It will be interesting to see if we can achieve the same effect from the 8 track.

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,UB Dan
Date: 31 May 01 - 04:29 PM

Claymore, Thanks so much for the info...I'll pass it along. I think Ed might already be logged out and on his way to the pub

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 31 May 01 - 04:20 PM

UB, I'm not familiar with the Alesis boards (I do use several of their reverb units) but a quick read of the Specs Block Diagram shows that your balanced DO's are derived after everything except Pan. This means that anything you do on the Alesis will be reflected in the channels of the Mackie. Not great, but good to know...

My advice would be to run the Mackie as flat as possible, until you get an idea what the Alesis is doing to your recording effort, so again, monitor at the tape deck output. Get a second set of head phones and compare solos between the Alesis and the Mackie. Then make such fine tuning changes on the Mackie as needed. Use the Mackie to ROUTE the signal into the eight tracks as opposed to MODIFYING it, unless, as I mentioned, you must take drastic measures.

Remember you can always add reverb etc. to each of the eight individual tracks later, so keep it clean, and below the redlines on the tapes input meter. Whether you decide to use the Mackie Return Monitor set-up or not, the concept is to make your mixer changes based upon what has been laid down on the track, and not what the audience (or FOH) is hearing. Screw the Front of the House (your friends will go nuts on cue, when necessary). Again Good Luck

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 31 May 01 - 02:55 PM

Emily, thanks.

Suggestion: Join Mudcat so you can "trace" this thread on the personal page you receive by virtue of becoming a member. In that way you'll be able to find this thread six months from now when you're ready to record.

Additionally, I wind up in Houston every so often and would love to hear your band.

In the meantime, check out the Alesis Web site and get to the owner's manuals for thier various boards. A little technical, but some good info none the less.

Click here

Ed

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,emily b
Date: 31 May 01 - 02:38 PM

UB Ed,

Please let us know how this turns out. I wish I could be there to support your effort but can't make it from Houston. Isn't it great getting all this info from people who have been there before. I read it all with interest in hopes that one day, my band will do the same thing.

All the best over the next 3 nights.

emily

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 31 May 01 - 01:58 PM

The recording board is a Makie 1604. The house Board is an Alesis Studio 32 with no owners manual!

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 31 May 01 - 11:43 AM

Clay, you are way cool. I'm going to the pub now for an initial set up.

I believe the house board is Alesis? and we will be recording into a 16 channel Mackie utilizing the subs to get to 8 channels.

I'll test the house DO and let you know.

Thanks for taking the time to respond in such detail.

Ed

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 31 May 01 - 11:25 AM

First line should read, "That may be a negative on the DO's".

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,Claymore
Date: 31 May 01 - 11:22 AM

UB, that's may a negative on the DO's. You didn't say what your boards are, but since you're from Richmond, I'd guess the house is a Yamaha, since Mackies don't throw 16 channels direct (only 8 on the 1604) and why get a Folio 16. Behringers don't have balanced outs on their 3242 and that can cause trouble in a snake. (I use an Allen & Heath 16 with 16 balanced outs for either stage monitor or tape mixer, and a Mackie 1604 for the FOH).

You need to look at the mixers signal path to see if your DO is derived after the pad and the EQ (rather common). Thus depending on your mixers signal path, the DO may reflect either the pad setting, and/or the slider setting and/or the EQ. That means that whatever the house mix is, will, in some fashion, shape the ability of your tape mixer board to "clean up" the house sound.

You can over come this by having the sound person MIX FROM THE HEADPHONE OUTPUT OF THE TAPE DECK, NOT THE FOH BOARD. (I would set it up to have the mikes go first to the tape mixer, then to the FOH mixer, but according to my read of your thread, this is not possible). His mix will derive first from the house board settings, so remember to check that output first. Not too hot so that you're picking up hash in the quiet moments (or taking the sound pressure to double-dunk on your digital tape), and not too soft so that detail is lost. Try and keep it flat as possible while still correcting the major boo-boo's, such as the guitarist who insists on stuffing the hole on his acoustic with proximity bass etc. - (use a condenser in that case).

Then mix and monitor from your second tape mixer, and forget the FOH. Keep your monitors WAY DOWN. Put up a sign: "Unsupervised Children, the Other White Meat". Put a friend at the pub door to ask people to wait entering the pub until the song ends. Have a women critique the EQ and reverb (their hearing is always better). And remember that you could always do the tape alone in the pub and then run the tracks later at a party, with two additional mikes open, to capture the audience reaction. That might be too "Phil Ochs does Milli Vanilli" for you, but by the third night you might need to consider it. (Enough, I've got to go back to work...) Good Luck!

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 30 May 01 - 12:08 PM

Being the self-centered guy I am, in addition to the fact that we'll begin recording for real this Thursday, I thought I'd refresh the thread for any additional last minute advice.

