By

Brandon Drury

1
 Pre-Book Junk

Legal
© 2009 by RecordingReview.com, All Rights Reserved worldwide under the Berne
Convention. May not be copied or distributed without prior written permission.

Dear Killer Recorder,

Thanks for buying this piece of the Killer Home
Recording pie.

Creating Killer Home Recording has been the most

Brandon Drury: Destroyer of
worlds, debatably the best looking
guy of all time, and recording guy
come from we cook our food!)
ridiculous, hair-brained scheme I've ever concocted.
I'm assuming that if I would have spent the night in
jail for smashing in mailboxes when I was 17, I would
probably regret writing Killer Home Recording first,
mailbox facelifting second. I've never smashed a
mail box. So, #2 is a toss up between buying
Captain Ron on DVD or eating that big ol' piece of
Wasabi at the sushi bar at the Michael Wagener
Workshop. (How was I supposed to know? Where I

The idea of trying to cram everything I know about home recording into one series of books is
flat out insane. When you factor in to that the endless barrage of audio clips, Interrogations,
and illustrations, it's a wonder if I have any sanity left at all. In fact, I get extra quiet around
cops and social workers just because I never know when they may mistake me for the
Unibomber.

2
My goal with this entire series has been simple. I wanted to take a topic that is way harder
than it should be and make it infinitely easier. After reading Killer Home Recording, I don't
expect you to be winning any engineering awards over night. I don't have any Grammy
Awards yet! (Man, I'd love to do what Pearl Jam did!) I do expect you to have a dramatically
clearer understanding of what it is this whole recording thing is all about. We will drastically
reduce and maybe even eliminate those feelings of indecision and second guessing that
plague us home recorders and we will exponentially improve your results in audio land.

I've tried my best to be a good boy in this thing. Like an 8-year old boy in church, I think I've
managed to be a little naughty, but in the end I realize that I still have to answer to a higher
authority: Dad's belt! (Yup, God always seemed to forgive a little faster than the sting on my
future God's gift to women.) In this case, I guess you are Dad (or God) and you are armed
and dangerous.

My general philosophy is if you can't offend 'em, befriend 'em. So if I can make it through
Killer Home Recording without feeling appalled shoot me an email and I'll owe you a beer.

Good luck!

Brandon Drury
http://www.recordingreview.com

3
The Killer Home Recording System

Killer Home Recording: Setting Up is just part #1 in my 13-part Killer Home Recording series.
I decided to give it away because I figured you should haven't to go through the headaches of
choosing you gear and actually getting it to run when you could be going through the
headaches of actually getting the sounds in your head coming out of the monitors.

So, enjoy the "boring book" of the series.

4
Killer Home Recording Owner Comments

"My parents paid $25,000 for me to go to Media Techs Dallas Sound Lab and I can
honestly say I have learned more from your book than I have learned collectively from
everything else."

------ Trey Wagnor ------

"I've read all the usual recording books (Mixing Engineer's Handbook, Mixing With
Your Mind, The Art of Mixing, Home Recording for Dummies etc.) and
Killer Home Recording slays them."

-----Jeff http://www.mountainmirrors.com

"You've already saved me four grand!"

------ Nate Thorpe - -

"This is ridiculously bad-ass! ....What a wealth of valuable, no-nonsense, no bullshit

information contained in this system."

------ Metaltyme ------

"I don't think their could be anything more helpful to your engineering skills then
getting KHR. If a neumann mic costs you $2000, and cost was based on how much it

5
will improve your sound, this pdf book should cost $250,000"

------ Jeremyk23 ------

More Info
There many, many more user comments and tons of info on what is included in the complete
Killer Home Recording package at http://www.recordingreview.com/killerhomerecording/

6
About RecordingReview.com
I started RecordingReview.com
because I felt there was no good
place for home recorders to get help.

It seemed the guys that dominated the home recording communities weren't recording at
home at all. They were tired, bitter old pros who wanted to tell everyone to simply throw
money at their problems. It's clear they weren't willing to respect the beginners enough to
give them the attention they required. (“Newbie” became a derogatory term. Why?) I think
maybe they themselves had forgotten just how difficult it was for them to start recording.

So RecordingReview.com is all about helping the beginner make the most bad ass recordings
they could possibly make. Maybe you don't have a $3,000,000 room or a $100,000 console.
So what! RecordingReview.com is all about you and I and all of our peers coming together to
give the big dogs a run for their money.

A surprising result was we ended up attracting way more than just beginners! We have a
strong member base of very experienced individuals who run the gamut from beginners to
war-hardened veterans who just happen to be very generous with their time.

At RecordingReview.com beginners and masters come together in ways I've never seen in
another recording forum. We work together to test various new mic placements, new gear,
and new mixing techniques. The idea is to unravel the secrets of our favorite recordings one
by one as we all progress to be more effective recording humans together.

Killer Home Recording is one gigantic leap towards fulfilling those original goals I had back
when I started RecordingReview.com back in 2005.

You are always welcome to take part in the most friendly, down to Earth recording
forum on the planet. RecordingReview.com

7
This Is Not Free!
Okay, maybe it's a little free! I didn't charge you for it up front.

I never intended for "Killer Home Recording: Setting Up", to be free. It was meant to be a kick
ass system that was well worth whatever price tag I put on it.

After some careful debating, I've decided that this is my way of buying you a beer. When
you are 100% sure I'm not in the sex slave industry maybe then you'll reciprocate....but no
pressure.

So here you go. Hopefully I save you a few thousand bucks and a few thousand headaches,
but like some kind of mafia Godfather, I may need you to do me a favor involving a large debt
and a shovel.

Help Me Proofread!

If you find any errors in Killer Home Recording, it would do me a HUGE favor if you could
make a list of them and email them to me (brandon@recordingreview.com) for correction. I
replaced all my grammar knowledge with beer and recording knowledge so a little help with
that will go a LONG way!

The Fastest Way to Recording Paradise

In this discussion of paradise I'll omit any references to cash, weather, or mind powers over
the opposite sex. I'm taking the more reasonable route to paradise. I'm assuming that
paradise is the ability to sit down and record our music without feeling like we are fighting a
battle each and every time. This little section is intended for people wearing their “musician
hat” while recording, but I guess it applies to the audio engineering head covering as well.

8
For most of you it appears that the 30 foot monster, known as “Learning Curve” in these
parts, stands between you and your ability to just plop down in a chair, grab a
weapon/instrument , and go to town making/recording your tunes. When you've got a
screaming baby, a screaming wife, and a screaming boss it's usually tough to make time to
toss down screaming guitar. So when you get 20 minutes to have some fun, you need to be
able to jump right in and rock on your recording rig at will.

What No One Is Telling You!

The problem with home recording is you can't play nice with Learning Curve. It doesn't work.
You can not injure her. She will simply heal up by the next time and take her vengeance out
on you even worse the next time. Of course, you can try to run past Learning Curve. But that
usually means you have to run four miles out of your way. I'm not sure about you, but I'm not
in the shape I once was. By the time I run that far, I'm too tired (if not dead) and I have too
little time to actually lay down my noise. Even worse, I remember how terrible that
experience was and avoid the whole mess simply because I don't want to have to deal with
Learning Curve next time.

The Secret to Home Recording Success

The ONLY way to achieve the big goal of being able to record your music at the drop of a
dime is to kill the stupid monster. Yes, cut her throat, poison her, or get more creative and
implement some of the tactics in the movie “Seven”. Once she is dead, she's gone. She
can't come back. Once you've slayed the beast you can walk happily with peace of mind
knowing that you can make music faster than you can make a cup of coffee.

My Paradise

Several months ago a gang of former hoodlum clients (generally known as a “band” to
uninformed laymen) conned me into joining their ruckus making adventure club. So now I try
to write a new noise piece at least three times a week on my guitar. I don't have to worry

9
about the Learning Curve monster because I killed her years ago. In fact, taking the time to
grab the damn guitar cable and plug it in is way more annoying than the recording rig.
(Seriously!)

Note: In this setting I am NOT in engineer mode. The last thing I'm thinking about is
compressors, equalizers, and all that junk. I don't want to deal with any of it. I'm in music
mode and I just want to play guitar and make noise.

So I fire up Cubase, go to the “Recent Projects” list, and select “Practice”. It immediately
opens Superior Drummer 2.0, EZ Player (a drum loop library thing), and three tracks all
loaded with my emulator of choice (usually Guitar Rig or Amplitube). This literally takes eight
seconds. That means in less than ten seconds I'm hearing my guitar through my monitors. I
often have a drum loop left over from last time. So I can hit play and be rocking right off the
bat. I just have to figure out what I want to play and hit record. When I'm happy with one
guitar part, I switch to the next track, arm it, unarm the other track, and hit play again. It's
literally that easy once you've killed Learning Curve.

How to Kill Learning Curve

The best way to kill Learning Curve is to watch Sioux Indians hunt a buffalo. The Sioux
mainly used a bow and arrow. A thin thrown stick with a rock on it is not going to take down a
one-ton mammal. You've got to use an all-out, Blitzkrieg-style assault to bring the beast
down. They didn't piddly-wink around.

So if you are serious about obtaining recording paradise, you simply need to invest a big ole'
army of time all at once, read through the Getting Started manual (not the actual 1,000 page
manual), and follow the tutorials. By scheduling one Saturday where you can get a running
start and slam Learning Curve as hard as possible, you may be able to knock her down and
kill her.

10
Conclusion

I seriously believe that those who FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS (even if you don't tell your
football buddies), go through the tutorials, and dedicate a Saturday to this task will be 90% of
the way there. They just need to follow up the next day by recording a song or two. That's it!
In a five hour period you can have your recording paradise. Will you know everything about
your recording setup? Absolutely not! I'm using a four year old version of Cubase right now
and I'm sure I only know how to use 13% of it. That's all I need. When I need an advanced
feature, I open the giant manual, do a search, and in two minutes I usually have that feature
down.

The alternative is throwing rocks at Learning Curve on a daily basis and never getting to the
point where you can actually make music. Life is too short!

11
Table of Contents

Pre-Book Junk......................................................................................................2
Legal.......................................................................................................................................2
Dear Killer Recorder,..............................................................................................................2
The Killer Home Recording System.......................................................................................4
Killer Home Recording Owner Comments.............................................................................5
More Info ................................................................................................................................6
About RecordingReview.com.................................................................................................7
This Is Not Free!.....................................................................................................................8
Help Me Proofread!.................................................................................................................8
The Fastest Way to Recording Paradise................................................................................8

Standalone Recorders Vs Computer Recording................................................20

Benefits of Standalone Recorders........................................................................................20
Drawbacks of Standalone Recorders...................................................................................21
Benefits of Computers For Recording..................................................................................23
Drawbacks of Computers For Recording.............................................................................28
Which sounds better? A standalone box or a properly setup computer recording rig? .....29
Which is better for me? A standalone box or a properly setup computer recording rig? ...30
Why I Consider Standalone Recorders To Be More Complicated.......................................32
All Drum “Machines” Are Not Created Equal........................................................................35
Reasons I Use Recording Software.....................................................................................35
Q: What About Digital Recorders That Function Like Tape Machines?...............................37
Before You Buy.....................................................................................................................41
Popular Options....................................................................................................................42

Overview Of The Computer Recording Process................................................44

Routing: Getting Started.......................................................................................................46
Recording Software Routing.................................................................................................55

Beginner Recording Gear Stuff..........................................................................57

Electric Guitar Recording Gear.............................................................................................57
Bass Recording Gear...........................................................................................................59
Drum Recording Gear...........................................................................................................60
Microphone Selection...........................................................................................................64
Mics I've Used And I Recommend Checking Out.................................................................67
One Mic Guys.......................................................................................................................73
Mic Stands ...........................................................................................................................74
Speaker Stands....................................................................................................................75

12
 Headphone Amps.................................................................................................................76
Headphones.........................................................................................................................76
Acoustic Treatment...............................................................................................................77
Studio Monitors.....................................................................................................................78
MIDI Production Gear...........................................................................................................79
An Overemphasis On High-End Gear..................................................................................81
Q: Do I Need A Mixer For Home Recording?.......................................................................83
Q: Do I Need A Pop Filter?...................................................................................................87
Q: Do I Need Expensive High End Analog To Digital Converters?......................................87
Q: Do I Need Expensive High End Preamps?......................................................................88
Q: Will A Tube Preamp Smoke My Stock Audio Interface Preamp?....................................90
Will The Band Notice High End Preamps?...........................................................................91
Q: I have a friend who insists on doing everything in analog. Should I go this route?.......93
Q: Do I Need A Control Surface?..........................................................................................95
What do you think of USB microphones?.............................................................................98
Monitoring For Performers....................................................................................................99
Studio Monitors: Pair Or Single Speaker?..........................................................................104
Better Instruments vs Better Recording Gear....................................................................105
Things You Don't Know You Need......................................................................................106
Things Not To Buy Yet.........................................................................................................112
X-Red Niner - Secret Recording Technology......................................................................112
How To Break Recording Gear...........................................................................................114

Audio Interfaces ..............................................................................................117

Audio Interface Features....................................................................................................121
Home Recording Soundcard Wizard..................................................................................129
Q: Which audio interface sounds the best?........................................................................129
Q: Do I need a soundcard and an audio interface?..........................................................130
Q: I want to record my entire band live. How do I add more inputs?................................131
Q: Why does my audio interface only have 8 inputs even though it advertises much more?
............................................................................................................................................131
Are the preamps in an audio interface as good as the preamps in a mixer?.....................132
Is Firewire better than USB 2.0?........................................................................................132
Before You Buy...................................................................................................................133
Mixers bundled with audio interfaces.................................................................................133
Q: I was thinking of getting X audio interface, but just a few hours ago I read someone had
a problem with it. Should I get something else?................................................................134

Recording Software..........................................................................................136
Placing Too Much Stock In Recording Software................................................................136
Recording Software All Sounds The Same .......................................................................137
No Bad Recording Software...............................................................................................137
Powerful Recording Software.............................................................................................138
The Recording Software Commitment...............................................................................139

13
 Q:I plan on using crappy software now, but upgrading later. Is this a good idea?............142
Q: What's the best software?..............................................................................................145
Features To Look For In Recording Software.....................................................................145
Features You Won't Look For.............................................................................................150
Wav Editor vs DAW............................................................................................................151
Q: What do you think about free software?........................................................................151
Q: Will my recording software work with my audio interface?............................................152
You Don't Need Mp3 Conversion In Your Recording Software..........................................152
So You've Just About Given Up On X Recording Software?..............................................153
Getting Started: Tutorial vs Manual....................................................................................153

Mac vs PC .......................................................................................................155
Advantages of Mac.............................................................................................................155
Advantages of PCs.............................................................................................................155
Computer Dependent Gear................................................................................................156
Q: Aren't Macs More Reliable Than Windows Computers?...............................................157
Q: Aren't Macs Better For Recording?................................................................................157
Q: Brandon, What do you recommend? Mac or PC?.........................................................158
You Don't Really Record With The Operating System.......................................................158
Conclusion..........................................................................................................................159

PC Computer Stuff...........................................................................................159
Calm Down!........................................................................................................................160
Computer Guts...................................................................................................................160
Recording Computer Demands..........................................................................................164
Q: Should I update my operating system?.........................................................................167
Q: What Is A Chipset?.........................................................................................................168
Q: Should I Go With AMD or an Intel Processor?.............................................................170
Q: What if my computer doesn't come with USB 2.0 or Firewire?.....................................171
Quad Core Computer Power..............................................................................................172
Keeping A Recording Computer Quiet...............................................................................174
UPS (Uninterrupted Power Supply)....................................................................................181
Laptop Recording Considerations......................................................................................182

Computer Performance Optimization...............................................................184

Dux nLited XP Pro .............................................................................................................184
Avoid The Problem In The First Place ...............................................................................184
Make A Carbon Copy Backup Of Your Operating System.................................................187
Stick with Good Ole, Reliable, Stable Operating System...................................................188
Use Multiple Hard Drives ...................................................................................................189
7200 RPM, 10k RPM, and 15k RPM Hard Drives..............................................................190
Optimize The Operating System........................................................................................190
Should I Use Internet On My Recording Computer?..........................................................191

14
 How Much Should I Spend On a Recording Computer?....................................................192
Take A Look At Servers.......................................................................................................194
How Much Computer Power Do I Need?...........................................................................195
There Is Always A Way Out................................................................................................196
32-bit vs. 64-bit Operating Systems...................................................................................199
Where To Get Your Recording Computer...........................................................................199
Incompatible Audio Interfaces............................................................................................201

Cables..............................................................................................................202
Different Types Of Cables...................................................................................................202
Should I Pay Top Dollar For High End Cables?.................................................................206
Really, Really Bad Cables..................................................................................................207
Short vs. Long Cables XLR................................................................................................208
Q: Should I Use Balanced (TRS or XLR) Cables Via Unbalanced Connections?............208

Beginner Studio Construction...........................................................................210

Q: Do I Need A Vocal Booth?.............................................................................................210
Q: Should I Begin Studio Construction?.............................................................................212
The Robo Basics of Soundproofing....................................................................................216
Avoiding Electrical Noise....................................................................................................222
How Pretty Should My Studio Be?.....................................................................................225
Form Is Function.................................................................................................................226
Gobo Construction..............................................................................................................227

Ideas For The Ultra-Broke Recorder................................................................230

Q: Do I really need a condenser mic?................................................................................230
Q: Can I use my stock soundcard?....................................................................................231
Q: Do I really need studio monitors?.................................................................................232
Q: Do I really need a pop filter?..........................................................................................232
Maxing Out An Old Computer.............................................................................................233
Buy Used Gear When Possible..........................................................................................234
Never Pay Interest Unless It's Profitable To Do So............................................................235
Always Have A Plan When Buying Gear............................................................................236
Be Skeptical Of Outsider Advice.........................................................................................237
You Will Never Be Satisfied................................................................................................237
Get A Used Standalone Recorder......................................................................................238
Pirated Recording Software: Why I Don't Use It................................................................239

Troubleshooting................................................................................................242
Signal Flow.........................................................................................................................242
Computer Troubleshooting.................................................................................................243
Q: It seems that all seven tracks are recording the same thing? Why?...........................244

15
 Q: I Can't Hear Any Audio On Playback? Why?...............................................................245
Q: No Audio Recording At All! Why?.................................................................................246
Audio Only Records On One Side......................................................................................249
MIDI Makes No Sound.......................................................................................................249
Troubleshooting Clicks and Pops.......................................................................................250
Clicks and Pops With A Single Track..................................................................................250
Clicks And Pops With Multiple Tracks................................................................................256
Clicks and Pops With Samples...........................................................................................258

MIDI..................................................................................................................260
An Explanation of MIDI.......................................................................................................260
The New Era Of MIDI.........................................................................................................260
MIDI Doesn't Have To Be “Stiff”..........................................................................................262
What Is A MIDI Sequencer?...............................................................................................263
What Is A Synthesizer?.......................................................................................................264
What Is A Sampler?............................................................................................................265
Loops..................................................................................................................................266
MIDI Is Simple....................................................................................................................269
The Basics Of MIDI Routing...............................................................................................269
MIDI Messages...................................................................................................................273
Potential MIDI Problems.....................................................................................................275
Drum Programming............................................................................................................276
So which method of drum programming should you use? ...............................................279
My Basic Approach To Mouse Drum Programming...........................................................285
Q: Drum Samples: Are you worried about songs losing their individuality?.......................292
Q: Do you have to think like a drummer to program great MIDI drums?...........................294
Q: How Do I "Convert" MIDI To Wav.................................................................................295

Glossary...........................................................................................................298
A/D Converter ...................................................................................................................298
Absorption Coefficients.......................................................................................................298
Analog Inputs......................................................................................................................298
Anechoic Chamber.............................................................................................................299
Arming.................................................................................................................................299
Arrangement ......................................................................................................................299
ATA......................................................................................................................................300
Audio Interface....................................................................................................................300
Automatic Delay Compensation.........................................................................................301
Autotune..............................................................................................................................302
Aux Send............................................................................................................................302
Axis.....................................................................................................................................302
Bandwidth...........................................................................................................................303
Bass Traps..........................................................................................................................303
Bleed ..................................................................................................................................304

16
Boost...................................................................................................................................304
Bounce................................................................................................................................304
Breakout Box......................................................................................................................304
Bus......................................................................................................................................305
Cardioid...............................................................................................................................305
Chipset................................................................................................................................306
Clipping...............................................................................................................................306
Clock...................................................................................................................................306
Chorus................................................................................................................................306
Comb Filtering....................................................................................................................306
Condenser Microphone......................................................................................................307
Control Room......................................................................................................................307
Converter............................................................................................................................308
Convolution Reverb............................................................................................................308
Copying and Pasting...........................................................................................................308
Cut......................................................................................................................................309
D/A Converter ...................................................................................................................309
DAW....................................................................................................................................309
Decca Tree.........................................................................................................................309
Delay...................................................................................................................................309
Drivers.................................................................................................................................309
DI........................................................................................................................................310
Digital Inputs.......................................................................................................................310
Direct Monitoring.................................................................................................................310
Dry.......................................................................................................................................311
Dual Boot............................................................................................................................311
Ducking...............................................................................................................................312
Dynamic Microphone..........................................................................................................312
Early Reflections.................................................................................................................312
Feedback............................................................................................................................312
Flutter Echo........................................................................................................................313
Freezing..............................................................................................................................313
Figure 8...............................................................................................................................313
Filter....................................................................................................................................314
Firewire...............................................................................................................................314
Formant...............................................................................................................................314
Fundamental Frequency.....................................................................................................315
Gain-Based Effects.............................................................................................................315
Gate....................................................................................................................................315
General MIDI (GM) ............................................................................................................316
Gobo...................................................................................................................................316
Golden Ratio.......................................................................................................................317
Harmonic Content...............................................................................................................317
Headroom ..........................................................................................................................318
High-Pass Filter .................................................................................................................319
Hi-Z Inputs..........................................................................................................................319
IEEE 1394 ..........................................................................................................................319

17
Impedance..........................................................................................................................319
In The Box...........................................................................................................................320
Integrated Audio..................................................................................................................320
Keying.................................................................................................................................320
Latency...............................................................................................................................321
Low-Pass Filter ..................................................................................................................321
Line Level............................................................................................................................321
Map.....................................................................................................................................321
Mastering............................................................................................................................321
Microphone.........................................................................................................................322
Microphone Preamp...........................................................................................................322
Mixing..................................................................................................................................322
MIDI....................................................................................................................................323
MIDI Controller....................................................................................................................323
Mixing Console...................................................................................................................323
Mono Compatibility.............................................................................................................323
Motherboard.......................................................................................................................324
mp3.....................................................................................................................................324
Multi-track Recording..........................................................................................................324
Noise Gate..........................................................................................................................325
Null......................................................................................................................................325
Omnidirectional...................................................................................................................325
ORTF..................................................................................................................................326
Overclocking.......................................................................................................................326
Overdub..............................................................................................................................326
Pad (microphone) ..............................................................................................................326
Pad (synth).........................................................................................................................327
Panning Law.......................................................................................................................327
Parallel Compression..........................................................................................................327
Parametric EQ....................................................................................................................328
PCI cards............................................................................................................................328
Phantom Power..................................................................................................................329
Phase..................................................................................................................................329
Plugin..................................................................................................................................329
Polarity................................................................................................................................329
Pop Filter.............................................................................................................................330
Preamp ..............................................................................................................................330
Predelay..............................................................................................................................331
Printable CD-Rs..................................................................................................................331
Proximity Effect...................................................................................................................331
Punch In/Punch Out............................................................................................................331
Q.........................................................................................................................................332
Quantized Grid....................................................................................................................332
Reamp ...............................................................................................................................332
Reverb ...............................................................................................................................332
Reverb Time.......................................................................................................................333
Ribbon Microphone.............................................................................................................333

18
 RMS Loudness...................................................................................................................333
Robo...................................................................................................................................334
Roll Off ...............................................................................................................................334
Room..................................................................................................................................334
Room Mode .......................................................................................................................335
Room Node.........................................................................................................................335
RT 60 .................................................................................................................................335
RTAS ..................................................................................................................................335
Sampler...............................................................................................................................336
SATA...................................................................................................................................336
Sensitivity............................................................................................................................336
Sequencer..........................................................................................................................336
Shelf....................................................................................................................................337
Sibilance.............................................................................................................................337
Sidechain............................................................................................................................337
S/PDIF................................................................................................................................338
Staccato..............................................................................................................................338
Studio Monitors...................................................................................................................338
Track...................................................................................................................................338
Tracking..............................................................................................................................339
Transient.............................................................................................................................339
Virtual Instrument................................................................................................................339
Vocal Comping....................................................................................................................339
Voiceover............................................................................................................................339
VST.....................................................................................................................................340
VSTi ...................................................................................................................................340
wav File...............................................................................................................................340
Wordclock...........................................................................................................................340
X/Y Miking...........................................................................................................................341

Post-Book Junk................................................................................................342
In Review............................................................................................................................342
Still Have Questions?.........................................................................................................343
Feedback............................................................................................................................343
Tell Your Friends! I'll pay!...................................................................................................343
The Killer Home Recording System...................................................................................344

19
 Standalone Recorders Vs Computer Recording

The debate over standalone boxes vs. computers for recording has come up time and time
again on the RecordingReview.com forum. While there is no standalone recorder currently
that can pull off everything that I can do with my PC rig, only you can decide if a computer or
standalone recorder is right for your needs. For all practical purposes, there is no reason to
expect any difference in sound quality between the two. The difference lies only in features
and possibilities.

Benefits of Standalone Recorders

Fewer links in the chain

While the components are more or less the same between computer recording and
standalone boxes, the standalone recorders have everything you need inside one little
machine. This means you don't have to think about the way the various components in the
“chain” are interacting. There are no internal conflicts because the designers have already
taken care of that.

Portable

It's easy to carry a standalone box to your buddy's house.

Less Emphasis On The Eyes

Because there is less to look at, you are more inclined to use your ears while mixing. When
the eyes do the mixing, the results can suffer, so it's usually preferred to keep them out of the
equation whenever possible.

20
All Bare Essentials Are Included

A big advantage of the standalone recorders is the fact that you can pick something and be
done with it. You don't have to wonder if there is a better reverb or EQ out there because
very few standalone recorders have the ability to add third party plugins anyway. There is
something about this finality that can be extremely liberating. You never have to worry about
being bed/wallet stricken with Gear Acquisition Syndrome. You'll never stress about how
much computer processing you are using or how much hard drive space you have left. You
simply have a device to record music. It either works or it doesn't.

Note: Some high end standalone recorders do have these expansion capabilities.

Drawbacks of Standalone Recorders

All Or Nothing

Either a standalone recorder works or it doesn't. You can't simply replace a component if
something goes wrong. If the unit decides not to work, you either get it fixed or use it as a
paperweight. Getting it fixed is usually going to mean shipping the unit to a manufacturer.
This probably isn't something the computer whiz down the street can solve.

You Get What You Get

Standalone boxes are “fixed” in that you get what they give you. Because of the “All Or
Nothing” concept, most standalone boxes don't allow you to upgrade easily. For example:

If you decide that you need 20 inputs to record a live band and your recorder only has 8,
there is nothing you can do beyond upgrading to a larger standalone recorder. Even if you
were to borrow some gear to record these 20 simultaneous inputs, odds are that you won't be

21
able to get these tracks in sync without tremendous hassle. You'll be forced to use some
other system for the mixing process.

Most standalone recorders do not give you the option of using different effects plugins. You
certainly don't have access to popular plugin formats like VST, which have a huge base of
developers that are practically giving them away for free. I consider this a huge drag
because when I mix I like to use specific compressors and reverbs for specific situations.

In most cases, you are very limited in terms of MIDI sequencing. Few people sequence
within their standalone recorders. Even if yours does come with a MIDI sequencer, you don't
have many options for adding new synths and samplers. Of course, a person could go with
hardware synths and samplers, but this is an old school route that few people are taking
today. I like the idea that I can fire up my software sampler and add string parts that sound
real (because they are real!) to my tunes in Cubase. If I don't like those string parts, I can
purchase “better” string samples easily.

Complicated To Learn

There are quite a few features, functions, and possibilities that most people don't think about
when purchasing a recording system. Because of their limited real estate, many
manufacturers of standalone boxes have chosen to make fewer buttons do more things.

Learning to perform some of these tasks can make a standalone unit extremely complicated.
For me personally, learning to setup a computer is much easier than trying to understand the
buttons in a standalone recorder. I would rather deal with a handful of issues on a computer
than have to memorize pressing 2nd, Shift, Option+Rewind to get to the beginning of the
song. Maybe remembering 2nd, Shift, Option+Rewind isn't a big deal, however, it's one thing
to use a system that has a learning curve, but dealing with a machine that fights you in the
heat of battle is another. It's counterproductive!

Obviously not all standalone recorders are created equal, so use your best judgment. It's
very possible that there are well-laid-out standalone recorders that make recording a breeze.

22
Just for the record, I've also seen computer systems where music making simply was not
possible because of the technical problems.

Note: If any of you are aware of any standalone recorders that are amazingly simple to use
send me an email and I'll make note of it.

Creative Tricks Are Limited

I've not heard of a person who was able to reverse a track, add reverb to it, and then reverse
it again. This was a common trick used on 80's snare drums or as an eerie vocal effect. Do
you need the ability to do cool tricks? That depends on your music.

Just be aware that silly tricks are limited in standalone boxes. Again, you get what you get.
Only you can decide if you want to add a bunch of weird noises to your songs, but I know
many of my clients certainly do. I'd be lost if I didn't have the computers ability to mangle
audio. Where do you draw the line between a silly trick and a creative possibility to enhance
your music? Good recording software is designed to give you total control over your music
regardless of the situation.

Do You Have Automation?

I'm guessing that there are some standalone recorders out there that have the ability to
automate volume levels. When I say “automate volume levels” I'm referring to the ability to
boost the volume of a syllable in a word and then drop the volume down on the next. This
may seem crazy to you now, but I consider it to be the single most important mixing tool
available. I would never purchase a standalone recorder that didn't have the ability to
automate.

Benefits of Computers For Recording

Computers Are Reliable

Today at RecordingReview.com, I was asked if computers are reliable enough for recording. I

23
imagine for older generations it's common to assume a computer is held together by duct
tape. Computers today are a reliable and efficient medium for recording music. However, if a
computer is being pushed really hard, it may buckle under the pressure and require a restart.
They aren't perfect, but if properly set up, you shouldn't have too much difficulty. We'll get
more into this as properly setting up a recording computer is a big deal!

With that said, if I had to use my girlfriend's computer for recording, I'd probably just quit and
get into motorcycles or fishing. The agony of using a disgustingly dirty operating system
would be tougher than climbing Everest.

Recording Software Is Easy To Use

While there is always a learning curve using anything, (a toilet, a car, Internet Explorer) once
a person understands their recording software, they find that it is very easy to use.

Some people get it into their head that operating recording software requires the type of
jargon they use in the control room of Apollo 13. You don't need Ed Harris physics equations
to select the input for a track, arm it, and hit the red button (the “record” button, not the
“destroy Earth” button)!

However, to a person who doesn't understand what “select input” or “arm the track” means,
these may appear to be complicated. All of this stuff is clearly explained in the "getting
started" guide of your favorite recording software and if you don't understand the computer's
lingo, just ask at the RecordingReview.com forum or check out the glossary here.

There can be aspects of learning your recording software that may not be obvious simply by
playing around. To some, this makes the recording software complicated. To me, this makes
the recording software powerful! This means they have a system in place to tackle some of
my crazy, creative ideas and all I have to do is take 3 seconds to read a paragraph in a
manual to understand how the software company has chosen to make my life easier.

24
Note: This is not limited to “crazy” ideas. This means they have a well thought out system for
handling common tasks as well that improve the efficiency of your workflow.

If a person tells you that a certain recording software is complicated, all they are really saying
is they never took the time to actually learn how to use the program as it was intended. We
have tens of thousands of members at RecordingReview.com who are better at using their
recording software than they are at cooking mac & cheese or driving a stick shift. So you can
do it!

Computer Recording Systems Are Modular

While there are more links in the chain that can go wrong, if something breaks or you decide
that you want to upgrade, you simply replace that one component. If you decide you need
more RAM, installing memory is a snap, literally. If your audio interface malfunctions, you can
simply send it back to the manufacturer or get a new one. If you need to upgrade from a 2
input to a 40 input audio interface, it's no big deal. In fact, upgrading to a full blown new
system isn't that big of a deal.

For example, just last night I ordered a brand new computer. I plan on using the exact same
audio interface, recording software, plugins, etc. Nothing should change other than the
performance of my system. All my projects should open up the same as they did before. I'm
not aware of any standalone recorder upgrades that can make this claim.

Expansion Is Easy

Expansion with a computer system is simple. If you decide that you need to put together a 40
input setup, it's possible to do if you get your hands on the right audio interfaces. I know of no
standalone, all-in-one recorder that allows for the recording of 40 simultaneous tracks.

Huge Assortment of Plugins

There are tons of plugins out there in a variety of formats and many of them are free. This
gives you quite a bit of flexibility in finding the right compressor or reverb for the job. Of
course, this only applies to people who find it necessary to use specific effects for specific

25
tasks. I definitely use certain plugins for specific tasks. I'd be lost if I was stuck with the stock
reverb in a standalone unit.

Laptops Are Portable

The ability to record music anywhere is very possible with a laptop recording rig. With a bus
powered audio interface you can make music on the beach.

Total Creative Control For Weird Stuff

• Reversing a track, putting delay on it, and then flipping it back takes seconds.

• Reducing the “ess” in a vocal track by a few dB without using a de-esser.

• Turning a plugin off and on quickly and automatically.

• Using the same plugin 8 times on the same track is an option. You are not limited to
using one compressor and one EQ in recording software. In my software of choice, I
can easily use 8 distortions in a row without a problem. Granted, I've never actually
used 8 distortions in a row, but can your standalone recorder do this?

Some of these are gimmicky tricks that may not interest you for more organic styles of music.
However, many of these features are used in every genre of music from folk to death metal.
An example of this is volume automation. You can automate just about anything with most
recording programs. We'll discuss that in great detail in Killer Home Recording: Murderous
Mixing.

Better Routing Than A Real Console

Advanced mixing techniques often require advanced routing. For example, it's common for
me to send the snare and kick drum to a bus where I aggressively compress. This technique,

26
known as parallel compression, allows me blend in a slammed-all-to-hell kick and snare drum
without affecting the original source. When I send a vocal to a delay, I often want that delay
to be fed to a reverb. In Cubase, I can route a delay on one bus into a reverb on an aux send
allowing me to create effects that wouldn't be possible otherwise. These kinds of advanced
mixing tricks aren't possible in most standalone recorders.

You Don't Need To Understand Computers To Record With A Computer

I don't think a strong understanding of computers is necessary to record music just as it is not
necessary to understand what is really going on in a standalone box. You definitely do not
need a computer science or electrical engineering degree to make great music at home!!

Later on I will walk you through the basics of the computer guts because I think it's very
important for a person recording music in the modern era to feel a little more comfortable
opening the lid to their computer.

Backing Up Data Is Easy

If I want to make a backup of a project I'm working on, it's as simple as copying and pasting
that project's folder onto a second hard drive. Done. If the band decides they want to keep
an archive of all tracks for use down the road, I simply drag that folder into my DVD burning
software and hit burn.

Easier To Get Help Online

If I encounter a problem with Windows and Cubase, the number of people online who use
both Windows and Cubase is huge. The same can be said for just about every recording
software and major operating system. Getting help for a specific hardware box from one
manufacturer puts you into a much smaller group and getting help for that one specific unit
can be very difficult.

Note: I've run the forum at RecordingReview.com for a long time now. The odds of
standalone recording questions to go unanswered is much greater than that of recording
software. This is just the nature of the beast. There are so many proprietary standalone

27
recorders out there that forces tend to get divided on a general recording website.

Drawbacks of Computers For Recording

More links in the chain

It can be a pain getting the audio interface, computer, and recording software all to work
together as a team. I've torn my hair out in agony several times over the years with this one.
If you follow the “Avoid The Problem In The First Place” section later on, your chances of
having problems are tremendously reduced. Once you get the problems weeded out, you'll
probably have a reliable system for years and years. In fact, you'll forget that you are
recording on a computer at all. You'll just sit down, and record.

Unfortunately, pretty much everyone has to go through a few mega-headaches before they
get their system working well. Once it's setup, life is good, but getting there can be a real
chore.

Desktops Are Not Exactly Portable

It is a pain to carry a desktop recording system to another location. The keyboard, monitor,
mouse and tower make setting up for location recording a real hassle. It's certainly not
impossible, but you are probably underestimating how time consuming it really is.

Relies On The Eyes

Unfortunately using a computer puts your brain into “visual” mode. This takes power away
from your ears and gives it to your eyes. This is handy when dealing with a member of the
opposite sex, but it's not so handy with mixing. When I think a mix is complete, I turn off the
computer monitors before I listen.

28
User Must Be Comfortable On A Computer

There are people who get nervous just sitting in front of a computer screen. I'm the exact
opposite, I get anxious when I'm not in front of a computer screen! (See “Revenge of the
Nerds”) I think that people who panic around computers are simply scared they are going to
break them: it's the same reason why I'm uneasy holding babies. A person has to go out of
their way to “break" a recording computer. I once dumped hot coffee on my computer's
motherboard, while it was running, and lived to tell about it without any damage (don't try this
one at home).

As much as I wish I could say "get over your fear already", if anyone said to me “Here, hold
my snake”, I'd have to punch them with a really long arm. Then again, computers don't have
venom.

Computers Can Have A Mind Of Their Own

Even when you have a strong understanding of how computers work, they sometimes get into
moods that makes them very hard to work with. I've had recording computers that have
worked extremely well for over two years that suddenly ran incredibly slow. This sort of thing
can happen. It's common for problems to occur while recording and editing audio because
the process is so damn demanding on a computer.

While I do feel that computers are a reliable tool in recording land, don't be surprised if some
day you find yourself needing more RAM and storage space to keep up with ever evolving
demands.

Which sounds better? A standalone box or a

properly setup computer recording rig?
To a person who doesn't need any of the added features and functionality of a computer
recording system, they sound the same. Plugging a microphone into the input of a
standalone box or computer audio interface should end up sounding identical.

29
However, this question can depends on how far you want to take it. Features definitely
impact sound. We've talked about the advantages of using specific plugins for specific tasks.
I love to layer drum samples beneath recorded drum tracks. I've never heard of any
standalone machines that are capable of this.

We could take it even further. In my recording software, it's no big deal for me to fire up a
software sampler and select super high quality samples of a string section. You can't get
samples like this in a hardware sampler and you certainly won't find them included in any
standalone recorder I am aware of.

Hardware samplers do not have enough RAM. (We'll discuss this later.) So if I wanted to use
my standalone recorder with a built in sequencer, I would not have access to the quality of
string sounds that I have available on a computer rig.

So, overall sound quality is the same in for standalone recorders and computer recording, but
the potential for enhancement is much greater in computer recordings.

Which is better for me? A standalone box or a

properly setup computer recording rig?
I can't answer that without lots of info and a strong understanding of your personal needs.
Generally speaking, as illustrated above, standalone boxes do not dig as deep into the
recording process as computers do. Standalone boxes are not nearly as useful for advanced
tactics that experienced engineers may need. A person who records strictly audio may do
fine with a standalone box.

For all practical purposes, one can compare recording on a standalone box to recording on a
tape machine. The big difference is in the mixing hardware. Mid-level and up recording
software can do pretty much anything the most expensive mixing consoles in the world can
do. You can't expect a $400 standalone recorder to have all the mixing features found on an
SSL J9000. It ain't gonna happen.

30
I can't recall anyone who switched to a computer for recording that ever went back to a
standalone rig. It's very easy to say “my needs are basic”, until you wish you could do this or
do that. The second you cross that imaginary line, you are officially limited. I only
recommend standalone recorders to people that have a incredible phobia of computers, or to
people who know their needs exactly and are 100% sure they will never step outside of that
box. (You know that guy who still drives his 1977 Ford pickup because there “ain't nothin'
wrong with it”? He will probably be quite content with his standalone recorder from here until
eternity.)

As for the “phobia”, if you pee your pants when you see a computer, I'd recommend a
standalone recorder. Other than that, you'll grow into it.

I've recorded quite a bit of music. I've worked with musicians who are very “organic” and
wouldn't be caught dead using synths, samples, and MIDI. Even when working with die-hard
purist musicians, there is always a point where they take advantage of some modern
computer feature that doesn't work on a linear recording method. For example, just the other
day I was mixing a band that recorded their entire album live in the studio with very few
overdubs. The singer came in a bit early on one part. He asked me if I could slide this note
back just a hair. It made all the difference in the world. This would not be realistic in the tape
machine world without pulling out the razor blade and it certainly would take more than the
2.5 seconds it took to achieve this. Will a standalone recorder be able to do this? Not sure.
I'd guess that some can, but which ones? Good luck figuring that out. I can't imagine even
the cheapest recording software out there not being able to do this.

In the end, without knowing your needs, it is difficult to guess which method is right for you.
Because computer recording is naturally more flexible, it's easier for me to recommend a
computer recording rig.

31
Why I Consider Standalone Recorders To Be More
Complicated
Simply put, I hate when I'm at a buddy's house and he brings out his standalone digital
recorder. I'm completely lost on these things. When I watch a person work on one of them,
it's clear to me just how much effort has to go into learning a proprietary system that simply
won't be of any use the second a person upgrades to the new model in a few years.

Seriously, just learn to fly a helicopter. It would be easier than some of the gadgets I've dealt
with!

It upsets me that a person has to work so hard to learn things that are second nature to me in
my recording software. They could have used that time to focus on improving their audio
engineering skills or writing better songs. I'm going to list a few reasons why I believe
standalone recorders are more complicated for me. You may not feel the same way and it's
very possible that I've only dealt with the most complicated of them all. I'm simply trying to
illustrate why I wouldn't want to go this route and warn you of what to watch out for.

Not Enough Buttons

I remember the big trend where remote controls for the home stereo, TV, etc, were using a
fraction of the buttons. I'm sure this made manufacturing the remote control easier and less
expensive, but it required the use of a 2nd and even 3rd button. In other words, one button
would actually have three different functions depending on if you hit the 2nd key, 3rd key, or
nothing before hitting that button. To me this is a total nightmare. I consider products like this
to be totally unfriendly to the user and a complete distraction when attempting to excite the
creative part of the brain.

I can't say that all standalone recorders have this 2nd and 3rd key problem, but enough have it
for me to make a point about it. I realize that there may be limited physical space on a
recorder for the layout of features and functions. It just so happens that my recording
software can cram in two zillion features, all hiding behind a menu or two. Even my budget

32
17” CRT screens are capable of offering plenty of visual real estate. Simply put, physical
space is not limited in a computer because we can simply open and close a window. I find
that this method of working is faster to learn and easier to use in the long run.

Not Enough Visual When Visual Is Important

I want to start by saying that it's easy to get sucked into putting way too much emphasis on
what you are seeing and not nearly enough on what you are hearing. Then again, there are
times when editing with your eyes can make the job easier. For example, let's say we
punched in a bass part and it sounds a little funny. In just about any recording software, I can
zoom in and quickly adjust the point in time where the new chunk of audio fade begins.
There are often cases where this is easier to accomplish using your eyes.

High gain electric guitars are always noisy. It's the nature of the beast that there is going to
be a little hiss when the guitar isn't playing. I like to go in and simply cut out all the parts in an
electric guitar track where no guitar is being played to avoid the distraction that this noise can
bring. It takes seconds when you can see it on a screen. A person could use a gate for this
same application, but there are a number of possible drawbacks. Being able to see the noise
makes it very easy to delete the bad stuff and keep the good stuff.

Again, not all standalone recorders will suffer from this problem. I know some standalone
recorders can use VGA computer monitors or even have detailed LCD screens themselves.
However, enough standalone recorders do have problems handling the visual from time to
time to make it an issue. Once again, this is the kind of feature that you won't think to ask
about until you have shelled out the big bucks for a standalone recorder. Hopefully, it's not
too late.