Over the past couple weeks, we've been plugging a cd burner into the stereo outs of the board. We wanted to get an idea of the mix as well as an opportunity to really hear how we sound (What songs we do well versus others). We have been working with that board for over a year now (We are to the point where all the gain and slider settings are written down; we just make sure they're set and play). Anyway, the stereo out actually sounded pretty good.

Because of our familiarity with the house system, we will be using two mixing boards, patching from the direct outs of the house to the inputs for the recording. My assumption is to set the gain on the recording board similar to that for performances (equal input signals for all channels) and adjusting the channel sliders for balance. (It would seem the direct outs from the house board would already all be at the same level; any experience?)

As there is no dedicated sound guy, we plan on spending the afternoon setting recording levels from the house output and letting her fly on autopilot for the remainder of the night. Our thinking is if we get close to a good 16 channel mix while recording, we can do any later tweaks on the eight channel ADAT.

Anyway, to be seen. As before, any additional advice is always welcome.

Ed

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 19 Apr 01 - 12:44 PM

Refreshed out of respect for Bedubya

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 17 Apr 01 - 09:08 AM

Richmond, VA May 31-June 2

By the way, I was wrong about the double mixer configuration. I was talking to the Big Guy after the post and although possible (there are two mixers), logistically it will be difficult especially with us doing our own mix.

Ed

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: Dave Swan
Date: 16 Apr 01 - 05:30 PM

Ed,

What's the where and when of the three night's worth of recording?

Dave

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 16 Apr 01 - 03:29 PM

Dan, Dave does have good suggestions, as well as the others. Kendall, I hear ya about the folks being around to buy one (from Tshirt land).

Anyway, we seem to be going for the "group" experience. We have a fascinating group of folks following us each Thursday and our leader has really built this into an event via pub announcements and our E-letter. So it'll be interesting to see what we get.

We have arranged to do three nights in a row at the pub. That should give us an opportunity to change the song order (excellent suggestion) as well as a couple or three opportunities to get the best version of one of our better numbers.

We will run the configuration I mentioned above from the PA mix to another 16 channel mixer and then to the 8 ADAT channels. We've tried to identify the 5 most critical elements that we may want to adjust during the mix down into individual ADAT channels with the remaining 11 channels subbed into the last 3 ADATs. We will take turns using the lead vocal microphone, so we'll need someone to help move it (quickly!) between songs.

At this point, there is no recording engineer. We all recognize the value such an individual would bring, especially to the recording portion, but have yet to "run into" someone who actually understands the nuances of a mixing board. I'm not sure how to overcome this, as the proof of ability would only come after the fact which could then be too late. (I suspect we may be too cheap to hire a proven performer).

I really appreciate all the suggestions (Sarah, we won't have red wine; will Guinness do?), and am all ears (eyes) for other suggestions.

Ed

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,UB Dan
Date: 16 Apr 01 - 09:21 AM

Ed, Dave seems to have some great ideas...i'm also posting just to refresh this thread

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: Dave Swan
Date: 13 Apr 01 - 03:52 PM

UB Ed

We're about to release a live album, so this subject is very much on my mind.

In four evenings, recorded over about six weeks, we did the same show each night and were able to collect twenty-four songs. We found that altering the running order of the sets helped each song sound its best on successive nights. You can distribute when you're tired, when you're spot on, and when you're not quite there yet.

It is important that you have an independant ear on the board who knows what you're after, and who will be around for post production. Hiring a producer (Danny Carnahan of Wake the Dead) was one of the best decisions we made.

By all means split you mics and record straight to the tape.

You might consider that your public address mics might not be the best choice you could make for recording. Although our SM58 betas are just fine for most of the joints we sing in, we rented a much higher grade of mic for recording, and were quite happy with the higher quality of sound we captured.

Think about your performance. Are you incidentally recording a show, or inviting an audience to a recording session? Are you willing to play a song a second time if you think it went to hell on you? Do you want the audience to hold its applause for a second or two after the song so that your engineer has more room to doctor that last chord in post production? How much audience response do you want on the final product?

We found that it's imporant to eliminate as much bleed through in recording as you can. That is, isolate each mic from the others, so that in post production it's easier to clean up intonation, timing, et al. Include a mic or two for audience pick-up for later inclusion as needed.

It's a pain to record live, as you surrender a lot of control. However, there's no substitute for the excitement and immediacy you can catch with a live recording. We found that we lived with some imperfections we would never accept in the studio, because the audience/performer energy carried the tune so strongly. I applaud your decision to do this.

I'm no expert at this. I've learned some things from the folks who helped us with our recording, and if you e-mail me, I'll be happy to pass along anything else you think might help.

Good luck, and have fun.

Dave

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: Phil Cooper
Date: 13 Apr 01 - 03:18 PM

I understand that Stan Rogers, when recording "Between the Breaks" did a whole week of shows and picked the best stuff for the album. I notice,when hearing a live recording of my group, that I can hear every imperfection. I also wind up, during the performance, thinking that this piece worked, but I really laid an egg on that piece, and not concentrating on what I should be doing. Good luck on your project.