Simple Stuff Might Be A Pain

It's very common for the band to request an echo on specific words. Of course, this is easily
done by automating the level of an aux send feeding a delay. On an analog console, you'd
simply have to do the automation yourself by twisting a knob at a specific time. In Cubase,
it's as simple as clicking a button that says “read”, selecting the parameter that needs to be

33
automated (volume, effects on/off, aux sends, panning, and just about anything else you can
think of), and start drawing lines. I can also manually control the level real time with a mouse
on the fader and record this as an “automation performance” or I can use a hardware control
surface. This process is robo simple and can be accomplished in seconds.

Although I haven't used Logic, Digital Performer, or Pro Tools enough to be considered
anywhere near proficient, I'm confident that popping open the manual for 60 seconds will give
me all the info I need to effectively utilize automation in a mix. In my experience, some
standalone recorders don't even have this kind of functionality (AHHHH!). Again, there are
probably some standalone boxes that do hit the nail on the head, but which ones? While
automation is a big deal for just about every mixing engineer I know, it's not something that
you intuitively think of when you are trying to make sure that you don't waste a grand or three.

Frankly, I'm spoiled from using recording software for so long. Even the cheapest recording
software out there has made concessions things I am never going to need to do. In most
cases, recording software is complete overkill and way more powerful than anyone recording
at home really needs. However, there is a peace of mind knowing that those features are
there if or when I need them. I don't have that same confidence when working on a
standalone box.

After You Know How

A much bigger issue involves the workflow of the unit after you know how to use it. I'm sure
there are standalone recorders that are very fast and easy to use in the middle of an intense
session. Then again, I've seen the most simple things take way too long. You can't afford to
kill the vibe when the artists is firing on all cylinders.

Q: Does it require more money to get great results out a computer?

A: Hmm. This depends on what "good results" mean to you. Generally speaking, I'd say the
results are the same, your tracking requirements will dictate the price. If you need to record a

34
live band with 20 individual inputs, it's going to be expensive no matter what you do. If you
program drums and then overdub everything, a person could do it with a single channel audio
interface and a cheap (or even free) audio recording program. It just depends on your
individual needs.

I've encountered guys who have done “guerrilla” style recording on a ridiculously low budget
using computers, and have cranked out some amazing recordings. With that said, it's easy to
throw a bunch of money into the computer, recording software and audio interface. I think
people tend to purchase fancy toys they don't really need and this often leads to spending a
fortune on gear that doesn't offer any substantial improvements to their recordings.

So, I stick with my original claim that there are little fidelity differences between the two
regardless of price.

All Drum “Machines” Are Not Created Equal

I've noticed recently that many users have been disappointed by the drum sounds in their
standalone recorders. While I certainly haven't heard all standalone recorders, the ones that
I've come in direct contact with have been of the early 90's persuasion. CORNY!!!!

So if it is important to you to have a method for creating drums, you may want to take a
serious listen to the modern drum samples that are only available on the computer side of the
fence. The difference is staggering. I consider the “drum machines” I've heard in standalone
recorders to be 1/millionth as powerful when natural drum sounds are required. Most people
will be 10,000 times happier purchasing some of the modern samples out there.

Check them out here: http://forum.recordingreview.com/f21/realistic-drum-samples-891/

Reasons I Use Recording Software

This is a list of reasons that I prefer using computers to record. In no way am I claiming that

35
any one method is superior or that any of these features are necessary for you. I'm simply
giving reasons why computer based recording is the only method to meet my needs and
maybe this will help give some insight as to which direction you should go.

• I like being able to record three (or more) tracks of vocals and then quickly edit
together the best parts. I'm sure this can be done on most standalone recorders, but I
can't imagine doing it as quickly and easily as I do it in my recording software.
• I like being able to download new plugins and add them to a new mix. Different flavors
of reverb, delay, distortion, compression, etc, add to the possibilities.
• I like samplers:
◦ I always have access to pro sounding drums using samples from Superior
Drummer, Steven Slate Drums, or BFD.
◦ If I really need an orchestra, I've got it.
◦ If there is something I don't have, I could order it in five minutes.
• I like 3rd party synths – Just like with plugins, the expandability of a computer is pretty
much infinite.
• I like that I didn't learn a proprietary system on a standalone box – One could argue
that I did have to learn proprietary software, but I'm confident that when I finally get
around to upgrading, Cubase will not have changed that much. As far as that goes, I
can upgrade my entire computer and stick with my current software for years to come.
• I like that I rarely have trouble getting my questions answered in regard to my
recording software. The user base for the major software manufacturers is so large
that I feel like I'm much more likely to get my questions answered than with standalone
recorders.
• I like that I can record MIDI triggers and mics on drums at the same time. Not all
standalone recorders have a MIDI sequencer.
• I like the fact that if one component breaks my entire recording rig isn't dead.
• I like how easy it is to backup files on a PC.
• I like the fact that I can easily burn all individual tracks of an album to a DVD or two so
I can mix later.

36
 • I like how much computer power I can get for a very low price.
• I like knowing that in three years I will have dramatically more recording power than I
do now.
• I like unlimited track counts.
• I like having excellent routing possibilities. With my current setup I can give out 5
individual stereo mixes with zero latency. With a few upgrades, I could get that number
up to 9.

I answer way too many threads at the RecordingReview.com where users of standalone
recorders can't figure out how to get their tracks into their computer! Way too many people
who own standalone recorders try to come up with some kind of hybrid method to mix
computers and standalone recorders.

Q: What About Digital Recorders That Function Like

Tape Machines?
A: I had this section mostly wrapped up until I was
asked a fairly unique question on the forum recently.
The dude had been using the old school ADATs (that
record digital data on VCR tapes), had plenty of analog
gear and really had no need for the additional features
offered by recording software. He didn't need fancy
editing. He didn't use MIDI. He simply wanted to be

Here's an ADAT Recorder able to record his music in a natural way.

He was under the impression that computer recording somehow sounded better than straight
to hard disk type recording (without the computer). His situation was unique in that his music
simply did not need the fancy editing features, fancy MIDI features, or any of the modern
features we often debate about and he had already purchased the expensive analog

37
hardware for mixing.

Some people live in fear of being “left behind” in the technological revolution. I read in a
recent issue of Tape Op that a band recorded an album on the old wax cylinders invented by
Thomas Edison. If an album can be made on wax cylinders after the year 2000, I'm confident
that analog tape and non-computer recording methods will be around for a long time.

You may wonder what the difference is between a standalone digital recorder box and the
tape style digital recorders I'm referring to now. The tape style digital recorders do nothing
but record and play back audio on individual tracks just like tape machines. They look very
similar to the old ADATs but now use hard drives. They have very few other features other
than stop, rewind, and record. You arm a given track for recording by pressing a button. It
records when you hit the red button. That's pretty much it.

In order to use these types of recorders you need a mixer, plenty of hardware EQ's,
compressors, reverbs, and any other effects you plan to use must also be outboard. Tape-
style recorders have zero effects, zero processing ability, and do not even offer a way to
control volume. There is no “saving” a mix for complete recall later unless you have a
retardedly expensive high-end console that is equipped with such a feature.

The benefits of working with this kind of system are more an issue of
philosophy:

• Some people are happier working on a real mixer / console with real faders. (Of
course, you can drop a grand to get a control surface that does this with computer
recording).
• Some people hate the computer mouse with a passion. A tape-style digital recorder
uses no conventional computer and therefore requires no mouse.
• There are some big benefits to not using your eyes to record music.
• Some people actually consider being limited to X number of tracks beneficial (I
generally agree)

38
 • All ins and outs can be used at the same time.

There are some disadvantages of tape style recording.

Price

While a tape style digital recorder doesn't seem to cost much more than a high end audio
interface and recording software, you must factor in the power of all the EQs, delays, reverbs,
compressors, and other plugins within a computer recording rig. Purchasing outboard gear
can get extremely expensive compared to how a $1,000 plugin package could handle all your
needs for years to come. If you buy a compressor plugin for $200, you can use it on every
track in your mix if you feel like it (as long as your computer can handle it). However, you can
only use a hardware compressor ($500-5,000) on one single track during mixing.

You can do the math. For a 24 channel mixer, 10-15 compressors, 10-15 outboard EQ
channels, 4 reverbs, 2 delays, a patchbay, and a ton of cabling you are going to be blowing
your kid's college money on something that is only marginally better than strippers and coke.
Software can do all of this for a geometrically smaller price.

Recall

Recalling a mix is often impossible for any mixing console a typical home recording human
can afford (digital consoles are an exception). This means you must finish the mix of one
song before moving to the next one. I personally prefer a few “first drafts” for a handful of
songs before committing to a mix. It's very rare that I get a mix exactly how I want it without
going back and making changes. This is huge for home recording dudes/chicks who may not
have accurate monitoring conditions. I would have been completely lost for years and years
of recording if I didn't have the ability to quickly and easily open up a mix to make subtle
changes.

It's also nice to be able to switch to programming some techno or orchestra thing and take a

39
break from a bluegrass mix. Being able to switch gears is virtually impossible with the tape
machine method.

Backups

Believe it or not, Windows does make some things easier in our lives. Backing up is as
simple as copying a folder from one hard drive to another. It takes seconds to initiate the
process. I'm not sure how long it would take on a tape style digital recorder or if all of them
can backup their data.

Sampling

A person would need some kind of external MIDI sequencer that was synced up to the tape
style digital recorder in order to use synths and samplers. In this case, hardware samplers are
often limited when compared to software samplers of today. So if a person needed powerful
sampling, they'd have to use a computer for that. While a person could certainly use a
computer sampler in a tape machine style studio, it would require a computer and mouse (in
addition the audio interface). This kind of nullifies the benefits of avoiding the computer.

Destructive Punch-Ins

I'm sure this has been taken care on most modern tape-style digital recorders, but the
Vietnam War killed my infatuation with blind faith. In the old days of tape, if a singer decided
they wanted to fix a word, they either had to record over it or record it to another track. If you
are considering going this route, make sure to ask about destructive punch-ins before
purchasing a tape-style recorder. Then again, some purists may even want this. I can see it
having its advantages.

Conclusion

Overall, the computer is just more effective and efficient for me. Because I build computers

40
frequently and have recorded with them for years, I'm very comfortable working with them. If I
purchased a Mackie or Alesis tape style digital recorder and I had a technical problem, I'm not
sure where I would even start. I have a feeling it would get scary and expensive. Though the
tape machine style of recorder isn't right for me, it is almost right for me. I'd love to make a
recording with my ears only. I like the idea of having a real console in addition to the mouse.
I don't like the idea of paying for it.

The price of hardware and lack of instant recall would have a very negative effect on the way
I work. Many bands would miss the advanced editing features that I employ with my Cubase
rig.

If I had $100k to throw away, I would consider going the tape machine route. Then again, I
would still need a rig for programming my dumb techno tunes. There would be times when I
would want to take advantage of specific features that are only possible within the computer.
This is when things get unnecessarily complicated. So maybe I'm better off just sticking to
what I have!

Before You Buy

If you've decided that a standalone recorder is right for you, there are specific features that
you need to look out for when selecting one. Make sure to ask around and do the research
ahead of time. Here are a few keywords to look for:

Simultaneous Inputs

A recorder may have 32 tracks, but you may only get to record on 8 or 10 of them at the same
time.

Preamps

A recorder may only contain mic preamps for a limited number of channels. It's easy to inflate
these numbers, similar to how some analog mixers have 16 channels but only 12 contain mic
preamps. The other four may be line-level only.

41
MIDI

Not all standalone recorders have a MIDI sequencer. That's only part of it. You need to find
out if the standalone recorder has any synths or samples included. It may only be the
sequencer. What quality are those synths or samples? Are they going to sound like the worst
thing since 1984? Are they going to work for your music? Can you add 3rd party synths and
samples?

Computer Editing

Most people automatically assume that their standalone recorder will make computer
manipulation a breeze. I've encountered way too many people who have been entirely
unhappy with the computer integration. Do some homework on this one.

Third Party Processing

Do you require third party plugins and processing? You should look to see if your standalone
recorder will be able to handle it. Do you have a rackmount reverb? Can your recorder
accommodate that easily?

Multiple Headphone Mixes

Will you ever be in a situation where the drummer and bass player track simultaneously (or
any other musicians) and need different headphone mixes? Make sure your standalone can
handle it.

CD-Burner

Most standalone recorders are going to have this, but don't let your guard down. Some have
gone to mp3 player recording only. Don't let you guard down.

Popular Options
Here are some standalone recorders that are very popular and you may want to check out.
I've never used any of them so don't blame me if they catch fire and burn your house down.

42
Zoom HD16CD

Reviews at Recording Review More details at Musician's Friend - Zzounds

Korg D3200

Reviews at Recording Review More details at Musician's Friend – Zzounds

TASCAM 2488neo

Reviews at Recording Review More details at Musician's Friend - Zzounds

43
Overview Of The Computer Recording Process

Graphic provided by DT_Chris from http://www.darktownstudios.com

A) The sound is picked up by a microphone.

B) An analog signal is passed through an XLR cable to the audio interface.
C) In this case, the preamps and analog to digital converter are bundled within the
audio interface.
D) The digital signal is sent from the audio interface to the computer.
E) The signal is routed to the software within the computer. *
F) The recording software manipulates the signal.
G) The signal is routed through the outputs of the stereo bus in the recording software
and back out to the computer. *
H) The digital signal flows from the recording computer back to the audio interface.
I) The signal is converted from digital to analog and sent to the studio monitors.

44
* These are the two areas that most beginners have problems with. You must select the
inputs and outputs within your recording software.

45
Routing: Getting Started
A fundamental part of recording music is understanding how the audio signal flows through
the various components. Audio can seem like a complicated topic, but once you understand
how audio flows in and out of your system, the concept gets quite a bit easier to grasp. In a
lot of ways, this sort of thing is very simple, but as usual, it's tough when you don't know how.
It reminds of when my grandpa taught me how to tie my shoe...kinda.

Hardware Mixer Routing

While I haven't recommended a hardware mixer for home recording since 'Nam, (I was born
in 1980) I feel that they offer an easy way to understand what is going on in terms of routing
on just about any recording system. All recording software systems that I've encountered are
designed to emulate a hardware mixer and by covering the hardware stuff, I think it's safe to
avoid any software specific issues that may arise.

You'll notice that our mixer here has been shortened. This mixer, the Mackie 1604, normally
has 16 channels, but I just happen to be handy with a battle ax. Now it has two.

Fair warning: This section is going to suck. I've done my best to simplify it. If you hate this
section, email me and maybe I can improve it.

46
Using a Mixer in Home Recording Land THIS YEAR
I realize that many of you are still using a mixer for home recording, but have no clue how to
hook it up. In this section, I'm going to give you the straight-to-the-point way I would hook it
up. Keep in mind that if you had a modern audio interface, hooking it up would consist of
running a Firewire or USB 2.0 cable to your computer, and there would be no need for this
mess. My point is not to belittle you guys stuck using mixers. My point is that we have flying
cars now, and the horses take a whole lot of feeding to get to the proper altitude.

This is MY way, so don't get wound up if you would do it differently. If you already have a
functional mixer setup, this section is not for you. This is for the guys who are tearing their
hair out.

A Few Guidelines

• I'm mixing in the box. Even though I have this doohickey called a “hardware mixer,” I
will not be using it for mixing. I do that in my recording software. A typical home-
recording mixer can not do what I want without $50,000 in hardware. Even then, most
still can't do what I want it to do.
• On the way in, the only function of the mixer is the preamp boosting. All those other
knobs are pretty much useless. We are going to hook our mic to channel one, boost its
gain with the preamp “trim” knob, and split out via the insert directly to the audio
interface.
• On the way out, our mixer can serve as a volume control for our studio monitors and
headphones. That's about it.
• I'm monitoring within my recording software. I have big reasons for this, which I'm
hiding from you now, because I'm trying to keep this simple. This means that if we are
recording a vocal, that vocal flows into Cubase (for me), to its own track all by itself,
and then I can compress it and add EQ/reverb/delay/etc. Then, that vocal will be
mixed with the other tracks and flow out the master stereo channel. This flows to the
mixer. Again, this makes the mixer little more than a preamp. If you are wondering

47
 why I'm monitoring in the mix, try playing guitar using an emulator or trigger a VST
instrument via MIDI. It'll be obvious.

Basic Assumptions

• Your mixer has inserts. Without inserts on each channel, we may have a headache. I
don't recommend buying mixers anymore, but I really don't recommend buying them if
they don't have inserts on every channel. Life is too short! Without inserts, we'll have
to use aux sends or busses to get the signal out of the mixer to the interface. This can
be problematic, because some cheapo mixers of this variety automatically route the
sound coming out of the computer with sound we are trying to record. Recording this
will mix the track we are recording with the mix in the computer and cause a
catastrohe. The workarounds are often a messy, complicated headache, which are too
easily avoided these days with a good ole $350 interface.
• You have a low-latency audio interface that's pretty stripped of features. (No preamps,
no DSP routing matrix, etc). Good examples of this are the M-Audio Delta 1010 or M-
Audio 2496. Both have ins, outs, and little else, but do it with low latency. If you are
using a stock soundcard incapable of low-latency operating, this method won't work.
• The buffer on the audio interface cannot be any higher than 192 samples. If so,
latency will be distracting. If you get clicks and pops, you've got bigger issues (which
we deal with elsewhere in this book). For now, just get it working, and we'll go from
there.
• You read this section at ¼ speed. If you try to read this like you would the newspaper,
it's going to sound way too complicated. Take your time and take huge breaths
between sentences and bulleted items.
• You promise to relax!? I'm not sure what it is about adults, but if someone were to
teach us how to tie our shoe for the first time, many of us would freak out. Calm down.
Relax. Accept that you don't know this stuff, so you can actually learn it!

48
The Setup

I'm recording a vocal on top of tracks I've already recorded.

• Vocal mic is plugged into channel #1 via XLR.

• We crank up to the preamp a little bit.
• I toss a 1/4” cable into the insert of channel #1. I push it all the way in. This means the
vocal leaves the mixer and does not come back. This makes routing and such
irrelevant. (Not everyone will do this, yet this is how I would do it. I have my reasons.)
• I plug that cable into Channel #1 Input on the audio interface.
• I create a new track in Cubase and select Channel #1 (from the busses I already set
up).
• When our singer talks/sings, we should see a signal coming in.

The singer will not be able to hear themselves just yet.

The signal must flow out of Cubase and out of the audio interface via outputs 1 and 2. Those
signals should then flow to the last 2 channels of the mixer (I do this to keep things simple).
I'll pan #1 to the left and #2 to the right. This will be routed so it flows through the master
fader on the mixer and flows out to our studio monitors.

When we hit play in Cubase, we should hear our previously-recorded tracks on our monitors.
Also, we'll want to route out our stereo-mix signal to the headphones for our singer.

Assuming we have the monitor button engaged in Cubase (to allow the incoming signal to
come in....as opposed to the track we may have already recorded), the singer should hear
themselves. Again, this signal is 1) flowing through Channel #1 on the mixer, 2) quickly
diverted to the interface, 3) ran through Cubase and its internal mixer, and 4) ran back out
into the stereo channel of the mixer.

49
Recording 2 Tracks At Once

If I want to record a singer in one room and an acoustic guitar player in the other, I'll toss a
mic on the acoustic guitar, run that to channel #2 of the mixer, through the insert of channel
#2, to channel #2 on the interface, to a new track in Cubase routed to get signal from the
Channel #2 bus, and through the Cubase mixer. We've already got our output figured out
from before. (The multiple headphones issue could be problematic, but we can feed a
headphone amp a single headphone mix, and it can power 2, 4, 6, etc. headphones in the
same mix. For this application, this should be fine. See more when I cover headphone
amps.)

The same process works whether we are recording 2 tracks over 40 tracks
simultaneously.

50
A) Preamp - This is the knob we twist to crank up the signal coming from our microphone,
synth, drum machine, etc. We cover preamps in detail elsewhere, but just remember this is
where you juice up the signal in the first place.

51
B) Auxiliary sends - We have four “aux sends" with this mixer. Each one is little more than a
1/4” output which we have the option of sending somewhere in addition to where the signal
normally flows through the mixer.

What does an aux send do? Think of it as a pipe. We can send whatever we want through it
(in terms of audio, obviously). This pipe is extra and has nothing to do with the usual flow of
audio in a mixer...hence the name “auxiliary”.

What do we send it to? We send it to whatever we want. We can send this signal to a
reverb, a delay, a headphone amplifier. If we really wanted to, we could send the signal to an
input on an audio interface, but there are reasons we may not want to do that (see below).
It's also common to use this signal to feed wedge monitors in a live sound situation.

When we send out a headphone mix, we'll want a nice balance of kick, snare, overheads,
bass, guitars, keys, vocals, etc, but we may want more or less of different instruments
depending on the player. Since each channel feeds to these "pipes", it makes it easy to
create a custom mix.

When we send a signal to a reverb, we may only want to send just a vocal or maybe just a
snare drum or both. It's all possible by manipulating how much of a given channel we send.

Aux sends are one of the most difficult parts of a mixer to understand for beginners, but they
really are super simple once you get the hang of it. Regardless of their learning curve, aux
sends are outrageously powerful. In other words, they are worth the damn effort so learn it!

C) Equalizer - The top knob lets us boost or cut the highs (treble). The second knob lets us
adjust the mids. The white knob underneath it allows us to adjust the frequency of the mids
for added control. The bottom knob gives us control over the low end (bass).

This EQ isn't nearly as flexible as the parametric EQ in your typical recording software. We'll
cover that in much greater depth in Killer Home Recording: Murderous Mixing.

The little button underneath the low end EQ knob is a high pass filter (otherwise known as a
low-cut filter) which essentially removes all the deep bass in a track. We'll cover the purpose
for that in "Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering and Murderous Mixing".

52
D) Pan - Turn it all the way clockwise and the signal moves entirely to the right speaker. Turn
it all the way counter clockwise and the signal flows entirely to the left speaker. This allows us
to determine where we want to place our instruments in the stereo field. For center panning,
we set it to 12 o'clock.

This concept of panning is one that often baffles beginners. Let's take Channel 15 in this
example. If we plug a mic into Channel 15 and start hollering, we have a mono source.
Because we have this whole panning mechanism (either hardware or software) we have the
ability to place that single mono source dead center so that it comes out of both speakers
equally. Some beginners mistakenly get this idea that you need a stereo track to get sound
out of both speakers. By definition, a mono signal comes out of both speakers.

E) Volume fader and routing busses - After the signal has flowed from the preamp, aux
sends, EQ, and panning knobs we can now adjust the overall level of the signal we are
passing onward by adjusting the white fader. This is fairly straight forward. What isn't so
straight forward is the buttons just to the right of the white fader. This is where routing comes
into play. Let's dig in.

This particular mixer has four mono busses. What is a bus? It's basically a path where audio
can flow allowing you to group several instruments together. I realize this is a generic
meaning now but we'll give it some real world context down below.

F) Aux send return levels – You control the amount of level being returned from your aux with
these knobs. Not all mixers have them. When using the aux sends for headphone mixes,
there really isn't any point to bring that signal back to the mixer. The headphone amp got it's
signal. Case closed. However, if we send a vocal to a delay box, we obviously want to hear
that delayed signal. We can send it out of the delay box to the aux returns or we could send it
to a channel in our mixer if we require EQ, the use of more aux sends, or fancy routing for our
delayed sound. It really depends on the mixer.

G) Meter and headphone phone monitoring – The LED meter gives us a visual indication of
how much signal we are dealing with. Most people would prefer their stereo bus (2bus) be
sent to the meter, but we have options. The 4 grey buttons on the left side of the box

53
determine which signals are being routed to the LED meter and headphone/control room mix.

H) Bus assignments – As stated before, we have 4 mono busses here. These options for left
and right are semi-confusing and really aren't important to the routing concepts to anyone
who isn't using this specific mixer. For 99% of all applications, we'll simply route the left to 1,
the right to 2, the left to 3, and the right to 4.

I) Bus fader – All signals sent to Bus 1-2 will flow through these faders before they get to the
master fader. If the bus faders are down, we will not hear any signals assigned to those
faders. If we routed 8 channels of drums to bus 1-2, (the first two faders) we could then
control the volume of all the drums with just these two faders. I'd call this the “drum bus”.
They have other processing powers which we'll discuss later on.

J) Master stereo fader / 2bus – This is the final output. All signals have been combined and
are fed to the final fader to control the stereo output of the mixer.

Q: Why not send an aux send to an audio interface input?

While we certainly can send an aux to an audio interface input, most mixers have a limited
number of aux sends. In the case of our mixer here, we only have four. So if we are relying
on our aux sends, we are only going to be able to record four simultaneous tracks. If we are
recording a live band with 14 inputs, this obviously isn't going to work.

Using this mixer and assuming the audio interface only had line-level inputs (no mic
preamps), I'd tap into the inserts of each channel by placing a 1/4” cable half-way into the
inserts jack. Don't worry! It's designed to do that.

Aux Send Uses

I talk about parallel compression quite a bit. This means I send a signal (we'll say a snare
drum in this case) to a compressor by physically plugging in a 1/4” cable into the Aux 1 output
and connecting it to an outboard compressor. We then bring that back on another channel (if
we want to further process it) or to the aux return if we want to free up as many channels as

54
possible. For our purposes here, we'll assume we have plenty of channels and would like to
manipulate the compressed signal and will therefore route the output of the compressor to a
channel on the board.

The idea is to adjust the level of signal I'm sending via the Aux 1 knob on the snare channel. I
then play with the settings on my compressor before sending that signal back to a separate
channel for me to blend in the mix however I see fit. Since the signal is flowing through an
audio channel in the mixer, I can utilize all the features such as EQ or additional aux sends
that might be feeding to a reverb or delay.

Feedback Loops

Basically, a feedback loop is a dog chasing its tail. The input goes through the output which is
totally normal, and then the output immediately goes back into the input. This is not-so-
normal. In audio, this causes a high pitched squeal. You've surely heard it in PA systems
(not so desirable) or guitar amps (much more desirable). Anytime the audio output gets into
the input at excessive levels, feedback occurs.

In our case, we sent our snare through Aux 1, then we compressed it and brought it back to a
new channel. If we sent it back through Aux 1 on that new channel the signal would route to
the compressor, back to the new channel, back to the compressor, and so on, resulting in
feedback.

Digging Into Routing

We have a few different options for routing with this mixer. After a signal has made its way
down to the volume fader, we can send it directly to the main stereo output if we so choose.
This is a good default setting. We can also send it to any of the two stereo busses if we like.
Why would we like that? We'll get into that. We can send it to just the individual busses or
the master bus or any combination of those. We could even send the signal nowhere. Let’s
make some sense of this.

Let's pretend I didn't pull out my battle ax and the mixer you see here had all 16 inputs. Let’s
say that 10 of them were drums, 1 bass, 2 electric guitars, 1 lead vocal, and 2 background
vocals. There went our 16 inputs! Let's say the mix is pretty good, but the drums are too

55
loud. It's not necessarily just the snare or kick, the mix is good but all the drums need to go
down in overall level. We could certainly go through and pull down each fader by 3dB, but
there is a much better, more powerful way.

By routing all the drums to a bus or “subgroup”, we have total control of their volume before
sending them on to the master fader. Basically, we are going to press the 1-2 button on all
the individual drum channels. That will route them to those first 2 faders I'm pointing to in “I”
in the chart above. This means that if we have the first two subgroup faders all the way down
or not routed to the master fader, we won't hear those pounding round things.

Bus Outputs

This mixer is not exactly a $300,000 console. This is a relatively inexpensive mixer and we
don't see any aux sends, EQ, compression, etc, on the bus channels. We only get a volume
control. We do, however, have 1/4” outputs for each bus. So, we could hook up a stereo
compressor and EQ across that bus and process all our drums at the same time. This is not
the same as having individual compressors and EQs on each channel. We are able to “gel”
the individual drum tracks together in a way that would not be possible if they weren't already
mixed together. Besides, if we are looking for this kind of “gelled” processing, we wouldn't
want to chew up 10 equalizers and 10 compressors when a stereo version of each would do
the trick. We could also send the bus to some kind of recorder, a video camera, or nothing at
all. Just like the aux sends, it's totally up to the user. You never know what you'll think of.

I have another idea. There is more to this functionality than just convenience. We can do
things that simply aren't possible with individual channels. It's a common trick to scoop out
550Hz from all the drums. You can do it by cutting each and every drum @ 550Hz, or you
could do it by simply using one single EQ on the drum bus to make this cut. It's very
convenient and it's easier to get the sounds you are looking for via bus processing.

We could do the same with just about anything. If we had 4 guitar tracks, we could route
them all to a bus and use a single EQ to process them. The possibilities are really endless
once you understand this routing.

So, to sum it all up simply. Don't send large groups of similar instruments directly to the
stereo bus, route them to a subgroup so you can control them all at once.

56
Recording Software Routing
Imagine we have a big complicated mix with 12 tracks of drums, 3 tracks of bass (DI, amp,
and guitar emulator), 4 tracks of electric guitar, 2 tracks of acoustic guitar, 1 lead vocal and 3
backing vocals. With recording software everything is virtual, so we can create as many
group busses as we want (assuming our software has no limitations). Right off the bat I'd
create 5 busses, for drums, bass, electric guitar, vocals, and a master bus that everything
routes to.

By doing this I have dramatically simplified things. For example, if I want a low cut on the
guitars to make room for the bass, I could put an EQ on each guitar track or I could just put
one on the guitar bus. I want to compress the bass as a whole, so I’ll send all three tracks to
the bass bus. I’ll push quite a bit of signal from the DI, a little from the amp, and a little less
from the emulator plugin. I’ll then toss a single mono compressor on to the bass bus, now all
3 bass’s gel together to sound like one. Pretty cool!

Let's say I want to add a bit of natural sounding ambiance to the drums. While this mixer
can't do it, my recording software can. I can create an aux track or “effects track” and slap a
reverb on it. It’s important to set the mix to 100% so no dry signal makes its way out of the
reverb.

Now, instead of sending individual elements of the drums to the reverb, I’ll just send the entire
drum bus. I am feeding an aux with a group so this is still a parallel signal. This means my
drum bus is routed to the master bus, but it's additionally flowing through a “pipe” to my
reverb plugin.

Differences Between Software and Hardware

While the concepts are exactly the same for hardware and software mixers, I wanted to touch
on a few differences. The first major difference is as long as you don't have a limited version

57
of your brand of recording software, (Light or LE versions) you essentially have unlimited
options. Our Mackie 1604 only gives us 4 mono / 2 stereo busses. It's no big deal for me to
fire up 16 stereo busses if I so choose in my recording software. The same can be said for
aux sends as well.

Another major difference is in the handling of returns. In our hardware setup, we had to
physically plug in a cable that allowed signal to flow from Aux 1 to a compressor. Then we
had to bring that signal back to the mixer with another cable routing it to a new channel. With
recording software, all of this is easy as clicking your mouse.

Recap On Routing

I've flapped my jaw on this one much longer than I intended so let’s do a quick summary and
move on.
1. Adjust the amount of signal coming in from the preamp
2. Send the signal via aux sends to wherever we want
3. EQ the signal
4. Pan it
5. Adjust the levels of that channel
6. Send that signal to a bus for further processing and volume control or send it straight to the
master fader or “2bus” as I like to call it.

Sorry. I know that was rough! This will need to be a video or something.

58
 Beginner Recording Gear Stuff

Electric Guitar Recording Gear

Situation #1

You are a guitar player. You've got your tone down. You have your amp and you love the
way it sounds.

Recommendation: You simply need a single mic to toss in front of it, and you should be
good to go. Mics I love on electric guitar are, depending on what I'm going for:

• Shure SM57 (Reviews At Recording Review –More info at Musician's Friend -

Zzounds)

• Sennheiser MD421 (Reviews At Recording Review –More info at Musician's Friend -

Zzounds)

• Cascade Fathead II (Reviews At Recording Review –More info at Musician's Friend -

Zzounds)

• Royer Royer R121 (Reviews At Recording Review –More info at Musician's Friend -
Zzounds)

• Shure SM7b (Reviews At Recording Review –More info at Musician's Friend -

Zzounds)

• Audix I5 (Reviews At Recording Review –More info at Musician's Friend - Zzounds)

Any of these mics will get you there. You can hear them all in action in “The Interrogator
Sessions: Electric Guitar”. There are certainly more options out there, and often times, the
same mic you use on vocals can do excellent things on electric guitar too, but these are the
mics I know work very well. If you can't get the tones you are looking for with any of these
mics, you've got a problem further up the chain.

59
Situation #2

You don't have your tone down. You may or may not already have an amp, but either way
you aren't entirely excited by what comes out of it. Maybe you normally love your amp's tone,
but you are stuck recording at ridiculously low volumes. (It's hard enough to nail the mega
tone when you aren't penalized! Good luck trying it with one arm tied behind your back. It's
not worth the effort in my opinion.)

Recommendation: I recommend taking a look at the guitar emulators.

There are numerous free emulators out there that are pretty damn good. The simple truth is if
you don't have an amp that makes you say “YEEEESSSSS!!”, by the time you run this not-so-
exciting tone through the recording process, it's going to get worse (unless you are just really
good at this whole engineering thing...then it will just stay the same).

In “The Interrogator Sessions: Electric Guitar” I've included some random clips of the
following emulators:

• Waves GTR 3.5

• Amplitube 2

• Vintage Amp Room

• Metal Amp Room

• Overloud TH-1

• Guitar Rig 3

Hi-Z Inputs

It's highly recommended to use a Hi-Z input as this brings out a ton of clarity in the electric
guitar by giving it an impedance load it was designed to work with. Many audio interfaces
have a Hi-Z input. You can purchase the Hi-Z input by itself such as what come with the
Waves GTR 3.5 or you can purchase a standalone preamp that has Hi-Z inputs.

You can hear the difference between Hi-Z inputs and standard inputs in “The Interrogator
Sessions: Electric Guitar”.

60
Make sure you check out the Electric Guitar Emulators thread on RecordingReview.com

Bass Recording Gear

Situation #1

You are a bass player. You've got your tone down. You've got an amp that adds some
serious character to your tone and you'd be lost without that one amp. You have a room that
sounds good.

Recommendation: You need one single mic that is excellent on bass cabinets.

The type of character you want out of your bass cabinet will determine which mic is right for
you. I like upper midrange grind and character. I'm big on the large diaphram dynamic mics.
I like the Shure SM7b and the Sennheiser MD421. A large diaphram condenser can sound a
bit thicker and maybe a hair less defined in the upper mids. The Shure Beta 52 is a fun mic
for both kick drum and bass guitar. I recommend you take a listen to the bass microphone
Interrogation in “The Interrogator Sessions: Bass”.

Situation #2

You are a bass player. You've got your tone down. Your amp is super duper clean and really
just makes the bass louder.

Recommendation: Record the bass DI.

I'd plug the bass directly into my audio interface via either the line input or the Hi-Z input. (On
bass, this line input vs HI-Z input thing is really just a personal preference while on direct
electric guitar I consider it mandatory.) Direct boxes will have their specific (but probably
subtle) impact on the sound. I have a Sansamp that is pretty cool sometimes, but over the
years, I've gotten away from it and moved to just plugging straight in. You can hear an array
of DI's in “The Interrogator Sessions: Bass”.

Situation #3

Maybe you aren't a bass player. Maybe you are. You aren't all that picky about any one

61
specific tone but would like a bit of versatility.

Recommendation #1: Take a listen to the $200 P-bass in “The Interrogator Sessions: Bass”
and see how it sounds compared to big boy American basses (Fender Jazz, Stringray,
Warwick, etc). Record the bass DI. Add a bass emulator plugin.

Because of the price of a bass amp, and more importantly, the difficulty in keeping the room
out of the bass amp in most home recording situations I recommend taking a look at the bass
emulators. They have quite a bit to offer in terms of character.

Make sure to listen to how Ampeg SVX compares to a number of real bass amps and maybe
read my review on it.

Make sure to check out the Bass Emulator thread at RecordingReview.com

Recommendation #2: If you are up for MIDI sequencing, some awesome tones can be had
with a bit of programming. Generally speaking, some mega dude has already done the
engineering for you. Before you buy samples, you always listen so you immediately know if
they are going to be compatible with your specific tastes. Jazz dudes probably aren't going
to buy sludge rock bass, for example. So if you are looking for X bass sound, it's safe to say
there are samples out there that 10,000% nail it.

I often tinker with Quantum Hardcore Bass. You can hear just one quick and dirty example in
my Recording Gear Quiz. If you'd like to hear more, just yell at me and I'll throw something
together. Of course, there examples all over the web.

It can sometime be difficult to get the feel of the “playing” right with samples. There are times
when it's just quicker to put it down with a bass and deal with the engineering. This is
especially true for fast punk stuff where the guitars “push” and are ahead of the drums a bit.

Drum Recording Gear

Situation #1

You are recording a real drummer with a real drum set. You need to figure out how many

62
mics you need. I'm going to stereotype and generalize here. (Kind of like saying black
people can jump high. It's a mostly true stereotype but I'm sure there are at least three black
people who can't dunk a basketball. I bet they are all rappers. (Joke!))

For Ringo Star drums, 2 mics is all you probably need. For John Bonham drums, 2-4 mics is
fun. For most anything else, 8 is about right, but 10-12 is often the most fun. In fancier
cases, a person can get up to the 30s and higher, although, this is only recommend for
people who REALLY know what they are doing. That many mics is the equivalent of juggling
nitroglycerin. You've got to be crazy and accept the fact that you are going to get burned.

Drum Mic Selection

Kick drums

You should really take a listen to the “The Interrogator Sessions: Drums”. My personal
favorites are the Shure Beta 91 and the Audix D6. I like the Shure Beta 52 quite a bit. The
Sennheiser e602 is cool. Many LDCs work really well on the outside of the drum. A
Sennheiser MD421 isn't the beefiest kick drum sound in the world (it's kind of a 1978 kick
drum sound), but it can certainly work.

Snare drums

Again, check out the Interrogations in “The Interrogator Sessions: Drums”.

It's hard to beat a Shure SM57. The Oktava MK219 is a fun mic on snare, but it is going to
catch more bleed than a dynamic and it'll require quite a bit more headroom as it can
overload most preamps with ease. I've seen quite a few people use SDCs with success on
snare but this isn't my bag.

On snare bottom I often just grab an SM57, but I did go through a phase where I used an
AKG 414 in figure 8 about halfway between the kick drum beater and snare to pick up both of
these at the same time, but block out most of everything else (do to the extreme null of the
figure 8 microphone). That was fun.

63
Toms

I've been using Oktava MK012s on toms for years. I'd love to eventually have 3-4 Sennheiser
MD421s for toms for more 2Hz attack. I've not been overly thrilled by many other things I've
tried.

Make sure you check out Favorite Tom Mics on the RecordingReview.com forum.

Overheads

Oh hell! This opens up Pandora's box. I've used everything under the sun. If the room is
awesome, just about anything works. If the room blows, just about everything sucks. So it's
hard for me to make a magic recommendation for overhead microphones. It would be better
if I just sent you here, I think. The World's Biggest Overhead Mic Shootout

Some people really love their SDCs on drum overheads. I can't say this is me. SDCs have a
tendency to get a little hard in the upper mids and this is something I generally try to avoid.
To each his own, however.

Room Mics

When it comes to room mics, I have to say that ribbons are often my first choice because they
avoid the harshness of the cymbals especially with hardcore compression. The Cascade
Fathead II and Royer R121 are both excellent at this. Being figure 8, they make it easy to
use their strong null to avoid the direct sound of the drums.

In certain rooms LDCs can be fun too. This room mic thing is really wide open and depends
heavily on where I'm working, what I'm going for, and what I've got to deal with. It's more of a
fun experiment than anything.

Situation #2

You are recording a real drummer with real drums and you aren't happy with the results.

Recommendation: Read “The Interrogator Sessions: Drums”. That should take care of
most of it. Post a mix in Bash This Recording.

64
If you still aren't happy with what you've got, it may be time to introduce sample layering. The
idea is to use the snare top track, convert it to MIDI, and then send that to a sampler,
triggering some robo sounding snare (or tuba or harpsichord).

To convert a snare track to MIDI I use KtDrumTrigger. It's free. It takes some getting used to,
but it's simple when you get the hang of it. I just got a review copy of Toontrack's
DrumTracker, which I'll be tearing into soon. It looks like it may be a little more elaborate and
may come with it's own samples. Another popular method for this is Drumagog.

Finally, you'll need drum samples for this. Make sure to check out Realistic Drum Samples on
the forum.

Here's an illustration of many of the drum samples I'm using these days.

Situation #3

You've been through #2 and you still aren't happy. Maybe you don't have the room or ability
to tune drums to the level you desire.

Recommendation: Get an electronic drum kit and use MIDI out to trigger incredible
samples.

The morality police are going to condemn me for this one. They'd rather you sound bad than
take some method that happens to give you the quickest path to monstrous results. I say the
music always wins. Kill who you need to in the process.

While edrums can have issues with drummers who do all kinds of weird stuff, for relatively
straight forward drumming electronic drums are incredible. The samples you can trigger with
them are absolutely phenomenal. See #2

Situation #4

You aren't a real drummer, but just need some real sounding drums to go behind your music.

Recommendation: Use the samples listed above and either program your own, use an e-
drum kit, or use MIDI grooves.

A big chunk of the drums for the Interrogations here in Killer Home Recording were done

65
using MIDI grooves through Superior Drummer 2.0. While I'm not a fan of sifting through
MIDI loops, I have to admit that Toontrack's EZ Player certainly makes the process easier.

Programming real sounding drums is a waste of time. Life is too short. Some guys do it
extremely well, but I feel like I'm filling out a tax return when I do it. You may have a higher
tolerance. When it comes to fake drums (techno / hip hop / etc), I have no problem with
programming because I'm not emulating anything.

Situation #5

You don't care about real drums. You are looking for techno drum sounds.

Recommendation: I really like Battery by Native Instruments. It comes with quite a few drum
samples and gives options for many more. Reason is a full-featured sequencer that is
extremely popular, although I've never really gotten into it.

Microphone Selection

A Few Microphone Rules

I will lay out a few “rules” for you that are probably worth 10,000 times what you are thinking
right now.

• If you are just getting started with music recording you will probably be surprised by
how good ANY $100 condenser mic sounds.

• If you aren't going to tear your hair out because your vocal sound isn't BETTER than
John Mayer, Toby Keith, Mariah Carey, or James Hetfield, do not bother spending
more than $200 when first jumping into this whole recording thing. In fact, $100 may be
fine. Your vocals will be a little bright at that price, but you'll live.

• If you are going for ultra-robo pro vocals then you really need to read “The Interrogator
Sessions: Vocals” and “Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering”. We tackle the
concept of the mic collection there. Simply put, few mics sound great on everyone. If
there was one mega mic, everyone would just shell out the bucks for that one mega
mic. It doesn't work that way. If you plan to record more than one source, you'll want to

66
 build an entire arsenal and learn how and when to use each piece of that arsenal.

• If you are going for ultra-robo pro vocals, don't expect simply dropping $2k on a mic is
going to make all of your dreams come true. As you'll hear in some of the Killer Home
Recording Interrogations, I'm using $7,000 signal chains and coming out with vocals
that sound okay (without processing), but they are definitely not the kind of thing worth
killing over...and I once killed for a Snickers bar! Some say the magic mics don't really
kick in until $5k. That seems to be directly contradictory of the tune I heard yesterday
that sounded outstanding and used a $70 MXL 990 (A mic I don't usually like.)

• When possible, a variety of possible microphones is always best. Real World Food
For Thought: If your recording style doesn't allow for trying out mic after mic after mic
before recording a new vocalist, there isn't any real point in having all these mics.

• The bang for the buck threshold seems to be pushed continually. Asking around on
forums for mega bang-for-the-buck mic companies is going to give you some exciting
options. There always seems to be new companies who may not be as famous as
their bigger counterparts but make outstanding products at prices that were unheard of
a few years ago.

What Big $$$ Gets You

This will be fun. My only goal here is to illustrate what you gain from paying way more for a
microphone. I'm big on the idea that the price of a piece of gear is only a factor when you buy
it. In the heat of battle, no one bothers thinking about price. The sound is all that matters.
However, since we are giving advice as what you should buy, let's think only in terms of
dollars and sound.

Download

Take a listen to this.

Note: Prices were obtained from Google Shopping Results

Answers

67
Lead vocals - 001 $299.00 vs 002 $1,200.00

Lead vocals - 003 $2,679.00 vs 004 $149.00

Electric Guitar - 005 $99.99 vs 006 $1,295.00

Fair Warning

In each clip, each mic was placed in the same spot and therefor they probably would have
sounded better if we would have ideally selected the “right” position for each mic. No EQ was
used.

My Views

I wonder why I shell out so much cash for some of these microphones! When a mic is a little
too this or too that, I have processors around to address that at least to a certain degree. In
an ideal world, I wouldn't need to rely on processing in any way, but in an ideal world, zebras
wouldn't be mangled by lions. Maybe using 2dB of plugin EQ to make X cheap electric guitar
mic sound a hair more like my Y expensive electric guitar mic is worth the benefit of not
having to explain to little Timmy why all the other kids get to go to the dentist and he doesn't.

Note: I'm not necessarily recommending processing over mic selection, mic placement, etc.
I'm simply stating that even when everything goes right, most musical styles and tones
require some processing in one way or another to meet the creative demands of the band or
producer.

I'm mixing a record right now. I did all vocal with a Peluso 47 ($1,200 give or take) through a
Martech MSS-10 preamp ($1,900+) > Distress EL-8x > Mytek AD96. On some of the tracks
the vocals are perfect. On some of the songs, I've had to fight and fight and fight to get them
where they needed to be. I did all kinds of stupid processing from using lots of EQ, de-
essing, multiple compressors, and blending in distorted high pass filtered tracks slightly. A
part of me really wonders if it would have been any different if I would have just used an
SM57. My point is that expensive gear hasn't been life altering. Sometimes I say, “Yes!”
Sometimes I say, “That's it?” Sometimes I wonder what disaster occurred that causes such
exponentially different sounds with identical gear.

68
How much should I spend on my first mics?

If your budget is tight, don't feel bad. There are some tremendous microphones out there that
perform dramatically better than you might expect. I'm still chasing that magic vocal sound
and even with mics as expensive as $3k, I've not gotten where I'm ultimately going.

Generally speaking, there are often sonic characteristics that can only be obtained by shelling
out the green stuff. I've not heard a budget mic that had the enormous low end of my Peluso
47 or Soundelux U99, for example. While this one particular sonic trait has advantages when
recording specific instruments, it's seldom a life or death thing.

If a person had a billion bucks, I'd recommend skipping the brand new car and pick up a
vintage Neumann U47 and Telefunken 251. If a person had $200 bucks, I'm confident that
there is a mic out there that will perform well in that price range. I hesitate to sensationalize
any one link in the chain until I know what other links we are dealing with. Since you are
brand new, it's safe to say that you don't have the experience of a Grammy Award winning
mixing engineer. Don't take that as an insult. Enjoy how liberating it is to say, “Of all the
problems I have, my mixing skills are the weakest link. I think I'll put my wallet back in my
pocket!”. In that light, you've immediately freed yourself from any potential stress in selecting
a microphone. I'm confident that a beginning mixer is a greater hindrance to the quality of the
recording than the price of the mic used.

If I had to answer the question on this topic, I'd say you should spend exactly what you want
to spend. A person willing to invest $500 in a mic will get a $500 mic. A person willing to
invest $100 will get a $100 mic.

I highly recommend you listen to the vocal mic Interrogations in “Killer Home Recording:
Vocals.” We've got four voices and enough mics to give you some perspective.

Mics I've Used And I Recommend Checking Out

Dynamic Mics

Shure SM57

Reviews – More Info At Musician's Friend - Zzounds

69
Cheap, versatile, and hard to break. They work well on a number of sources. Some people
love them. Some people hate them. I couldn't imagine life without them. Extremely popular
on electric guitar and snare drum. They can get bitey if you aren't careful, but are often under
rated on certain vocals.

Shure SM7b
Reviews – More Info At Musician's Friend - Zzounds

A super versatile microphone. It does very very well on many vocals, electric
guitar, bass, cutting acoustic guitar, and kick drum (needs a low shelf boost
though). An excellent mic to have around. It doesn't do the condenser sound
or the ribbon sound, but does pretty much everything else well.

Sennheiser MD421

Reviews – More Info At Musician's Friend - Zzounds

A fun dynamic mic that can get a little nasty in the 2k region and somehow
sound good doing it. I don't care for it on vocals much, but on electric guitar, it
can be mean as hell. It does the 1978 thuddy kick drum sound well and it's
about as good as it gets on toms. It's a good mic to have around. I don't consider it as
flexible as the SM7b, but I do like it.

Large Diaphram Condensers

AT4050

Reviews – More Info At Musician's Friend - Zzounds

You can find these for $300 used all the time. The shockmount sucks. The
sound is usually very, very good. It's doesn't have a super thick low end like
the more expensive condensers, but for a home recording situation, this thing is often
excellent. It can be a hair bright sometimes, but not nearly as bad as many of the $100

70
condensers out there. I read a while back that this was used on all the solo Richie Sambora
records after Bon Jovi had more money than since. My point? This mic can deliver pro
results.

AKG 414

Musician's Friend - Zzounds

You can find these for $500 used quite often. They are much thicker than many
mics out there in the under $1k category. I love them on acoustic guitar and
certain vocals. On vocals that really need to cut through a mix, I'm not super huge on the
AKG 414 unless I'm willing to go to war via EQ or the mix is sparse. When I need “smooth”
vocals (whatever that means) the AKG 414 is usually my first choice.

Karma K35

Website - Reviews

A hell of a bargain. This thing is heavy and needs a strong mic stand, but it
sounded good on everything I tossed on it. It wasn't excessively bright
compared to others in the same price range. You'll need an external pad for this one on loud
sources. If you are on a budget, this is definitely a mic I'd take a look at.

Cascade Elroy

Website - Reviews

This mic can get a bit sibilant in a hurry, but sometimes there is something about
this mic that I really like. There is some exciting stuff in there. People who
really get their panties in a wad about “clarity” will love this thing in omni. It's a
tube mic, so I don't recommend it as a starter mic.

71
 Peluso 251

Reviews – Website

I love the Peluso 251. I don't know how it compares to the $9k Telefunken
version, and until my bank-robbing career takes off, I probably will never know.
It's not cheap, but at $1,200 (used) it performs extremely well. I have certain
singers who insist on this mic (always a good sign!). I haven't heard a voice I didn't like in
front of it. It's done great on just about everything I've ever used it on. If you want to pay
extra, I think there is some value in this one. How much value? Hell I don't know. I just like it,
okay. Give it a listen in all the Interrogations in Killer Home Recording.

Peluso 47

Reviews – Website

On a good day, I love the 47. It's a bit darker in the ultra high end than the 251
but has a bigger, lower midrange. It's a big sounding microphone. This is
another expensive mic. If you are a beginner on a budget, ignore this one.

The Oktavamod MJE-K47H "Solo"

Website

I haven't used this one yet, so I'm not making a glowing recommendation
YET. However, based on what I've heard in audio clips, buzz, etc this thing
is going to officially break the price / performance barrier. The MJE-K47H
is just the to capsule which is the bottom part in this picture. You have a to
screw this capsule to a specific SDC body. You can see the details on their website.

72
Small Diaphram Condensers

Karma K10

Reviews – Website

Super bargain SDCs. $140 for a pair of mics that can run with big boy mics
is unheard of! These have an aggressive upper midrange. Sometimes this
isn't a great thing. Sometimes a bit more smoothness is required. At this price, who cares!
Sometimes this aggression is exactly what you want. Very useful on drum overheads (with
an external pad), acoustic guitar, and percussion. You'd be surprised how they do on a bass
cabinet or an electric guitar cabinet. (See the Killer Home Recording Shootouts for those.)

Oktava MK012

I love them on toms. I don't get as wound up about them on drum overheads or
acoustic guitar as many people do. They used to be $100 a piece, but I hear
they've gone way up and are harder to find.

Ribbons

Royer R121

Reviews - Website

I have it. I love it. It's expensive. It's my favorite electric guitar mic, and it's
excellent as a room mic on drums and anything you'd reach for a ribbon for.
The hype on this this is substantiated. Does it work miracles? No. Does it make engineering
easier? Yes.

Cascade Fathead II
Reviews – Website

It's just as good as the Royer, but voiced a bit different. I like it 96% as much as I

73
like the Royer on electric guitar. With a touch of EQ, it's about the same. It costs about 1/6th
the price. It can get a little 2k heavy if I'm not careful. It did something “neat” on acoustic
guitars...kind of a 1950s acoustic guitar sound. On drum overheads, it does something
awesome if you don't need any real top end in the cymbals (fairly rare for me). As a room
mic, it's awesome.

Karma K6

Reviews – Website

Similar to the Fathead II, but not nearly as aggressive in the 2k region. It can
almost be too smooth sometimes, but some of you may like that. I tend to like
aggressive sounds more than the next guy. You'll need a pad with this one if you are using it
on anything loud.

Conclusion

There are many, many mics out there. I've only used a tiny portion. My use is entirely
subjective. If you want objectivity take a geometry class. You won't find it in this
craft....EVER. Recommending a mic is much like recommending a girlfriend. I can give you
advice on the girls I've dated. I can tell you what I like (and what I hate) about the girl I
decided to keep. I can give you advice on how to deal with your girl after the fact, but I can't
really say anything about girls that I've not gone out with. It's the same with mics.

I've used many more mics than appeared on this list. You won't see me un-recommend a
mic. I simply wanted to show the mics I do recommend.

There are plenty of mics on this list that are excellent, but I didn't see much reason to list 40
mics that all do very similar things. So don't send me any death threats because I didn't
include X mic. This was just a quick recommendations list. There may be better mics for less
money out there.

74
One Mic Guys
For those of you prescribe to the epic disaster known as monogamy, let's talk about your
specific mic needs. Because you are going to be with this one mic all the time, it's important
that you can stand her (for this discussion, the mic is a girl) pretty much all of the time. The
only way for that to work if the situation changes often is by going with a fairly neutral mic.
A mic that has a bit too much personality this way or too much personality that way is going to
cause you problems.

Note: I want to emphasize that we are discussing a situation that changes often. If you know
the only voice you are going to be recording is Johnny Cash (good luck with that one these
days), then you can find that one special mic for the job.

The problem with relatively neutral mics is that they don't have a whole lot of character. I
come from the school that I want to flatter each and every instrument in a way that makes the
instrument most exciting on the recording at hand. Simply tossing up a neutral mic is not
always the easiest way to achieve my sonic vision.

Then again, the difference between most mics is subtler than it should be, so maybe I'm
blowing this concept out of proportion, particularly if you aren't going to go into depression if
you don't win an Engineering Grammy. The real fun and color comes from certain preamps,
compressors, distortion gadgets, EQ, and the all the other mixing tools.

Audio Technica AT4040

Reviews – Musician's Friend - Zzounds

If I had to pick one relatively inexpensive mic that works well on practically
everything, I'd take a hard look at the Audio Technica AT4040. Again, it's not
the most flattering mic in the world, but that's exactly what makes it so versatile.

Make sure you check out this thread: Neutral / Workhorse Microphones

75
Mic Stands

Avoid The Cheapos

If you plan on recording for a while, invest in some decent mic stands. I don't mean anything
you can do a pull up on. That's overkill! I just mean something name brand. Atlas and K&M
make good stuff, but just about any “real” company will work. There are often micro budget
mic stands on Ebay or in flea markets near lakes (don't ask!). Refrain from buying them
unless it feels like they were created during the industrial revolution.

People have often asked me, “What in the world do you have to do to a mic stand to break
it?” They obviously have never had cheapo mic stands. I've seen the bases fall off the
bottoms. I've seen the base break from the rest of the stand. I've seen stands break in every
place they can be tightened. Murphy's Law certainly applies in this case.

Stackable Mic Stands

If you are ever going to take your stands to a live show, make sure to get the stackable
stands that have a round base that resemble a distant cousin to Pacman. Not only are
stackable mic stands extremely convenient when traveling, but they also use dramatically
less real estate in your studio. That real estate could be used by bass traps or groupies.

Tripod Mic Stands

I do like having a few mic stands with a tripod base. When it comes to micing a drum kit,
there are some situations where only a round base will fit. There are situations where only a
tripod will work. Having both is the only way to go.

$200 Mic Stand

I have several $200 mic stands. Luckily, they cost me less than $50. How? I bought a

76
standard mic stand with a round base and a boom for $45 and then added an old 10lb weight
from an old weight lifting exercise package to the bottom (take the base off, run the mic stand
through the weight, and then screw it back into the base). After years of trying, I've never
knocked over a $200 mic stand. They are a gift from God when using heavy mics like the
Shure SM7b or many large diaphragm condensers.

Make sure not to go heavier than 10lbs. I used a 15lb weight for a while and I ended up
pulling the stand right off the base. 10lbs seems to work well, but I bet a person could come
out with a $175 mic stand with a 5lb weight.

Short Mic Stands

Always have at least one or two shorter mic stands. While you can usually make a standard
boom stand work on most instruments, if you just happen to need to put a mic inside a kick
drum, these are required. There are certainly guitar mic placements that are tough to pull off
with a standard mic stand particularly with side-addressed microphones. Mic placement is
too important to compromise.

Speaker Stands
When you’re in the audiophile world, you see all these $249+ speaker stands. For the life of
me, I can't figure out why a person would need fancy speaker stands. In 99% of the studios
out there, the speakers are behind a desk of some kind (whether that be Neve console or just
a computer desk). So, in most cases the aesthetic argument is moot.

I always recommend buying 8 cinder blocks. They cost $1.42 each as of this writing. That
comes out to $11.36. Some say they look ugly. a) I think they are the coolest looking things
ever. b) Are you telling me that you have creativity to write a song, but you can't figure out
how to use $4 worth of fabric, $4 worth of wood, and 10 minutes to pretty them up into
something to the caliber that would be on the cover of Mix Magazine? It should be super
easy. Make it fun!

It's important to have something rigid with mass for your studio monitors. Obviously, a big

77
part of this is just so the monitors don't fall over. My monitors weight a good 50lbs. A not so
obvious factor is the way the speaker vibrating the stand can have an effect on the frequency
response of that speaker. I believe that my cinder block method is a relatively crude way of
dealing with this vibration, but it's also pretty damn massive. (170 pounds per stand). It's
hard to refute sheer physics sometimes even if there are more elegant designs.

Headphone Amps
For those of you recording live bands, recording more than one musician at the same time, or
who would like to offer everyone in the room a chance to listen via headphones, a multi-
channel headphone amp is a must.

I went with a cheapo Behringer headphone amp back in 2001, and it is still growing strong in
2009. I don't feel that a high-end headphone amp provides any benefit. Take a look at this
headphone amp. They also make an 8-channel version if that better suits your needs.

Headphones
When it comes to all-purpose headphones there are many options. Some guys spend the
bucks to get really nice headphones. I personally haven't found a need for this. While I do
have my studio monitor headphones for mixing, I don't use them during tracking unless I'm
checking a sound. (They aren't cheap and musicians are bigger versions of dumb kids that
break things.) I've had excellent luck with Behringer headphones I bought for $25. Do they
sound good? They sound about like any other $25 set of headphones. The thing I liked
about the Behringer headphones was their ¼ connector. Most headphones in this price
range have an 1/8” jack with an adapter. This is the biggest waste of time ever. These
connections go bad more than you go to the bathroom. I refuse to use one in my studio. I'd
gladly pay double for a set of headphones just to avoid that damn adapter.

78
Acoustic Treatment
As we explain in great detail in “Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering,” acoustic
treatment is the name of the game. A great sounding live room and an accurate room for
studio monitoring is absolutely essential. There is no way around it. You can fiddle fart all
day with your fancy gadgets that are more fun to talk about on forums, but that stuff is
practically useless without killer sounding rooms. (In regard to “fiddle fart”...Back off,
buster! That was my grandpa's saying, and he had a Purple Heart fighting the Nazis. ROAR!)

Avoid The Foam

There are some famous brands that have very nice logos and present themselves as real
companies. Deep down, all their tech guys know they are selling products that do not work.
Let me rephrase that. Foam will absorb some frequencies. It just so happens to be that
those frequencies could be absorbed by a stupid blanket. Even if a person had at least some
interest in aesthetics (I don't), then with a little creativity, the blanket method is still superior.

If you are considering the purchase of acoustic treatment for your room, I'd check out
Realtraps and Gik. These companies make real products that will actually improve the sound
of your rooms. They also have logos and appear to be professional companies, too. I guess
it's a nice bonus that they sell an authentic product. Yes, I hate studio foam.

Bass Traps, Bass Traps, Bass Traps

If you have any intention of putting together a room that is anywhere near accurate for studio
monitoring, you'll want to go nuts on the bass trapping. We cover this in “Killer Home
Recording: Audio Engineering,” so I just want to mention it here. Just remember to save
room in your budget or consider building your own. (If you build your own, make sure to
submit your plans on the Acoustics and Studio Construction forum first.) It's very easy to
screw up a bass trap design, and if you've got the budget, buying them is often a better way
to go.

79
Financing The Unknown

If you'd like to spend money on a product you know nothing about, I recommend sending me
$50 for what my Invisible Machine does. Actually, you can't see, taste, hear, smell, or touch it.
You'd have just as much luck with my Invisible Machine as you would with purchasing
acoustic treatment, if you have no understanding of what is going on in your room. I
recommend you don't spend a dime on acoustic treatment until you've conquered the “Control
Room Acoustics” chapter in “Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering.” (Fair warned! You
will not like it!) You'll thank me later.

After you understand the basics of room treatment, then be prepared to dump some real cash
into it.

Studio Monitors
We cover this in robo detail in “Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering.” The short version
goes like this. If your room isn't ideal, and you don't have extreme room treatments, no studio
monitoring system is going to be all that accurate. With that said, mixing on studio monitors is
generally more pleasing than mixing on headphones, and it’s certainly more likely to deliver
better results than using your home stereo.

For a person who doesn't want to shell out a good $2-3k on acoustic treatments, there is
limited reason to purchase studio monitors that cost $1k+. I'd recommend going with studio
monitors in the $500-1,000 range. If that's too expensive for you, just use a stereo system
from around the house until you are ready to upgrade. I highly recommend you check out
Budget Studio Monitors: Do They Work?

Regardless of your budget or situation, I recommend that everyone snag a set of studio
monitor headphones. Getting this level of accuracy with studio monitors and room treatment
would cost thousands, but you can hop into the world of accurate studio monitoring for under
$150 even if you just happen to be stuck in headphone land, too.

The beauty of the studio monitor headphones is they give you an accurate playback system

80
for a price that most of us pay for shipping studio monitors. I find that even if a person hates
mixing on headphones, they make a great 2nd system to check your mixes on. I expect to be
using mine even when I have a super mega room and robo high end monitors.

When I make my usual rounds through Bash This Recording, I find myself repeating the same
old cliché. It seems that every beginner is making mistakes that have nothing to do with their
abilities, necessarily, but due to inaccurate monitoring. Big problems have a way of sneaking
through poor monitoring conditions, but mixing (or at least listening a time or two) through
studio monitor headphones can be a lifesaver.

MIDI Production Gear

81
MIDI Controller Selection

We get into the greater details of MIDI in “Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering,” but it
basically goes like this. MIDI has got to get into your recording rig one way or another. One
way is with the conventional MIDI port. The other is USB. Since USB is pretty much the
standard on every PC in the universe, it's a safe bet to go this route. However, if you have an
old keyboard collecting dust with a MIDI out port you may be in luck. Just make sure your
audio interface has a MIDI input. You can always buy a MIDI interface separately, but
bundling with the audio interface will probably save you a couple of bucks.

For your meat and potatoes MIDI work for non-piano players, just about any old keyboard
with MIDI out will work. I'm still using an old Roland XP-10, and I'm entirely satisfied. (Real
keyboard people laugh when they see it.) Others may want a certain weight and feel, but I'm
not a piano player. Some MIDI controllers allow you to control all sorts of functions. I've
never felt the need for this but, again, your needs may be different than mine.

Misc Virtual Instruments

In the old days of MIDI production, you ran out and bought a high-end keyboard and used its
onboard sequencer to make your productions. Those sound like crap for just about
everything unless you have something really special like (sing along Human League fans)
“Don't you want me baby?” Realistic certainly wasn't an option.

Nowadays, none of us are using synths to mimic real instruments. Instead, we are using
samples.

In the old days you needed a hardware sampler. These set you back about half the price of a
new Kia back then. They were the centralized player of all your samples. I'm calling them
The Mothership, because I'm that nerdy. The hardware Mothership was replaced by the
software Mothership. (Kontakt is my weapon of choice for that).

There's a problem. All the Childships grew up. (Why does Mothership sound bad ass &
Childship sound ridiculous?) Instead of buying a cd of Color Me Badd edition drum samples,
82
drum samples took on a whole new life. They grew to be real sounding. In fact, they are
scarily real sounding. They can do all kinds of wicked things. You can control how much
bleed of the snare gets into the hihat or kick drum. You can send only the snare drum to the
room mics. (Not a reverb!) The days of bleed in the toms are over if you want them to be. It
wasn't possible for the Mothership sampler to do all this. So some nerds on the Childships
got creative and changed the sample world. It was no longer essential to use the Mothership
sampler at all. Each sample package now had its own independent player.

Then other instruments followed suit. I have individual Childships for every sample package
I've ever purchased except one. Quantum XP Hardcore Bass, Native Instruments B4 Organ,
Native Instruments Electrik Piano, Superior Drummer 2.0, and all the others I can't think of,
all came with their own players. There is no need for the Mothership samplers for any of
these.

I'm hesitant to recommend buying the Mothership sampler software because of this.
However, there is one thing I do like about having Kontakt. I have access to all kinds of
random samples that come in handy. For example, I'm not a harmonica guy. I'll never buy a
comprehensive sample set of harmonica. However, I have found a need for it in my ridiculous
productions from time to time. It's nice being able to fire up the stock harmonica samples in
Kontakt. These samples are not nearly as elaborate or comprehensive as those found in a
dedicated sampler set, but they fit my needs.

I'm not sure what it's worth to you to have a nice collection of simplified samples to toy with. I
guess it depends on how badly you have need to toss in random instruments.

An Overemphasis On High-End Gear

We all know that losing weight is as simple as burning more calories than you take in. Yet, we
all want some kind of short cut. Fat burner pills and such is a zillion dollar industry. I guess
it's human nature to look for some kind of shortcut that allows us to outsmart the system and
bypass the simple solution. I consider recording to be similar. A great band playing in a great
sounding acoustical space in a situation where an engineer can make decisions that translate

83
to the outside world (accurate studio monitoring) is the exact formula that was used to make
your favorite recordings. The other stuff makes up minor details. The other stuff is the cherry
on top.

While you could say that engineering is a game of inches, and a great engineer should be
aware of each and every detail, what do we say about the engineer who obsesses about the
tiniest details and completely ignores the most important hit-you-in-head-with-sledgehammer
criteria? I'd call this engineer nuts! Sure, the big boys like their fancy consoles, preamps,
and compressors, but do you think they'd be caught dead recording a band that couldn't play
or a vocalist who couldn't sing?

It's complete insanity to put high-end preamps and robo-priced analog to digital converters
over accurate studio monitoring, room acoustics, songwriting, and musicianship. You might
be shaking your head saying to yourself “Yeah right! The big boys put such an emphasis on
the gear. There must be something to it!” There is something to it. The big boys have
conquered all the prerequisites and now play around with their toys, because they can.
They've earned the right to nitpick about the small, fun stuff. More power to them! However,
if you think that any big boy is going to put a greater emphasis on gear than they would the
accuracy of their studio monitoring system or the quality of the music/musicians they are
recording, you have either been intentionally mislead or you are asking the wrong questions.

Go on the usual recording forum and say “Brandon Drury says in his book that a person
should focus on putting together an extremely accurate studio monitoring system that
translates well to the outside world before spending money on high end outboard gear such
as preamps and AD converters.” I'd like to see how many big boys argue with this. If anyone
does, ask to hear mixes from them as they are probably not a big boy. They are probably full
of that stuff my grandpa always said I had between my ears. I'm aware of no engineer worth
his salt that undermines the importance of accurate studio monitoring and the power of
“great” music.

84
Q: Do I Need A Mixer For Home Recording?
A: It's very common for beginners who have just jumped into the world of home recording to
automatically assume that they need a console or mixer. I can see this as rational. I don't
know much about guns, so I figure I need a gun and some bullets to shoot. Of course, I'm
just basing this of layman understanding, watching movies, and guessing.

It turns out that I very rarely recommend a mixer for home recording anymore. In fact, never
may be a better description. To understand this, we first need to understand how old school
tape machines worked. It goes like this. Let's say we want to record on channels 1-10 on an
analog tape machine. We plug our kick drum microphone into our mixer on Channel #1. We
bump up the gain with the preamp, and then that kick drum is routed to track #1 on the tape.
After we have recorded that kick drum, we rewind the tape and hit play.

That kick drum is then routed to the outputs of the tape machine. These outputs are actually
sent to the Tape output side of the console. In this case, we'll say that we run kick drum from
Track #1 out to channel #25 on the console. From here we can play with the signal after it's
already been recorded to tape if we really want to. This is something we may do more
aggressively during mixing where we may be adding compression, EQ, or sending the track
to reverbs, delays, distortions, and who knows what. For the time being, however, these tape
outputs are only there so we can hear what is going on through the studio monitors. This
routing is repeated with the snare mic routed to channel #2 on the console to track #2 on the
tape to channel #26 on the console. This repeats for as many tracks as we want to record.

So what we really have is a chain that works like this when tracking:

Mic > Mic preamp > Recording Device

When it comes to playing the track back, the chain goes like this:

Recording Device Output > Mixing Console Channel #25 > Stereo Out Of Console >
Studio Monitors/Headphones/Whatever

Now let's talk about how we record tracks with a computer system.

We run a mic to the kick drum, just like before. We then run that microphone to a preamp.
This preamp could be in a console, but let's forget the console for right now and go straight to

85
the built in preamp in our audio interface. This is channel #1 on the audio interface.

Behind the scenes, the preamp is routed to the AD converter in our audio interface, which
converts the signal from analog to digital, and then shoots the signal into our computer. In
our recording software, we create track #1, make sure it's a mono track because we are only
recording one mono microphone, and then we make sure the signal from input #1 in the audio
interface is routed to our newly created track.

From that newly created track, the signal is passed down to our console. However, in this
case we are not using that giant console that looks like something inside a 747 jet’s cockpit.
Instead we are using the console within our recording software. As each kick drum hit is
captured, we can see the meter bouncing up in Channel #1. This channel then flows into the
stereo master fader and to the audio interface. The audio interface converts the signal from
digital to analog and sends this analog signal out of the audio interface into the studio
monitors.

The routing to capture the kick drum track looks like this:

Mic > Mic preamp > Recording Device (which is the audio interface routed to the
recording software).

When it comes to playing the track back, the chain goes like this:

Recording Device > Mixing Console In Recording Software > Stereo Out Of Software
Mixer > Audio Interface > Studio Monitors/Headphones/Whatever

It's extremely important that you understand these two concepts.

A) In both the analog tape situation and in the computer situation, the mic is plugged into a
mic preamp, boosted, and then sent to the recording medium. The concept is exactly the
same. Instead of scratching audio into a magnetic tape, the audio is converted to digital and
stored as ones and zeros. A fancy console is certainly not required on the input side in either
situation.

B) In both the analog tape situation and the computer situation, a mixer/console of some type
is required to mix the music. You'll want EQ, compression, etc. You'll want to send the signal
via aux sends to reverbs, delays, and other effects. In an analog situation, you will need a
real, hardware mixer for this. For every reverb you use, you must have a hardware box that

86
you can route this signal to. For every delay you use, you must have a delay box sitting
around.

However, when it comes to computer recording, all of this mixing is handled “in the box.”
Instead of buying a box for reverb and a box for delay, you simply fire up a plugin. The
concept is the same, but it is all handled in the computer. The entire signal flows into the
stereo master bus and is then routed to your studio monitors in either case.

With the computer recording method, all mixing is done within the computer, and you can
forgo the analog console and all rack devices because your recording software replaces all of
this. The only hardware device you still require is the kick drum, mic, and preamp.

Long story short: The computer with an appropriately equipped audio interface has entirely
replaced the need for a mixer. In fact, in most home recording situations software is
dramatically better than a mixer.

Headphone Mixes

When I got into home recording back in 2001, there really wasn't a good way to rig up
headphone mixes on the computer. So, I went ahead and purchased a Mackie 1604 mixer
for $1,000. I would send the mic I was recording to channel #1 on the Mackie, boost the
signal with the preamp/trim knob, and then immediately send that signal to my audio interface
(which was from back in the days where audio interfaces did not include preamps). Using the
mixer I could then use the aux sends to create up to 4 individual headphone mixes for
individual members of the band. This was one solution, but I have to admit that $1,000 is a
lot of money to pay for headphone mixes considering the fact that many modern audio
interfaces include a DSP mixer especially designed for this. (My current audio interface
allows me to give up to 9 individual stereo mixes!) So the audio interface and computer have
made the analog mixer obsolete for home recording in my opinion in almost all situations.

The Big Boys And Analog Consoles

There are still some die-hard fans of the analog way of working. At first, I could see their
point. The original EQs, compressors, reverbs and other plugins simply didn't sound that
good on computers. Today, this has changed. Computers have some great sounding plugins

87
for a fraction of the price of the hardware stuff of yesterday. Some hardcore, big boy purists
still prefer to use their $300,000 console and $4,000 compressors on vocals while mixing the
big boy platinum records at a fee of $4,000 per song. Well, this level of recording I can't even
relate to. $50k to mix an album? That's complete insanity based on the budgets I'm used to
dealing with! It's no wonder these big boys are buying expensive gear. They have more
money than they know what to do with!

Note: If you pay attention, you hear about more and more big boy engineers making platinum
records while mixing in the box.

A person that makes that kind of cash to mix a record can use whatever gear he/she wants
and does not have to worry about the price/performance factor. They can simply use “the
best” and go on with their day. For the rest of us, we don't have a $2,000,000 facility. If I can
get 98% of the way there for 1% of the price, I'm very happy! When my lottery check comes
in, I'll have to re-evaluate.

For just about every beginner, there is no need for a mixer. Buy an audio interface with built
in preamps and mix “in the box” within your recording software. Use DSP headphone mixes
from the soundcard if you require a bunch of fancy headphone mixes.

Hardcore Hardware Synth Dudes

There is one exception to this no-mixer rule. The dudes who insist on using quite a few
hardware synthesizers when working on their MIDI sequencing projects often require an
analog mixer to plug all of these synths into. It is possible if you are using high end software
and have an audio interface with tons of inputs to create specific, external busses that will
automatically route the audio out of your hardware synths and samples to an audio track in
your recording software, but it never fails that the people on the forum who want to use 10
different hardware synths in their MIDI productions always seem to have a two channel audio
interface. This does not make using external synths practical.

If you are using virtual instruments (synths and samples in the box) you'll have no need for a
mixer.

88
Q: Do I Need A Pop Filter?
Don't even think about this one. Buy one! If you are on a robo tiny budget, go mow a lawn or
two, and then go buy one. Or, just build one for four dollars.

Pop filters are great for reducing the plosives that have a way of getting into your vocal tracks,
but I don't consider this to be their #1 function. Instead, I use pop filters to keep singers the
right distance away from the microphone. Singers that stand too close to directional
microphones can sound boomy because of the proximity effect. Let's just say I like the sound
of the singer standing 10” away from the mic. The solution: I move the pop filter to be about
9” from the mic and the singer plants their face right on the pop filter. Everyone wins!

Of course, not everyone needs to stand 10” from a mic. With my Shure SM7, people have a
tendency to put their lips right on the tip of the mic. It's kinda sorta designed for that, but I
usually don't want that sound in the recordings I'm doing. Placing a pop filter just 1” of the
mic is enough to dramatically reduce the proximity effect and get the sound I want. We'll get
into distance in the vocal recording section, but let's just say that this is a very big deal and
should not be overlooked. That, and life is too short to waste it removing P's from vocal
tracks!

Not All Pop Filters Are Created Equal

I started with the standard $25 nylon circle pop filter. Somewhere along the line, I was
convinced I needed one of the new metal, $40 pop filters that are supposed to sound clearer
came out. It's a total sham in my opinion! Don't spring for the $40 pop filter. The $25 model
is fine.

Q: Do I Need Expensive High End Analog To Digital

Converters?
Any audio interface with analog inputs already contains analog to digital converters. So this
question is really about whether it's worth upgrading the converters. I don't know your

89
financial situation, but I can tell you my experience with analog to digital converters. I
dumped about $2500 on upgrading from stock M-Audio Delta 1010 converters to (2) Mytek
AD96s and a Mytek DA96. The Myteks are on the high-end side of the market. I received a
discount for buying multiple individual products at once, but normally, a set of stereo inputs is
around the $1k mark I believe. Again, this is not for the preamps and not for the audio
interface. We are speaking specifically in terms of the analog to digital conversion.

There was a difference in sound quality. However, it wasn't the kind of upgrade I was hoping
for at $2500. It wasn't like my drummers, bass players, guitar players, and singers said,
“Man, I've never sounded better!” after the upgrade. In fact, no one has ever noticed the
switch. If I A/B a source, I can hear a difference, but I have to make that funny face with eye
brows (like Larry David from Curb Your Enthusiasm) as if I'm thinking really hard before I
choose the Mytek.

You'll read later on in the Killer Home Recording system about “The Ineffectiveness of
Upgrades,” where I sum up the notion that upgrades in audio recording seldom have the
benefit that home recorders expect when paying 2x or 10x as much for a product. I consider
upgrading analog to digital converters to fall into the “When You Get Bored” category. They
also fall into the “When You Get Rich” category.

No beginner should ever purchase high-end converters, ever! Stick with what you've got and
save your money for the things that really matter. Don't let anyone convince you that you'll be
stuck making terrible recordings until you get the high-end converters. After you've got your
important stuff worked out, then you can start playing around with boutique gear like high-end
converters.

For audio examples of converters in action check out Interrogations in the various other Killer
Home Recording products.

Q: Do I Need Expensive High End Preamps?

I think this question is highly dependent on how you define “expensive.” Personally, I find
$2,000 for a volume knob to be very expensive. When I plug a mic into this god-like preamp,

90
everyone in the room should turn and look at me as if I am the ultimate recording genius of
the world. This often happens when you switch from a mail-order guitar amp to a real-deal
mega guitar amp!

Unfortunately, if I was rich, and $2k wasn't all that much money, I probably wouldn't expect all
that much from a $2k preamp. It all comes down to how many meals you have to skip to get
that $2k. The rich people seem to have the correct expectations.

High-end preamps have their place, but if we strip off the psychological impact of knowing
you are using a gold plated volume knob, it is difficult to hear a difference in objective quality
between many preamps. This is especially true for beginners looking for that objective
improvement in fidelity and not simply a change in character. Even when I conducted the
preamp Interrogations, I had to listen over and over and over until my brain began to focus on
the ultra-minute differences between one track and another. It's often very subtle and it's not
the kind of thing that makes band buddies of mine come over and say “Brandon, you have
GOT to hear these drums!!”.

I think that spending big cash on preamps is something that should be done after a person
has quite a few mixes and quite a bit of experience under their belt. I never recommend a
high-end preamp in the first year of recording. Never!

No beginner is going to get any tonal benefit out of a super high-end preamp until the big
issues like accurate studio monitoring have been dealt with. The benefits from the high-end
preamps are way too tiny for this. It's ridiculous to put such a huge investment into one tiny
link of the chain unless the other links of the chain are of similar quality. If you are recording
drummers who have drawings on their drumheads from two years ago, the notion of high-end
pres being an issue becomes silly. In fact, if you’re recording a drummer who didn't go to
Berklee, the notion of preamps might still be silly.

There are people who believe the mic preamp is extremely important and even more
important than studio monitoring. I couldn't possibly disagree with these people more. I'm
willing to call them mentally retarded or at least deaf. In fact, I find that the objective
improvements in sound quality that are often implied in big boy recording circles when
upgrading to a fancier preamp is dramatically overstated 90% of the time and just overstated
the other 10% of the time. If you listen hard enough, you'll hear differences, but it takes an

91
incredible set of ears to say that one preamp simply smokes another preamp.

As much as I like to run my mouth about this and that, I'll let you decide for yourself. Check
out some of the various preamp Interrogations in other Killer Home Recording Books.

I want to make it clear that I started out with a Vintech 1272 from day one. I was led to
believe that this preamp was required for me to get the kind of sounds I wanted. I've
recorded literally thousands of bad sounding tracks through it. There is no magic in a high-
end preamps that can turn bad sounding sources into magic. It simply doesn't happen. The
“magic” comes from actually being able to hear what you are doing and having the knowledge
to know the most effective way for dealing with issues that pop up.

Q: Will A Tube Preamp Smoke My Stock Audio

Interface Preamp?
This is a loaded question. It's about as loaded as questions like “Which is better? A Les Paul
or a Strat?” The short answer is this. The stock audio interface preamps these days pack
quite a bit of value that most home recorders will never really outgrow. Those of you who are
willing to starve (or are willing to skip the trip to Hawaii) can get sonic gains from the higher
end gear. How much? It's limited.

I think this whole tube thing is hyped up considerably because of guitar player instincts. A
guitar amp is supposed to distort the living crap out of the signal. Mic preamps are entirely
different. Even the more colored mic preamps on the market (tube or solid state) don't distort
the signal anywhere near what a guitar amp does. Because of this, it's impossible for anyone
I know to tell you which preamp was used to record a track without an A/B test.

The general consensus for guitar land is solid state is completely acceptable when you want
clean playback. Much like digital technology, solid state amplifiers just don't happen to distort
as pleasingly. This concept can be easily illustrated by taking a look at your home stereo.
Unless you are on the robo high-end side of things, you probably are using a solid state

92
amplifier to listen to your music, yet your favorite recordings sound amazing. How can that
be?

Now, when it comes to actual preamp selection I've gotten my hands on the Presonus ADL
600 and Manley TNT (both of these 2 channel preamps are in the $2k+ region). First, I have
to say that if I was going to pick just one preamp, I wouldn't want it to be a tube circuit. Based
on what I've heard from both of these, the tube sounds big. The tube sound is a little too big
for me when I've got 20-30 tracks to work with. These tube preamps have a darker vibe to
them than their solid state counterparts and tend to have lower harmonics. For most
applications, I'd take a good solid state preamp. The Neve, Trident, SSL, and API sounds
that all the big boys rave about are all solid state designs and if we took away these four
companies, we have to take away probably 80-90% of all major label recordings made since
1970.

Now, when it comes to the low end of the scale, it's even more of a hit and miss. My gut says
that a good tube preamp is going to cost more than a good solid state preamp. Why?
Because tube circuits have more stuff that makes them expensive. Transformers and tubes
are a start, but the list goes on and on. Many budget tube preamp circuits aren't using the
tube as you would expect anyway. Using a tube in a wall-wart power supply, for example,
isn't exactly going to give the impact it would in the actual audio path.

On the low end of things, it doesn't make a bit of sense to me to bother with tube this or solid
state that when we are using preamps that aren't great to begin with. If you are the kind of
guy who wants to fuss with preamps, then you are aware of the sonic differences between the
high end and the low end pres. I'd guess if you are the kind of person who absolutely
demands the high end gear, then the circuit topology (tube vs solid state) in a budget preamp
is going to be irrelevant.

Will The Band Notice High End Preamps?

I may have to eat some of my words. Will the band notice high-end preamps? In the past, I

93
would have answered that problem with a distinct “no”. I may have even slapped in an
exclamation point to hammer the point home. Now I'm not so sure.

When conducting Interrogations for Killer Home Recording, it became increasingly obvious to
me that band people CAN hear preamps in many situations. To hear this difference does not
require a lab coat or 30 years of audio engineering experience. It simply requires a bit of
listening.

As I was conducting these Interrogations, I have to admit that I was naturally leery of the
impact of high-end gear. A part of me really wanted a Martech MSS-10 ($2,000 for a single
preamp) to have no noticeable impact over a Presonus Firestudio preamp. After I had a few
Interrogations finished, I would ask friends and fellow musicians to listen to a couple. I found
that on many sources, once the person got acclimated to what a preamp does, they were
able to identify which one sounded better (at least to a degree that was consistent with my
opinions).

It’s important to note that I'd ask the person, “Which sounds better.” Then I'd play both files.
Each and every time, you could see the person was putting on their thinking cap. Each
person had that indescribable thing that happens to the forehead when engaged in deep,
profound thought. In those situations where we’re playing the “Can You Find The Difference
Game?” most people did choose the high-end stuff.

This preamp Interrogation business sort of reminds me of when I need to go outside at night.
When I first walk out, I'm stepping on rocks, shovels, land mines (from my dog), and who
knows what else, because I'm completely blind (and should take better care of my yard). In a
matter of minutes, my vision becomes much more acute. I can see details that were getting
lost just a few minutes ago. Bear Grylls says after 45 minutes in the dark, your vision will
become outstanding.

In a real deal session, few of us are allowed the luxury to let our eyes get used to the dark or
our ears to get used to what the preamps are doing. Most of us are fighting our sources to

94
the extent that the subtle nature of preamp character isn't going to make a truly life-altering
impact on what we are doing. For example, a guitar player who can't play in tune renders any
possible benefits of the high-end preamp useless. However, when the time is taken to really
listen, most of us will often hear benefit from the high-end gear. In other words, I've decided
that this whole high-end microphone / preamp / compressor / converter business is for more
than just audio engineer nerds, but at the same time, it's not something that those of us who
make records in a hurry are going to have the time to compare or may even hear any benefit
with.

The Big Issue

Maybe a person can hear the difference if put on the spot and allowed to put on their thinking
cap and concentration glasses. However, that doesn't mean the track sounds good. A
person hears a vocal recording. They immediately form an opinion. Maybe on a 1 to 10
scale, the vocal gets a 7. Then they listen to the two tracks with dramatically different
preamps (in terms of cost) and after three of four listens to each they make a slightly nervous
guess.

They've already decided that the vocal was a 7. If you had to ask them to re-rate the more
expensive one, I can't imagine they say anything more than 7.1 out of 10.

Q: I have a friend who insists on doing everything

in analog. Should I go this route?
A: The fact that your friend uses analog tells us a few things. #1 It says that your friend has
been doing this for a long time. If he is doing everything analog, it's fairly safe to assume he
has the experience and understanding to make great recordings. So I'd imagine that the
analog part has very, very little to do with his sound. It's his tremendous skill that makes his
recordings sound great. #2 If he is using all analog, he got into recording with a sizable
investment. This would illustrate his commitment to the craft.

95
There is no doubting that analog tape was the dominant force for recording classic albums for
several generations. With that said, I think it's easy to overlook just how dominant a force
computer based recording has become in 2000s. Different tastes will prefer different eras,
but just because a person may prefer music from a certain era does not mean their recording
method must be from that era as well.

While I'm not trying to change anyone's mind who insists on analog tape recording, it's
important to make sure you understand the benefits and limitations of either technology so
that you can form your own opinion and know exactly why you insist on one method or the
other.

There are many advantages of digital over analog.

• No purchase of analog tape

• No need to waste hours and hours aligning a tape machine before each session
• No worry about tape hiss.
• Most people who dealt with analog tape will tell you that the really good analog
recordings were done with the most high end of machines and a crappy analog tape is
not nearly as magical as may be implied.
• Purchasing all outboard gear for mixing is very expensive. For me to do what I do
during mixing with a $400 computer, Cubase, and $4,000k in plugins would cost
somewhere between $30,000-50,000 with hardware. Maybe more. Some argue that
the real stuff is marginally better than plugins. Maybe. However, human skill is 100x
more important, and that's the part I'm worried most about.
• With computer recording, you have the ability to save and recall a mix instantly. This
won't make a mix sound better, but it does allow you to make quick, slight, incremental
revisions that can dramatically improve a mix. If nothing else, you can work on a
different project without doing a total remix.
• Recording software allows you to work with VST instruments (synths and samples)
much easier.

96
 • If you are listening to anything modern, the odds are very strong that it was done
digitally in some way.

I generally do not recommend anyone getting started to go the analog route. I can definitely
see situations where once an engineer is skilled enough, he may decide to try analog tape
out. He may even like it. At that point, the sky is the limit. Knock yourself out. However,
you've got to crawl before you can walk. You may need training wheels for this one. While
you are putting together a great sounding environment, it would be a good idea to start with
the least expensive quality tools available and work your way up. Any potential (and
debatable) benefits of analog tape are tossed out the window if any link in your recording
chain is broken, so approach this one when you get bored.