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: kendall
Date: 13 Apr 01 - 02:45 PM

Be prepared for some of the people who tell you to make a cd to not be around when it is ready.

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: Bernard
Date: 13 Apr 01 - 12:26 PM

When recording 'live' remember not to use the PA mix, as it will be equalised for the room, and sound 'thin' on a recording (probably).

Using splitters on the mics, and a completely separate mix is preferable. Microphone positioning for recording should be different from PA, too, or the recording will lack a true stereo 'image'.

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Apr 01 - 12:03 PM

WAIT A MINUTE!!! Was NASA behind the fake Phil Ochs In Concert Album? Sorry wrong thread.

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: Sarah the flute
Date: 13 Apr 01 - 11:58 AM

We did a "Live" recording in the studio. For the French tunes we added the noise of a French Fest Noz from a dictaphone and then one of the band said "I'll have a red wine" over the top at the end. Very atmospheric it was too

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,Don Meixner
Date: 13 Apr 01 - 11:53 AM

Gasp! Another myth shattered, another God brought down. And I suppose typical Phil as well.

Thanks Ted.

Don

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: radriano
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 05:43 PM

You can do pretty well recording from the mixing board. I have some recording experience and I would say that the way you record has a lot to do with how the band works. My former band did a lot of three-part singing. Laying down instrumental backup worked fairly well when done individually but when it came to the vocals the only way it sounded right was when we all sang at the same time.

Good luck to you.

Richard

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: Tedham Porterhouse
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 05:21 PM

Don, I'm sorry to break your illusion, but "Phil Ochs In Concert" was not a live album. It was done in a studio with recorded applause to make it sound live. Good album, though. Better than the actual live albums of Phil: "Live In Vancouver" and "Gunfight at Carnegie Hall."

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 05:17 PM

And Stans, "Home in Halifax", and Garnet's "Summer Lightning", and Archie Fisher's "Off The Map"

As a matter of fact, can you think of a folkie who's live stuff isn't better that their studio recordings?

;-)

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: GUEST,Don Meixner
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 05:08 PM

Hi Ed,

It seems with all that effort you may aswell do a studio recording and invite in a small audience just for atmosphere. The beauty of the individual instruments and vocal mics as well as separate channels is that you can do significant post production and really clean up the recording. Again, to me, it seems that you may as well do a studio job.

If you go the route described, try and isolate the sound guy and engineer so they hear your feed and not the rebound of the room. The rebound will be there anyway but it won't confuse the techies.

I too like the idea of the live recording as to the studio effort. I realize that my favorite recordings by my favorite "Folk Musicians" are all live recordings. Stan Rogers "Between the Breaks", Tom Paxton "Troubador" Phil Ochs "In Concert", Doc and Merle, "Live". And many others. I am clueless as to how these were all staged and recorded. I do know that Tom Paxton was studioish and done before a guest audience so different takes could be done. One of my favorite studio recordings was done by John Hartford and friends called "Steam Powered Areoplane". Each song was done with one mic, in one take. Such is the skill of Hartford, Tut Taylor, Norman Blake,and Vassar Clemments (Clemmons?)

Ever tried just running a video camera for sound only in the room? Some place up out of the way so as to limit local noise but get the mix from the front end? Might be worth a try. Goodest luck

Don

Subject: RE: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 01:06 PM

oops, screwed that up (Maybe Clinton has a point).

Anyway, the first 5 channels would feed directly to individual ADATs and include lead vocal, lead guitar, recorder fiddle and bass. The next 5 channels would be for backup vocals and drum feeding to a subout into one ADAT channel, another drum and guitar (2 channels) to a sub and single ADAT and the remaing 4 channels foe a whistle, two guitars and yet another drum to a single sub and ADAT channel.

The plan is for whoever is singing lead to use the lead mic.

Anyone with experience doing "live" recordings?

Subject: Recording Live
From: UB Ed
Date: 12 Apr 01 - 12:57 PM

Greetings. I've checked the Supersearch, but only came up with some discussions about burning cds...

We play weekly (weakly) each Thursday night and are getting ready to make a cd (people keep asking). We believe our greatest appeal is for a "live" disc, so we seem to be wed to the concept of recording at the pub.

The pub is fantastic; owned by musicians with a high quality 16 channel board.

We plan on mixing the 16 channels down to an 8 track ADAT. Proposed channel assignment:

Lead Vocal 1

Lead Guitar 2

Recorder 3

Fiddle 4

Bass 5 Each of these would go directly to an ADAT channel back-up vox 1 6

back-up vox 2 7

back-up vox 3 8 Ed back-up vox 9 Henry back-up vox 10 Dan Drum 11 Dan Guitar 12 Jim whistle 13 Jim Guitar 1 14 Jim Guitar 2 15 Jim Drum 16