This analog vs. digital argument is pretty much dead these days. I consider it little more than
a distraction for a person wanting to record their music at home. Jump in with a digital
recording system and make a great recording. When you get bored and rich, you can try out
analog.

Q: Do I Need A Control Surface?

I never recommend a control surface in the very beginning. In fact, I've been recording for
nearly 7 years as of this writing and I still haven't been able to convince myself that a control
surface is worth the grand or so. I'm not even sure if it's worth anything to me. With that said,
it's hard for me to say, “You don't need this!” when I've never really used one. Then again, I
can say without hesitation, “I don't NEED a control surface! Why should you?” For me, it's
not that I take an anti-control surface point of view. It's more of an issue that I don't have a
grand to spend on a new mouse when I have so many important things to purchase that will
have a direct impact on the music.

What Is A Control Surface?

97
 A control surface is a set of faders that resemble
an analog console, but actually control the mixer
inside the recording software within the computer.
Some people refer to a control surface as a
“glorified mouse”. There are some folks who feel
better with a set of faders in front of them than a
conventional computer mouse in their hand.

Control surfaces allow you to adjust faders, aux

Mackie Control Universal Pro sends, etc within your computer software from a
box that is supposed to look and feel like something you'd see in an old-school studio with an
analog console. There is something about the feel of real faders in your hands that I could
see being pleasing, and maybe even faster in the mixing process, particularly to a person
who hasn't replaced their right hand with a mouse (like I have considered). Some mixing
engineers probably consider mixing to be more fun on a console. There could be some real
benefit to having your hands on a fader, or 40, when setting levels.

However, I still don't see how the end result should be any different. Regardless of the fact
that playing with a metal thing that slides up and down might be fun. Who's to say that the
spinning of the wheel in the mouse is any different? Is there something inherently more
musical about sliding a metal thing versus spinning a plastic thing? Maybe. Maybe not. It's
rare that I don't use the wheel in the mouse to set my levels. In the end, I'm convinced that
the results would be similar in regard to setting volume faders, but who's to say? Maybe I'm
really missing out.

I think the differences in using a control surface and using a mouse come in the automation
side of things. When you automate things with a fader you get this natural, random, imperfect
organic thing that really only occurs from human interaction with a device. In many cases,
this is a performance within itself, and you can come up with interesting results that you would
never come up with by plotting dots with a mouse. This “organic” method of automating may
end up adding a little extra to the tune.

Then again, I'm not sure how much this theory really holds water. When I have an idea for an
echo for a vocal, I hear it in my head. I already know what I want. When I start drawing the

98
lines for the aux send to a delay, I'm going for something specific. I stop when I get it. Done.
Would it have mattered if I had used a control surface vs. a mouse? I'm not sure. However,
my ability to get what I want seems to be more dependent on how I set the delay or other
processing than the nature of the way I drew the line that sends signal to the processor.

A buddy of mine had his album mixed by a big producer dude in Nashville on an SSL. While
there were some things that were great about mixing on a real console, I thought the
automation process was kind of “clunky”. It just seemed like an outdated way of doing things.
I can't help but think if I was mixing on an SSL console, I would prefer to tap into the SSL's
computer and draw my automation in there as opposed to using the faders. I don't know.
This may be personal preference. I just didn't see any example where a “human”
performance in the automation department was particularly beneficial to the music.

Some people like to say that control surfaces use one side of the brain and the mouse uses
the other. These must be people who don't feel comfortable creating with a mouse. I'm of the
opinion that the computer has been used for a billion creative purposes and it really doesn't
matter if you spin a wheel on a mouse or turn a knob on a console. I can guarantee you that
the side of my brain I'm using when I mix is not the same side of my brain that writes PHP
code for web database applications or balances my checkbook. I feel that I am being
creative, and I don't feel like I'm clamped down by my mouse. I can do anything I want (within
the limits of my own skills and abilities). Then again, maybe I'm just a computer nerd and I
don't know what I'm missing.

The big thing that really interests me about the control surface is the ability to do things that
would take ages with a mouse. Pumping tracks up and down to the beat is a cool way to
create excitement in my tracks. (Note: I'm not talking about the “pumping” that describes the
sound of an overworked compressor.) There are probably other things that I just don't think
about that may be easier with faders. It's tough to say. Until I can think of these, I'm keeping
the subwoofer and big drum room as my top ways to blow my money. If you really like the
idea of using faders, knock yourself out. However, I can't help but think there may be a
weaker link in your chain than your mouse.

In the end, when I'm listening to a mix in the car, I never say “Awww! You can tell I drew the
automation with a mouse! Damn it!”

99
What do you think of USB microphones?
USB microphones can be a great way of getting into this recording thing on a very tight
budget. They do have their limitations, however, and these need to be noted. USB
microphones are often of higher quality than most expect when shelling out only a few
hundred bucks or less for a full blown recording setup. These mics are usually the equivalent
of the other $100 microphones on the market. Usually they are a bit bright and a bit fizzy
when compared to mics that cost thousands of dollars, but they are a dramatic improvement
over computer talkback microphones and the type of products you find in consumer
electronics stores. Most people are surprised by how good they sound.

The components in USB microphones are very inexpensive, but usually of better quality than
one would expect. The USB microphone manufacturers cut corners on features and options.

My biggest complaint with USB microphones is not the microphone. It's the audio interface /
soundcard they are replacing. The USB microphones really cut corners on the audio
interface. If you are simply recording a lecture like you would with a tape recorder, USB
microphones are fine. If what you do requires monitoring of some kind where you must hear
yourself in headphones, most USB microphones are dreadfully lacking. Some have no way
to get audio back to you at all and therefore rely on the stock soundcard to have low enough
latency to pull this off.

Another shortcoming of many USB microphones is the preamp. No, I'm not nagging about
the fidelity aspect necessarily. Make sure the preamp for your USB microphone does not use
some kind of auto-gain circuit like you find in most video cameras. Auto gain circuits detect
the level of incoming signal and boost it when it is quiet. You do not want this for anything
that requires actual fidelity.

While I don't want to get into specific models, I've have noticed that some USB microphone
models have solutions for monitoring, have real preamps with no auto-gain circuits, and are
fairly well thought out for music recording use. If these meet your needs, they are worth
looking at. You should definitely ask around first and don't assume the microphone has made

100
concessions for your way of working, because many of them have not.

If you are on a very, very, very tight budget, and your needs are geared more towards the
recording sounds that do not require low latency monitoring, I can think of worse routes than
the USB microphone. However, if your needs are higher (particularly in the monitoring
category), I would double check to make sure that the USB mic can do everything you
think/assume it can.

The New Era of USB Recording

If you have made up your mind that you want to record with a USB microphone, you may
want to check out this doohickey. This adapter thingy allows you to use a standard
microphone within the USB realm. That way if you ever want to upgrade to a real audio
interface or sell the microphone you aren't stuck with the USB format.

What Is the Best/Most Affordable Mastering Plug-in?

I don't believe in "mastering" plug-ins, because they don't do anything different than "mixing"
plug-ins, which don't do anything different than "tracking" plug-ins. There are many big boy
hardware "mastering" equalizers that allow for more subtle, fine-tuning than the standard
models. I can't think of a good reason why a compressor that is good enough for a lead vocal
isn't good enough for the stereo bus (assuming it sounds right in either application).
Sometimes a lead vocal will require a certain compressor and color, but (so far) most of the
plug-ins contained in these "mastering" applications can be quite colored, too.

You may want to take a look at this:

http://www.recordingreview.com/blog/mastering/tracks-3-deluxe-mastering-mixing-plugins-
review/

Monitoring For Performers

I make a huge deal about monitoring in this book when it comes to audio engineers making

101
accurate decisions about mic placement, gear selection, instrument selection, and mixing.
However, now I turn the attention to the person actually performing. Just as an engineer is
completely lost if they can't hear what they are doing, a musician is lost as well.

There are various methods for providing headphone mixes. Unfortunately, your options for
setting a headphone monitoring system require a bit more technical knowledge than we'd
probably prefer, but I hope to simplify this whole headphone mix mess.

I own a Presonus Firestudio audio interface. While not robo-expensive, it's towards the top of
the Presonus line. Because of the many features built into this audio interface, I have a
number of options when it comes to creating headphone mixes. Most budget audio interfaces
won't have features such as a DSP signal routing matrix or the ability to output up to 9 stereo
mixes. Then again, if a 2 channel audio interface meets your needs, you probably won't be
recording too many 9-piece bands live in the studio anyway.

Recording Software Monitoring

My first “go to” method is monitoring through the software. If I'm only recording a single
person I always use this method. So if you are recording yourself, this is the method I
recommend. Let's say we are recording vocals. The signal travels from the vocal mic >
preamp > analog to digital converter > computer > recording software.

In the recording software I can manipulate the audio as I wish by adding compression, maybe
reverb or delay, etc. I love having this control because I use the same exact model of
headphones listening to the same exact mix as the singer. The only difference between what
I hear and what the singer hears is the sound of their own voice is resonating in them. Other
than that, I keep everything identical in our headphone mixes so I can adapt to quiet sections
in the song, loud sections in the song, etc by simply moving a fader in my recording software.
I do have to say that there are some creative benefits to using certain reverbs and delays, so
don't rule those out and make sure to crank up the predelay extra high on reverb in the
headphones.

102
After I've tinkered with the audio in my recording software, it flows back out the computer >
digital to analog converter in my audio interface > headphone amp > headphone extension
cable > headphones.

Requirements:
• Low latency audio interface - All of this processing is done in real time. In order for the
signal to flow through this gear so fast the singer doesn't notice any delay, I must have
a low latency audio interface/soundcard that gets the audio in and pull it back out of
the computer as quickly as possible.
• Capable recording software - You must have recording software capable of software
monitoring (which almost all do these days).
• Powerful CPU / Low overhead - Low latency always adds additional strain to any
computer. It's as if we have a whip out saying “Faster! Faster!” If you are already
pushing your CPU to the limit with a particular tune, you'll have trouble when you turn
the latency down to settings low enough to use computer monitoring. My computer is
fairly dated by today’s standards, and I have to pay attention to the amount of CPU
power I'm using, but seldom is it an issue. With lower latencies, the risk of clicks and
pops arises.
• Headphone amp – In this case, it would be simple to use the built-in single headphone
jack in my audio interface. However, I want to hear what the singer is hearing, and I
definitely want individual volume controls. So I feed all channels of Behringer 4-
channel headphone amp with the single stereo out signal from my Presonus
Firestudio. This is a luxury, and most people would be content using the headphone
output in the audio interface (if applicable).

Benefits:
• The singer hears exactly what is being recorded for the best possible performance.
• I hear exactly what is being recorded. If there are clicks and pops, I know about it. If
there are weird issues with the microphone, I know about it.
• If the singer wants to listen at rock concert levels, they can. I can be a wimp and live

103
 to hear another day by turning my own volume down.
• Adding any effect via plugin is a godsend. I don't track vocals without compression.
It's rare that I don't give the singer just a bit of reverb or delay. Sometimes the effects
inspire the singer to give an over the top performance.
• When using budget preamps to boost low-output signals, noise is often a problem, but
even worse, sometimes it's tough to get the signal out of the track you are recording
loud enough. One way to help is to use a healthy boost in the makeup gain on a
compressor (even if you aren't actually compressing anything) to get the level you are
looking for.
• No headphone amp is required if the audio interface has one built in.
• Software monitoring is the way that all guitar simulator plugins and virtual instruments
(synths and samples) work. If you are ever going to use any of these tools, there is no
other way to go. Users who are used to monitoring via hardware struggle with high
latency when attempting to utilize real time processes in the computer.

I consider software monitoring to be the way to go for anyone recording a single source and
who has the proper gear to meet all requirements. The fancy stuff I've mentioned like
separate volume controls for headphones and such can be ignored. For people recording
themselves, there is no need for such redundancy anyway.

DSP Routing Matrix Monitoring

My Presonus Firestudio is capable of recording up to 26 simultaneous inputs if I take

advantage of the ADAT inputs. My rig currently allows for 18 inputs. These inputs are
simultaneously sent to the recording software, but are also sent to the light-weight DSP
“mixer” (this may be a bit of a stretch), which allows me to create up to 9 headphone mixes
(Note: This would use 9 stereo outputs while my audio interface only has 4 stereo (8 mono)
outputs and one headphone output. An additional ADAT (8 mono channels) output would be
required to utilize all 9 stereo headphone mixes).

The “light weight mixer” works very similar to how aux sends work on a conventional analog

104
board. Aux #1 goes to the drummer, for example. If I turn up the bass guitar for Aux #1, the
bass gets louder only in the drummer's headphones. This is easy enough to figure out.

Requirements:
 Audio interface with a DSP routing matrix
 Enough outputs from the interface and headphone amplifier channels to supply
individual mixes

Benefits:
 Allows for all band members to have individual mixes. (The importance of this is
debated by some).
 You don't have to spend a sizable amount of cash on a mixer with 4 aux sends, and
you don't have to spend the outrageous amount of cash required for a mixer with 9 aux
sends.
 I'm not aware of any mixer that allows stereo aux sends, but my DSP routing matrix
does and I'd expect most others to as well. In my opinion stereo headphone mixes
make it dramatically easier to hear what is going on in a more natural way.
 Latency is a non-issue. Because the audio bypasses the computer and goes straight
to the headphone amp, the latency is diminished to practically nothing. The audio
does have to pass through the DSP routing matrix, but that will add a tiny fraction of
what a Windows / Mac computer will add even with a real deal audio interface. The
recording computer could be set to using very high buffer settings and this could take a
big load off the computer.

Some downsides to DSP Routing Matrix Routing are that there are no effects without doing
some crazy routing in front of the audio interface or recording with those effects on in the first
place (which is seldom recommended). There is no compression, eq, reverb, or delay. You
simply get volume controls and that is it. That doesn't have to be a terrible thing, necessarily,
but I hate not giving singers compression in their headphones.

Note: Some brand new audio interfaces on the market have begun to introduce effects in

105
their DSP routing.

Analog Mixer Monitoring

Back in the day when I started, there wasn't

any of this DSP routing junk. You had to
buy a conventional analog mixer, use it for
all your monitoring needs, and then split off
the individual signals with half-normalled
inserts and feed your audio interface with
that.

This method made it easier to learn how the

Here's how to split a signal from a mixer signal flowed in an audio chain, as this is
to an audio interface
made quite obvious when you get the hang
of a mixer, but may not be quite as obvious in a software control panel. With that said, the
concepts are essentially the same and 10 minutes of manual reading (OH NO!!!) should make
this a non-issue.

Requirements:
 Analog mixer with enough aux sends for each individual headphone mix.
 Enough headphone amp channels to power all headphones

Benefits:
 Some people prefer knobs over computer sliders, but it's not like you need a ton of
“feel” when you are setting up headphone mixes.
 Adding effects like reverb and delay is easy with hardware effects.
 Zero latency
 Computer does not deal with monitoring in any way and can therefore be set to high
latency.

106
If you don't mind mono headphone mixes and shelling out the cost for an analog board, there
is nothing wrong with the old school method. It'll take some routing creativity and hardware to
add non-destructive compression the way you can with recording software, but it is possible.

Studio Monitors: Pair Or Single Speaker?

When buying studio monitors, always make sure you know whether the price given is for a
single studio monitor or for the pair. Studio monitor prices can get outrageously high. Simply
because the price is up there doesn't mean that you get two for that price. Pay attention. I
know this is common sense, but I've heard too many stories of people who were confused
paying $50 to ship a single studio monitor back to the warehouse because they couldn't afford
the second one.

Better Instruments vs Better Recording Gear

Should a home recording person dump their cash into better recording gear such as mics,
preamps, compressors, and studio monitors or should a person purchase better instruments?
It's a common debate that is never easy to answer.

It comes down to whom you are recording, and the weakest links in your chain. If an
instrument is not capable of delivering the necessary tone, no high-end mic or preamp will
save it. It seems a bit silly to run an acoustic guitar that everyone involved in the recording
agrees is “bad” through world class mics, preamps, compressors, and converters. The
recording toys only really become important once you get the source exactly how you want it
in the room and that means the “right” instrument must be chosen first.

Note: I want to make it clear that the price of the instrument is a non-factor in this situation.
We are looking for the “right” sound and not necessarily an expensive sound. If a $99
acoustic guitar gives you exactly what you are looking for, you may as well have the
necessary recording toys to capture that in an as-flattering-as-possible way.

107
In the end, I'm always looking for the “Wow!” factor. Changing mics has caused a “Wow!” a
few times from my clients, but not often. Changing preamps or converters has never incited
anything close to a “Wow!” from my clients. Switching from a modern digital guitar amp to my
various high-end guitar heads has given the “Wow!” response many, many times on a
consistent basis for all kinds of music. Using sample layering on drums has produced many
“Wow!” responses. So it's tough to say what is going to make the artist say “Wow!”

In the end, we are looking for the most obvious improvements in recording quality for as many
recordings as possible with limited funds. No one can really decide what is going to be the
best new investment for you, and few investments are going to apply in every situation
(except for studio monitoring). I say take a look at your weakest link and attack it. For most,
this is going to be studio monitoring, but there are definitely many other possibilities.

You really have to factor in how often this new acquisition is going to be utilized. For
example, when I purchased my electronic drum kit recently, I knew that not every band would
be willing to use it. Lets just say that half the bands insist on using the real thing. I went into
it knowing that the possibilities of electronic drums would be utilized by only 50% of my clients
and that made it easier when deciding how much to invest in an edrum kit. My electric guitar
amps have made their way on many, many recordings, but there may be a month where they
don't get turned on at all. There may be another month where I use them almost daily.

Things You Don't Know You Need

Headphone extension cables

Headphones cords seldom stretch more than 10'. If you are recording a 6' tall dude and your
rack is 4 feet off the ground, you essentially have nothing left. Buy name brand headphone
extension cables because I've had horrendous experiences with the generic brands. This is
definitely an item I wouldn't skimp on! Definitely purchase upper-mid grade on these. You'll
be glad you did.

108
Adapters

1. 1/4” male to 1/8” male adapters

2. 1/8” female to 1/4” female adapters
3. RCA to 1/4”
4. 1/4” to RCA
5. 1/4” extender (to connect 2 1/4” cables together)
6. RCA extender (to connect 2 RCA cables together).
7. 1/4” to XLR male and 1/4” to XLR female (you could buy an adapter or just buy the
cable)

Of all the things I hate in life, I'd say the top 3 are socialist philosophies, war profiteers, and
1/4” to 1/8” adapters (with child molesters and various other sex offenders coming in fourth).
These damn adapters have caused me more grief at just the wrong time than any other
inanimate object in the universe. You'll know when it happens to you. The infamous “I can
only hear out of one ear” cliché is something I've heard a trillion times. It's caused by these
stupid adapters 99% of the time. The fix is usually shaking and twisting them. After an
adapter is really crappy, usually slamming it on the floor is the only way to revive
consciousness. Life is too short for this!

While these adapters are always going to be needed for various things, I highly recommend
you select gear that does not need them when possible (especially headphones). For the
gear that does, you'll just have to wing it.

When it comes to actually buying these adapters, I would be careful buying locally.
Consumer electronics stores are notorious for marking this stuff up by the bajillions. A simple
adapter should not cost $15 in my opinion. I recommend heading over to an online
electronics store and ordering at least one of each of all these. You may not need all of them
ever in your life, but the second you need one, you'll waste an evening tracking it down in
your hometown, waste gas, and end up paying about what you did for the entire package I
have listed here for a single adapter.

109
Common uses of adapters are:
 The singer has his certain pair of headphones he/she likes (9 times out of 10 these
sound like something smelly my dog squeezes out of his body)
 Someone wants to play you a song with their Ipod.
 Someone wants to record the Wicked Witch of the East from a DVD and put it in one of
their songs.
 You want to reamp guitar, but your reamp box only accepts XLR female.
 You need to send signal to a video camera.

Extra blankets

Don't buy these. Find them! I'd say that 10% of the sessions I've done did not require a
blanket. I use blankets all the time for makeshift acoustic treatment. I have my infamous
Ninja Turtle blanket that I keep on a mic stand either behind or in front of the singer
(depending on whatever sounds better). I'd be lost if I didn't have three or four blankets
hanging around the studio.

If you can find a major label caliber studio that doesn't have blankets, I want their name, rank,
and serial number because they are up to something screwy.

Methods to stop a drum kit from sliding

If you find a drum kit that doesn't slide, go out and buy a lottery ticket because it is your lucky
day. No matter what, drum kits like to slide forward. One of these years, I'm going to screw a
2x4 into a piece of plywood. I think that would be the ideal solution (and it's nice to have a
hard surface under the drum kit). A $15 piece of carpet under the kick does an excellent job
of stopping the sliding, but it also absorbs all the high end from the bottom of the kit that I'd
otherwise prefer to have (particularly in smaller rooms). I've had luck with cinder blocks. I've
also had luck with batteries from a Caterpillar (I was going to build some UPS power supplies
and never got around to it). 15-pound weights from a weight lifting set did nothing. Good
luck. Put just a bit of thought into this beforehand and you'll save yourself from a bind. Also,

110
keep in mind that when a drum kit moves, all that fancy measuring and mic placement goes
down the toilet. I've seen kick drums go out of phase because they have shifted over the
course of a session.

Phone book

If you are recording bands, always have a phone book handy. I can't stress this one enough!
I debated whether I should put this in here, and then I realized it's the single most important
bit of advice in this book. When bands ask for the phonebook, it means they are ordering
pizza! When bands make a trip to Burger King, 20% of them will offer to buy you a Whopper
or whatever. (If they do, actually work hard on their mixes, but if they don't, intentionally erase
half their session!) However, when bands order pizza, it's an 89% chance that you'll be
getting a free supper! Always have a phone book!

Music stand

No one knows their own lyrics. Everyone wants a music stand. I bought one on Ebay that
resembles an extremely long toothpick and a binder combined. Get a real music stand. It'll
make life easier. You will use it more than you think.

Duct Tape

Do I even have to explain this one! You will use it way more than you realize. For example, I
went through a phase where I recorded all my electric guitars with the volume on 10. This
was very fun. It also had enough pressure inside the guitar cabinet that it literally blew the
1/4” speaker cable out the back of the cabinet on a regular basis. The solution was simple. I
just used duct tape to reinforce it. I could probably name 45 other situations where I never
would have expected to use duct tape to save a session.

111
Flash Drive

I think I may like flash drives better than Oscar Meyer hot dogs on white bread. I consider a
flash drive to be equal to the same hot dog on a real hot dog bun. Flash drives are a
godsend for anyone working on a computer that isn't hooked to the internet. Because the
internet is a blood sucking rapist of recording computer performance, it's great to have an
easy way to deliver files to and from other computers. All updates, new plugins, etc go
through the flash drive. All my early mixes go to the flash drive to be heard on my home
computer speakers. I've probably saved 500 cd-rs this year alone with my flash drive and
hours of time. Get one! I recommend spending a few extra bucks and getting at least a 4GB.
(I can't wait until when people are laughing at that one in 2015! If you don't have a teleporter
or flying cars quit laughing and shut up!)

Bulk CD-Rs

Some mixes are going to take you twenty tries to get right. It's the nature of the beast when
you are pushing the limits or struggling with your studio monitoring. I go through cd-rs like my
girlfriend goes through toilet paper. (Don't ask! I don't understand it either). You can save
some cash by buying a metric ton of cd-rs online, but I've actually found the best deals just by
taking a look at what is on sale at my local consumer electronics stores. There is usually one
brand that is on robo-clearance and costs 1/5 the regular price. Check online to see what the
going rate is and then check your local stores. You may be surprised.

Bottled Water

Singers always get sick right before a session. If you are lucky enough to pass through that
hurdle unscathed, you will still encounter a singer who is really dried out. Singers should be
guzzling water like they are hydrating for a marathon so always have bottled water around.
Just buy a bulk package and bury it in your kitchen. Always keep a few in the fridge.

No, tap water isn't good enough for any singer I know. Don't ask!

112
Coffee

If you don't rely on a chemical dependency to keep you going during long sessions, you are
doing something wrong. Some say the love of coffee (and whiskey) was the downfall of the
Native Americans. If I were an Indian, I'd have to say it was worth it (except for all the
starvation and general betrayal imposed by the United States). I pretty much draw the line
after coffee, but obviously some artists take it much further. Even if you don't drink the stuff
(yet!) it's nice to have it around when people do need it.

Extra Chairs

It's always amazed me how for certain sessions, 15 people show up. Not only does this turn
me into a paranoid schizophrenic who is about to have a nervous breakdown, it also forces
those people to stand. It's always good to have a few extra chairs lying around if you record
others.

Then again, I must admit that after the session is over and I experience what Rolaids claims
to deliver, I get huge satisfaction knowing that a) I now have 15 people that no longer believe
in “studio magic” and b) I'll be lucky if 2 people show up, let alone 15, for the next session.

Guitar Tuner

You'd be amazed at how many people don't bring tuners to the studio. Why? I have no idea!
If you are on a budget, I know there are free tuner plugins out there. I prefer needle tuners to
strobe tuners generally, but unless you are a guitar nerd, a tuner is pretty much a tuner.

Guitar Strings

I always keep a few different sizes of acoustic and electric guitar strings around. I make my
views on the subject of new strings very clear throughout Killer Home Recording. It's not
worth the risk of putting your name on a recording that used 6 month old strings because you
were too cheap to invest $4 for a rainy day. If necessary, order them to save you a couple of

113
bucks.

Entertainment For Bored People

There are two schools of thought on this one. Either you want the non-decision makers to get
bored and fall asleep during long mixing sessions, or you want them to be preoccupied. I
usually take the latter route. Depending on your clients, it's nice to have books with jokes,
funny pictures, animals mating, people mating, religious material, etc just to give people
something to do when you are fiddling with automation on aux send #5.

These sorts of things can be real icebreakers when working with new people. We discuss
that in Killer Home Recording: Vocals.

Things Not To Buy Yet

Some things you purchase for your studio are a no-brainer. You can't really buy the wrong
chair, for example. However, some things are a bit complicated and require a bit of
understanding before you dive in.

Anything Involving Acoustics

In “Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering” you'll get a hardcore dose of why acoustics is
not as simple as stapling some egg crate foam to the walls.

Anything Involving Aesthetics

It's very possible that all of your pretty stuff will end up in the trash when you need to move
your Mona Lisa to make room for real deal acoustical treatment. Before you pour your
concrete, you may want to measure first. So figure out what you are doing before you finalize
it. Then if you want womanize your studio, knock yourself out.

114
Studio Furniture

As I discuss later on here in “Killer Home Recording: Setting Up” and in even more detail in
“Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering,” it's extremely important not to buy a 400lb desk
before you figure out where to place your studio monitors. Hint: It's not Feng shui!

X-Red Niner - Secret Recording Technology

There is this implication that X recording gear company has the secret Stealth technology that
the US military guards with guys carrying gigantic machine guns and fancy night vision. The
information is so sensitive that the Russians have attempted to infiltrate this Stealth audio
technology multiple times.

(Sound of needle scratching a record.) Wait just a minute! The audio amplifier has been
around since the days of Edison. This puts it in the technological era of the invention of the
light bulb. They had microphones and playback systems back when you had to carry water to
your house with a bucket and you crapped outside.

I once read that the most awesome set of studio monitors in the world were created in the
1950s. What? The 1950s? Didn't audio playback systems sound terrible back then? Yes
and no. The playback systems that my family could afford certainly weren't anything that we
would consider to be of tremendous fidelity today. However, trusted engineers who have
heard this system, which cost the price of a few nukes back in the heyday of the Cold War,
say that it's about as good as sound gets. In other words, audio fidelity reached its pinnacle
in the 1950s, and we haven't done a damn thing to improve it in half a century. Okay, maybe
there have been some improvements, but the real issue here is not what a $20,000,000
speaker sounds like. The issue here is what a $100, $500, or $5,000 speaker sounds like. In
the past half century, the quality of a $500 speaker has improved infinitely! So, as much as
we'd like to think that the best of the best technology has improved, it really hasn't, but the
accessible technology has improved tremendously for the price.

115
In other words, really good stuff is much cheaper than it used to be.

Now when we think of the most popular recording gear on the planet, most big boy engineers
would love to get their paws on a Neumann U47, a Neve 1073, and a LA-2A compressor.
This is one hell of a signal chain! However, from a technology standpoint, we aren't exactly
cutting edge here. The U47 debuted in 1949. The Neve 1073 first showed up in 1970
(utilizing the brand new NON-TUBE transistor technology). The LA-2A appeared in 1965.

Note: The computer on the Apollo spacecraft from the era was 2Mhz.

Why in the world is this old junk so popular? You hop in a 1960 fighter plane. I'll jump in a
2008 fighter jet. We'll see who dies first. Okay, we both would crash, but you get my point.
My point is, in recording land, the best of the best hasn't changed in 40 years. The notion that
anything groundbreaking is going on in the world of audio gear went to the wayside before the
Vietnam War ended. They didn't even have microwaves! You had to boil your hot dogs back
then! AHHHH!

So, just remember that Presonus or RME Hammerfall are not leasing land in New Mexico to
test nuclear explosions. They are simply trying to get the sound of that 40-year technology in
a package that the average Joe can afford. The differences between all these various
companies hitting various price points appears to be very small. There are no innovations.
There is no secret technology. I'm pretty sure the patents on the holy grail gear ended years
ago. So don't overplay this gear thing!

How To Break Recording Gear

Whenever a person starts a new craft, they are always afraid for the worst. They are afraid
they are going to break something. When someone asks me to hold a baby, I look at them as
if there is a large venomous snake running around the room. My eyes grow wide. Panic
begins to set in. The only thing I can think of is “Don't break this thing! Don't break this thing!
(Deep breath) Don't break this thing!” (Calling a baby “this thing” goes over very well with the
mothers!).

116
Then, when kids get big enough where I can knock them down for fun and I am supposed to
break them, I thrive. I come into my own.

So let's talk about what you have to be afraid of and what you can chill out about so you can
“come into your own”.

Irreversibly Breakable Things

Crushing

If you were to run over every item in your recording studio with a dump truck, the only thing
that would survive would be the SM57s. Other than that, all recording items are susceptible
to extreme weight.

Excessive Electricity

If you had a method for bumping your 110V signal up to something dramatically higher, you
could fry your gear. It is important to plug 110V gear into a 110V outlet and 220V gear into a
220V outlet. This isn't really an issue for those of us in the United States, because I've never
encountered any recording product that ran on 220V.

Using Exponentially Excessive Signals

If you were to plug in the speaker output of your guitar amp which is outputting 100 watts into
a line level signal that has a limit of something like 0.0001 watt, or whatever (I made that
number up), then you could have problems.

Basically, if you run enough electricity to kill a person through an input that was designed for
micro-level voltages, you are probably going to kill that device. So if you wouldn't touch your
cat with that signal, you probably don't want it to touch line-level recording gear either.

Flooding

It goes without saying that you don't want to soak any of your recording gear. Under this
category I will also include volcanoes.

117
Deleting Windows or Program Files

Software obviously requires specific files to function. I've encountered computer beginners
who have no problem going into C:\Windows and deleting files randomly. This is the
equivalent to doctor taking a chainsaw to a person's chest when they are having ankle
problems. As long as you don't touch anything within C:\Program Files on a PC, you probably
aren't going to break it.

That's pretty much it. I can't think of any other way to cause permanent damage to your
recording gear off the top of my head. I didn't bother including tornadoes, earthquakes, or
hurricanes. That joke got old after volcanoes. Basically, with exception to mechanical stuff
simply breaking, for a person to destroy their recording gear, they have to intentionally set out
to break it.

In terms of anything that involves a low-output signal, you can pretty much plug it into
anything without any problems. In terms of software, there is never a need to delete program
files. You use the “uninstall” function for that.

Have Confidence!

Get in there and start playing. You may mess something up a bit, but the problem is usually
immediately solvable by plugging the cable into the correct input or resetting a few settings in
your recording software. Have fun! That's the only way you learn.

118
 Audio Interfaces
The audio interface is your gateway into the computer realm. If you are recording using a
standalone box, you won't need to bother with this chapter. If you are brand new to computer
recording or just planning your initial purchases, this is the chapter is for you!!

What Is An Audio Interface?

An audio interface (a.k.a. soundcard) is the device that lets you send audio into and out of
your computer. It is the hub of your recording rig that makes using a computer possible. I
always recommend a “real deal” audio interface designed for audio recording. Consumer
grade versions found at your local electronics store are not always cut out for music
recording.

Here are a few examples of audio interfaces:

M-Audio Delta 1010

Presonus Firestudio M-Audio Audiophile 2496

As you can see, an audio interface can come in many shapes and sizes with different options
for connections. Interfaces with several inputs are typically rack mountable and can connect
to your computer using USB, Firewire, or PCI.

119
What Is Wrong With My Computers Stock Soundcard?

I'm often asked why it is necessary to purchase an audio interface when a w computer
already has a sound card. There is nothing wrong with your computer's stock soundcard for
playing back mp3s and other consumer grade activities.

However, that soundcard is not designed to convert the audio you are recording into a high
quality format that you can mangle with your recording software. Even that “upgraded”
soundcard from your local electronics superstore which I'm sure came with an amazing
graphic on the box won't cut it for home recording in most instances.

If you made it through the mine field with a fancy consumer soundcard, expect some really
bad luck tomorrow because this you've used all the good luck you can expect in a week.

Latency

Latency is the time it takes for your computer to process stuff. In audio land, this is usually
associated with the amount of time it takes for sound to go in, get processed, and come back
out of your computer's soundcard.

Let's pretend we are going to run a MIDI controlled keyboard into the computer. When we
strike a key on the MIDI controller, the MIDI data will flow through the computer to trigger a
synth or sample within the computer. In this example, we'll fire up some piano samples.

When we strike a key, there should be no noticeable lag in time. In other words, we should
hear the note immediately just like we are playing it through a standard keyboard or a real
piano. Your stock soundcard is probably going to take a while to process this note. It is slow
and cheap by design and will have to sit around and think about the note that needs to be
played.

I've seen stock soundcards take as long as 250ms to play a note. This means every note you
strike will be behind 250ms. It's impossible to play this way! The solution is to use a low
latency audio interface that can process this piano note in just a few milliseconds so the delay

120
is not audible by the person playing.

The issue of low latency isn't limited to the playback of virtual instruments (synths and
samples) on your computer. This becomes an issue anytime you want to hear what you are
playing through the recording software. We'll discuss this later, but I prefer to monitor from
within my recording software because it gives me tremendously greater control of the
headphone mix. I monitor through my recording software every step of the way from the
tracking of the drums to the tracking of the vocals. This would be impossible without a low
latency audio interface.

Note: Some people do not monitor through their recording software, and are able to get by
on their stock soundcard, but I do not recommend this route. The reasons for this are
numerous. We'll get into them shortly.

When I fire up an electric guitar, the first thing I do is move the amp to an isolated area so I
don't have to listen to it. Then I slap up a mic and start listening to the guitar through the
studio monitors. This allows me to hear exactly what the mic is picking up and make
adjustments as necessary. This would not be possible without a low latency audio interface
as the sound of the guitar would lag behind what the guitar player is doing.

Electric guitar plugin emulators are becoming more popular each and every day but they are
next to impossible to use if the guitar player can’t hear what he’s doing in real time.

You may get lucky and find that your current soundcard is adequate for low latency recording.
Go ahead and try cranking the latency down to the point that it is acceptable for monitoring
vocals with no significant delay. If you can reduce the latency low enough without static,
clicks, pops, and the infamous “blue screen of death” you may actually be able to get away
with using your computers stock soundcard. Consider yourself lucky.

121
Analog To Digital Conversion

The device that converts an analog wave to a bunch of numbers the computer can use is
known as an A/D converter. All A/D converters are not created equal. The higher the quality
of conversion, the less unpleasing distortion added to your recorded tracks.

Generally speaking, A/D converters are usually not as prone to subjectivity as other links in
the recording chain. In other words, there really isn't a case I know of where a person wanted
poor A/D conversion as a “cool effect”. I'm guessing that the guy singing through guitar
pickups or a megaphone on a major label recording is still being routed through high end
converters. Poor quality converters tend to sound harsh.

The effects of high end converters (which cost thousands of dollars) are fairly subtle. Some
people can't hear a difference at all. However, it's possible that the converters in your stock
soundcard are so bad that the difference would be quite noticeable. They may sound okay at
first to the untrained ear, but once you know what you’re listening for it’s easy to tell the
difference.

With that said, I don't want to overemphasize this quality difference. A pro could use the
converters in an $8 sound card and still smoke anything that 90% of people recording at
home are cranking out regardless if they are using multi-thousand dollar converters.

Lack Of Features

Audio recording has its own unique demands that few people outside the recording realm
face. This is why consumer grade stuff is not recommended. I'll break down all possible
audio interface features below.

Adapters

This may seems like a small issue, but the connections that you use hook up your recording
gear are not the same connections that are used in consumer land. I hate adapters with an
extreme passion. Consumer soundcards seem to always come with the dreaded 1/8” jack.

122
(If this were a Will Ferrell movie, he'd yell some fear-related stupidity at the mere mention of
the word.) Here on Earth, we need to cure a few things: World hunger, Cancer, AIDs, and
1/8” jacks.

Audio Interface Features

Analog Inputs

Drums

For every separate track you wish to record simultaneously, you need an input. A person
recording a drum set with 8 microphones must have 8 inputs on their interface in order to
manipulate these tracks individually inside their recording software. A person overdubbing
acoustic guitar, vocals, or any other instrument which only requires a single microphone to
capture, may only need one input. I recently recorded an album for a band that did their
drums in a big studio. We recorded the rest at my studio one instrument at a time. I only
used one single input for the entire project.

How many inputs do you need? This is entirely dependent on your situation. For drums, I've
recorded with just 2 mics and I've recorded with 18 mics. It depends entirely on the sound
you are going for. This will be discussed in greater detail in Killer Home Recording: Drums.

Most people recording drums are going to use 8 inputs. Kick, snare top, overhead left,
overhead right, tom1, tom2, tom 3, and room. More advanced tracking such as recording the
snare bottom, using multiple mics on the kick drum, or using multiple room mics could add
tremendously to the number of channels used.

Live studio recording often requires a hefty number of inputs. The most I've ever used was
20. After the drums are miked up and you throw in the bass, electric guitars, and vocals, you
are easily pushing 14 tracks. If more complicated miking schemes are used on any of these
instruments, more inputs will be necessary. In my experience, few bands do their recordings
entirely live. There will usually be some overdubs.

123
Hardware Synths

For people using multiple hardware synths without a mixer, it's a good idea to get a stereo
pair of inputs for every synth you have. This allows you to route MIDI from your recording
software to your synths and then route the audio back into your recording software. Those
using virtual instruments will have no need for this.

Hardware Gear

People who have hardware gear can still use these units in conjunction with most recording
software. For example, let's say you want to use a hardware compressor on a lead vocal
track. Most of the high end recording software will allow you to create an “external bus”,
however, you will still need to route that signal from the compressor back into your DAW.

For users who won’t be recording live drums, using numerous hardware synths, or mixing
with analog gear there is no point to getting an interface with an enormous amount of inputs.
A two input interface will be plenty for many home recording enthusiasts. The miracle of
multi-tracking allows you to record everything separately, overdubbing as many tracks as your
computer can handle.

*Note: Some audio interfaces have digital inputs which can allow you to record even more
tracks at the same time. We'll discuss digital inputs down below.

Preamps

Every microphone requires a preamp. A preamp is

a volume knob that allows you to boost the signal
from the microphone up to “line-level” so that other
gear can use it. This other gear includes

124
This Presonus audio
interface comes included
with preamps.
compressors, A/D converters, etc. Again, a preamp is required for each microphone you plan
on recording simultaneously.

If you already have enough preamps, (like the trim knob on a mixer or external preamps) you
may be able to save money by purchasing an audio interface with zero built in preamps. If
you do not have preamps, you may consider purchasing an audio interface that comes with
your required number of preamps. It's always a good idea to have the same number of
preamps as analog inputs. An 8 input audio interface doesn't do you much good if you only
have 2 preamps.

Hi-Z Inputs

Direct guitar recording has become quite popular. One way to liven up direct guitar
recordings is through high impedance guitar inputs. Hi-Z (high impedance) inputs will help
make your guitar sound more alive and natural. Hi-Z inputs aren't really “enhancing” the tone.
They are just providing you an input with an impedance that is designed to be similar to that
of guitar pedals and amps. By optimizing the impedance, more of the guitar's natural tone is
captured. In other words, plugging a guitar into a standard low impedance input sounds like
crap. Plugging a guitar into a high impedance input sounds much like you would get through
a real amp. You can hear this in Killer Home Recording: Electric Guitar.

MIDI Inputs

This is the standard connection found on

conventional MIDI gear. The advent of a USB MIDI
connection has reduced the need for these cables.
If you plan on using a MIDI controller that still uses
this connection you will need to purchase an audio
Here's your standard MIDI
connector. interface that comes with a MIDI input or purchase a
separate MIDI interface.

125
Connection

An audio interface must hook up to your computer in some way. There are 4 main methods.
There is no wrong or right here, only what works best for your needs. The connection type
has no direct correlation with the sound of an audio interface.

PCI

PCI is a card that plugs directly into your computer's

motherboard just like a network card. PCI cards
have been around for a long time and are usually
very reliable. They are capable of recording many
tracks and usually do so with low latency. PCI
connections are less expensive primarily because of
The M-Audio Audiophile
2496 is an example of a their lack of portability. A PCI interface cannot be
PCI audio interface used with a laptop. If you have no intention of
taking your rig out of your studio, this interface is usually the most economical way of
recording a large number of inputs at high quality.

126

Here's the USB 1.1
Connection that you've
surely seen if you've used a
computer this decade. The
inventor even has his own
Intel commercial.
lower latency.
If this USB 2.0 image looks
SLIGHTLY similar to the
USB 1.1 it's for good
reason. There is no visible
way to discern a USB 1.1
and a USB 2.0 jack.
USB 1.1
A USB 1.1 audio interface is an older style and are
typically inexpensive. USB 1.1 has a little higher
latency and is limited to two tracks in and out
(although a few manufacturers have managed to
squeeze four simultaneous inputs into these
things). If you are on an extreme budget, and don't
need to record more than 2 inputs at the same
time, this is not a bad way to go. USB 1.1 is
portable and will work with desktops and laptops. If
you are using direct monitoring, you may be
happier going with a connection type that has a
USB 2.0
USB 2.0 is a much faster format than USB 1.1.
While USB 2.0 uses the same jack as it's
predecessor, it performs with lower latency. USB
2.0 allows for very high track counts and laptop
portability.
127
 Firewire

Firewire is similar to USB 2.0 in terms of speed,

high track counts, low latency, and portability.
Firewire appears to be the most popular audio
interface connection method these days by both the

Here's a Firewire (IE 1394) manufacturers and the consumers.

jack.

Software

Many audio interfaces come bundled with recording software. Usually these are the “LE” or
“Light” versions, but they are powerful enough to get a feel for the software and get your
audio interface up and working. In fact, some guys never bother upgrading from these “Light”
packages.

These LE versions of the software may not meet all your requirements in the long run, but
they are of considerable value! In fact, by choosing the correct bundled software, you may be
able to save enough money to more than pay for your audio interface. Let me explain:

Robo Money Saving Trick

The LE versions of software are designed to suck you in with a “teaser”. They want you to
buy the full blown version, which is often expensive. As of this writing, Cubase 4 costs $800
at Musician's Friend. However, practically every software manufacturer is willing to give you a
break for upgrading directly through the manufacturer. Recently, Steinberg had a deal where
you could upgrade for half the price found at Musician's Friend. The $400 Cubase 4 Studio
was only $199 and the full blown Cubase 4 was $399. It's cheaper to buy the interface and
upgrade than it is to purchase the software on its own!

128
Digital Inputs

You can supplement the number of analog inputs in your audio interface with digital inputs if
your particular audio interface supports any of the various digital input formats. Listed below
are the 3 main digital formats. With digital inputs, you are on your own in regard to preamps
and AD conversion. You'll have to buy additional gear for that. (Only about a million of us got
screwed on that deal!)

After the signal has been converted to digital it can then be sent to your audio interface to
increase your total number of inputs. I repeat. Your digital inputs are useless on your audio
interface until you purchase external hardware (converters and preamps) to feed a digital
signal into them.

S/PDIF

S/PDIF is probably the most popular form of adding

S/PDIF cables are the
same as RCA cables used
on DVD players and such.
interface.
inputs to an audio interface. S/PDIF is limited to just
two inputs so you are not going to gain many inputs
with this format. S/PDIF is typically supported to
allow the input of a higher quality AD Converter. I
use S/PDIF to send a digital audio signal from my
Mytek AD96 to my Presonus Firestudio audio

ADAT Lightpipe

ADAT Lightpipe can deliver up to 8 audio channels

per input. Some audio interfaces allow for multiple
Lightpipe inputs. You'll find many 8 channel
interfaces on the market that allow you to connect a
single ADAT Lightpipe cable to instantly add 8 more
channels of simultaneous inputs. I use an M-Audio

Here are some fancy Octane to send 8 channels of digital signal to my

looking versions of the Presonus Firestudio.
ADAT Lightpipe cable.
129
 AES

AES is typically used on more high end systems.

You are less likely to deal with AES in home
recording land, but MOTU and a few other
manufacturers often include it.

AES generally uses an XLR cable to pass a digital

signal. This means it works much the same as
As you can see here AES analog in that only one digital signal can flow
cables use XLR cables.
through a standard XLR cable. This, however, can
be a hair confusing because with AES you often see DB25 connectors used to create a snake
that can house multiple channels. These resemble a printer cable from the 1990s.

Multiple Monitor Mixes

Some audio interfaces allow you to setup multiple monitor mixes. This is handy if your
drummer wants a different mix than the guitar player (in a live recording setting). This is
usually a bigger deal for recording bands than recording yourself as a solo artist. Many of the
upper end audio interfaces have a “DSP routing matrix” which in English basically mean you
have absurd routing possibilities. Any combination of inputs can be routed to any output. You
may not see the point in this now, but my DSP routing thingy has made life dramatically easier
for me.

For example, I use the S/PDIF outputs on my audio interface to go to an external Digital to
Analog converter which feeds my studio monitors. I also send this signal to my headphone
amplifier so the singer can hear what he or she is doing. Using the DSP routing matrix, I
simply assign the same “mix” to the S/PDIF outputs and outputs 1 and 2 on my audio
interface. Just for the hell of it, lets assume that the band was making a documentary and
wanted an audio feed. I could assign the same mix to outputs 3 and 4 and run that to their
video camera.

130
There are a zillion other possibilities. Most of the time, I don't need to use anything special
with my DSP routing matrix, but when I do it's very nice to have it.

Mac, PC, or Both

This one is fairly straightforward. There are audio interfaces that can work with just Windows,
just Mac, or both Windows and Mac. If you use both types of computers, it may be in your
interest to purchase an audio interface that can work with both.

Bus Powered

If you plan to do your composing or recording on the beach, out in the woods, or some other
postcard caliber location, you may want to look into picking up a bus powered audio interface.
They receive their electricity via a USB or 6-pin Firewire jack. (Only 4-pins are required for
standard Firewire operation, but the other two pins provide the power).

Home Recording Soundcard Wizard

After running my recording forum at RecordingReview.com for about a year, I became tired of
being asked “What's the best soundcard for me?”. It's not that I mind helping people, there
were just too many “if this, than that” type of situations.

So, I read a few tutorials on PHP programming and made the Home Recording Soundcard
Wizard. What used to take 10 days can now be completed in 10 minutes.

http://www.recordingreview.com/soundcard/soundcard_wizard.php

Q: Which audio interface sounds the best?

A: I'm of the opinion that all audio interfaces in the same price range will sound pretty much
the same. There are no audio interfaces that stand out as being an incredibly great value.

131
When I switched from M-Audio Delta 1010 audio interfaces to the Presonus Firestudio
(because I needed portability) I noticed no obvious difference in sound quality. To take it even
further, the difference in sound quality between my M-Audio Delta 1010s, my Presonus
Firestudio, and my mega expensive Mytek AD96 converters was very subtle. I can hear a
difference, but none of my clients seem to care.

Don't believe me? Take a listen! This is illustrated in numerous Interrogations in Killer Home
Recording.

I wish I could tell you that after listening to zillions of mixes on "Bash This Recording" at
RecordingReview.com I've noticed that X audio interface seems to always sound better or
even sound better most of the time. The truth is I have absolutely no idea which audio
interface a person is using when I hear the finished mix. If you are looking for an absolute
leader, think again. The human factor is essentially everything in regard to sound and the
difference between similarly priced gear is essentially non-existent in almost all cases.

So when it comes to selecting an audio interface I wouldn't put too much stock into sound
quality. They all sound good. Instead, focus on getting the features you need, reliability, and
compatibility with your system.

Q: Do I need a soundcard and an audio interface?

A soundcard and an audio interface are the exact same thing. Some people believe that an
audio interface is an external box (breakout box) and a soundcard is something inside the
computer, but the truth is they both perform the same function. It's become very popular to
use breakout boxes, but there are definitely high quality, low latency audio interfaces that fit
nicely inside the computer.

Generally speaking, a soundcard refers to just about any device capable of sending audio
signal to and from the computer while an audio interface is more specifically geared to the

132
needs of home recording with low-latency and such.

Q: I want to record my entire band live. How do I

add more inputs?
A: First of all, see the digital inputs section above. If your audio interface has ADAT Lightpipe
inputs, you can purchase a simple 8-channel preamp A/D converter that will allow you to add
8 inputs instantly to your audio interface. External preamp / converters with S/PDIF will give
you 2 extra inputs.

If your audio interface does not support a large number of digital inputs, you can always hook
multiple soundcards together. I read today in my recording forum of a person who had
hooked 3 Presonus Firepods together for a total of 24 analog inputs. I've linked 2 M-Audio
Delta 1010s together with an extra 2 channels to each via S/PDIF for a total of 20 inputs.
Currently, I use one Presonus Firestudio, with 2 extra channels via S/PDIF and 8 extra
channels via ADAT from my M-Audio Octane. This gives me a total of 18 inputs. I can add
an additional ADAT device for another 8 inputs.

In some cases, it may be less expensive to buy another audio interface than it would to
purchase the additional preamps and converters. It is highly recommended that if you are
going to use multiple audio interfaces simultaneously that you use the same brand and
model. It'll make your life much simpler when you are dealing with drivers and computer
issues. The one downside to using multiple audio interfaces could be the DSP monitor matrix
(if applicable) not working the way you expect it to. Make sure to research that one first. This
is the main reason I went with the ADAT Lightpipe method.

Q: Why does my audio interface only have 8 inputs

even though it advertises much more?
A: I've always considered this a semi-dirty trick. The audio interface manufacturers realize

133
that bigger is better. It sounds better to get the X26 than it does to get the X8. The
manufacturers are adding the digital inputs and analog inputs to come up with this number.

If an audio interface claims to have 26 inputs, it probably has 8 analog inputs, 2 ADAT
Lightpipe inputs (for a possible 16 channels), and then a S/PDIF connection for an additional
2 inputs.

I've always felt this is misleading because a person who doesn't know any better may assume
they are getting more usable inputs and factors that into the price when choosing one audio
interface over another. As mentioned previously, it isn't always cheaper to simply add an 8
channel preamp / A/D converter. Sometimes it's cheaper to purchase an entire audio
interface.

So, it's always better to do your homework and make sure you are selecting the right gear for
your needs. You can read my rants on this issue on the Home Recording Blog at
RecordingReview.com. Search for “Fraud and Idiotic Audio Interface Descriptions”.

Are the preamps in an audio interface as good as

the preamps in a mixer?
For a person just getting started in home recording, I think there are a billion other factors that
are more important than preamps but if you really want to see for yourself, check out all the
preamp Interrogations in the other Killer Home Recording systems. Generally speaking, the
preamps found in an audio interface are very comparable to preamps found in mixers in the
under $1,000 category. They usually don't provide extreme amounts of gain and they often
do get a little noisy when you drive them extra hard.

Is Firewire better than USB 2.0?

Based on the number of users of each I deal with on the forum, I would say they are both

134
adequate for home recording. In almost every situation, it comes down to the quality of the
drivers associated with the interface that determine the reliability of the connection.

The tech guys lean in favor of Firewire, but I swear I've heard great sounding recordings via
USB 2.0.

Before You Buy

Before purchasing an audio interface, always perform a detailed search of the manufacturer's
website and/or Google to determine their issues with specific chipsets!

I'm not aware of any interface that doesn't have major problems with at least one chipset.

Every connection type requires a chipset to function and audio interfaces don't play well with
the wrong chipsets. I can't stress how important this is. It's so important that when I build
custom recording computers I always force the client to purchase the audio interface first so
that I can select my computer components.

These chipsets can be found on a motherboard, features built into the motherboard (USB,
USB 2.0, Firewire, etc), or external PCI and PCIe cards.

Have I scared the hell out of you? If so, that may be a good thing. We'll get into this concept
of the chipset more later. We'll get more into what a chipset actually is, how to find out what
chipsets your computer has, and hopefully calm your fears a bit.

Mixers bundled with audio interfaces

In the past few years, there have been an explosion of audio interface / mixer bundles. It
seems that just about every mixer manufacturer is including USB, USB 2.0, or Firewire
outputs in their mixers. For anyone in the market for both a mixer (presumably for live use)
and an audio interface, it's very possible to save a few bucks going this route. However, there
are a few things you should know before you jump in with an audio interface / mixer bundle.

135
Pitfalls:

Do you really need a mixer?

For studio use, only a tiny minority of people will get any benefit from a mixer. This is
discussed in "Do I Need A Mixer For Home Recording?"

While having a mixer on a desk does look more like a conventional studio, it's an
unnecessary link in the chain. In most cases, an audio interface is all you need. Scan over
"Audio Interface Features" and make a note of all that you require and compare that with any
mixer / audio interface bundles you may be looking at.

How many inputs?

Make sure you research mixer / audio interface bundles thoroughly as they are known for
being masters in the guessing game when it comes to their I/O connectivity. It's often a
mystery whether the mixer has a stereo output or separate outputs for every channel. You
wouldn't be the first person to assume wrongly that a 16 channel mixer would allow you to
record 16 independent tracks. Shipping prices are high and RMA numbers are annoying to
obtain.

Q: I was thinking of getting X audio interface, but

just a few hours ago I read someone had a
problem with it. Should I get something else?
A: You will never find an audio interface that has had zero problems. They don't make one.
This is no different from cars, TVs, or neck ties. The important thing is to figure out why a
person had problems. Was the unit simply unreliable? Was there a hardware conflict? (Which
I consider to be the fault of the user for not doing adequate research.) Was there a software
conflict? Was the user using a dirty operating system? (We'll get into this “dirty operating
system” business in Eliminate The Dirty Operating System in Computer Performance
Optimization)

If you know why the interface had problems you can better address whether the problem was

136
the user or the product itself. I know this complicates things considerably, but 95% of all
audio interface problems stem from systems that are not setup properly or what I call "user
error". So take this in mind when you read about a single person who has problems with X
audio interface.

In the end, you are looking for a series of patterns in reviews. Hopefully, you won't have any
trouble reading more reviews than you can stand. Then you'll have a much greater idea of
the quality of the product.

137
 Recording Software

When it comes down to it, there is no piece of equipment you will spend more time using
other than your recording software. If you're mixing "in the box", (not using an external mixer)
pretty much everything will be self-contained in your recording software. Because your
recording software is such an integral part of your workflow, it's important that you drive
yourself crazy choosing the right one...right? Maybe not, lets find out.

Placing Too Much Stock In Recording Software

I don't get it. Just ten years ago (as of this writing) 99% of major label albums were recorded
on analog tape. With analog tape, you have functions like: play, rewind, fast forward, record,
and arm (so that track will record when you hit the record button). That was it. If you wanted
to move a chorus from one section to another, it involved the razor blade. I know for sure that
I would feel a little more inclined to just record the dumb song the way I wanted it than to pull
out my sharpening stone.

Fast forward a decade and now people get into heated fights about Pro Tools this and
Cubase that. Logic is the best. No, Sonar is the best. Bla, bla, bla, I think there is this arms
race to acquire the "best" software and it has very little to do with actually making music.
Don't ask me how recording software turned into a manhood length contest. It certainly has!

Every recording program I've ever seen has the ability to play, rewind, fast forward, record,
and arm. Kids who write recording software in their basement have those features
conquered! So it is no surprise that real recording software made by professionals has all the
features required to make your favorite albums of all time (at least from back in the analog
tape era). Dark Side of the Moon was made with play, record, and rewind! So if your needs
are relatively simple, just pick something!

138
Note: I am not saying you shouldn't put any thought into your recording software. I am
saying that it's hard to make a bad decision when selecting one. Again, Dark Side of the
Moon was made with play, record, and rewind! Then again, so were the Bananarama
albums.

Recording Software All Sounds The Same

Some beginners choose to believe that one program sounds better than another. While it's
possible that some mixing algorithm is 0.000001% different than another (the calculations
necessary to combine audio tracks when doing the final mixdown), these differences are
excruciatingly tiny when compared to the big picture. I'm going to go out on a limb and say
there is no appreciable difference, especially for anyone just getting started.

If you expect the software to have a direct impact on the sound of your recording, think again.
An $800 program or even a $2,000 program is not going to sound any better than a $300
program or even a free program. An expensive recording program should allow you to do
more stuff and that's it!

No Bad Recording Software

I've never encountered recording software that I'd consider bad. There is software with better
features (which you may or may not use), or that may look prettier (which means ZERO to
me!) but in the end even really cheap stuff is very solid. With that said, I probably wouldn't
recommend you purchase your recording software from the same place you purchase socks
or flat screen TVs.

There are certain things that are easier with “better” programs. For example, I started with
Sonic Foundry Vegas and recorded well over 500 songs with it. Vegas was not known for
being exceptionally good recording software, but it certainly worked. It was like a tape
machine for me.

139
Let's say I had 10 tracks on the drums and we needed dead silence during a break down. In
Vegas I had to cut this silent chunk out of each and every track individually. This wasn't really
a huge deal but when I switched to Cubase, I tossed all the drums in a “folder” track and just
cut the single folder one time. I performed the same task in 1/10th the time. This isn't going to
make the recording sound any better, but it did save time, effort, and energy.

I would say that Cubase is quite a bit more efficient, but I certainly can't say that Vegas was
bad. A recording rig is only “bad” when you require the ability to do something and you simply
cannot do it. I do think there are programs that make the music making process easier these
days.

Powerful Recording Software

I'll mention the term “powerful recording software” from time to time. I'm referring to software
that is designed to handle any situation with maximum efficiency and effectiveness. Software
that makes your life easier allowing you to focus more on music and less on mundane tasks.

Powerful recording software has features that you will probably never use. This is a good
thing because it means that anytime you encounter a tricky situation, you can handle it.

Off the top of my head, the MIDI sequencer in Cubase has a “logical editor” which allows me
to randomize velocities (the intensity in which a note is struck), or slightly randomize the
timing of notes struck to give them a less robotic feel. This is a fairly advanced feature that
you won't find in non-powerful recording software.

Will you need it? Who knows. Personally, I'm recording folk music one day, death metal the
next, and then programming MIDI orchestrations after that, so it's extremely important to me
that the software I use is designed to handle any situation I can throw at it.

Some people avoid powerful recordings software because of the learning curve. In the
example above, yes, I did have to learn what a “folder track” was and how to use it. It did

140
take about 4 seconds to master. The very first time I cut silence on drum tracks, the feature
paid for itself (in terms of time it took to learn it). I think it's safe to say there are several
hundred features in Cubase that dramatically improve the workflow in my studio compared to
what I started out with.

Don't look at the powerful recording brands out there as intimidating. Look at them as being
helpful. The good stuff has made concessions to handle just about any task and problem you
can toss at it. Be glad that such possibilities exist!

Powerful Recording Software Examples

I consider all of these to be powerful recording software programs. They are mature, have
been well thought out, and it's safe to say they will be around for quite a while.

A: Just to name a few:

• Cubase
• Logic
• Pro Tools
• Digital Performer
• Sonar

The Recording Software Commitment

When you decide that you are going to go with X or Y brand of recording software you must
be in it for the long haul. If you just want to record one song, one time, don't bother going with
a powerful piece of recording software. It won't be worth your time to learn the specific
“system” of that software. However, if you plan on making music for the long haul, it's way,
way, way better to go ahead and jump in with what you plan on sticking with.

I personally hate wasting the time learning a new piece of software unless there are huge
gains for me. I could never understand the people that like to brag on the recording forum

141
about how they have used eight different recording programs. That never made any sense to
me. The gains from thoroughly learning a killer recording software program inside and out
are exponentially greater than scratching the surface with many programs.

Keep in mind that you don't have to go with the big boy robo software right out of the gate.
Few people do and even fewer actually require the big boy stuff. I recommend you pick a
“system” and work your way up. Moving up from Cubase LE to Cubase 4 Studio to Cubase 4
is a logical, intuitive upgrade. Time spent learning Cubase LE is not a waste of time unless
you plan to switch to an entirely different platform. Many platforms allow you to work your
way up in a similar fashion.

Going back to this commitment idea, if a program is “mature” and the company has been
doing this for decades, they probably have a system or method in place to handle anything
you would ever need to do. Once you have committed to X software it's simply a matter of
learning how to perform the required task.

While the general method of working in recording software is pretty much the same across
the board, the little things can be quite a bit different. Maybe they crammed the EQ plugin in
each channel strip window. Maybe you have to click an extra button to open the EQ. That
kind of stuff is the only real difference. In the end, there are probably going to be those who
like the way that Logic handles their windows and there are going to be those who prefer the
little Cubase windows. This is known as the “user interface”. This is irrelevant as long as the
workflow does not trigger your serial killer switch. In other words, as long as the method Mr.
Software company has employed doesn't get in the way of your noisemaking, who cares!

I believe it's the job of the software company to make sure their programs are easy to use in
the heat of battle. I rely on them to give me the most efficient system possible. As long as I
don't feel that my ruckus time is held back, I don't think about it. There are people who make
the claim that one is way better than another. It doesn't make sense to me to try them all.
Maybe test driving a car takes 10 minutes. Test driving recording software takes 10 days. I
don't have the time!

142
There are definitely software genres out there that have a more intuitive interface and are
easier to jump into than others. Recording software is not one of these genres. I don't care
what anyone says, powerful programs are seldom intuitive right off the bat.

Use Paint (bundled with Windows) your whole life and then jump into Photoshop. Photoshop
is a nightmare when you first jump in. It's not that Photoshop is necessarily complicated.
Photoshop simply has specific way of handling tasks (whether they are very simple or way
over my head). Once you learn the Photoshop system, you quickly realize why it is such an
outrageously powerful and popular graphics program. Removing a background from a picture
in Paint may take 4 hours. The same task can be done in Photoshop in literally 4 seconds.
It's worth taking the time to learn a high end software system!

I feel that recording software is the same way. So if jumping into a new recording program
frustrates you, join the crowd! Just make sure you aren't complaining because your high end
recording software doesn't function like paint!

Q: Isn't The Recording Software Commitment Risky?

A: So you are worried about jumping in face first with one recording software and then not
liking it. I think you shouldn't have any worries. If you go with a powerful recording software
platform, you will like it when you get the hang of it. I'm confident. There is a reason that I'm
calling this level of recording software “powerful”. It's good!

I think the greatest risk of all is halfway learning 3 or 4 recording programs and at the end of
the year have no music to show for it. You could end up not being proficient at any of the
programs. This would be a total waste of time.

If no one before you had ever used the recording software in question I'd say you may be
taking a risk. You don't have to worry about being the guinea pig. Millions of people use the

143
big, powerful recording software. It's already been done.

Since I don't see people running from Sonar with their arms flopping in the air and their guts
falling out while screaming bloody murder, I think it's safe to say that Sonar is an effective tool
for recording music even though I've never used it. Somebody is using the thing and liking it!

The sooner you get to the audio engineering side of the fence, the sooner you'll be cranking
out great recordings of great music. Remember that the learning curve for recording never
really stops. I've been doing this years and years and I still find audio engineering to be very,
very, very challenging. A person can take it as far as they'd like.

Because there is so much to learn and because powerful recording software is so well
thought out, I don't think you can go wrong. All the recording software programs I've
mentioned on are of very high quality and should meet your needs indefinitely. Again, the
biggest risk is wasting too much time being the master of none. We'll all be dead soon! I
figure I have between 1-60 years left. I have to get with it! Make music!

So figure out exactly your needs, ask around on forums stating exactly what you plan to do,
read reviews, and choose a piece of recording software. If you don't feel comfortable going
with a super expensive version yet, that's okay. Go with the middle of the road or even the
“Light” version at first. If you grow out of your recording software, you can always upgrade to
the higher end version. You may be happy with the “Light” version and never need an
upgrade. This is fine too.

There is some old proverb that says "any decision is better than indecision". Just jump in.
You'll figure it out.

Q:I plan on using crappy software now, but

upgrading later. Is this a good idea?
A: This depends on how you define “crappy”. I highly recommend you select recording

144
software that you can grow with. Instead of going with el cheapo recording software from a
place that sells dramatically overpriced TV cables, it may be best to go with the “light” version
of something the big boys are using.

There are some very inexpensive programs out there that are getting better and better
reviews all of the time. While I would still rather start out on X Software's awesome “light”
version, some of these free online solutions look very tempting for people on a budget.

If budget is a robo issue, check out the free software out there. If you don't have any money
yet, start somewhere.

Q: Is Pro Tools The Industry Standard?

A: This depends. What is the industry? If you are in the industry where you record Jay Z's
vocals in New York and then fly out to LA to mix on an SSL console, and then catch a flight to
Dallas to catch Three Doors Down on tour so you can do a few quick overdubs before
heading back to San Francisco to mix another song, then yes, Pro Tools is the “industry
standard”. There is no doubt about it. The guys who fly to their recording gigs rely on the
studio they are working in to have Pro Tools. You can pretty much guarantee it with rare
exception.

A Pro Tools HD rig usually costs about what a brand new Honda Accord will. It's usually
placed in a control room that can fit a Honda Accord without too much trouble as well. The
ceilings are usually tall enough to stack several Honda Accords on top of each other. You get
the idea. Big boy studios are obviously not home recording studios (duh!) and they have
dramatically more uses for the popular Honda product.

Pro Tools was first in big boy land and by the time the computer recording thing exploded, Pro
Tools had a firm grasp on the high end recording market. Anyone who wanted to interface
with a big boy studio could bet that Pro Tools was going to be used at that studio. It doesn't
mean that your music will turn out any better on Pro Tools than it would on any other

145
recording system. It's actually not uncommon for major label releases to be done in Logic,
Cubase / Nuendo, and just about any other major recording software as well, but the odds of
any given studio using any of these is fairly small.

If “industry standard” means guys who make killer recordings in rooms that could easily turn
into a baby's bedroom, I think it would be tough to call Pro Tools the industry standard. I'd call
it a “major player” in the home recording game. The playing field is leveled in home recording
land. All the major players in the home recording software game have large user bases.

At home, the need to interface with other recording studios is greatly diminished. I've never
opened a session in another studio with tracks I had recorded at home. I have gone to other
studios (some of them Pro Tools studios) to track drums and added then exported the tracks
to finish the recordings up at my place. It was clear that it didn't really matter what I was
using.

After recording over one thousand songs, I've still not had a need for Pro Tool's #1 selling
point. The point is moot to me. The bandwagon technique is effective, but I can't help but
think it's an insult to your intelligence.

You Pay For Pro Tools

Pro Tools LE is excellent software, but it can get expensive. Digidesign, the makers of Pro
Tools, know that a big chunk of their sales comes from people who want to interface with the
big boys (or simply use what the big boys are using). They have used this to their advantage.

They often charge very high prices for what appear to be fairly simple feature upgrades. For
example, the OMF Export function which allows you to open a session tracked in Pro Tools in
another recording program costs $500. Pro Tools LE has a number of upgrades that you will
pay dearly for.

Cubase SX3, my software of choice at this time, only cost me $400 (as an upgrade), has the
OMF export built in, and (from what I hear) has a much better MIDI sequencer. It has all the

146
functionality that would require multiple $500 upgrades if using Pro Tools LE. This isn't a
factor if you don't need these features, but in the event that you do, you will be paying dearly
for them.

Personally, I'm convinced that the only real reason to go with a Pro Tools system is for the
need to walk into another studio and immediately fire up a session you were working on at
home or a different studio. Aside from that, there isn't any reason to think of Pro Tools as
being “superior”.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking Pro Tools. Pro Tools HD is the most popular recording
platform for major label recordings and I'd like to think that the big boy recording people aren't
totally brain dead zombies. They use Pro Tools HD for a reason, and I'm sure most of this
incredible software will spill down into Pro Tools LE. I just don't think the reasons that make it
so popular translate to the guy making music at home nearly as often as is implied.

It just seems a bit silly to me to pay more with the only outstanding benefit based on this
notion of “industry standard” that applies to an “industry” that we are not even a part of.

Q: What's the best software?

A: The best software for you is the lowest priced software that meets all of your needs. No
one can really say what the best software is for you without knowing a whole lot more about
you. While I could recommend high end software that I'm sure will meet your needs, it won't
do you any good to waste a chunk of your budget on features you simply don't need. So what
are your needs? What are you trying to do? Read on.

Features To Look For In Recording Software

Warning! Software Companies and Stupid Definitions

I'm going to do my best to explain all the features to pay attention to when choosing your

147
recording software. Each manufacturer puts their own stupid name on features to make their
product sound more cool than the other guy. It may help them make more money, but it
makes it difficult to explain definitions!

MIDI Sequencer

Even to this day, not all recording applications come with a MIDI sequencer. Even if you don't
think you'll ever deal with synths and samples in this fashion, I highly recommend that you
take a look at recording programs that have MIDI capabilities for 2 reasons:

• Any recording software that has omitted a MIDI sequencer has probably omitted many
other features that you haven't even thought of yet.
• You never know when your needs will change or if your client will have special
demands.

MIDI is more than just techno and rap music. Importing a screwy click track the band created
in Guitar Tab Pro is not something you'd expect, but it's something my clients have requested.

Replacing a snare drum with a sample is an extremely common request in modern music. I
do this with MIDI. Not all MIDI sequencers are created equally. If MIDI is a priority to you,
ask around to find out if the software you are considering has a sequencer that people like.

Unless you are positive that every sound you ever record is going to be coming through a
microphone or line in, a MIDI Sequencer is an extremely useful tool to have.

Limits In Track Counts

Some recording software will limit the number of tracks you can record with. I've seen some
“Light” programs that limited a person to only 8 tracks. In other words, you could record with
4 tracks for drums, 1 track for bass, 2 tracks for guitar, and 1 track for vocal. If you want
background vocals, you'd have to get creative.

148
Most recording programs are going to offer at least 16 tracks. From what I read, Pro Tools LE
is limited to 32 tracks (which should be plenty of tracks a majority of the time for most people).
Some recording programs impose no limit to the number of tracks. I don't make too big of a
deal about this.

In my younger days, I did have some tunes that got up into the 70 track range, but I could
have easily knocked that down to 30 without much trouble. The big track count just allowed
me to put off making a decision.

Limits In Inserts

You may be familiar with the term “inserts” from a mixer. A mixer allows you to “insert” effects
(usually gain based effects such as EQ and compression) on a specific channel. In recording
software, you will have a “virtual mixer” which allows X amount of insert slots for effects that
will be applied to this one specific channel or track. My current recording software limits this
number to 8, which is a fairly high number. This means I could place a compressor, an EQ, a
de-esser, and a distortion plugin on a vocal and still have 4 inserts left.

Limits In Auxiliary Sends

Aux sends allow you to send the signal from a track somewhere else. Common uses are for
time based effects like reverbs or delays but this is also how parallel compression is used.
The more aux sends, the better. My current recording software allows for 8 aux sends per
channel and I can't remember ever coming close to that amount even with my wildest mixes.

Plugin Format

There are multiple plugin formats such as RTAS, VST, Audio Units and Direct X. If your
recording software supports VST plugins you can have access to a huge supply of quality,
free plugins in addition to an enormous array of premium plugins. There doesn't seem to be
any quality difference between the various plugin formats. Most premium plugins come in
multiple packages anyway. In the end there are plenty of plugins for all major plugin formats.

149
Just be aware that specific programs have specific plugin format requirements.

Routing

Unfortunately, it's not exactly easy to compare the routing abilities of various recording
software. For the most part, routing preferences are subjective and you will simply want to
ask around to see if people are happy with the routing options in their recording software.

For very simple, natural forms of music, a mixer may not need advanced routing. But, being
able to send a signal virtually anywhere can be a huge convenience and even a necessity for
some mixing tricks. In general, advanced routing is for more advanced mixing engineers.
However, even if you don't require advanced routing now, you may eventually.

It may not be obvious to you why routing is super important now, but we'll cover that in Killer
Home Recording: Murderous Mixing.

Automation

I love the fact that my weapon of choice can automate practically everything. If I want to turn
an EQ off during the chorus, it's no problem. If I want to ramp up the amount of reverb in the
verse, no problem. Some plugins even allow you to automate individual knobs. For example,
with certain plugins I could “twist” the depth knob throughout the song. Automation
capabilities are not something you will read about on a box even though they are extremely
important to a guy like me. You'll want to ask around.

Support

With any computer system, there are likely to be bugs that appear. The best recording
software manufacturers have active support forums and are quick to respond to your support
issues. One advantage of going with a recording software program that has a large user
base is you can get help from a number of other sources. The less reliance on tech support,
the better! Obviously, the more people who use the program, the easier it will be to get help
with your specific troubles.

150
It's a grim reality that some software companies will go out of business. While I'm all for
helping the little guy make it, if that little guy goes out of business, you will have no support for
your problems. Because of this, the sheer size of a recording software company is often a
positive thing in and of itself.

You should ask around to see how people have been pleased with the support of their
recording software before making a commitment.

It is nice to hang out on a forum where many people use the same recording software. While
RecordingReview.com has users from all walks of software life, I know that I've been able to
help tons of people with Cubase.

Reliability With Your Operating System

When Windows and Mac release new operating systems (it seems like Macs have a new OS
each year), there are bound to be issues with compatibility concerning your recording
software. A killer recording application may work flawlessly on X platform but terribly on Y
platform. You'll have to ask around.

Note: Most people who have problems with their computer and recording software simply
failed to set them up correctly, which I cover in the “Computer Performance Optimization”
chapter (coming up!). It's more than likely that "user error" is causing their lack of success,
so be careful when trusting people who have had reliability problems.

Included Plugins

All recording programs come with stock plugins. In many cases these are useful, but not
always the most exciting. Most people are happiest with premium, 3rd party plugins, which
are easily added to any decent recording software. If budget is tight, you may not want to
sink a bunch of cash into new plugins when you still have tons of other recording things to
blow money on. Of course, the quality of the included plugins is 100% subjective and often
over rated to the beginner.

151
Included Virtual Instruments

Anyone working on MIDI compositions will benefit from using synths and samplers built into
their computer. These are known as “soft synths” or “virtual instruments”. Again, most people
are happiest with premium 3rd party toys but that's not to say that these stock sounds are
garbage: I find quite a few uses for the included virtual instruments. The quality is 100%
subjective to your tastes and preferences but try asking around anyway.

Features You Won't Look For

You'll never think of all the features you require. The human brain simply does not work that
way. You will never anticipate every little tiny detail. What kind of details?

Here's a perfect example. I once hit the wrong button on my external analog to digital
converter. This sent the wrong Word Clock sample rate. Long story short, my recording
software thought I was dealing with 44.1Khz tracks but I was dealing with 48Khz track and the
pitch was all out of whack.

Well, it turned out that Cubase SX 3 had a built in method to change the internal “label” in
each wav file (called a “header”) to the correct sample rate. I was impressed! Now this is
something you would NEVER think of needing!

I'm not really trying to push Cubase on anyone else even though I have been extremely
happy with it. However, time and time again I have run into various situations (much like my
little sample rate issue) that needed addressing.

The features you aren't looking for are often the features that make or break your experience
with the software. The propaganda they place in magazine ads couldn't be more irrelevant
most of the time. How the software handles when you get your hands dirty is everything. The
only way to really find that out is to ask people who have dirty hands!

152
This sample rate header issue may not seem like a big deal to you. Let me explain how I
solved this problem the last time it occurred back when I was using Sonic Foundry Vegas. I
downloaded a header changer doohickey online. I found the first flawed file. I opened it in
the program. I changed the sample rate header. I saved it. I re-imported. Repeat. It took
about 8 hours to solve the problem.

I think this is an outstanding testament to the Powerful Recording Software section above.
It's also a testament to keep that under-evolved monkey named Brandon Drury away from
your external clock!

Wav Editor vs DAW

I want to point out that there are two main types of recording software: Wav Editors and
DAWs. This entire chapter has been about DAW's which stands for Digital Audio Workstation.
This gets confusing for beginners because in the past, some standalone recorders have been
named “workstations”, and it's often unclear as to whether a person is talking about their
actual computer or their recording software.

A DAW is a multi-track recording software designed to allow the recording, playback, and
mixing of multiple tracks. A Wav Editor, such as Sound Forge or Wavelab, is only capable of
processing a single file. Because of this, I'm always shocked to hear that some beginners list
Sound Forge as their main recording software. How? You can only work with one track at a
time!

Q: What do you think about free software?

A: You may want to revert back to my answer to “What's the Best Recording Software?”. If
you can meet all your needs with a certain piece of gear, that gear is great for you! I've
tinkered with a handful of free programs over the years, but I must admit that I've never really
seriously tried to do anything. It's usually me messing around at a buddy's house.

You get what you pay for most of the time but software can be a different story. Open

153
source / GPL software can be extremely powerful when enough programmers get together to
donate their time to create something special. It happens. So, you never know when a
tremendous piece of Open Source / GPL software is going to come out.

Q: Will my recording software work with my audio

interface?
A: If the software works in Windows, it should also function properly with your windows
compatible audio interface. Audio interface manufacturers and recording software developers
would be out of business if they didn't make compatibility a high priority.

Pro Tools is an exception. It uses a proprietary system that only functions with its own
hardware and software. I recommend you talk to Pro Tools people to get the real story. I've
heard so many conflicting views regarding the use of different hardware with Pro Tools
software or Pro Tools hardware with different software. It's very confusing. Just be aware
that there is a “catch” that does not exist with other audio interfaces and recording software.
(Just another Pro Tools turn off in my opinion.)

So, in short, if your audio interface works with Windows it should have no trouble working with
your recording software.

Note: They are using some gadget inside certain audio interfaces known as Dice II. It has
been known to cause conflicts with certain recording applications. While they may be
working the bugs out of this one, it represented the first time in this era of home recording
where an audio interface and a recording application where not compatible.

You Don't Need Mp3 Conversion In Your Recording

Software
For whatever reason, recording software companies like to place limitations on the number of
mp3 files you can render with your software. This means that it's no big deal for you to export

154
your mix to a single stereo wav file all day long, but mp3s are a different story. I've seen
some people panic over this one. Well don't!

There is no need to run and panic because there are great free wav to mp3 converters out
there. I use Razorlame. It's a very simple program, just drag all the files you want to convert
into the box, adjust the settings, and press “Encode”. I love it because I can convert an entire
album at one time. I hate wasting time converting one track at a time after I've spent hours
mixing each song.

So You've Just About Given Up On X Recording

Software?
I've encountered way too many people who refuse to open the manual for their recording
software and expect to “get it” simply by tinkering. That's a fine concept, but a majority of
these people waste hours of time doing things the hard way.

I've heard way too many of them say “I've just about had it with X recording software. I'm
going to try something else”. While it's certainly possible that they are experiencing reliability
problems, in most cases they never really bothered to learn their recording software in the
first place.

So, before you end your relationship with your DAW, make sure you've actually started one!

Getting Started: Tutorial vs Manual

I think a big reason that so many beginners don't take the time to read their manual is they
think they are about to read a 1,200 page PDF. I know that Cubase has a “Getting Started”
guide which consists of a number of tutorials that teach you specifically what you need to
know in order to use the software. I could get through it in a day. I'd suspect that most
recording software has an equivalent.

155
So before you get immediately intimidated by the daunting task of reading a Bible-sized
manual, you may want to check to see if there are actual tutorials for you to follow.

156
 Mac vs PC
The Mac vs PC debate has gone on for what seems like forever. It seems that when the Cold
War ended, everyone decided they needed another ridiculous stalemate to waste their time
and resources fighting. The only difference here is that the excessive hatred for the other
guy's country has been replaced with a hatred for the other guy's computer.

Advantages of Mac
 When compared with name brand PCs, a Mac is usually a little better suited for music
recording right out of the box. This is ideal for a person who has absolute no interest in
understanding anything about their computer.
 People on a super tight budget have better luck with the stock soundcard in Mac
computers compared to a PC's. However, Mac users seldom fit the “super tight
budget” demographic.
 You get to belong to a group. Because of creative marketing, Mac users often feel a
sense of camaraderie that PC users do not. If you are buying a computer because you
need a friend, I would consider therapy first or maybe get a dog.
 The Mac has less of a risk of obtaining viruses and spybots. Since Mac has about 4%
of the market, the goons writing the viruses don't bother targeting them. If Mac's
market share increases, you can be sure that some little programming thug will seize
his opportunity.
 I'd say that a Mac is slightly more reliable than a well setup PC and quite a bit more
reliable than a trashed PC.
 You can have a certain bit of irresponsibility that you simply can't have with a PC in
regard to internet usage. You can let your guard down a bit with a Mac.

Advantages of PCs
 Custom built PCs are very powerful and very economical. For many, myself included,
putting a PC together is the most powerful balance of power, quality, performance, and

157
 price. For example, I've kept myself on a schedule where I invest $300 in computer
upgrades every 2.5 years.
 For equally equipped computers, it's a safe bet that a PC will always be cheaper.
 An overwhelming majority of computer users own a PC. This means that getting help
with your problems is dramatically easier.
 There are radically more software titles to choose from under the Windows platform.
 There is an endless of supply of quality free plugins and virtual instruments available
for the PC.
 Getting parts for a PC is no big deal. While the closest Mac hardware dealer is two
hours away, the PC dealer is a 10 minutes drive.

Computer Dependent Gear

The type of computer you choose will have an effect as to which hardware and software you
are able to use. I'm told by my users that some software doesn't run as reliably on a Mac as
it does a PC and vice versa. I'm not sure what causes this. The latest version of Logic is Mac
only. Certain audio interfaces are for Windows and some are designed specifically for Macs.
So just be aware that whoever you ally with in the PC vs Mac war may have an impact on the
gear you choose to record with.

Besides software and hardware compatibility, there aren't any reasons to assume a Mac will
be more powerful than a PC so be wary of the marketing, hype, or myths that tend to go
around. Of course, the same can be flipped. There is no reason to expect a PC to be any
more reliable than a Mac. I consider them equal overall with personal preference being a
bigger issue than general superiority. Go with the computer you prefer.

158
Q: Aren't Macs More Reliable Than Windows
Computers?
A: Because of the responsibility factor above, I think a person has to be more alert to the
dangers in the PC world. Us robo nerd PC users have a nice opportunity to save some cash.
The rest of the population may have better luck with a Mac.

If all PC users were created equal I don't think there would be much reason to use a Mac over
a PC. The problem is there are drunk drivers behind the mouse of way too many Windows
systems. (This includes the decision makers at Microsoft, Dell, HP, etc). Because of this I do
feel that many PCs get a bad rap based on user error. For whatever reason, coked out Mac
users don't seem to run over as many nuns.

A high end, purpose built recording computer (which may cost a fortune) should be just as
reliable as a Mac especially if your little brother isn't visiting questionable animal websites on
it.

Is there anything magical about Mac? Not even close! There are people who are convinced
that buying a Mac is going to end world hunger, solve our climate change issues, and make
the world a better place. That's a load of crap. Macs have their problems. I see them
constantly. There are entire forums for solving Mac problems.

Q: Aren't Macs Better For Recording?

A: Absolutely not. The difference between a Mac and a PC is highly overstated these days.
They use the same basic hardware, but have different operating systems. Back in 1991 they
say that Mac had an advantage over PC. I'm not even sure what that was. I was 11. I was
busy smashing bugs or beating the crap out of my brother. Years later, any differences in
computer technologies have settled just as my brother can now stomp me. If you really want
to be stuck in '91, wear your spandex. Don't let me stop you! However, just be aware that

159
the playing field leveled out years ago.

Q: Brandon, What do you recommend? Mac or PC?

A: It depends on the user. If money is no object Mac people need to think less. I'm not sure if
that makes them more productive or not, but it's a possibility. If money is an object, you can
blow a big ol' wad on a computer and have nothing left for the recording gadgets.

If you follow the guidelines here in Setting Up, there is no reason why a PC that costs a
fraction of the price can't be just as good and just as reliable as a cutting edge Mac. I firmly
believe that. However, the Mac users do get to skip those chapters and move on to topics
that are more fun.

Worst of all, if you buy a Mac you are now in the “Mac User Demographic”. While anyone
who has published in a scientific journal or has an Oscar is exempt, I can't help but see a
correlation between Mac users, people with near-death experiences, and people who did way
too much heroin back in '03.

Sorry dudes/chicks! The above paragraph was in retaliation to those commercials where the
PC guy is a nerd and the Mac guy is relatively normal. I've never seen a stronger insult to
intelligence of the human race in my life. Even Jerry Bruckheimer jumped up and said,
“Come on guys, people aren't this stupid!”.

You Don't Really Record With The Operating System

I want to make it very clear that after the initial setup, you won't deal with the Operating
System that often. In fact, the only time I deal with Windows XP is when I'm backing up files
or dragging files into a CD burning program. That's it! When I'm recording, I'm using
Cubase . My entire recording experience is joined at the hip with Cubase, and Windows
doesn't even come to mind.

160
The same is true for any real task on a computer. At the moment, I am not typing in
Windows, I'm typing in Open Office Writer. When I develop web pages, I'm using
Dreamweaver, not Windows!

So when you choose a computer system, don't get hung up on ridiculous debates about PC
vs Mac. Spend your time finding the recording software that is best for your needs. It's a
much more important decision. Focus on the ultimate goal: Making great sounding
recordings! Getting caught up in stupid controversial topics is a waste of time, money, and
resources.

Conclusion
A stock Mac is probably superior for home recording to a stock name brand PC at a higher
cost. However, a quick formatting of Windows (or setting up a dual boot system) on a name
brand PC or starting out with a custom built PC in the first place will essentially land you the
same caliber computer for often less money.

I've been able to stock up on quality recording gear because I haven't invested too much
money into any one link of the chain. If I had gone the Mac route, I could only imagine all the
microphones, preamps, plugins, and samples I would not been able to afford. I simply cannot
imagine my rack shrinking. For those people who aren't dealing with the same financial
limitations and own a $10k Neumann U47, I could see the issue of price being a much
smaller concern. In those cases, maybe the added simplicity of the Mac would be worth the
additional cost.

PC Computer Stuff

While this is not a computer book, computers play a dominant role in modern music
recording. I know quite a few members at RecordingReview.com who are experienced at
recording, but have been hesitant to jump into the world of computer recording.

161
Relax.

In this chapter, I hope to knock the edge off of some of the learning curve associated with
recording computers. I don't intend for this chapter to be ultra comprehensive. This is a
RECORDING book!! Maybe I can explain some of this computer junk in plain English. You
could find this information in a billion other places, but wouldn't you rather have a dude who
rocks show you?

I'm calling this “Computer Junk” because I realize that understanding computer guts isn't an
exciting proposition for the average guy/gal looking to make noise at home.

Calm Down!
Most people look at the guts inside their computers and begin to cringe. I guess to a layman,
all those circuits can be quite scary. If we pretend that all those pieces of circuitry are black
boxes (like that of cd players, dvd players, airliners, etc), the computer suddenly gets easier
to deal with. In fact, I'd venture to say that understanding the inside of a computer is fairly
simple when compared to something complex like understanding the female mind or the DVD
remote control. If you can hook up a dvd player to a tv to a home stereo, you can deal with a
computer. It's essentially the same thing. If you can't hook up a dvd player, it's much easier
than you think.

Computer Guts

Motherboard

A motherboard is the main hub to that all components

ultimately dock to. Every component in a computer plugs
straight into the motherboard. It's popular for motherboard
manufacturers to include sound, video, networking, USB,
and Firewire on the motherboard itself to reduce the

162
amount of extra “stuff” you need to buy later on.

This thing looks really complicated doesn't it! A person could go out of their mind if they had
to deal with the deeper level stuff.

This thing isn't that bad at all. It's just ugly. We've got to power it and plug into it the CPU,
RAM, hard drives, and cd-roms. We can plug in any extra stuff we may like such as front
USB ports, but that is optional. So don't let this little wuss get you down. It's just trying to
scare you.

CPU

The CPU is a stupid acronym for the processor. The

processor does all the thinking in the computer and
therefore the faster the processor, the faster the
computer. A fast processor can get bogged down by
other weak links in the chain, but we'll deal with that
mess later on. The better the CPU, the “smarter” the
computer and the faster it can perform tasks.

RAM

RAM is a stupid acronym for memory. I guess we could

call this “short term memory” as it handles everything the
computer is thinking about right now. Any open programs
that are running right now are using up memory. When
you close files in these programs, they will be removed
from RAM. You can kind of think of RAM as everything
you have sitting on your desk right now. Maybe you have
some bills you need to pay, some papers you need to sign, and maybe a DVD you plan on

163
watching tonight. The amount of RAM makes a huge effect on the performance of a
computer. A large quantity of fast RAM and a fast CPU are the two main factors in increasing
performance on a recording computer.

Hard drive

The hard drive is more like your filing cabinet. A hard drive
stores all data and files in your computer. It's more of a
long term storage system. As long as the hard drive
doesn't die, the data on a hard drive is there forever, even
if you turn off your computer. Hard drives offer different
amounts of storage and spin at different speeds.

As of this writing, most hard drives are spinning at 7200rpm. This speed is fine for all but the
most insane of audio recording demands. Laptops and cheapo desktop computers typically
come with a 5400rpm hard drive. This is not sufficient for even moderate audio recording
work. If you are using a laptop, it's recommended to use an external USB 2.0 or Firewire
7200 rpm drive.

CD / DVD Burner

This one is fairly self-explanatory. A DVD burner reads and

burns CDs or DVDs.

164
 Video card

A video card allows a computer to display video on a

computer monitor or other video device like a TV. The
performance of the video is affected by the quality of the
design and components within the video card itself. For
recording computers, the demands on the video card are
very low. In fact, I've had my current video card in my
recording computer for six years through three different
major upgrades (if that tells you anything).

Many motherboards come with “integrated video” which simply means the video card comes
built into the motherboard and you don't need an additional video card.

Misc PCI Cards

Motherboards come with auxiliary inputs so that you can add other miscellaneous stuff to
your computer. These kinds of “stuff” include networking cards, Firewire cards, USB 2.0
cards, PCI audio interfaces cards, etc. Again, there is nothing complex about the concept of
PCI cards. If you want to use a PCI card, slide it into the slot and make sure the drivers are
installed. While it takes a tad bit more dexterity to get the PCI card to fit into the slot, the
concept is no different than plugging a lamp into the wall.

Misc PCIe Cards

A new format has emerged that is slowly overtaking the PCI format. It's called PCI Express or
PCIe. It works the same way that PCI cards worked, but with greater performance
possibilities and a slightly different slot.

165
Operating System

The operating system is the software designed to put the whole thing together so you can
actually use all of this hardware. Microsoft Windows is the most popular operating system.
The operating system must contain software that tells each hardware component how to
function. (These are called drivers). Every process or function that takes place within the
computer must go through the operating system in one way or another. 99% of all problems
that occur within a computer are caused by errors in the operating system added by the user
or computer manufacturer. We'll discuss this in the “Properly Setting Up A PC Recording
Computer” section.

Power Supply

You connect the power supply to the motherboard, and you

plug the power supply into the wall out let. I guess you can
figure out that it supplies the electric stuff to the computer.

That's it!

That's all the major components in the computer. Hopefully, when worded like this, the guts
of a computer don't sound so complex. The overall setup is designed to be quite simple. A
computer is designed to be modular. If one component doesn't work, you can simply trade it
out with a component that does.

Recording Computer Demands

If you so choose, recording can use up every ounce of computer power available on even the
fastest of modern recording computers. Then again, people have been using computers for
multi-track recording since the mid 90s when computer power was a tiny fraction of what it is
now. Computers really came into their own in regard to being able to handle multi-track

166
recording fairly well in the early 2000s. Now, it really isn't too big of a deal for a computer to
record 10 or 20 tracks at the same time. However, as you start getting fancy, the demands on
the computer get astronomically greater.

Low Latency Monitoring

I do quite a bit of low latency monitoring these days. Let's assume we are recording a vocal
overdub. I like to run the vocal signal into the computer, into my recording software, use
compression and reverb, blend the signal with the backing music, and then send the signal to
the headphones for the singer to hear.

Because the audio signal has to flow through the computer, the computer must take some
time to process it. This time delay is called “latency”. Because the vocalist definitely does not
want to hear a delay from their real voice to the headphones, the latency must be set so low
(fast) that the singer doesn't notice.

As we set the latency lower, the demand on the computer increases drastically. It makes
sense. We are expecting a computer to work faster. When using low latency monitoring, we
are pushing a computer very hard.

Note: We could completely bypass the computer for monitoring altogether and setup a
headphone using a small mixer or something (but this is not preferred by most of us these
days for a number of reasons which we'll discuss later on). When we no longer require low
latency monitoring (such as during mixing) we can crank up the latency and give the
computer some room to breathe and we'll have quite a bit more computer power at our
disposal.

Samplers

In order to play back a sample in real time, samples must be loaded into RAM. The samples
are already stored on the hard drive, but the hard drive isn't fast enough to instantly react to a

167
key being struck on a MIDI controller or being played back by a sequencer. Because of this,
samples can use an enormous amount of RAM. In fact, when I set my old drum sampler,
DFH Superior, in “mega-quality” mode, I can use up 2GB of RAM with just a single drum kit.
This is a TON of ram just for drum samples! So, if you plan on doing any MIDI sequencing
using samples, you need to go all out on RAM.

Plugins

For the home recorder, plugins are amazing. The ability to buy one compressor plugin and
use it on every single track in a mix is amazing. In the past, plugins were considered
substandard when compared to their high-end hardware counterparts. This is changing.
More and more pro engineers are switching over to plugins for more and more of their mixing
needs because the sound of plugins gets a little bit more exciting each day. Most engineers
who haven't switched over will say that plugins are closer than ever to rivaling the hardware
stuff.

Unfortunately, this comes at a cost. As plugins get better and more musical sounding, they
also use more and more CPU power. While there are some very decent plugins out there
that are very efficient in their plugin usage, to get a noticeable step up in plugin character
often means taking a CPU hit. Because most of us are never satisfied, the home recorder is
always going to require a fast computer to handle the most demanding modern plugins.

Note: I've noticed that most high-end premium plugins tend to be much easier on the CPU
than your typical open source (free) plugins.

High Track Counts

In the end, nothing really puts a huge demand on resources like a high track count. While
recording, wav files are actually fairly light on CPU loads, more tracks means more plugins,
more routing, and more everything! In most modern recording programs, each track in use is
going to use a little bit of RAM and a little bit of CPU power. Of course, if you begin using

168
extremely high track counts, it's possible that you will over-extend your hard drive. This is
especially true in slower, 5400 rpm laptop hard drives.

Note: Even with track counts in the 70s I have never exceeded my hard drive's capabilities
and I'm using ATA 100, 7200 rpm hard drives which were standard grade in the early 2000s,
so there is no reason to panic and dump $10,000 on the hard drives used at NASA or
whatever. The “consumer grade” hard drives conquered this a long time ago.

I've actually found that as I've gotten to be a better engineer that I'm using fewer and fewer
plugins (or maybe using less plugins made me a better engineer?). I get the tones I need
while I'm tracking or we don't track. So, I find that not only am I wasting less time “fixing”
tracks (which never works anyway), I'm using less and less plugins. If you don't use that
many plugins, you can work with very high track counts on a modest recording computer--
food for thought.

Virtual Instruments

Synths have become extremely popular on the computer. The genres of electronic music, hip
hop, and any other music style that typically uses “keyboard” sounds have made a huge
switchover to using synthesizers “in the box” (or from within the computer). Generally
speaking, synths tend to be very CPU intensive. So if you plan on using synths, it is highly
recommended to pick up as much CPU power as you possibly can.

Q: Should I update my operating system?

I can't remember ever updating the operating system on my recording computer. First of all, I
wouldn't know if my operating system needed updating, because I'm not online.* I have no
idea if my operating system even needs updating. Secondly, if my system is running
smoothly, I change nothing. The “if it ain't broke” mentality is definitely what I recommend.
(Maybe it's the Wayne's World, “Change? We fear change!” side of me!) Updating this can
screw up that, and before you know it, you have the snowball effect going out of control.

169
It's my recommendation that you spend your time writing songs and making recordings, not
playing the “latest update contest game”.

If you do encounter a problem, then by all means, consider updating. However, my

experience with updates has been mostly negative in regard to the operating system.

* This actually brings up a great argument for not using internet (not even plugging it in) on
recording computers. Windows automatically tells you when your updates are available by
checking to see what updates you've already installed on your system. What else is the
internet “automatically” doing? On what other demands having nothing to do with audio is my
CPU wasting itself?

Q: What Is A Chipset?
A: Who cares! This isn't an advanced computer nerd book. This is a book that is supposed
to knock the edge off the learning curve of making great recordings. I could tell you what a
chipset really is and give you some kind of robo technical jargon that repels fun faster than
diarrhea. I'd rather take the smash-beer-can-on-forehead approach to computers.

All motherboards, USB 2.0 cards, and Firewire cards have a “thingy” called a chipset made
by a number of various manufacturers. (Texas Instruments, Via, Geforce, etc). All audio
interface manufacturers have a list of “doesn't play well with X chipset” buried deep down in
the darkest caverns of their website. (Even if you look and don't find, it doesn't mean it's not
there. I'm not aware of any audio interface that works perfectly with all chipsets. The list of
incompatibilities for an audio interface tends to be the kind of thing you only find after you've
purchased the audio interface.)

If you were to hook your audio interface into a chipset that wasn't compatible, you'd have a
nightmare on your hands that is only fixed by swapping to a device with the matching chipset.
This isn't a big deal if you only need to pull out a PCI Firewire card and toss in another one.

170
This would take 45 seconds or so, assuming you had a spare PCI Firewire card.

Note: If you don't have a spare PCI Firewire card laying around, you can expect to pay
between $5-20 for one on Newegg.com. You can expect to pay $50 at your local consumer
electronics store. If you don't take this chipset thing seriously when putting together your
recording rig, you will pay for it later.

If the chipset incompatibility is found on the motherboard itself, you have a much bigger
problem. I hope you didn't plan on recording in the next two weeks, because if the audio
interface hates your motherboard chipset, one of them must go. Are you going to totally
rebuild your computer, or are you going to ship back the audio interface?

Finding Your Computer's Chipset

To determine the chipset of your USB 2.0 ports, Firewire ports, or motherboard in general (for
PCI audio interfaces), head here in Windows:
Control Panels > System > Hardware > Device Manager

171
In this case, my Firewire card (IEEE 1394) uses a VIA chipset.

Q: Should I Go With AMD or an Intel Processor?

A: Because technology is constantly dynamic, I hesitate to recommend one over the other in
a book that could be outdated before I even get this stupid thing released. Generally
speaking, I've felt I've gotten more bang for my buck with AMD than with Intel. However, this
does not mean that you will. It also doesn't mean that my next processor I purchase will be
an AMD. In the end, both AMD and Intel make computer processors that are more than
adequate for high-end recording. It comes down to saving a few bucks in most cases.

A person would be best off by shopping around to find out what is available in X price range.
It won't take long to find some computer nerd who posted the results of benchmark testing for

172
the processors you have in question. These graphs should give a fairly clear indication of
how the performance compares from one processor to another. I'd expect performance
results to go hand in hand with price. (The exception to that are the brand new “cutting edge”
processors. They always jack the price up. I love to see a processor that was once $1,500
drop to $150 in a matter of months.)

The bigger issue for me is the motherboard chipset problem. As you may have already read,
I always recommend choosing the audio interface before choosing the computer simply
because of chipset compatibility issues. However, if you decide to switch to a new audio
interface, it's a total guess whether a given chipset will work with your new audio interface.
While Intel does have issues with a few audio interfaces, I've found that Intel chipsets have
been the safest bet for across the board for compatibility with audio interfaces. Now don't get
the wrong idea. It's still a gamble! As I've said, there are still audio interfaces that do not
work well with certain Intel chipsets, but Intel is more likely to be future proof.

In the end, don't get too wrapped up in small computer issues unless it's going to save you
big bucks. There are so many musical and audio engineering things to learn, that a night
debating Intel vs AMD is a night I consider to be wasted. Yup, debating processor companies
is like a night spent watching a Friends marathon. Write a song for Christ's sake!!

Q: What if my computer doesn't come with USB 2.0

or Firewire?
A: Don't worry! This is an easy problem to solve. For a desktop computer, you simply need to
purchase a PCI Firewire or USB 2.0 card. When I ordered my Presonus Firestudio, it turned
out that my previous Firewire card was the wrong chipset (Do as I say, not as I do!). I made a
trip to the local consumer electronics store. They wanted $50 for the card. I ordered a
Firewire card for $6. It works fine! As long as you have the PCI slots available (just about
everyone does) you won't have to worry about compatibility issues with your computer.

For laptops, the PCI slot isn't available, but you can purchase a PCMCIA card to add Firewire

173
or USB 2.0 capability.

I recommend purchasing your computer components here.

Note: Firewire is the same thing as IE 1394.

Quad Core Computer Power

I was at my mom's house. I was in the library (you know the room with the bathtub), and I
looked in my old hiding places for literature (Not dirty magazines, you nasty people!). I found
an issue of Electronic Musician from 2003. I flipped through it. The big thing that shocked
me was that the role of the recording computer had not changed all that much in six years.
While there have been breakthroughs and improvements – particularly on the audio interface
features side of the fence – I really can't say that we are doing anything all that different now
than we did then.

Back in 2003, we were recording audio and sequencing. We had compressors, EQ, reverb,
delay, chorus, and just about every other effect from the hardware world, including even a few
that weren't possible in the hardware world. We had more synths and samples than a person
in 1996 would have known what to do with. In the right hands, a computer recording rig (even
running at 1/20th speed of today’s computers) was capable of devastating recordings.

We've seen other dramatic improvements in three notable areas:

• guitar amp emulation

• plugin sound quality

• samples

Guitar amp emulators have gone from being flat out useless to making a guy like me wonder
how long his amp collection is going to be worth anything. The compressor and EQ plugins in
2003 got the job done, but few had any real character to speak of. That's all changed.
Samples have improved immensely, particularly in the realm of realistic drum samples. All of
these use quite a bit more horsepower in the ol' overgrown calculator box than was necessary

174
in 2003, but it's not like we are running climate models or rendering the latest “Industrial Light
and Magic” effects.

I feel comfortable in saying that Quad Core computers have conquered audio recording. The
Quad Core processors are the first to allow a person doing some fairly wild stuff to sit down
and add plugin after plugin, and sample after sample, without a care in the world. (Previously,
you could do pretty much anything you wanted, but you always had to worry about your CPU
reserves, and sometimes, just one or two instances of a guitar amp emulator would leave you
out of gas.) These days, a person would have to be using an idiotic amount of plugins and
samples to overload Quad Core computers. (Some genres call for an idiotic number of
plugins.)

While there will be incremental improvements in sound quality and various recording
computer software gadgetry, the truth is that the computer world can do pretty much
everything the hardware world can do right now. It's safe to say these incremental
improvements will also utilize more and more CPU power as time goes on. However, for
there to be a major technological breakthrough requiring 5x the processing capabilities of that
of the Quad Core computers, it's going to require some kind of revolution that really doesn’t
exist in the hardware recording world. It's going to have to be something new, and something
that most of us cannot even fathom at this point: Maybe recording software that reads our
brain waves or involves time travel. For everything else, Quad Core computers have it
conquered.

There is one possible exception to my little theory. If Microsoft, and maybe Mac, decides that
their operating systems need to exponentially hog more CPU power in upcoming releases,
that could throw a wrench into our campfire. (Isn't there a saying about throwing a wrench
somewhere? Oh well.)

So, this is my long way of saying that until we need cloaking devices to record music, I think
Quad Core computers pretty much conquered home recording land!

175
Keeping A Recording Computer Quiet
Computers make noise. It's a part of life. I've recorded some fairly quiet instruments in my
control room only 10 feet away from my recording computer so I'll try to explain how to do it.

There are two sides to keeping computer noise to a minimum. There is reduction of the noise
in the first place within the computer itself. Then there are ways to deal with that noise once it
leaves the computer.

Within The Computer

Fans

The most obvious noisemakers in computers are the fans themselves. The fan on the CPU
and the fan on the power supply are the biggest culprits of all. The stock fan on the CPU can
always be upgraded to a model that is much more quiet for just a few extra bucks. (You can
find these here.) When you begin to check out noise level ratings on CPU fans, you'll find
that there can be enormous variation between similar models, even at relatively low price
points. I've seen $30 CPU fans/heatsinks where one model may be 10dB quieter than
another model. This is an enormous difference! Do some research and find a fan/heatsink
for your CPU that makes as little noise as possible.

Make sure you go with as large a fan size as possible. The smaller the fan, the higher rpm it
will have to spin to move the same amount of air. The faster the fan is spinning, the louder the
noise and the higher the pitch of the noise making the noise more audible.

There are some crazy designs out there for heatsinks and fans. Some of these are capable
of dramatically reducing the noise of the computer for a very reasonable amount of money. If
absolute silence is a requirement for you, money spent on fans is money well spent.

176
Alternative CPU Coolers

There are other alternatives these days when it comes to cooling a CPU. Water-based
cooling has been getting more and more popular over the years. Water based cooling is not
cheap and the actual water pump can make noise as well so you may want to look into
specific models to make sure you aren't replacing modest fan noise with an even louder water
pump. Personally, I've always been a little bit hesitant to toss water into my recording
computer. (I once dumped a cup of coffee onto a computer's motherboard while it was
running and lived to tell about it...BARELY!!)

Fanless CPU Coolers

There are also fanless designs that incorporate enormous heatsinks so that the actual
computer case is a big part of its cooling. These are usually not cheap, but may be worth
looking into. With all of this computer jive, make sure you do your research to ensure that
these methods are still viable as this writing may be ancient history by the time you get a hold
of it. Fanless CPU cooler cases may be fine today but may not work for the next generation
of power hungry computers. As computers get faster, they tend to use more electricity and
therefore generate more heat. The long story short is that your computer needs may outgrow
your fancy cooler.

Power Supply

The power supply is another major contributor to the noise problem. It's always highly
recommended to purchase as quiet a power supply as possible. Every dB you can stop the
computer from producing is a dB you don't have to worry about getting into a microphone.
There aren't too many tricks when it comes to quieting down a power supply. In fact, the only
thing I really know is to buy one with a quiet rating (not necessarily a quiet title) and make
sure that it has as the largest possible fans.

Fan Speed Controllers

Some motherboards allow controllers to either automate the speed of the fans within the

177
computer via a thermostat or allow you to set the fan speed with a knob on your desktop. If
you are having lots of problems with computer noise, even after following my guidelines, a fan
speed controller may be a lifesaver for you. Stock fan speeds are set to overkill speeds and
you can often dramatically reduce the noise level of the computer by simply turning the fans
down.

Because absolute computer silence is a requirement unique to audio recording,

manufacturers seldom bother with the added cost of adding fan speed controllers. If silence
is a requirement, it could pay off to turn the fans down.

Be careful with these. Some of them are dramatically more complicated than they need to
be. Setting them involves dusting off the geometry books. I'm not kidding! Setting them
incorrectly can cause crashes and the dreaded Blue Screen of Death.

Computer Cases

I've noticed that computer case manufacturers often like to name their cases something “cool”
or “quiet”. It's common to see “thermal” this and “silent” that. Never trust the name of a
computer case. That is a marketing ploy. Instead, do some research to find out if the case
can reduce noise or not. While a case is limited in what it can do to reduce noise, every dB
helps. It's totally possible for a case to be rigid enough to knock down noise and be designed
so that wind turbulence in the computer itself is reduced.

You may be familiar with a product called Dynamat. It's very popular in the car audio world.
Dynamat is basically a lead sheet with sticky stuff on one side. The idea is by adding mass to
an item that is resonating, you can greatly reduce the amount of resonance and therefore
reduce the noise. There is some truth to this concept when it comes to soundproofing, but it
is not perfect. It is great for reducing rattles and resonance, but probably isn't going to do
anything for direct fan noise. I've spoken with people who have used Dynamat in their
computer cases and they were pleased with the upgrade. You would apply Dynamat to the
sides and to the top of the insides of the case. We'll discuss this concept of resonance later

178
on in this section.

Round ATA Cables

Always use the round style ATA cables when connecting components to your motherboard.
The flat, ribbon style cables are an incredible inhibitor of airflow and a big reason that
computer fans have to work hard to cool a computer. Spend just a few extra bucks to use
cables that are much more ideal for the cooling of your computer. I'm positive that using
round cables would allow you to turn the fan speed down by a noticeable amount.

Note: Most of us are using SATA hard drives, therefore this isn't that big of an issue anymore
as SATA cables are much smaller and don't inhibit airflow in the way the old ATA cables did.

Fanless Video Cards

Modern video cards get hot. Many of them come with a fan. When putting together a silent
recording computer, choose a video card that uses a fanless design. It's not like a mega
powerful video card is required for audio recording anyway. Therefore, I'm of the opinion that
going with a middle of the road, relatively quiet, and relatively cool video card is the way to
go.

Hard Drive Isolation

Hard drives are mechanical devices that spin at very high RPMs. Because of this, there is no
way to get around the fact that they shake. This shaking will transfer throughout your
computer case. By isolating the hard drive so that the transfer of these vibrations to your
case is reduced, we can reduce the amount of resonance within the case.

179
Fan Isolation

All case fans follow the same laws of physics as the hard drives mentioned above. They are
spinning, so therefore they are vibrating. There are products that allow you, at a relatively low
cost, to reduce the amount of vibration transferring to your computer case.

Outside The Computer

Now that our computer is fairly quiet, we'll still have some noise to contend with. Let's
discuss our options.

Enclosures

If you've got the cash, an enclosure is the way. With an enclosure, you simply toss your
computer into a pretty cabinet and call it a day. You don't have to think about the computer
nerd stuff. You just use a “normal” computer and say heck with it. When you upgrade to a
new computer down the road, it's no big deal to pull out the old computer and put in the new
computer. Unfortunately, a good enclosure that actually does what it is supposed to costs
money. Big money!

Rethinking Home Built Enclosures

I know what you are thinking. Why are these enclosures so expensive? It's easy to build a
wooden box, right? The idea of stuffing a computer into an airtight box sounds like a great
rig. Stuff it in there, seal it up, and be done with it, right? Well, a good enclosure is
expensive. Very expensive! There is much more that goes into an enclosure than you may
initially think.

The first problem is heat. A modern computer is essentially a small space heater. In fact,
computers were getting so hot that they've made efforts in recent years to reduce the wattage
a CPU uses (and therefore dissipates into the air), even at a cost of performance. When you
cram a little space heater into a box, that box is going to get really hot in a hurry. The
problem is ventilation causes noise to leak back into the room and that totally defeats the

180
purpose of the isolation enclosure to begin with.

The second problem is resonance. As discussed briefly above, the computer is full of rotating
thingies that vibrate. It takes advanced engineering to come up with a box that will be able to
contain this resonance. If you were to take a 4'x8' sheet of plywood and simply toss it on top
of the average computer, the noise would actually get louder. The vibrations would transfer
through the plywood and the plywood would act as a primitive audio speaker.

Another way to see this concept in action is to grab your guitar and physically touch a window
with the headstock (Gently!!!!) and strum a chord. Now pull the guitar off the window. Strum
the same chord. The difference is enormous. The window actually makes the sound louder.

We get into this concept of transfer in the soundproofing section later on, so I'm not going to
dwell too much on it here.

However, simply tossing a computer into a box that is not incredibly rigid (and more than likely
incredibly massive) will result in noise that is louder than a computer with no iso box at all.
On top of that, if significant efforts have not been made to ventilate the iso box, the computer
will run too hot. Of course, we've already defined that the noise can escape this ventilation
rendering the iso box useless.

You can now see why a real deal iso box is so expensive!

Simple Treatments

As ridiculous as this may sound, you may not need any fancy soundproofing for your
recording computer.

Why can't we simply block computer noise with blankets, a couch, or any other absorbing
material? Obviously this depends on your demands. Finger picked acoustic guitar parts and
soft vocals are going to be very quiet and therefore the possibility of noise from the computer
is dramatically increased. Guys in screaming rock bands won't have to worry nearly as much.

181
If blankets don't do the job, more aggressive absorption such as Rockwool probably can. I
keep a 2'x4'x4” sheet of Rockwool wrapped in fabric running along the side of my recording
computer. The noise of the computer has to go around the Rockwool either through the front
or the back of the computer to get to the microphone (which has the blanket in front of it and
is pointed away from the computer anyway). As crude as this method is, I'm shocked by how
little noise gets into my recordings with robo sensitive microphones. When I pull the
Rockwool away, the noise level increases dramatically.

Note: This was with my older Athlon 64 computer which I'd guess is at least 6dB louder than
my current Intel Quad Core computer with stock fan.

No method will work well when the room is excessively live. Just as the sound of clapping
your hands will bounce all over the room, the sound from the computer noise will too. I've
heard some people mention that even with no instruments playing, they can hear the “sound
of the room” as if they were sticking their ear in a seashell. That's not the sound of the room!
That's the noise of the computer bouncing around the walls!

The sound of the computer noise bouncing around the room could be very loud in a room with
many reflective surfaces, and I can't think of a time when we'd want this in a control room. So
if your control room is excessively live, you may want to look into broadband treatment (which
we'll discuss in the “Control Room Acoustics” chapter).

Distance

The best way to deal with noise, toxic waste, and nuclear radiation is to use distance. If you
can't beat 'em, put them so far away that you simply don't notice. Maybe you don't have a
nuclear fall out shelter, but you do have closets, other rooms, etc. What am I talking about?
I'm talking about purchasing KVM extension cables for your keyboard, mouse, and computer
monitor. Most people aren't aware of extension cables. But moving a computer up to 30' feet
is a great way to solve the noise problem. You'll have to walk 30' feet before you burn a cd,
but us recording people could use the exercise anyway.

182
Do not undermine the effects of distance. This is the single most powerful weapon we have
against the forces of control room noise. Without a doubt, KVM extension cables are
dramatically cheaper than any other method outside the computer for stopping noise.

Isolate Vibrations

A problem few of us ever think about is the actual vibrations of the computer case itself.
These vibrations transfer through the floor and can add dramatically to the noise. By adding
some kind of isolation between the bottom of the computer and the floor, there is dramatic
potential for noise reduction.

UPS (Uninterrupted Power Supply)

Don't even think about it. The second the idea of losing all of your recording gear due to an
electrical burnout becomes unbearable, run out and purchase an Uninterrupted Power
Supply. An UPS gives you the luxury of saving your work and shutting your computer down
when the power goes out. When the power has gone out, I've specifically sat down to mix for
15 minutes, because I had nothing else to do. This is the luxury side of the UPS. Then there
is the necessity side.

As I'm writing this, thousands of people are still without power in my immediate area. The UE
guys have put in 90-hour weeks trying to restore power. A massive ice storm has left only a
percentage of trees standing. Those that fell often took power lines with them. The idea of
having heat and electricity again may sound like a huge relief, but for many households, the
news wasn't so pleasing.

My girlfriend's parents lost their furnace, two TVs, computer, X-box 360, stereo, little PA
system, and fireplace doohickey (don't ask), all because their circuit breakers weren't fast
enough. It appears that when a massive tree took a dive in their yard, it took some power
lines with it. Instead of yanking the power lines right off the house, the lines stretched to the
point the insulation between the two lines became thin enough for the two wires to meet. The
end result was disastrous.

183
I got to thinking what I would do if I lost my recording computer, Presonus Firestudio, Vintech
1272, Distressor, Mytek converters, etc etc etc. I'd be out thousands of dollars unless
insurance would bail me out. (Yeah, you can really count on them!)

So anything that is extra important to you, run through a UPS. You won't regret the
investment!

Laptop Recording Considerations

The notion of going portable is great for recording, and in practice, laptops do extremely well.
However, there are a few things to be aware of when recording with a laptop.

Ditch the 5400rpm Hard Drive

A huge majority of laptops come from the factory with an internal hard drive that spins at 5400
rpm. By modern standards, this is slow and there will result in degradation of recording
performance when lots of tracks or samples are used. The second you run into problems go
ahead and purchase an external hard drive and make sure it is 7200 rpm. It's extremely rare
to need more performance than a 7200-rpm drive can deliver. It really doesn't make much
difference whether the external drive utilizes USB 2.0 or Firewire.

You could replace your internal hard drive with a 7200-rpm internal drive, but this would
require you to re-install Windows and all software. In most cases, the external drive method
is preferred.

Dual Boot Systems or Virtual Machines

Seldom are laptops dedicated strictly to recording work. They are used for internet, email,
and just about everything a typical home computer is used for. Therefore, there is an extreme
risk for the operating system of that laptop to be destroyed by an unclean operating system.
If I were going to record on a laptop, I would immediately setup a dual boot system or look
into my options with Virtual Machines.

184
Chipset Issues

As with home computers, make sure the chipset of your laptop is compatible with the audio
interface you select. The chipset problem is no different than with home computers, but the
solution can be more difficult with laptops. In regard to motherboard chipsets, the problem is
the same. If your motherboard is incompatible with your audio interface, you are essentially
up a creek and will be sending the audio interface back. In regard to issues with Firewire or
USB 2.0 chipsets in a home computer, you can simply toss in a new PCI card and be on your
way. With a laptop, you can add a PCMIA Firewire or USB 2.0 card to address this. The
cards are less available and typically cost more money. So plan ahead with the chipset just
like you would with a home computer.

6-Pin Firewire

If you plan to use a bus-powered audio interface so that you can go out and record in the
woods or in the beach relying solely on the power of your laptop's battery, you will want to be
sure that you have a 6-pin Firewire output. A 4-pin, which is more common in laptops, will not
supply power to bus powered audio interfaces.

Performance Limitations

Quite a few people want to record with a laptop. There is nothing wrong with that necessarily.
However, you are going to pay quite a bit more for laptop horsepower. The simple truth is
laptops run slower. As of this writing, the Quad core desktop computers are all over the
place. You can't even purchase a Quad core Dell laptop no matter how much cash you've
got.

Make sure that extra portability is worth the cut in performance. I've found that most people
dramatically overemphasize this portability thing.

185
 Computer Performance Optimization

Dux nLited XP Pro

Some dude named Dux has put together a specific build for Windows XP Pro SP3 that is
completely optimized for audio right out of the box. You have to do nothing but install it. I've
been running it for several months on my rig and I have to say that it's amazing.

I did have to install an unzip program (Windows can't do .rar files anyway) and a lightweight
media player program because it's that stripped down. It's a racecar!

If you plan to format your computer for audio recording, I highly recommend this version.
Check it out.

Avoid The Problem In The First Place

Eliminate The Dirty Operating System

I want to make a gigantic emphasis on the importance of this section. Many home recorders
get demoralized by the bugs they have to deal with in their recording setup. Clicks and pops
in their recorded tracks, random errors in their recording software, and just general
unreliability typically stem from the fact that they don't have a “clean” computer.

186
A clean computer has only the bare minimum of software installed. (Extra software clutters
up a computer's hard drive and increases the chances for performance digesting conflicts). A
clean computer is free of viruses and spybots (A huge problem for recording computers
connected to the internet). A clean computer looks boring and empty when you click on the
Start > All Programs. Most importantly, a clean computer is wasting as close to 0% of its
power on unnecessary tasks as possible. This is the big one! If your computer is wasting 1/3
of it's power on junk, you may as well be using a computer from 3 or 4 years ago. Why pay
$2,000 for a new mega computer when you could setup a clean system in an hour and get
the same performance with a computer at a fraction of the price?

I can't state the importance of this concept enough. You will waste hours and hours and
hours fighting your recording software (if you are doing anything demanding at all) if you insist
on using a dirty operating system.

In my opinion, life is too short to build the foundation of your recording studio on such shaky
ground. I want a strong foundation and I don't want to have to mess with any more
distractions than I have to. As if music recording didn't have enough challenges!

Recording Software Is Different

Recording software is fairly unique. High-end software like Adobe Photoshop or

Dreamweaver can run on just about anything remotely modern. When I type a key, the
software reacts when it can. If the computer is slow it may take a while, but ultimately the
dimension of time is not one that these programs really deal with.

However, with recording software, when I speak into a mic, I need to hear the sound
immediately. There is no “take your time” tolerance when recording music. So maybe a
computer runs fairly aggressive programs with little to no problems. So what. That is nothing
compared to giving a computer 5ms to take in an audio signal, route it through recording
software, compress it, add reverb, combine it with the background music, and then send it
back out.

187
Because of this added time demand, we need to treat our recording computers with a little
more care than we would the computer we check our email with.

Use a dedicated computer for recording

Recording music puts extraordinary demands on a recording computer. It's a miracle that the
technology exists that can handle the demands of music recording. So, it's extremely
important that our recording computers are performing at their best. Raw horsepower cannot
make up for flat tires. To anyone with the means and budget, I highly recommend using a
separate computer for music recording. Ideally, internet should never be hooked up. There
should be no software installed that isn't specifically used for the recording process.

I basically look at my recording computer as my racecar. Racecars do not have air

conditioning or carpet. The seat is not designed for comfort. The car is designed to go fast
enough to kill you! Recording computers are built for performance and nothing else.

Closing out a program is only going to reduce a slight portion of the damage done by a
trashed registry, viruses, spybots, etc. The only way to get around it is to use a system where
you won't even be tempted to install Yahoo Messenger and other cancer causing agents.

Dual Boot System

To those with a smaller budget or a situation that doesn't allow for a second computer, a dual
boot system is a great alternative. Basically, you have two operating systems. When you
start your computer, you will have the option to load the usual system or to load the recording
system. The recording system can be 100% optimized for recording while your normal
system can be used for email, internet, games, etc. Installing a dual boot system is free and
it only takes about 30 minutes to install Windows XP on a good day. I highly highly highly
recommend this to anyone who is having problems with their recording software. The dual
boot system is beyond the scope of this book, but it's not difficult to do. It's certainly simpler
and faster than troubleshooting recording software forever.

Viruses have no trouble working their way over from one installation of Windows to another.

188
Virtual Machines

Yet another route to take that may work better for the average joe is the use of a Virtual
Machine. Essentially, a virtual machine allows you to run a completely isolated operating
system within another operating system. This opens a number of doors, but the most
important being the enormous security that you can wrap your internet operating system in.
Check out Vmware, Virtual PC, VirtualBox, or QEMU.

The basic idea is you install Windows normally on your computer. This Windows version is
barely even used for anything other than launching the Virtual Machine software. Then with
your Virtual Machine, you divide the computer up into various sections where you will install
Windows (or possibly another type of operating system) again. These are totally isolated
from each other so you can switch to the internet installation and download all the craziest
viruses in the world and it will have zero effect on your recording computer. This is what I
plan to use with my next recording computer.

Note: There are going to be the Mac enthusiasts who claim that none of this is necessary on
a Mac. I think the use of the word “none” may be a bit of an overstatement, but I can't argue
with the fact that a typical Mac avoids the need for much of this setup process. Inevitably, the
Mac route is a bit more convenient for an additional fee. However, I've not heard any
significant evidence to suggest that the Mac is more secure because of better-written
software. It seems to be simply a matter of fewer people attack Macs because fewer people
use Macs. So if Macs continue to gain in popularity it's possible that their secure status will
diminish. Virus software writers will find a way.

Make A Carbon Copy Backup Of Your Operating

System
I often recommend that new home recording people format their current operating system.

189
The idea is to start fresh with a “clean” operating system free of the headaches that come
from using a trashed operating system. The actual formatting of a Windows computer isn't
too time consuming. Within 30 minutes to an hour I can have a system formatted with a new
install of Windows ready to go. However, by the time I install all my software, register it, and
then begin the tedious process of installing all plugins and samples, it's very possible that I've
wasted most of the day.

If you have a trashed operating system there is no way to get around formatting in my
opinion. However, once you have a well-performing, reliable system it's time to make a
carbon copy. Using a program called BartPE you can make a flawless carbon copy of your
Windows setup on an additional hard drive so that if you run into problems in the middle of a
session, you can completely restore your last backup in about 10 minutes.

Note: I want to make it clear that this is not the Windows “system restore” feature, which is a
total joke in comparison. This method actually erases the entire C: drive and replaces it with
exactly what you had on your hard drive (byte per byte) on your last backup date without
losing a single shred of performance.

http://www.recordingreview.com/blog/computer-recording-issues/create-a-perfect-backup-of-
your-windows-hard-drive/

Stick with Good Ole, Reliable, Stable Operating

System
To this date, I don't know of a single person who is happy recording music with a New, Cutting
Edge, Piece of Junk Operating System. (I'm referring to whatever operating system is being
advertised on Super Bowl and American Idol commercials). The hardware manufacturers
have been very slow to release New, Cutting Edge, Piece of Junk-ready drivers. While some
companies have had drivers out for a long time, I still hear of people having problems nearly
two years later.

190
There is considerable debate in regard to the need for New, Cutting Edge, Piece of Junk
Operating System. In other words, many people have been very happy with Good Ole,
Reliable, Stable Operating System and don't see the added benefit of running New, Cutting
Edge, Piece of Junk Operating System. This will eventually change. Just remember that if
you decide to run New, Cutting Edge, Piece of Junk Operating System on your recording
computer, it's likely that you will exponentially increase your headaches. Because of the
nature of music recording, I always recommend going with the most stable system out there.

In case, I didn't make my point obvious here, I'm talking about Window XP and Windows
Vista. Windows XP is the good ol' reliable software. Vista is the new, cutting edge, piece of
junk. I didn't want to date myself. I'm sure in the next decade the same debate between old
vs new will still be going. Once again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I'm not really trying to turn this section into a XP vs Vista argument. In fact, I don't want to
limit it to a discussion of Microsoft products. This applies to Mac and Linux as well. A
recording rig is a low tolerance, high performance machine. You do not want to go on an
experimental mission unless you are more interested in boldly going where no man has gone
before than you are actually recording music. Play it safe. Like pulling off a bank heist (yes,
I'm an expert), you must know that every member of your crew is reliable and not going to
turn on you. It's hard enough to steal the jewels when everything goes right. The same
applies here.

Use Multiple Hard Drives

It's always recommended to use one hard drive specifically for the operating system and then
a second hard drive for the actual audio files. Because the audio drive is working very hard in
a recording computer (playing back dozens of tracks), its always best to let it focus on just the
audio data. In the event that you use samples, it is recommended that you place your
samples on the third hard drive. Samples need to be played back extremely quickly and by
using a dedicated hard drive for your samples, you dramatically improve reliability and
performance.

191
Go ahead and install your actual recording software on the C: drive. There is no performance
benefit to installing it on your audio or sample drives.

7200 RPM, 10k RPM, and 15k RPM Hard Drives

Since the early 2000s, I've been using standard ATA and SATA hard drives that spin at 7200
rpm. You can certainly get faster performing hard drives at a higher price. For example,
Seagate (a popular hard drive manufacturer) claims an increase in performance of 30% with
their 15k rpm Cheetah series, which sell for about triple the price of their more standard
Barracuda line and require a special motherboard.

In all but the most extreme cases of audio recording I consider this to be a total waste of
money. Stick with the good ol' 7200 rpm hard drives that you can purchase in the $60-100
range (give or take).

Optimize The Operating System

Unfortunately, operating systems have to be all things to all people. I would love to have an
operating system that was perfect for Brandon and not care about the other 60 zillion people
on the planet. It hit home for me when a nerdy, server type of guy showed me his operating
system on a floppy disk. (Why does Windows require an entire CD or even DVD?)

Windows comes with junk and add-ons that I will never use. Because of this, there is quite a
bit of tuning that can be done to dramatically improve the performance of an operating
system.

This tuning can result in ridiculous gains! I always go for performance so a good chunk of this
optimization is turning off pretty things that have no functional purpose. For example, as I
write this piece of epic literature, the bar at the bottom of my screen (I'm typing this on a
Windows XP system) is grey. The standard color is this pretty blue gradient. The pretty blue
bar will not make this book any better and that pretty blue bar won't make your recordings
better either. While probably not an enormous CPU hog, the pretty blue theme in XP uses

192
more computer power than the “classic” ugly design. I'm not going to go into detail about
optimizing Windows XP for recording because I'd like for this book to be of some use in 2018.
So forget I even mentioned XP! Just understand that any operating system designed to be
sold to the masses is going to have unnecessary, CPU using stuff installed that may not be
catering to you. If performance is an issue (and when is it not!) turn that stuff off!

You can find endless articles from the computer nerd sites online that go into great depth on
what you can turn off, how you can turn it off, what is safe to turn off, what will fry your
computer (joke), etc. I could rehash the same info that is freely available all over the web in
this book, but I didn't see the point. Just search for “XP optimization” or “X operating system
optimization” and you'll find plenty of well thought out guides by computer guys who are way
more nerdie (and knowledgeable) than you or I can stand.

Should I Use Internet On My Recording Computer?

This always sounds like a loaded question to me. If a person walked up to me and said
“Should I use illegal controlled substances?” I would make a strange face. I would then
slowly ask, “What?” If they persisted and asked “Should I use heroin?” I'd probably have to
go ahead and suggest that they don't stab themselves with a needle 50 times a day just so
they can flush their life down the toilet. I find this issue internet/recording computer
relationship to be similar.

The issue of internet usage on a recording computer is often discussed on the forum at
RecordingReview.com. I do not use internet on my recording computer. My life is
complicated enough and I don't want to risk dealing with the potential performance loss that
can be associated with running internet on my recording computer.

I think there are two things in this world that do not mix. Drinking and driving is one.
Recording computers and internet is the other. That's it. Everything else mixes.

To me, the need for internet also brings up the need for Anti-virus software and spybot

193
removal software. Adding these 2 programs (which are known performance KILLERS ) is not
an option for me. Every little image you see on your screen is stored away in a cache
somewhere incrementally fragmenting your hard drive. Even a person who is pretty good
about avoiding “bad neighborhoods” on the web will still find new surprises in their programs
list that they didn't put there. I've even had hardware conflicts that occurred simply because a
networking card was installed. On a typical computer, this is no big deal. On a recording
computer, I'll let you decide.

The only benefit I can see to having internet on a recording computer is the ease in obtaining
software updates. I only update my software when I have problems, so this is a very, very
rare situation. So, to me, the risk is not worth the reward. To others, the risk to reward ratio
may be different.

When I need to transport files to and from my computer, I simply pull out my flash drive. It
works great and means I don't have to take any risks with the internet.

Note: I should probably mention that lightly using internet on a recording computer isn't
guaranteed suicide. Smart, light uses of internet in very safe neighborhoods can work out.
However, it's a risk. As a guy who doesn't have time to deal with the potential pitfalls, I don't
take the chance. Because I'm constantly helping people with their technical hurdles at
RecordingReview.com I find that a trashed computer is one of the biggest causes of technical
problems and frankly I'm too tired to solve my own!

How Much Should I Spend On a Recording Computer?

The idea of spending too much money on a recording computer has always bothered me.
There are so many components in the recording chain that it doesn't make sense to blow too
much cash on just one link.

Obviously computers are not known for retaining their value. A $4,000 computer today is a
paperweight in a few years. You'll be lucky to pay someone $5 to take it off of your hands!

194
With that said, the clunk of slamming a digital computation relic into a trash can is something
that makes an impact on a person...and the trash can. It's important to note that not all
recording gear is like this. Microphones, preamps, compressors, and other hardware tend to
hold their value very well if they were desirable in the first place. Musical instruments vary
quite a bit, but a “good” instrument will hold its value in most instances.

It seems illogical to blow an enormous amount of cash on computer power when you know
you are “working your way up” in terms of gear. It's usually smarter to invest in a computer
that will meet your recording needs and little more so that you can put your money to work
into areas that are much more important than the bragging rights of having a supercomputer.
(What's the deal with the computer nerds who post their computer specs in their forum
signature?)

When I see people who are blowing $2,000 on a recording computer, it always makes me
wrinkle my nose a little bit as if someone broke wind in an unpleasing way (as opposed to the
“pleasing” way). It's that same feeling I get when I see people who shouldn't be scantily clad
in public being scantily clad in public. Just remember that there are many, many links in the
chain. If your studio monitoring sucks, your recording computer should suck too. That's my
opinion, anyway.

When I upgrade my recording computer, I spend $100 on the motherboard, $100 on the
processor, and max out the RAM which my operating system will effectively use.

At the moment, my current recording computer (which I use to make a living) would be
completely smoked if I were to upgrade it today. My computer is “slow”. So what! Yes, there
are much faster computers out there. I'd rather have the cash! Of course, I already have a
high quality power supply, an excellent video card, and three hard drives. (I actually have a
fourth hard drive installed, but that's just for backup purposes.)

Instead of measuring your computer performance needs by what everyone else is doing, take
a look at your sessions. If you are wasting time or feel limited because your CPU keeps

195
bogging, maybe it's time to look into an upgrade. However, if you do well with your current
setup, buy yourself a new mic or other misc recording toy. Better yet. Fly to Hawaii!

Note: I lied. I just ordered a new computer last night. I spent $50 on the motherboard, $180
on the processor, and maxed out the RAM. All the parts cost me a hair over $400 and this
computer should be about nine times faster than my previous computer.

Take A Look At Servers

My experience with consumer grade, store bought PCs has been not-so-good. I find that they
are a pain in the neck. Everything from the useless software they contaminate the operating
system with from the factory to the fact that most of the buttons have been changed when
attempting to fire up safe mode or BIOS to the fact that some of them have such tiny cases
that you need the hands the size of a seven year old to toss in a RAM chip have made me
really grow intolerant of the typical computer the big computer manufacturers put out. Good
luck trying to fit three hard drives in your typical Walmart computer.

However, there is still one place to look to find affordable, killer computers from the big, name
brands. It's the used server / workstation market. A Dell server was my first recording
computer and even after I retired it from recording use, it held its own with computers with
dramatically higher specs for years. Looking back, that computer was especially impressive.
It kind of reminds me of an old dog I used to have. I think I'll call that server “Old Yeller”.

Servers and workstations are intended for a different market. They are marketed to people
who actually want to do something productive with their lives / computers. The typical person
who's greatest life achievement is decorating their Myspace page or installing yet another
toolbar is not really going to be interested in the relatively boring, performance driven mindset
that goes into a server or workstation.

When workstations and servers are brand new, they cost a fortune. For example, I just
checked Ebay for a “Dell server” and found a Dell PowerEdge 6650 that listed for $6,000+
just a few years ago. Now you can get the thing for a few hundred bucks. Even by today's

196
standards this thing is still fast.

Not everyone wants a 90lb rack mount box that looks more like a tank than a computer
(actually, that sounds about like the most pleasing thing imaginable), so do yourself a favor
and at least look at the workstations out there if you are not interested in building your own
computers.

The average consumer looking to purchase a computer seldom searches for “server” or
“workstation” and usually it's a large corporation who has upgraded their entire fleet of
computers who is selling them. They are simply looking to move their old computers to make
room for the new. The long story short is the bang for the buck possibilities are very high.

How Much Computer Power Do I Need?

I'd love to tell you “7”. You need 7 computer power. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of any good
standard to judge the amount of computer juice I'm using other than looking at my CPU %
meter. Generally speaking, a fairly modern computer (in the mid/late 2000s) that is setup
properly and clean can handle recording 40 tracks of audio with a fair amount of CPU-friendly
plugins and simple routing fairly easily. Recording wav files is not nearly as demanding on a
computer as it was earlier in the decade.

However, MIDI synths and samples can be VERY aggressive at chewing up your CPU power
in a hurry. There is no limit to the amount of RAM a sampler can use. I've seen drum
samples that use 2GB of RAM for a single drum kit.

MIDI synths like Native Instruments Absynth are capable of tremendous, mind-blowing
sounds and are also capable of overloading a computer processor in no time.

As of this writing, I'm using an Athlon 64 2800 with 2GB of RAM which is considered “old” by
current standards. I can record 40 tracks without too much of a problem in Cubase. The
bundled plugins with Cubase and the Waves Platinum edition work great for me and are very
easy on the CPU. I've downloaded plugins that weren't so efficient on my processor. I

197
recently tried some new, free plugins and my computer was toast after using 5 or 6 plugins.
So, your computer's performance will be affected greatly by which plugins you use.

I can usually fire up quite a few instances of synths and samples without too much trouble.
There is no way that I could do a full blown orchestra MIDI production with my computer
without rendering down to wav files constantly. Usually 10 tracks (assuming drums are just 2
tracks in this case) of MIDI running to 10 different synths and samples will start to push my
computer pretty hard. Adding a few reverbs on top of this can make my computer tired in a
hurry. Of course, if I'm really serious about mixing a MIDI tune, I'll render all the tracks to wav
files and remove the synths and samples from that project. This would free up 90% of my
CPU power.

The general rule goes like this: If you plan to use many synths and samples in your music, go
for maximum computer power that you can afford. If you are recording wav files you won't
require as much power. As illustrated above, both synths/samples and wav recording can
use up huge amounts of CPU power if the plugins are CPU hogs.

As mentioned previously, a Quad Core computer will pretty much solve this problem.

There Is Always A Way Out

People have been doing multi-track recording with computers since the late 90s. So if it was
possible then, why is CPU usage still an issue now? Well, some of that is caused by modern
CPU hog plugins. Some of it was because people were using techniques to squeeze more
power out of their computers back in the 90s. Here are some of those techniques that I still
use on a regular basis.

Use Aux Sends Properly

Every recording software has a method to send a signal to an “aux” of some kind.
(Sometimes these are called “effects sends”). By sending some of the vocal signal to a bus
with a reverb plugin on it, we are able to share this reverb with other tracks. We can send a
guitar, snare drum, or any other track to this exact same reverb. This is an alternative to

198
placing individual reverbs as inserts on tracks. One reverb used as an aux send could take
the place of 50 reverbs used as inserts. This means you've effectively used 1/50th of the CPU
power.

In this case, you are stuck with that one single reverb. You may find that you don't want the
same reverb on the snare drum that you are using for vocals. Just fire up another aux send
with the new reverb. A typical mix can usually get away with two or three reverbs without any
problem.

Of course, you aren't limited to just reverb. You can use aux sends for chorus, delay, or just
about any effect in which you want to blend in an effect with a dry signal from multiple tracks.
If you haven't played with auxiliary sends in your recording software, it's time to crack open
the manual.

I cover this topic in more depth in the Killer Home Recording: Murderous Mixing as specific
effects work better than others with aux sends.

Render Tracks

Just remember that there is always a way to reduce CPU usage, but there is a compromise.
Processes that must be done in real time cause CPU usage to climb. For example, if we hit
play on a song, the computer must process the reverb on the vocal (among a zillion other
things). We force the computer to process this reverb each and every time so that we have
the ability to tweak and make future decisions. However, if we decide we want to commit to a
sound, all we have to do is render the output of that effect to a wav file. We still have the
ability to manipulate the reverb as it is sitting on its own track, but our computer isn't working
nearly as hard playing back that reverb track wav file as it was processing the reverb plugin.

I always save the original project file with all original MIDI files, wav files and synths/samples.
Then I save the project as Song-Name-Mix-001 or something. This gives me the freedom to
render down anything and everything in whatever combination I feel like at the time. This
makes it easy to conserve CPU power. If I goof up, I can always go back to the original

199
project file and get what I need.

If you are using a synth that is hogging your CPU power, it's not a big deal to render that
down to a wav file. If you have 12 layers of guitar tracks, once you have them where you
want them, you can render those down to a stereo wav file to reduce CPU usage.

When I mix a song, sometimes I push the CPU meter a little hard even after all synths have
been rendered to wav. It's common for me to use plenty of gates, EQ, compression, reverb,
fancy routing, distortion, sample replacement, and who knows what else to get my drum
tracks happening. If push came to shove and I was desperate, I could easily render the
drums down to a single track. This would free up tons of CPU power. Is it ideal to give up the
option of tweaking the drums? No! However, it's one way out.

Note: As I've gotten better at tracking drums, I'm using far less processing power to get the
drums where I want them. If you are maxing out your computer, maybe it would be better to
put your time into improving your audio engineering skills. Food for thought.

Freezing

Recording software like Cubase (and probably others) utilize the freeze function. Let's say
we have a vocal track with an EQ, compressor, de-esser, and pitch shifter on a vocal. Let's
say these are all high quality, CPU-hogging plugins. We can simply scroll to the vocal and
press the freeze button. Cubase then renders the track in the background. We can no longer
make edits to it. We have pretty much committed just like I mentioned about rendering
above. The difference is switching back to non-rendered mode where all the plugins are
doing the processing can be done instantaneously. Pressing the un-freeze mode puts us
right back to where we were in the event that we need to change an EQ or whatever.

I've found that freezing doesn't free up as much processing power as rendering a track down,
unfortunately. Maybe the newer software versions have taken care of this issue. So if you
are still pushing your computer, even with freezing, try rendering files to wav the old fashioned
way and see if that gives you any more power.

200
32-bit vs. 64-bit Operating Systems
As of this writing, there is yet another factor to further complicate things when setting up a
computer-recording rig. Not only do we now have to contend with chipset compatibility for our
audio interface (and in the case of Dice II certain software applications), but now we must
make sure that both our audio interface and recording software are compatible with either 32-
bit or 64-bit operating systems.

There isn't a whole lot to tell here. To put it simply, do not purchase recording software, an
audio interface, or an operating system until you are positive that all three are compatible.
Often these types of requirements are hidden deep down within the manufactures website.
Save yourself hours of headaches, shipping costs, and desperate research!

Where To Get Your Recording Computer

If you are in a position to get your hands on a computer that is dedicated for audio recording,
you certainly have an advantage. The tricky part is finding where to purchase your computer.
There are several possibilities.

You can purchase your computer from the kind of company that has Super Bowl
commercials. You can buy your computer from a shop specializing in recording computers.
You can build one yourself. Your options are fairly wide open on this one, and it can get a
little tricky.

Major Brand Computers

The big corporation computers are not a terrible way to go. They are usually reasonably
priced and have a warranty. There are usually little hurdles that can make these computers a
little more difficult to work on, but this factor certainly isn't the end of the world. You can be
certain that all the individual components within the computer match up with one another, but
it's generally a guess as to whether the chipsets within these computers will work with a given
audio interface.

201
A major problem with the major brand computers is they always seem to feature the latest
operating system. It takes time for those writing audio interface drivers to accommodate
changes in operating systems; it's very common for this “up to date” operating system to be
well ahead, and therefore problematic. There is a tendency to release Windows versions that
aren't compatible with many forms of hardware. There was essentially an industry wide “No
Support for Windows Media Center Edition” policy, for example.

By installing an already optimized operating system, such as this version of Windows XP, a
person can have all the benefits of a big brand computer while avoiding most of the
drawbacks.

Build Your Own Computer

Putting your own computer together does take a little more knowledge, but there can be great
benefits, too. When you put your own computer together you know what components you
have used, and you can control the quality of those components. I think it's safe to say that
most major brand computers have gone with relatively humble components to keep costs
down. This doesn't always translate into extreme performance losses, but it can. When you
build your own computer, you can ensure that all chipset requirements line up, you know
exactly what operating system you've used and how you've optimized it, and you can decide
how much you want to spend.

It's possible to make huge savings. I recently put together a Quad Core computer for $400.
The cheapest equivalent name brand computers were over $600 and many were well over
$1,000.

Specialized Recording Computer Companies

There are quite a few companies out there who build computers that are ready to rock for
audio recording. All components have been selected to be quiet and ideal for recording. They
often come with a warranty and are completely optimized. The cost of such computers is
very, very high however. You certainly pay a premium for having someone else do all the
optimization and component selection. Typically, for the price of a high-end major brand
computer you will only get a fraction of the performance with specialized recording

202
computers. You've got to shell out serious bucks to get the latest performance. I doubt if my
$400 Quad Core computer could be purchased for less than $2,000 from such a company.
Then again, it's nice to have a guy on the phone you can contact when things go wrong.

Open Source Recording Computers

I'm playing with this new idea where Recording Review builds custom recording computers
just like the specialized companies above, but cuts out the support in exchange for saving
you $500-1,000 on a full blown mega-powerhouse recording computer. If you require
support, you could call our 1-900 number. If you don't, keep the cash and go on a mini-
vacation. If you are interested, check it out.

Incompatible Audio Interfaces

Q: I found a great deal on an old audio interface that isn't compatible.

Should I get it?

Yes, I've actually been asked if it's a good idea to jump on a good deal for an old audio
interface that makes absolutely no mention of compatibility and then simply work out the bugs
to get it to work on the newer, higher bit operating system. My answer to that is an
overwhelming no! Do not do it! Unless you write drivers for fun it's definitely not worth saving
a few bucks on an audio interface to get one that is not compatible with your operating
systems. Force the manufactures to do that! There are plenty of audio interfaces in the
under $200 range. Some exist in the $100 range. Do not put yourself through this much hell
just to save $50!

203
 Cables
There isn't that much to cables in the home recording world, but I figured that since we are
starting with the absolute basics, we should cover the topic.

Different Types Of Cables

XLR Cables

An XLR cable is the standard for plugging into

microphones, but can be used throughout the
recording chain. My high-end preamps have only XLR
outputs, but my mid-grade preamps have both XLR
and 1/4” outputs. My high-end converters only have
XLR inputs. So, I guess it's fairly safe to say that most
high-end gear will interconnect with XLR cables. XLR
XLR Cables cables are what we call “balanced” which means that
they have a noise canceling feature built into their design. Don't get too excited by this. It's
not like XLR cables eliminate all hiss and hum. They are simply designed so that the cable
itself doesn't add any additional noise.

204
1/4” Cables

You will mostly see 1/4” cables associated with guitar

gear, but the 1/4” jack is certainly prevalent in the home
recording world. Most mid-grade gear will interconnect
with 1/4” cables. 1/4” cables are not balanced and
therefore have no hum and noise reducing qualities.
These are often known as “instrument cables”.

1/4” Cables

205
TRS Cables

TRS cables (also known as Tip-Ring-Sleeve) look like

standard 1/4” cables but they have a third wire run
within the cable to make the cable balanced just like an
XLR cable. It's always recommended to use TRS
connections between recording gear.

TRS Cables

S/PDIF

S/PDIF cables are used to send digital signals. I use

S/PDIF cables to send signal from my Mytek AD
converters to my audio interface. S/PDIF cables look
just like the standard RCA cables you use to connect
your DVD player to your DVD. In fact, there really isn't
any difference. I have used standard RCA cables and
haven't noticed any change in quality.
S/PDIF Cables

206
Wordclock BNC

When sending Wordclock to all devices that require a

clock, a fancy connector that can be twisted to lock
securely in place is used. Most home recorders will
never have any need for this kind of connector.

BNC Cables

Optical Cables

ADAT Lightpipe connections use a cable that passes

light through it. The connector is a small rectangular
figure that reminds me of what a cereal-box equivalent
of a Star Wars spacecraft may look like. Okay, that
may not be that helpful, but you'll know it when you see
it. These are the same optical cables that are often
utilized in home theater setups to pass Dolby Digital
5.1 signals. They are often referred to as Toslink
BNC Cables cables.

207
Should I Pay Top Dollar For High End Cables?
Some people make a huge deal about the quality of cables. I have a buddy who spent $500
on the cables for his car stereo. Of course, he is ignorant of the fact that the acoustics of his
car are a disaster resembling Earthquake tragedy footage, but he swears he can hear a
difference. Perception is reality with the audio stuff (and that's part of the solution and the
problem!).

I have no doubt that super expensive cables can make a difference, but this difference is
rarely what the user expected to get for the investment. The difference between cheap
cables and expensive cables is most audible in areas where impedances are not optimized.
In English, this means that electric guitar cables will make the most obvious difference. (If
you are interested in the technical explanation, do a search on “capacitive reactance” and
“inductive reactance”). How obvious? Let's put it this way. You have to work really hard to
hear the difference and switching from a cheap guitar cable and an expensive guitar cable,
and no expensive cable has ever turned a crappy guitar sound into a great guitar sound.
Then again, if you can get an extra 1% for a minimal price upgrade, why not?

The difference in cables for XLR cables is a little less profound, simply because the
impedances are a little better optimized than you would find with electric guitar. Some people
swear by using high-end cables for their microphones. I read about one producer who was
using a $400 mic cable. He was having problems with the vocals sounding too bright. He
wasn't happy with the tone. He got the idea to replace the $400 mic cable with a standard
grade cable, which was nothing special. That fixed it. He actually preferred the sound of the
typical $20 cable. The high-end cable sounded too aggressive and harsh. Granted, I would
expect the difference in high end to be quite subtle. I'm guessing that a producer in this
position is going to be extremely picky about capturing exactly what he wants.

You'll find that as you get up to line-level, the difference in cables is very subtle, because the

208
mathematical possibilities of inductive and capacitive reactance have been significantly
reduced. So any source that is line level, I don't bother with anything fancy. I stick with my
good ol' reliable cables that I've had for years.

Any standard length cable (10'-30') that costs more than $100 is a total waste of money, in
my opinion, for anyone recording in anything less than a zillion dollar studio. With that said,
purchasing ultra-cheap cables is expensive too. I usually don't have any problems with the
sound of my normal cables. The only problem is that most of my cheap cables no longer
work! My middle of the road XLR cables ($25-40 for a 30' cable) have lasted me for years
and years.

I bought some Spectraflex guitar cables back in 1996. They still work perfectly to this day. I
think they were about $20 in 1996 dollars. So, buying good cables is a great idea. Buying
the step or two up from the bargain bin is a smart idea. However, I don't really consider it an
issue of fidelity. It's more of an issue of reliability.

Really, Really Bad Cables

I don't mean to imply that bad cables can't ruin tone. Try using yarn instead of copper and it'll
be obvious that sweater material doesn't not have the conductive properties that copper does.
So with that said, there are definitely totally substandard cables out there that can totally
wreck your tone. However, I'm not even sure where a person could buy these. I've
encountered cables like this only a few times in my life.

I did have an “eye opening” experience with my KVM switcher. A KVM is a switch that allows
you to use the same keyboard, computer monitor, and mouse for multiple computers. I
bought a low budget KVM that included cables. When I fired up my second computer with
these included cables, the screen was so blurry it was hard to read. I switched out the
included cables with my own and the screen was instantly clear. The included cables must
have been made out of yarn!

209
So, cables can make a difference in fidelity. Really, really bad cables can wreck whatever
signal they are passing. So make sure you go with good, name brand cables and you will be
safe. With most cables, it's fairly safe to assume $1 per foot. A 20' mic cable should cost in
the ballpark of $20. The same goes for instrument cables and such. Shorter cables tend to
cost a little more per foot.

Short vs. Long Cables XLR

When I first got started, I read some article that scared the living daylights out of me. It said
that if my cables were too long, my audio fidelity would plummet. This guy is what we refer to
in the specific field of audio recording as a “jerk”. While theoretically, if you ran a mic cable
from New York to LA, you would hear some fidelity problems. In fact, I bet a mile long cable
would have noticeably poor effects on audio performance. However, I've yet to hear a
noticeable difference between 10' cables I run straight into my preamp versus 30' cables I run
into a 100' snake before going into my preamp. Maybe I could A/B the two and scrunch up
my nose and force myself to hear a difference, but I definitely wouldn't put money on it.

So, definitely do not purchase cables that are too short! There is zero audible difference
between a 10' cable and a 30' cable for all practical purposes. Keep in mind that a mic stand
for a vocal is 6' off the ground. Your audio interface may be 4' off the ground. This means
your singer must essentially stand on the audio interface. Unless you know you require very
short runs, I recommend 30' cables.

Q: Should I Use Balanced (TRS or XLR) Cables Via

Unbalanced Connections?

A: My general view is to use balanced cables whenever possible. (A part of me says I need
to look into converting my guitar, amp, and pedals over to balanced.) However, it won't do
you any good to plug balanced cables into an unbalanced connection. The third wire will just
be hanging there and won't be connected to anything, no noise cancellation will occur, and
you will have wasted the extra cash required for TRS.

210
So if you just happen to be using gear that uses RCA ins/outs or 1/4” (instrument....not TRS)
ins/outs, don't bother with the extra expensive of balanced cables.

211
 Beginner Studio Construction

Q: Do I Need A Vocal Booth?

A: Why do you need a vocal booth? Is it because you saw pictures of vocal booths in
recording magazines? Is it because you require the isolation of recording vocals in their own
separate little room? I've recorded quite a few vocals (some with a vocal booth way back in
the day) and I have to say that I greatly prefer having the singer recording in the control room
with me. Is this a sign of amateurishness? No! This is what Bono from U2 does. He's so
professional they make South Park episodes about him. Recording vocals in the control
room is popular with many, many pro engineers, producers, and singers even when they have
access to well designed, great sounding vocal booths.

This whole music creation process has nothing to do with doing things the way you are
“supposed” to. There is no “supposed to”. This is something that people who are not yet
confident about their music creation make up. Each and every decision that is made along
the way is to make the music more effective. It has nothing to do with how the other guy does
it. It has to do with finding a way that works for you, the clients you work with, and most of all,
the music being made. There are going to be certain situations that are unique. Maybe your
computer is noisy or the cat meows all the time. Maybe your control room is super small (I'd
be making a trip to Lowes and acquiring a large sledgehammer as soon as possible.)

So much of producing (and engineering) is getting the singer comfortable so that they can
open up. I need to be there to coach them, excite them, lead them, and push them to perform
better than ever before.

Recently, a singer I worked with was accused of “studio magic” because this singer sounded
quite a bit better on the recording than they typically do live. It turns out that I barely used any
Auto-tune or any other tool that is considered to be of supernatural origin on the entire
project. I simply pushed this singer until they got to a place where they could hit the song
with maximum intensity. I think I'm better at doing this when I'm just a few feet from this
person. I don't want to feel like I'm on the phone with the person when I'm working with them.

212
I want to look them in the eye and I want to be able to throw stuff at them. Seriously! Ballistics
is my number one reason for not using a vocal booth.

There are more issues with vocal booths that I don't like. Vocal booths require special
acoustical treatment. Take a condenser mic into an untreated empty closet. It's sounds like
it’s on boxy overload. YUCK! This sound is totally unusable for anything I'd ever do. The tiny
nature of vocal booths makes them prime targets for this terrible boxy sound. It's
unacceptable! The only option to getting rid of this boxiness is to make the room totally dead.
However, you have to be smart about this because it's possible that you will absorb all the
high end and upper midrange reflections but end up with a room where you can still clearly
hear the muddy low end and low midrange reflections. Yell in a vocal booth. You shouldn't
hear any boominess. If you do, take the Lowe’s sledgehammer and knock it down. Either
that or figure out how to get that low-mid junk out of there. (Don't ask me how to do it. I'm no
acoustical engineer!) Most people dramatically underestimate the acoustical treatment side
of vocal booths. Most people do not realize that a bigger room often has less severe standing
waves and other acoustical anomalies that get in the way of great-sounding vocals. I've had
better luck with larger rooms.

One thing you seldom see in big boy studios is the ceiling of the vocal booth. The vocal
booth isn't usually huge, but the ceiling is usually dramatically taller than you may expect. It's
fairly common to see vocal booths with 15 foot ceilings or higher. This is all done in an effort
to keep the low mix boxiness out of the room (and probably to have somewhere for the heat
to go!). Granted, there are small vocal booths, but they are always heavily treated.

A few big reasons I don't like vocal booths are:

A) I like to feel like I'm working together with the singer I'm dealing with and not in some
distant land.

B) Vocal booths that are not well-designed sound like someone's nightmare. They are
horrible! If you get the vocal booth right, you have the benefit of isolation, but seldom is that
an issue for me or anyone overdubbing vocals.

C) The cost. Why should I bother spending my time and money on something that may affect
the way I work in a negative way and at the same time sound worse? That makes no sense

213
to me nor to my way of working. For some studios, a vocal booth has the “Wow!” factor and
can actually bring in clients. Why on Earth a client would pay simply because a person has a
6 x 6 prison cell is beyond me, but I know that this happens frequently. In situations where
bands are tracking live and we want to cut vocals at the same time without thinking about
isolation (dramatically opening up our microphone options) I can definitely see the benefit of
the vocal booth. For the beginner just getting started in home recording, don't blow your
money on construction of things like vocal booths. In time, you'll figure out if you really need
a vocal booth or not. For now, get your basic needs covered.

Q: Should I Begin Studio Construction?

In the Accurate Studio Monitoring Chapter of Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering I say
this:

“Note: I always feel a little bit uneasy when I see pics where a person who has built up their
first studio has this 4,000 pound oak desk that will hold their gear and what not. I always
wonder how this person is going to find the sweet spot in the room when they need a crane to
move their studio monitors.”

I see many people who start putting up their first wall before they record their first track. To
me this is a total mistake. It's crazy for a beginner with no real clear understanding of what
they need (and don't need) to begin massive construction on a home studio. Even if “light”
construction is intended, it always has a way of becoming heavy construction, in one way or
another.

I started in my bedroom. For months, this was a great way to get familiar with recording
software, work out bugs with the audio interface, get my computer set up, and conquer many
of the remedial tasks that must be dealt with before any serious music-making can actually
begin. (Most of the stuff this book focuses on, actually.)

I was given access to an 8'x12'x8' room which I ran a snake to from my bedroom. My
bedroom served as my “control room” (which is a hell of a stretch of the definition of the
word). I threw out a bunch of junk from my bedroom and converted a fairly large closet into a
vocal booth by stapling scraps of carpet onto the walls (avoid carpet like the plague!). I

214
quickly found out two things.

A) Drums sound like crap in a 8x12x8 room.

B) Vocal booths in closets sound boxy and boomy unless the acoustic treatment is done
properly. Even worse, a vocal booth will get extremely hot without a custom air conditioning
solution.

This article is not a rant on small drum rooms and it is not a rant against vocal booths (I'm
generally against both). This rant is about the fact that I put so much time in the construction
end of the my little drum room and vocal booth and it was all a complete waste of time. I was
an idiot! Correction. I AM an idiot!

Let me explain. I read online (not a great source when it comes to quality recording
information) that no walls should be parallel in rooms in which you are tracking. This one
happens to be true more or less. The online article went on to say that if two walls happen to
be parallel, absorbers should be used on one of the walls and it is better to distribute the
absorption throughout the room than to just cover one wall in insulation. All this is true.
Based on this tiny fraction of the required information I went to work building little absorbers.
Of course, I wasn't aware of absorption coefficients of egg crate foam!

I'm sure I never even bothered to learn what absorption coefficients were until I hated the
sound of my recordings. I went to work building absorbers that I thought of myself (don't do
this!). I glued sleeping pad style egg crate foam onto pieces of Styrofoam and covered them
in fabric. They didn't look half bad. In fact they looked better than what I use now. Then I
covered my entire room in a checkerboard style with these egg crate absorbers. That didn't
look half bad, either. I used fragments of carpet padding on the ceiling and covered those
with fabric. You get the idea. I took a 4'x8' sheet of plywood and curved it to break up
reflections on one wall and I built this stud frame thing above it to house a fancy mount for my
snake and diffusers (which didn't really work either).

215
There was a big problem with all of this. I did all this fancy work and didn't take into account
THE ROOM WAS UNACCEPTABLY SMALL (8' x 12' x 8')!!!! I could barely fit a drum set into
the stupid thing. Drummers had trouble getting behind their kit. From an acoustics
standpoint this was a total nightmare. Even though I had built all these “absorbers” I still had
a problem of this low frequencies ringing. I'm guessing it was at 150Hz, give or take. You
could hear the low end reverb just swirling around the entire room completely out of control
At the time, I didn't know what it was.

This is my entire point for this section! Unless you're aware of the problems your construction
will cause, don't build! If you don't know what a standing wave is, do not building anything! If
you've not read at least two books on acoustics, do not build anything!

When taking on a construction gig, you end up buying things you didn't ever considering
buying. When I said I wanted a drum room, I didn't think about the purchase of Liquid Nails
for the acoustic absorbers, real metal nails for the my stud frame thing, paintbrushes or
staples for the carpet. I just thought I was going to have a drum room. The End.

While I learned a considerable amount about construction from this little project, I learned
something else. I don't want to learn construction! I want to be a recording guy! I wasted
away hour after hour after hour building a room that was barely suitable as a vocal booth,
much less a drum room. Actually, from my standards today, it was not suitable as a vocal
booth. Even with all the absorption, it was way too live of a room in the low mids and low end
for me to get the kind of vocals I need. I would have to use blankets aggressively (even more
than when tracking vocals in my larger control room).

The sad part is I could have learned all of these recording lessons with 1/100th work and with
1/500th the bucks. If I could go back, I would have started recording in those rooms without
doing a single thing in terms of construction. Nothing! Any place I thought would be a
problem for reflections I would have stapled a blanket to the wall and moved on. You may be

216
asking “Do blankets absorb low frequencies?”. No, they don't. Neither did my pretty
absorbers which are now resting in that grand landfill in the sky. (Neither does studio foam.) I
would have learned the same lessons in about two hours of stapling that I learned in 200+
hours of sanding, sweating, sawing, stapling, panting, painting, etc.

I'm not trying to make you aware of every single pitfall in the way of building a recording
studio room. That would be an entire book in itself and really I don't think I'm qualified to write
that particular book. I've only screwed up a few rooms. We would want someone who had
screwed up a few hundred rooms to write that book. However, it is my goal to make you
aware of the fact that this construction business is a bigger deal than you might think and
designing a recording studio is a bigger deal than you think. Even if you are a great
carpenter, you are probably going to build a bad place to record in unless you are extremely
lucky, have incredible insight for predicting workflow requirements, and have a solid
understanding of constructing rooms with even room modes and minimal standing waves.

It just doesn't make sense to build, learn your lesson, rebuild, learn your lesson, rebuild.
There are ultra cheap, ultra fast ways of achieving practically the same exact thing that allow
you to jump right into recording even if they are not as shiny as you had originally envisioned.
From there you can build up a knowledge bank of things you wish you had in a room and
things you wish you didn't. This “knowledge bank” only comes from real world experience of
hanging microphones in the room and hitting the red button. Major issues that come up are
inadequate control rooms causing poor acoustics causing a poor studio monitoring system
which leads to mixes that rock on your studio monitors but suck everywhere else. Another
major problem is drum rooms that are too small or too dead. Of course, a person could solve
both problems (small drum room and small control room) by using one big control room /
drum room. This is not something you see often in big boy land, but we aren't in big boy land.
We have limited supplies of cash and resources. (YOU still have some kind of grounding in
reality.) It's not a bad solution if you understand the problem.

217
Hold Off On Construction

If you are absolutely dying to put together a pretty little recording room with all the
stereotypical decorations (egg crate studio foam, lava lamps, blah blah blah) I really can't do
much to stop you. I'm not an interior decorator. I'm an audio engineer. I will always take
sound and function over form. However, if you can muster up the will power, force yourself to
record X number of albums or X number of bands before you do any major overhauling.
You'll be able to incorporate all the lessons you've learned into these improvements and come
out with better sounding recordings for less money without making all the big mistakes I have
made.

The Robo Basics of Soundproofing

Introduction

I want to make it clear that this book is not a studio construction book and I'm certainly not an
expert on this topic. The goal is to get you going with the basic concepts and if you desire
you can pursue soundproofing in greater depth later from the experts. More importantly, I just
don't want you to waste $2,500 on something stupid!

Acoustic Treatment vs. Soundproofing

We go through great lengths to get our instruments to sound great and get the room to sound
great. Soundproofing has nothing to do with “sounding great”. Soundproofing is a way we
knock the sound down after we have used it so that we don't tick off parents, neighbors, etc.
While we certainly can't ignore the real-world issues of what to do with all this loud noise we
are making while recording, there are no direct benefits to soundproofing that we will hear in
our recordings. That's not what soundproofing does. With all things being equal, our
instruments will not sound any different before or after soundproofing.

218
People like to look at studio foam and the various tactics we use to control the reflections in
the room as methods to keep the neighbors happy. Bass traps, studio foam, floating floors,
etc are all things we use to control the quantity and tonality of the sound bouncing around
within the room, but those things make no appreciable effect on how much sound gets out of
the room.

Make sure you clarify between acoustic treatment and soundproofing.

How Soundproofing Works

We measure audio volume (SPL) in decibels. This number actually indicates the pressure of
sound waves in the room. We could compare sound pressure in our live room to the air
inside a balloon. When we blow up a balloon, the air inside the balloon has nowhere to go,
the pressure increases, and the balloon begins to expand. The same exact thing occurs
when we hit a snare drum. The sound waves pressurize the room. Since the room can't
increase in size, the pressure in that room increases. Of course, we aren't really too worried
about the loudness in the room so much. We are more concerned with the loudness that gets
out of the room and into our neighbors' ears. So, just like a balloon, we need to make sure
our room has no leaks.

I like this simple philosophy: If your room is nuclear-safe, it's probably sound-proofed too.
No, I don't mean that the commies could drop a nuclear weapon on your house and you'd
survive. That's pretty much impossible. I mean that if you could survive the nuclear radiation
that followed, you'd be in good shape in regard to soundproofing. Sound energy and nuclear
radiation energy have a way of traveling in similar ways. This means that you want no quick
and easy leaks from the outside world to your recording room (and vice versa). Stuff like air
conditioning / heating vents, leaky windows, etc are all prime spots where sound could exit
your studio or nuclear radiation could get in.

219
Just like radiation particles, you want sound waves to have to go through as much mass as
possible. Enough inches of solid concrete will pretty much stop gamma radiation dead in its
tracks. It's safe to say that sound waves are similar. It would take several feet of dirt to
accomplish the same task. The idea is to surround your fortress with enough material so that
any sound waves that are exiting the building will be absorbed by the material around it. After
taking the tour of Blackbird Studios, which is the biggest studio in Nashville, I remember the
studio manager saying their concrete walls were essentially thick enough to survive radiation,
so there you go!

I'm speaking in robo-ideal terms. But just in case you haven't gotten the drift, the most ideal
place to put a recording studio room that must be totally sound-proofed is in Bugs Bunny's
house. If you could place your live room underground with about five feet of dirt on top of the
studio with just a little ladder to climb in and out, it's a safe bet that the cops would never be
beating on your hatch.

For those of us who don't have nuclear-safe capabilities and don't know Bugs Bunny home
construction techniques, we may have to find more realistic ways to keep sound from
escaping our places. In the end, the concepts are the same. It's difficult to keep extremely
loud sounds in the standard American home. They are not designed to be perfectly sound-
proofed. However; stopping leaks, controlling sound transfer, and adding mass are common
ways of knocking the amount of sound leaving your studio down to realistic levels.

Sound Transfer

If you were to leave the tip of a metal poker in a fire long enough, grabbing the handle will
burn you. The heat energy from that tip will make its way up to the handle and make it hot
enough to roast the flesh right off your little hand. Sound energy works the same exact way
and it can do it in more varied materials than you may realize.

220
I remember going to a home construction site with a friend. There was a long, metal I-beam
that ran the length of the entire house. I was on one end and my buddy was on the other
end. When he tapped the metal beam, it sounded like he was just an inch away. In fact, he
was about 50 feet way. The energy of striking the metal transferred easily through the metal
I-beam. You can witness the same effects while swimming underwater. Acoustical energy
can travel through distances that seem crazy under water compared to the way that sound
travels through air.

It's no big deal at all for the sound of a pounded drum kit to shake a drywall sheet which is
connected to 2x4 studs. Once a single stud is excited by this acoustical energy the entire
house will resonate and can actually make the drum sound louder! This means the entire
house is essentially resonating to the sound of those drums and little is being done to stop
this transfer of energy into the air and into your neighbor's ears.

You need to really understand this concept of energy being able to change forms like some
kind of X-Men mutant. The best way to control such a mutant is isolation. You may have
heard of a “room within a room” concept. It's simple. You build a room like you more or less
normally would. Then you build another room inside it with as much isolation (in regard to
sound transfer) as possible. The little room should not touch the bigger room in any way
including the floor.

This is the equivalent of taking the I-beam mentioned above and cutting it in half and moving
the two pieces three inches apart. When my friend taps the I-beam, the energy travels down
the length of the I-beam and then comes to an abrupt halt at the cut. When the tapping used
to travel all the way down to my ears, it was easy to hear the tapping. Now that the I-beam is
cut, that energy would have to “transform” to “air energy” (I told you I wasn't an expert on this
stuff!) to travel the three inches and then convert back into “metal energy” to make it to my
ears. Obviously, this is going to drastically reduce the ability of that metal I-beam to transfer
sound.

221
This concept is similar to hiring the government to take care of a specific need. Money goes
out of your pocket and into the government bank account. The money is converted to
government power. Then a tiny portion of the money goes to what was actually supposed to
be built.

With our room within a room idea, it's best to think of it as a cube within a cube. This means
that all 6 walls need to be isolated from the larger room. Yes, this means the floor, too. This
is achieved with a process called “floor floating”. This has other benefits in addition to
soundproofing, but the idea is to keep the kick drum or bass cabinet on the floor from shaking
the main level floor (under our floated floor). Floor floating is a subject I know little about, but
I've seen people use rubber to isolate the floated floor from the actual floor. I'm sure some
energy gets through with this setup, but I'm sure there are gigantic gains when converting the
“wood energy” to “rubber energy” (a very inefficient transferring medium) and then back to
“wood energy” of the bottom floor before it converts to “concrete energy” and shakes the
entire floor of the building (when applicable).

You should do more research on this “room within a room” concept because it can provide
huge soundproofing benefits. Obviously, a room costs more to construct and the final room
will be smaller, but the end result is fairly economical especially if you must choose between
recording tonight or spending the night in jail.

Most people who employ the room within a room method effectively are very happy with the
level of isolation they achieve. Some people will take it a step further and actually mount
double layers of drywall on their studs. This additional mass requires more sound pressure to
excite the room.

Another trick is to use staggered studs. Basically, you want to use a wider frame than you
normally would when building your stud wall. So if you would normally use a 2x4 on the

222
bottom and top, you now use a 2x6. Then you build your stud wall the way you normally
would except that the first, third, fifth, etc stud should be placed so that they are touching the
drywall on the inside wall and the second, fourth, sixth, etc studs are touching the drywall on
the outside wall. The idea is to make it more difficult for the studs to transfer energy from one
room to another.

Alternative Construction Materials and Methods

I remember reading about Steve Albini using an adobe-like material to build the inside of his
studio. According to Steve, this adobe-like material had the rare quality of being beneficial
both to the room acoustics inside the room and soundproofing to keep sound from escaping
the room. I don't remember much about it, he gave an endorsement for the otherwise secret
material. Steve Albini is located near Chicago, so apparently this material isn't limited to
desert use. Check out his Electrical Audio site for details.

I'm sure there are many more creative ways to construct a soundproofed facility if you have
the inclination and knowledge to do so.

Soundproofing Realities

As you can see, soundproofing is expensive. It can be a fortune if your standards are high.
Before jumping in with any plan, you must realize that soundproofing must be comprehensive.
You can't soundproof one wall at a time. Either sound can't get out of the room or it can.
Low-end sound waves could escape through a single electric outlet and annoy neighbors in
all directions. Because of this and the nature of construction costs, soundproofing is out of
reach for most people recording at home.

It may be better for you to go with the cheapest form of soundproofing known to man.. none!
Being responsible and turning your amps down will do wonders. Arranging specific noisy

223
times with the neighbors is one of the best ways to get around soundproofing costs. The
difference between a guitar amp on 3 vs. 4 is quite a bit in dB but usually very subtle in terms
of recorded tone. (Actually, we did a Interrogation on this one in Killer Home Recording:
Electric Guitar.) Drums is a different story. If soundproofing is a major issue, it may be time
to look at the modern e-drum or sample options out there. I use them from time to time with
enormous success and none of the annoyances of the real thing. The modern way of using
drum samples and guitar emulators may not be as sexy as doing it the old fashioned way, but
there is no mistaking how infinitely more practical these modern tools can be.

Avoiding Electrical Noise

Some facilities have noise in their electric outlets. For those of us who are lucky enough not
to have problems with hum, whine and ground loops, we should consider ourselves lucky. I
am definitely no expert on studio construction and because I've never really dealt with the
problem of electrical noise first hand, my advice on the subject won't be as comprehensive as
I'd like.

Star Grounding

The number one cause of noise is ground loops and the number one cause of ground loops is
using multiple grounds. It's important that all of your recording gear utilize the same ground.
When possible I run all powered musical instruments to this same ground as well. This is
achieved by simply using the same electrical outlet for everything.

If you are wiring your studio from the ground up, it’s a simple matter to wire a grounding grid
discretely to the outlets. This cuts out some nastiness that can come from outside appliances
that they’d otherwise be sharing a ground with.

If you had 14 100 watt Marshall heads running, you may run into a problem with pulling too
much electricity for a single breaker. However, I've never had a problem running my
recording rig and a few amplifiers off the same breaker. If you are running a large console
and lots of outboard gear, you may pull too much for a stock breaker. In that case, it may be

224
time to consult an electrician about your options.

Ground Lifts

If excessive noise is a problem, using a ground lift within the equipment itself can reduce the
noise. While it's generally not recommended for safety reasons, using a 2-prong to 3-prong
adapter will lift the ground for the entire circuit. In a pinch I have done this before on remote
gigs and lived to tell about it. I'm not sure you'll be so lucky.

Isolation Transformers

While not cheap, isolation transformers can dramatically reduce the noise in an electric
system. Isolation transformers work in a way that isn't too far removed from using balanced
cables.

Noise Troubleshooting

If these methods for dealing with electrical noise don't reduce the noise to acceptable levels, I
immediately recommend you take an evening, pack up your rig, and head to a buddy's house.
This is a method of troubleshooting to ensure that the problem is indeed your wall outlet and
not something else. As with all troubleshooting, take careful note of anything that may have
changed between your buddy's house and your house to ensure you have isolated the
problem to being an electrical issue. If your rig works great at your friend's house, it's fairly
safe to say that the problem is indeed electrical.

Potential Causes of Electrical Noise In Audio

In order to save you from tearing your hair out the next time you encounter noise, here are a
few typical causes of noise and buzz.

• Space heaters
• CRT computer monitors
• Fluorescent lighting
• Light Dimmers

225
 • Cellphones
• Poor Electrical Wiring, poor grounding
• Excessively Long Wiring (from outlet to breaker)
• Lighting wiring and Outlet Wiring run too close together
• AC Adapters (especially with guitar pedals)
• Cables run to close to AC Adapters
• Ground loops
• Lack of Shielding
• Crackly pots (knobs) on preamps
• Poor wiring on electric guitars and basses
• Instrument cables run across electric cables
• Battery Chargers
• Electric Motors
• Radar/Radio Transmitters, CB radios

Alternatives To Light Dimmers

In the event that you require the ability to dim the lights in your studio, there are alternatives
to conventional light dimmers; which we've already established as being obvious causes of
noise.

Variable Autotransformer (aka VARIAC)

There are essentially two types of dimmers. There are the noisy dimmers which essentially
shorten the amount of time the lighting gets its voltage. Remember, that a standard light build
in a home in the United States is flickering 60 times per second. By making these flickers
shorter, the light doesn't shine as bright. This causes noise. A variable autotransfomer style
dimmer does not play with the amount of time the light receives it's voltage. It simply reduces
the amount of voltage going to the light. They are considered to be noise free and perfectly
acceptable for recording studio use.

226
Don't Dim

Do you really need continuously variable lighting adjustment? What if you had just had a few
steps of lighting. In other words, what if you could turn off the main lights and simply use a
small lamp or may be an array of softer lighting? In other words, why not have five different
lights connected to five different switches. You can then control the amount of light in your
room by simply flipping the desired switches.

I personally like to leave Christmas lights hung up all year long in the studio room. Is it cheap
and tacky? Definitely! Do I like it? Definitely!

How Pretty Should My Studio Be?

How pretty does my studio need to be? This is a question that we all ask ourselves when we
jump into this recording thing. A studio is as much a room and a facility as a collection of gear
and it's hard to deny that aesthetics have an impact on our moods and therefore our music, at
least to a certain degree.

With that said, I think there is this implication that, in order to be a “real” studio, you must
have some kind of elite interior decorator design some kind of post-modern, new age
whatever. (I'm so out of my element in describing fancy architecture and interior design that I
have no idea how to describe what I'm talking about.) I'm talking about the kind of studios
that make the cover of Mix Magazine. These studios have no grounding in reality. If your dad
owns Halliburton, maybe you can afford something like this. If you so desire, knock yourself
out. However, don't feel for even half a second that you absolutely require a robo fancy
facility in order to make killer music or to work with killer musicians.

Real studios are ugly. They have problems. Real studios get banged up. Coffee gets spilled.
Controlled substances become uncontrolled. You get the idea.

You don't have to be a subscriber of Tape Op for very long to see some very impressive
engineers working in facilities that aren't so aesthetically impressive when compared to the
Mix Magazine covers. I can't count the times I've read articles of engineers who did solo
albums for Keith Richards or maybe did a few records with Elton John and did them in what

227
are essentially dumps or garages. It does happen!

I'll come out and say it. My studio looks terrible. Like most engineers who are in this for the
right reasons, each and every improvement I have made was done so with sound in mind. I
have to turn down clients because I can't handle the load. While a part of me certainly wants
to move up in the world, if my potential clients need a picture or tour of my studio before they
will work with me, I immediately tell them no. Too bad. Go somewhere else. Not everyone
will have this attitude, but it's working for me.

In the end you are going to go where your budget and desires take you. However, not
everyone wants to record an album in a place that feels more like a modern museum exhibit.
Some guys will take the pickup truck over the Rolls-Royce any day. People have certainly
walked into my facility and said “Really?.....okay”. Later on, after the recording goes well they
tell me they love the fact that they don't feel intimidated at my place. They feel comfortable.
They aren't worried about spilling their beer or breaking some kind of rare antique. I don't
have any rare antiques.

Make your studio as fancy as you want to, but it had better sound good. Real musicians (the
kind of people you really want to record) love a place with character. Gigging musicians are
used to playing shows in sweaty, smoky bars with urine and beer all over the floor every
Saturday. So if you are insecure about having a not-so-pretty place, forget about it! Have
fun. If you really want to make your place fancy, go for it. Just make sure you don't rule out
the people with more humble tastes.

Form Is Function
I asked Michael Wagener why he had so many damn lava lamps in his studio. I wondered
why he had the TV on with no sound. He basically said to your average musician, the studio
can be the most boring place on Earth at times and if the room is dynamic, you can work
longer. It was a new concept to me, but it made total sense.

While my studio is certainly not going to win any design awards, I always struggle for
maximum function. I've found that I like to cover the walls in stuff and it does increase a
band's attention span. What kind of stuff? Anything interesting! I have all the cds I've done

228
that were printed up on the walls. I have Darth Tater, Indian Jones Tater, Spinning Kicking
Leonardo Ninja Turtle, posts, signs, political propaganda, etc. I basically try to emulate the
restaurants that cover their walls in crap only my stuff is actually good. (If you haven't seen
Mr. Potatohead dressed like Darth Vader, you haven't lived!)

Regardless of the design you decide to go with, make sure the walls aren't boring. Put stuff
there that is dynamic or put so much junk on the walls that a person wouldn't be able to look
at all of it one session. By keeping your clients from getting bored while you are doing the
boring stuff, both you and your clients will be much happier, more alert, it will be less likely for
mistakes to slip through, and have more fun.

Gobo Construction
There are many times when it's desirable to increase isolation between all the instruments.
While I always try to record live bands with zero isolation, it's hard to find a band that won't
want to punch in a note here or make an edit there. This is where isolation comes in. In the
home recording environment (and even in many big studios) it's not practical or musically
beneficial to put each person in their own isolation booth. Sometimes you've just got to place
gobos around the various instruments and hope for the best.

On the RecordingReview.com forum, there were plans for gobo construction. I was
immediately skeptical. Why do you need special info for gobo construction? It's a fairly
straightforward concept. You put stuff in between the instruments to reduce the amount of
bleed. In this particular case, the gobo plans were actually plans for Helmholtz resonators (a
form of bass traps) that offered no real advantage in terms of soundproofing. So, it looks like I
need to set the record straight on what a gobo is, what it is trying to achieve, and give you
some insight to create your own.

A typical application for a gobo is to separate two electric guitar amps. Let's say we have two
4x12 cabinets. While we could just set them 3' apart and accept the bleed, we are going to
assume that the band has ruled out this kind of production. We need to isolate them.

If 100% isolation is required, it's pretty obvious what we need to do. We need to place one
cabinet in China and one cabinet in Florida and hit record. If we don't have distance, we want

229
to build the Berlin Wall between these two cabinets as a gigantic fortress is going to isolate
the sound more effectively than placing a 1” square in front of each microphone. In reality, we
don't need to get nearly that crazy with it. The idea behind gobos is not necessarily to
achieve 100% isolation. Other than the distance mentioned above the only real way to do
that is to construct separate rooms that have been designed to be isolated. So gobos are
more there to reduce the bleed between instruments. They aren't trying to work miracles.
With that said, you'd be amazed at how effective a relatively crude solution can be for
reducing bleed.

With our gobos we are looking for a few things. We want them to be inexpensive. We want
them to be dense enough to a block a “good” amount of sound but probably not as much as
the Berlin Wall. We need them to be portable (within the studio at least). We need them to
be fairly wide and fairly tall so that the sound has to go all away around the gobo to get into
the other guy's mic. We don't want them to be overly reflective because we don't want super
fast reflections getting back into our mic causing comb filtering.

Rockwool

My favorite solution for this is fabric wrapped 2' x 4' x 4” Rockwool pieces. The wrapping part
isn't fun, but the amount of absorption is unparalleled. Instead of using all out density like a
concrete wall would use to reflect sound, it absorbs it. This rules out any problems with comb
filtering with the sound of the instrument reflecting off a reflective gobo and back into the
microphone. Rockwool is fairy dense. Best of all, Rockwool absorbs down to very low
frequencies so the possibility of bass shooting through your gobo is fairly small. Because of
their dimensions, it's easy to stack Rockwool gobos or built little mini forts around guitar amps
and such.

Plywood

The most popular method I see in big studios is to use a piece of relatively thick plywood on
wheels. The plywood usually has some kind of absorbing material attached to it to reduce
reflections. These don't necessarily have to be overkill. A little absorption goes a long way.
While maybe not ideal for small rooms, unwanted sound must travel well out of it's way to get

230
around the 4'x8' dimensions of a typical piece of plywood. Even relatively thin plywood is
dense enough to significantly reduce the amplitude of any sound waves attempting to go
through it. You'll have to come up with a creative way to stack your plywood gobos as it's not
always immediately obvious how you would want to break them up into smaller sections. I've
had great luck with a simple 4'x8' sheet of plywood with blanket tossed over the top. This is
my go-to method for finger picked acoustic guitar.

Blankets

I wouldn't go so far as to call a blanket a gobo. However, lets just say we are recording two
acoustic guitar players simultaneously and we want to reduce the bleed between them.
Simply tossing a blanket on a mic stand and setting it in between the two players is going to
go a long way towards minimizing the crosstalk. Granted, we may define “long” differently. I
don't come from a school of thought that says that everything needs to be 100% isolated.
Sometimes minimizing the amount of junk in the other guy's mic by 20% is all that is needed.
I'll save the pro-bleed discussion for a later time. Just be advised that blankets certainly have
their place.

Misc Stuff

In the end, you can reduce bleed between two instruments with just about anything. A couch
cushion works well if you can get it in the right spot. A table on its side is excellent. In a bind,
even clothes on a hangar can be useful. None of these are perfect solutions, but after seeing
some of the crude makeshift contraptions created in some of the big time studios I've been in,
it's obvious that whatever gets you through the sessions is fine. No one will know you used a
Taco Bell wrapper around that Neumann when the record is done.

231
 Ideas For The Ultra-Broke Recorder

This section is meant for people attempting to record on a shoestring budget. This section is
about stretching the dollar as far as possible in situations where our cash quantity may not be
ideal. I'm not necessarily recommending that you don't purchase an audio interface or a
condenser mic as I'd be totally lost without either of these. I'm simply trying to help those who
aren't in a position to follow my “ideal situation” advice.

It's important to jump in and start recording now. If you are the kind of person who truly
enjoys recording, you'll have almost as much fun doing it with a boombox and a karaoke
microphone as you would in a gigantic SSL studio. You may even have more fun with the
boombox!

So for the financially challenged, this section is about what you can do. You may be
surprised.

Q: Do I really need a condenser mic?

A: The answer is no. While condenser mics are extremely useful for many tasks, there are
no situations where a condenser is absolutely required. Dynamic mics are very useful. In
more cases than you probably realize, they are preferred. Mics like the Shure SM57, Shure
SM7B, Sennheiser MD-421 and AKG D112 are classics regardless of their comparatively low
price tag.

Dynamic mics are are useful on a ton of sources. On a tight budget, feel confident that you
can make a great sounding record with nothing but dynamics. While ideally speaking it would
be nice to have some nice condensers for certain things, even I'm surprised by how good an
album made entirely with dynamic mics can sound.

You would be surprised by the sound of some of the $30-40 condensers on the market. I'm
confident that in a blind test, enough RecordingReview.com members would choose a $30
Behringer over my $2,600 Soundelux U99 in any given situation that it may shock you.

232
Real Mics

You definitely need “real” microphones. Imaginary microphones don't really pick up sound!
The semi-imaginary microphones like you see in headsets or that come bundled with
computers are generally unacceptable. In some cases, you'd be better off recording into your
cell phone than recording with some of these mic. Take a hard look at some of the mega-
budget, yet real microphones designed for home recording.

Q: Can I use my stock soundcard?

A: Sure. You'll need a mixer capable of sending separate signals to a headphone mix and a
separate signal to an audio interface. Just about any mixer with RCA ins/outs and decent
routing will work. The standard jack size for stock soundcards is 1/8” and they are very
notorious for being terribly unreliable jacks, but this is more of a pet peeve of mine than the
consensus. You'll have to do all of your monitoring through the mixer. This means that
latency will be a true 0ms, but it also means you can't take advantage of compression, reverb,
or delay within your recording software during tracking for headphone mixes. You won't be
able to take advantage of the various guitar emulators out there either and if you plan to use
synths/samples within the computer you can count on big latency. This alone is worth the
price of a real, low-latency audio interface in my opinion.

It's safe to say that the typical AD converters in a stock soundcard are lacking and there will
probably be an improvement in sound quality with an audio interface.

If you are on a micro-budget and you have a capable mixer collecting dust, this is a great way
to jump in. Again, it's not ideal or even recommended, but it's a first step. If a pro engineer
had to use a stock soundcard, you would be floored by the results. So don't feel held back by
your budget gear!

There is a driver that often helps stock soundcards perform dramatically better. It's called
ASIO4All. Make sure to check it out.

233
Q: Do I really need studio monitors?
An accurate studio monitoring system that you are robo familiar with is required if you
absolutely need your tracks to sound great on as many audio systems as possible. If you are
just getting started or really record music for the fun of making and not because it'll sound
great in you buddy's truck, it really doesn't matter if you record on consumer grade
headphones, a boom box, or $5,000 ADAM studio monitors.

I've made my views of the importance of studio monitoring quite clear in the Accurate Studio
Monitoring chapter of Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering. If the cash isn't there, I
understand. When you win the lottery, make it a priority!

Note: The current crop of studio monitor headphones are very impressive.

Q: Do I really need a pop filter?

A: If you are recording vocals, Yes! Pop filters do so much more than simply block the
plosives from getting into the mic (as if that wasn't enough). Pop filters are a great way to
keep your singers at the desired distance from the mic. The proximity effects plays a huge
part in how sound is captured and a pop filter is a necessity for keeping the proximity effect
working in your favor.

There are various options and models out there. The conventional nylon pop filter works well.
The fancier Stedman costs quite a bit more and you'll be surprised by how simple it is when
you pay the big bucks for it. I figured I could build it for $3 at Lowe’s, but that may be pushing
it. Considering this is about 1/14th of what I paid for it, it would have been worth attempting to
build it yourself.

For people on a tiny budget, the pantyhose over the coat hanger does work. I wouldn't call it
ideal, but it will effectively block plosives. I've seen people who used those circle hoop
thingies used in cross stitching very effectively as an alternative to a bent up coat hanger. As
for the mounting system, I greatly prefer keeping the pop filter on it's own mic stand (if you
have an extra when doing vocals). So I would consider maybe buying a clip for an SM57 and
attempt to glue the pop filter onto it somehow so that the pop filter can be removed when the
stand is in use for something else but no fancy goose neck device is necessary.

234
I once loaned out my pop filters and I was impressed by how effectively a pencil held onto the
microphone via rubber band worked in a pinch. It did nothing for the proximity effect, but it
definitely did block plosives.

Maxing Out An Old Computer

In the event that you don't have the latest cutting edge beast of a computer, don't fret. It's
very possible to make killer recordings with an old PC by todays standards. People have
been doing multi-track recordings with computers since the late 1990s. Fortunately for the
mega broke, computers from just a few years ago can be acquired for basement prices. For
about $100 on the used market, you can get a computer that would smoke the computer I
was using to make a living on in my recording studio back in 2004.

Regardless of whether a computer is brand new or 10 years old, I always recommend

following all the steps in Computer Performance Optimization.

Computer Performance Hogs

There are some performance hogs you'll want to be leery of if you are using an old computer.
You can probably get away with any of these individually, but as you use more and more of
them you will dramatically increase the likelihood that your computer is going to bog down.

Super low latency

I've made it clear that I greatly prefer to monitor within my recording software. I love giving
singers compression and reverb in their headphones. I love being able to hear exactly what
they are hearing, etc. If I was using an old computer, I may have to ditch this notion and
monitor via hardware or make sure that I'm using practically zero CPU power on my rough
mixes during tracking. I did it this way for years so it wouldn't exactly be the end of the world.

235
Synths In The Box

I love using synths in the box. They sound great and I don't have to deal with routing them
back into the computer like I do when using hardware synthesizers. In order to play synths
real time via a MIDI controller, the latency must be set very low. This adds to the computer's
load. Synths themselves can range from being light to extreme heavy on CPU load
themselves. If computer power is at an absolute minimum, you may be better off using a
hardware synth.

Software Samplers

Software samplers have revolutionized the world of home recording on many levels and have
greatly expanded musical possibilities. For that, they are great. However, they tend to be
heavy on computer performance (particularly RAM). Extravagant products using zillions of
samples are going to bog down an old slow computer.

Plugins

Plugins are another potential hog of CPU power. The more plugins you use, the greater your
chance of overworking your CPU.

Buy Used Gear When Possible

I recently watched a documentary about the possibility of going to Mars – If you are into this
sort of thing check out The Mars Underground. (For the record, we should absolutely go!)
They were worried sick about radiation from solar flares killing the astronauts due to
mechanical failures in the space shuttle. They were discussing ways of neutralizing or at
least minimizing the exposure of this radiation to astronauts and ensuring they don't turn into
roasted marshmallows. We home recorders, on the other hand, make noise. We then push a
button in order to capture this noise so that it can be repeated.

I could see where a no-compromise attitude towards 100% reliability would be a good idea
when hitching a ride to Mars. I'm not so sure that any government employee has ever had to
deliver an American flag and “the telegram” to the family of a home recorder because his

236
condenser mic wasn't detecting phantom power.

My point? My point is this home recording business is just a damn hobby. Even if you make
money (even serious money) there is never a crisis. You will never pull out an AKG
microphone, charge it up, and then slam on it on some child's chest to get their heart to start
beating again. Don't make this recording business out to be more important than it really is!
If a microphone stops working, big deal! Get it fixed. Sessions usually don't stop because of
one little piece of gear fails. Even if they do, someone gets a Saturday night to relax instead
of slaving over micro-details in bass tracks locking up with drums.

So, why not extend the quantity and quality of gear you can acquire by purchasing your gear
used? In all reality I can't say I've had too much problem with my used gear. In fact, my used
gear is often more reliable than the stuff I have purchased new. For people who make the
claim that brand new gear is reliable, I could always counter that used gear has had to stand
the test of time. Who's right? Who cares! I've had great luck with used gear and it's very
rare for me to even bother looking for anything new. Why? I don't want to pay extra to be the
guy that has to unwrap it from all the silly packaging! I'm guaranteed to at least be aware of
the resell value because I'm the guy that did the buying. Off hand, I can't think of a single item
in my control room that I wouldn't consider buying used instead of new. Maybe tissue paper.
Maybe!

So save a few bucks and max out your buying power.

Never Pay Interest Unless It's Profitable To Do So

While it's not really a secret that I maxed out a few credit cards when I jumped face first into
home recording back when I was 21, I can't say that I recommend this course of action to
anyone unless they are serious about making music recording a career. Good luck with that.

The big boys have every link in their chain so strong that they are bored. They develop
fetishes and over-exaggerate the relatively minute differences in the way not-so-expensive
piece of gear #1 sounds versus how mega-expensive piece of gear #2 sounds. Many
frustrated home recorders shell out the cash on a credit card to buy this high end gear without

237
the necessary skills and experience to really get their money's worth out of that piece of gear
anyway.

Few things sicken me worse than hearing about people who record for fun and have made a
gigantic investment with their credit cards to make the most subtle of improvements in their
recordings. I think it is a huge mistake for any person to go into debt for preamps, converters,
and other pieces of high end recording gear upgrades. In fact, it's often a mistake for a
person in the recording business to upgrade to the high end gear at all. Simply put, there are
a lot of bad mixes being made with high end gear. The clients know what they want to sound
like and so far I haven't found a client who would give a damn whether I used my Vintech
1272, Trident S20, or my stock Presonus Firestudio preamps. I'm not saying you shouldn't go
for nice gear. However, I am saying that I haven't been able to charge more for my services
because of any single gear upgrade I have ever made! Maybe you'll have better luck than I
have.

Regardless of the effectiveness of the high end stuff, there is no denying that destructiveness
of the credit card companies owning your soul. If you decide that you need X high end gear,
buy it with cash. When you run into enough clients who are willing to pay quite a bit more to
say they used a Neve, maybe you are losing money if you don't upgrade. Until then, be
careful with your money. Quit paying interest!!!!

Always Have A Plan When Buying Gear

Putting together a home recording studio can get fairly complex. Everyone has different
needs and those needs often change over time. It's very possible to put together a rig that is
scalable to your demands. It's also very possible that you will buy one piece of gear and then
turn around and need to replace that piece of gear when your needs change.

A great example of this is with the number of simultaneous inputs on an audio interface. It's
very common for people to buy a two channel audio interface when they get started. Before
too long, they want to record drums or use elaborate miking schemes that use more than two
microphones. Of course, this requires the purchase of a new audio interface while the old
two channel audio interface spends its time on a dust collecting mission.

238
So, do your best to plan ahead for the foreseeable future. It's impossible to predict what the
future will hold, but putting a few units of noggin power into the decision could save you a
migraine.

Be Skeptical Of Outsider Advice

With this home recording gear business, you must be very careful of who you are taking
advice from. Just because another person happens to enjoy the notion of ruckus-capturing
doesn't mean they know what is best for you. In fact, what works for them may be flat out
wrong for you. So anytime a person says you really need this or that, take it with a grain of
salt unless that person is well-trusted and understands your specific needs.

The situation is compounded when you factor in that even robo pro engineers seldom agree
on their favorite mics, preamps, and converters. If one guy happens to be disappointed with
a piece of gear, take note. Maybe that guy is an idiot. Maybe that guy is expecting too much
out of a volume knob. Maybe that guy expects some serious benefit when he shells out
$2,000. Maybe the guy is a genius and his advice is dead on.

You Will Never Be Satisfied

When have you ever been entirely satisfied with anything? I don't know one single person
involved with music recording who says “I'm 100% satisfied with my gear”. It simply does not
happen. I'm not sure if this is some kind of naturally occurring phenomenon or some kind of
marketing mind control, but you will always have a list of recording gear you want. It's a
given.

Because you will never be satisfied, don't ever expect a piece of gear to fulfill you. It won't! It
may solve a problem you have been having or it may improve one aspect of the recording
process, but don't expect to feel complete. My chosen words here are important. What are
you really looking for by purchasing X new product? Are you looking to solve a specific
problem? Or are you simply looking for some random kind of fulfillment? If your life isn't
complete, don't expect the inside of a UPS box to do the completing for you. I'd give this a
0% chance.

239
If you are looking to compensate for some kind of psychological shortcomings with the green
stuff, I recommend you stop reading this stupid book right now, write a song, record it and
toss it on Bash This Recording at RecordingReview.com. If that doesn't work, Tony Robbins
or equivalent may be able to help.

Get A Used Standalone Recorder

If you are in the market for a standalone recorder, I'd recommend going used. Why? I'll tell
you why! Farrah Fawcett! Sure, I was born in 1980 and my only real experience with the
chick were reruns on TBS back when I was a young lad. Jump on Google Images and
search for Farrah. You'll find all the old pics where she was debatably the hottest chick on
planet. (I know some dudes prefer that other Charlie's Angels chick.) Keep looking. You'll
find pics of her where it looks like someone had an accident with the combination of an
excessively acidic chemical and a land mine.

I've got another example. Britney Spears.

I've got another example. BETA tapes. I'm talking about the loser of the VHS vs BETA
struggle for dominance in the home viewing entertainment industry back in a day when if you
said DVD people thought you had misspelled the name of a brand of underwear.

Alright: enough fun Let's get down to the chase. With standalone recorders it's really easy to
get sucked in by the glamor that was Farrah, Britney, and BETA in their peak. However,
sometimes the fall from that peak isn't so glamorous. By snagging a standalone recorder
after its heyday, you have a clear idea of what is going to happen when this standalone
recorder isn't the hottest thing.

When all the magic around this standalone recorder is gone, will you be able to get support?
What happens when musiciansfriend.com quits selling the unit? With a used standalone
recorder, you will definitely know if you can actually get support for it because you can do a
search right now. You know if the recorder will last by the communities online that use them.

My point is that some relatively old technology will still be great years down the road. Other
technology will turn into a Britney Spears nut case. Do yourself a favor and go with a unit that
has already proven itself in the test against time. Oh yeah, in the process you'll save a small

240
fortune.

Pirated Recording Software: Why I Don't Use It

Illegal downloading is a popular activity these days. Off the top of my head, there are a few
reasons (outside of the fact that it’s against the law and effectively stealing) to buy the real
stuff and not just download it. I'm not preaching here. I'm giving semi-objective advice on
some reasons that I think downloaded software is more expensive than just buying it.

#1 Reliability

In order to get software to function without a dongle or other security measures, they have to
hack it. I've heard so many horror stories of people getting unreliable, glitchy hacked versions
that I couldn't imagine further complicating a sometimes already complicated process.
Getting a recording rig to run at maximum performance is a huge undertaking for some. Why
in the world would you want to push the issue even further using software that is wounded
right from the start?

#2 No Updates

Few software manufacturers get it right the first time. It's very common to release updates,
bug fixes, improved driver implementation, etc. Cubase SX3's update fixed practically
everything for me. Without these updates, you will probably be dealing with more issues of
reliability than you ever intended. This doesn't sound that bad, but just wait until you are in
the middle of battle. Wait until you are in the heat of the moment in the middle of a big mix
and the computer locks up.

#3 Support

You will have problems. You will need help with something eventually. I know that the
Cubase.net forum requires you to enter your serial # / dongle key thingy immediately after
registration. I'd assume they are not the only manufacturer of audio recording software to
require you to register before receiving support.

241
#4 Self-Motivation

No human ever appreciates a freebie.

There is too much effort that goes into setting up a computer rig. When things go wrong, it's
just human nature to scrap it and take an easier path. However, if a person has shelled out
$X for their rig, they will have no other choice but to work it out or they risk losing their money.
Tapping into this "survival mode" that all humans have is worth the price of the software,
alone. It's just easier to go watch a movie or play a video game than it is to setup a recording
rig. So, you had better be motivated to get it going. If you are unwilling to make the initial
investment of a few hundred bucks, forget about the investment of thousands of hours of
time, work, frustration, and more work. You simply aren't cut out for this kind of thing.

#5 Research

There is a big tendency for people who are getting a freebie not to do the research required
when buying high-end software. There are certain features and traits that may or may not
work with what you are doing. When all you have to do is double click on a file and have
software in a day or two, it takes this part out of the equation. The last thing you want to do is
take the time to install, possibly troubleshoot, and learn recording software that doesn't meet
your needs.

#6 The Engineering Commitment

Like some kind of “Oath of the Brotherhood”, I made a commitment back in 2001 that I would
fight for the cause of better sounding recordings. In many ways I've succeeded, but at the
same time I still fight each and every day to get better. I've recorded over 1,000 songs. I've
spent tens of thousands of hours recording bands or myself. This is a lifelong process. Even
though I'm still not nearly as good as I want to be, I could probably make a better recording
with a tennis ball than the average guy who decided he'd just download $2,000 of software. If
you have similar goals of recording great-sounding music, you must be committed. Audio
engineering is not an easy hobby or profession. While I don't mean to scare anyone off, I do
want to point out that there is serious work required.

242
Start With Free Software

There are quite a few open source recording applications out there that don't cost a dime.
There is a big list at Recording Review here. If you don't have the cash to invest in a full
blown rig, that's okay. No harm done. Instead use what you have. Use one of the free
software applications. You can always upgrade down the road.

243
 Troubleshooting

Signal Flow

Audio In

• Sound
• A microphone to capture the sound and convert it into a tiny amount of electricity.
• A cable that can reliably send this tiny amount of electricity to our preamp.
• A preamp to boost this tiny amount of electricity up to levels that our recording gear
can use.
• We need to convert this electrical signal (which is currently analog) into a digital signal
that the computer can use. (This is taken care of by the audio interface in most home
recording situations)
• We need to send this digital signal into the computer via the audio interface and into
the operating system. (Which is handled by the drivers of the audio interface).
• We then need to send the signal to the recording software.
• We need to send the signal within the recording software to the specific track we are
recording on.
• We hit the record button.

This is the entire path that audio takes to make its way onto a track in your recording rig.

While this may look quite complicated, don't be alarmed. Most of these things are something

you only have to setup a single time.

Audio Out
To get audio out of your computer (so that you can actually hear it) a similar path is taken only
in reverse.
• The audio track must flow through the recording software (usually through the stereo

244
 bus / 2-bus).
• The stereo bus must then be routed to stereo outputs in the audio interface.
• This digital signal must be converted to an analog signal (usually handled within the
audio interface).
• The analog signal is then sent to a playback device such as studio monitors or
headphones.

Computer Troubleshooting
No matter what the problem, there are a series of troubleshooting steps that seem to pop up
each and every time. All of this was covered in the Computer Performance Optimization
chapter previously, but this is a nice overview when you are experiencing difficulties.

Is the operating system clean?

 After restarting, press Control + Alt + Delete and take a look at your CPU and RAM
usage. Both them should be near zero.

 Does the computer feel slow?

 Are there unnecessary programs that have been installed?
 Is the computer frequently used for internet?
 Has the computer been fully optimized for audio recording?

Is Your Gear Compatible?

 Yup, the good ol' chipset problem pops up again.

 Specific recording software doesn't play well with certain audio interfaces. (This is
fairly rare, but the DICE II problem has made the problem more widespread. The 32-
bit vs 64-bit issue has made it even worse.)

Issues With Drivers?

 Are you using the very latest driver? (One may have come out today!)
 If the latest driver doesn't work, what about the driver before that and the driver before
that? You'd be surprised how often a previous driver works best.

245
  Did you follow the the driver installation instructions to the letter? Drivers often require
goofy steps. I've goofed this up numerous times.
 Did you uninstall the previous drivers correctly before installing the new ones?
 Make sure to take a look at firmware upgrades as well for your audio interface.

Issues With Software?

· Are you using the latest version? Practically every manufacturer posts improved
versions of their software on their website.
· Are you using it correctly? The most common of all problems is not setting up
the internal routing properly. This should always be covered on page 2 of the manual
(give or take). Refusing to read the manual will waste a dramatic amount of time in the
long run. Give in!
· Are you using hacked software? As I've already said, I believe that hacked
software costs more in time than the real software costs in $. Life is too short.

Issues With The Buffer?

· If you set your audio interface's latency to an extremely fast level, it will cause
clicks and pops even if your CPU isn't working hard. This tells us that we are overworking
some other component in the computer in most cases.
· If your CPU is getting pushed clicks and pops are inevitable. You must increase
you buffer / latency.
· Sometimes setting a buffer that is too big can cause latency.

Q: It seems that all seven tracks are recording the

same thing? Why?
If you have multiple tracks fired up in your recording software, presumable to record a source
like drums, you must route each individual signal to each individual track. Let's keep it simple
and say we have this:

Input #1 – Hihat Side Overhead

246
Input #2 – Ride side Overhead

Input #3 – Kick

Input #4 – Snare

When we create four tracks in your recording software, we must grab track #1 and say “Hey
you! You are getting signal from input #1”. We do this with all of our tracks whether we are
recording 2 tracks or recording 40 racks. If left at their default setting, all tracks would be
getting that same signal from #1. You simply need to make sure that your recording software
has all four inputs activated and then you need to select each track and choose the
corresponding input.

The process is different for every piece of recording software, but this should be explained in
a getting started guide in the manual.

Q: I Can't Hear Any Audio On Playback? Why?

A typical output chain goes like this:
· Audio Track
· Routing To 2-Bus (stereo bus)
· Stereo output routing to audio interface output
· Audio interface routing to playback system

Possible Solutions

Audio Track

The audio track itself obviously must have signal to play back. It can't be muted and the fader
can't be pulled down too low.

247
Audio Track Routing

It's common for me to route audio tracks to busses. For example, all my drum tracks are
routed to a drum bus so that I can process the drums as a whole. The signal from this drum
bus must eventually make its way to the stereo bus in my recording software to be audible.

By default, recording software should route the audio track to the 2-bus, but this can often be
changed.

2-bus Routing

Within the recording software, you must specify where to send the 2-bus signal. In most
cases, it will be to outputs one and two (left and right) of your audio interface, but it could vary
depending on what you are up to.

Audio Interface Routing

In the event that your audio interface has DSP routing, you will have the option to route any
signal just about anywhere. As nice of luxury as this is, it can dramatically complicate things
until you have a firm grasp of how the routing works. Generally speaking you simply want
signal to flow from the output of the recording software to outputs at ½ power .

Playback System

When signal is coming out of your audio interface, it needs to be amplified and pushed out of
your studio monitors, headphones, or regular speakers.

Q: No Audio Recording At All! Why?

It's clear a link in the chain is broken. Let's discuss it.

A input typical chain goes like this:

· Source
· Mic
· Mic Cable

248
 · Preamp
· Converter
· Audio Interface (The preamp, converter, and audio interface may be bundled
together. If not, they will have cables between each of them.)
· Recording software input
· Track input (as in the track you create in your recording software).

Possible Solutions

Source

When recording an acoustic instrument, it is easy to tell if the thing is making noise.
However, if recording an instrument direct such as a keyboard, bass, or electric guitar you
really don't know if any signal is coming out of until you get some sort of visual indicator
further down the line. (The preamp level meter is often a good one).

Mic
While fairly rare, mics do die. If one mic isn't working, temporarily toss in another mic to see if
it works. In the case of condenser microphones, make sure you have phantom power turned
on.

Mic Cable
Mic cables go bad. Some mic cables start out bad. Try swapping out your mic cable with
another mic cable and see if that solves the problem. The same holds true with line-level
signals from direct instruments.

249
Preamp
Obviously, make sure the preamp is plugged in and the gain is cranked up to a reasonable
level. If channel #1 is having problems, try using a different channel.

Converter
Converters don't have problems too often as there really aren't any movable parts. If you are
using an external converter (most people are not), check to make sure that it's getting
wordclock and is in sync with the rest of the system. My Mytek converters blink when they
aren't getting a clock signal. Of course, make sure the digital output of the converter is
properly connected to the audio interface.

Audio Interface
If you are using external preamps and/or converters make sure to double check all of your
routing. It's very common - for me anyway - to route preamp #7 to input #5. I'm an idiot!
Those of you using the modern era of audio interfaces with preamps built in won't have the
pleasure of tracking down bugs like this.

Recording Software Routing

99% of the time, this is the problem. It comes from people not reading their manuals and just
hoping they can figure it out on the fly. In most recording programs, there are two potential
routing problems.

For example, in my current recording software, Cubase SX3, you have to first create an input
bus where you route the signal from the audio interface into the recording software. This is
done “behind the scenes” under a menu. Then, you must route these busses to the proper
track. If we want input #7 for our bass track, we need to select input #7.

250
Audio Only Records On One Side
Whenever a stereo track is recorded, by default, the recording software places input #1 on
the left and input #2 on the right. The mic on the left side of the instrument is run to input #1
and the mic on the right side of the instrument is run to input #2.

If you are only using one microphone (and therefore recording in mono) if you send that
signal to #1, it will only come out the left side.

The solution is to make sure to create a mono track when recording mono sources.

Note: There is nothing wrong with recording in mono. Mono tracks will always allow for
panning and default to the center. So you record a mono electric guitar and pan it to the left
and a mono piano and pan it to the right to create a stereo mix.

MIDI Makes No Sound

MIDI does not make sound. This is why it can be used for channel switching and other, not-
so-musical functions. Only when we send MIDI to a synthesizer or sampler can it trigger
sounds.

If you have a MIDI track that is routed to a synth or sampler, but you are not getting any
sound, here are a few reasons why you may not be getting sound.

Synth or Sampler Itself

The synth or sampler may not have a patch loaded. In that case, our MIDI is making its way
to the synth or sampler without any trouble, but the synth/sampler simply isn't doing anything
with it. If you have ruled out all other options, you may want to fire up a different synth and try
routing your MIDI to it.

Wrong Channel

The synth/sampler may be expecting MIDI on a specific channel. If you have drums on
channel #1, bass on channel #2, and piano on channel #3 of a sampler, but are sending your

251
MIDI track to the channel #6, you won't hear any sound. This only applies to synths/samplers
that allow multiple sounds/channels. Some synths use a single channel.

Wrong Notes

A tuba or cello only goes so high. A violin only goes so low. A 4 string bass (in standard
tuning) won't go as low as a 5 string bass. If you are attempting to play notes with your MIDI
track that simply aren't possible with the patch you are using, no sound will play. This is
typically more of a problem with samples than synthesizers but it's a mistake I commonly
make. It’s a really nice time to learn the actual ranges of acoustic instruments for more
realistic programming.

Channel Muted

When using virtual instruments in the computer, a channel will be automatically created to
route the output of the synth/sampler to the mixer in the recording software. It's possible that
maybe this fader has been muted or the volume level is all the way down.

Troubleshooting Clicks and Pops

The #1 cause of clicks and pops is an overworked computer. Let's make sure this isn't the
problem.

1. Restart your computer

2. Create a new song / project in your recording software
3. Record just a single audio track
4. Play back that track
5. Do you have clicks and pops in it?
If you have clicks and pops while recording just a single audio track there are a few
possibilities.

Clicks and Pops With A Single Track

Generally speaking, if you are getting clicks and pops with just a single track and your

252
computer isn't a total train wreck, it's usually a sign that something has been misconfigured.

CPU

Your computer may have so many spybots and viruses that you are indeed using more
computer power than you think. This is easy to check. Fire up Windows Task Manager. (As
of this writing, this is done in XP and on via hitting Control + Alt + Delete) and selecting first
the “Performance” tab and then the “Processes” tab. If you are using next to zero CPU
usage, move on to step #2.

If your CPU usage is more than 20% with nothing going on, something is definitely wrong with
your system. I prefer my computer to be using around 1-2% after Windows is fully loaded. If
your CPU usage is not this low the first step is to make sure parasites aren't hogging all your
power.

CPU Parasites

Software manufacturers love to partially load their software on your system's startup. Why?
The idea is that by partially loading their software when your computer loads up, their
software will load quicker. The downside is your entire computer runs slower. There are
many programs that use this parasitic autoload method and frankly I find it disgusting. It's
entirely unnecessary and if a person really wants software to load on startup, they can do so
by pasting a shortcut into their “Startup” folder. (I automatically launch Cubase when
Windows starts up, for example.)

As annoying as software parasites are, they are relatively easy to solve. Click Start > Run >
msconfig. There are various ways of going about this. I turn everything off. After restarting
my computer there is usually a feature that I miss and need to turn on, but this is much
quicker for me than turning them off one by one. If you aren't comfortable with my seek and
destroy method, find the “Command” column and make it wide enough so you can see what
program is loading.

253
When I take a look at my current laptop I see a bunch of junk I don't need. The one that
strikes me as being most interesting is this Adobe Reader 9.0 (see highlight). I use Adobe
Acrobat Reader about once per month, but the nice folks at Adobe don't see any problem
having it chew up RAM and CPU power the other 300 hours a month I'm on this computer.
That's unacceptable for a home computer and it's borderline sexual assault of a recording
computer.

Note: This msconfig tool applies to Windows XP. I'm taking the risk of being outdated here,
but I'm putting all my money on Windows keeping this one around for future versions. If you
can't find msconfig in your futuristic version of Windows, do a search on “Google” (a primitive
search engine from the year 2009) for an equivalent.

This is my laptop. You'll notice that I'm running absolutely nothing but ClamTray, my antivirus
definition updater; NvCPL, whatever that is; and two gizmos that run my wireless internet.

Worse Than Parasites

While I would like to take this time to formally slam all manufacturers who needlessly bog
down computers just so their program will load two seconds faster, I have to give them credit.
At least they are playing by the rules. With a simple uncheck of a box in msconfig we can tell

254
their parasites to take a hike. Viruses and spybots are not nearly so compliant.

If after turning off all unneeded junk in msconfig you still find that Windows is using more than
5-10% of CPU power doing essentially nothing you have a problem with your computer. It
probably needs a formatting immediately. You can attempt to uninstall software, remove
viruses, and do the usual 101-style maintenance, but sometimes taking a shower won't cut it.
Sometimes you need a heart transplant!

Don't waste too much time trying to duct tape a system back together when you could have
Windows back up and running on your system in less than an hour after you backed up your
important files.

Note: The installation of software and the registering that software can considerably add to
this time.

It's important to know that most recording software has a CPU usage meter, but this meter
doesn't always read the same thing as the CPU meter within Windows.

Latency

It's very common for the lowest levels of latency (smallest buffer size in the audio interface
control panel) to cause clicks and pops. Even with a killer, modern system fully optimized for
audio there may be factors that simply don't allow you to run with latency set that lo. This is
okay. Usually, just changing this latency to the next smallest buffer setting will dramatically
reduce or solve the problem without causing too much trouble during monitoring while
tracking. If not, try going the highest setting and see if this stops the clicks and pops. I used
to track with a latency of 128 samples, but after an audio interface switch caused clicks and
pops at 128 samples I was forced to use 160 samples until better drivers were eventually
released.

Note: Clicks and pops can occur at two different times. They can occur during the tracking
process and actually end up on the track you have recorded. They can also be added during
playback. You can tell the two apart because clicks, pops, and glitches that occur during
playback will not occur in the same place. They show up randomly. If you've recorded the

255
clicks and pops onto the track, you'll be able to zoom in and see where the clicks and pops
are occurring and you will hear them each and every time.

If you are using the highest buffer setting and your computer's CPU is barely cracking a
sweat, you've got real problems beyond that of just the basics.

Compatibility

It's possible you have some gear that is not compatible. Check the chipset requirements from
the manufacturer of your audio interface. Yes, they are there somewhere. These are buried
right next to the Watergate Tapes. Dig, dig, dig. Ask for help on the RecordingReview.com
forum if you need to. Usually someone knows where those stupid requirements are.

Then figure out what chipset your Motherboard and/or connection card (Firewire, USB 1.1,
USB 2.0, etc) is using. The easiest/most exact/best way is to check the manual of your
computer's motherboard, if possible. If this is out, try heading to Control Panels > System >
Devices. If your drivers have been properly installed for your motherboard, you will see Intel,
AMD, Nvidia, Geforce, TI etc. Note: We are not talking about the processor type. We are
talking about the motherboard or connection card's chipset. There is a difference. A
motherboard with an AMD processor could use a Via chipset, for example. (This is confused
by the fact that Intel creates both processors and chipsets.)

Another potential compatibility issue arises with certain audio interfaces not being compatible
with certain recording software. This was unheard of until this thing called “DICE II” came out
in specific audio interfaces. I'm not even exactly sure what it is, but it marked the first time I
was made aware of specific audio interfaces not working with specific recording software.
Before then, all Windows based audio interfaces were compatible with all recording software
(minus the proprietary systems like Pro Tools). Great! Like this needed to be more
complicated!!

256
Drivers

Triple check to make sure you have the latest drivers from the manufacturer of your audio
interface and make sure they are installed properly. Sometimes installing a new driver
requires that you uninstall the old driver. Sometimes a new driver requires a firmware update.
It's very, very, very common for driver updates to require you to brush up on your hoop
jumping skills so make sure to read the instructions carefully if your driver upgrade goes awry.

I've seen drivers make outrageous improvements in reliability and performance. If you are
using a new driver that isn't performing well, you may want to give an older driver a shot. I've
had some luck in the past with this one.

Note: I never update my drivers unless I'm encountering a problem. If it ain't broke, don't fix
it!

In most cases, a new driver will solve the problem when all previous factors have been ruled
out.

Beyond these factors, there are no glaringly obvious reasons why you would be experiencing
clicks and pops when recording just a single track of audio. If you are still hearing clicks and
pops, it's time to swallow your pride (and free time) and begin contacting customer support.
You will will most likely get the run around and you will mostly likely encounter one
manufacturer blaming another manufacturer.

It's recommend that you make a post on the RecordingReview.com forum under Solve
Technical Issues because it's possible that another member has already gone through the
agony of customer support and can help you solve the problem in seconds. With that said,
tech support issues are always tricky so don't count on this exclusively.

BIOS

I hope I don't scare any of you. Don't worry, this one doesn't have to be all that bad, but if you
feel scared of this one, don't do it! If you are new to computers I can confidently recommend
you jump into the BIOS only if you have immediate access to a second computer with
internet. This is to dig you out of any holes you may dig yourself in.

The BIOS is where you can hardware settings. The BIOS is the very first thing to load when

257
you turn your computer on. Guys who like to hotrod their computers (aka overclocking) do it
in the BIOS but there are a few options than can affect the way your recording computer
functions. Every BIOS I can recall in recent times has a “Load Optimized Defaults” option
which can sometimes fix problems with the way your computer runs. Usually the need for
such a feature is caused by idiots like myself who monkey around in the first place. So if you
don't know what a BIOS is may be good to avoid this. I just wanted to list it as a possible
factor.

Sometimes this “Load Optimized Defaults” can change one or two settings that stop your
computer from loading Windows. To a beginner, this could rival the fear of nuclear war. For a
nerd like myself, it's usually as simple as finding the boot order making sure your hard drive
with Windows is selected to boot. It's also common for this feature to enable A: (disk drives)
that don't exist which could cause problems until you manually disable them.

Note: Never mind. I've decided no one should play with the BIOS. Stay away from it!

Clicks And Pops With Multiple Tracks

When a computer can record one track without a problem, but adding additional tracks
causes issues the problem is usually more of performance. Make sure to go through all the
troubleshooting possibilities above that pertain to a single track.

If a single track can be recorded without a single click or pop, there is only one obvious
reason why a second track or even 10 tracks would cause problems. The mix you are playing
back is exhausting your computer's resources. Sometimes glitches occur within a given
project. I'm going to go ahead and define a “project” as that thing you save when you finish
working on a song. Sometimes you are using more CPU power than you realize. On an
computer that had its heyday back in 2005, it only takes a few guitar emulator instances to
cause the whole system to run out of gas. The same can be said about certain synths. Make
sure you check your CPU usage meter in your recording software and in Windows via the
task manager to get a feel for what your system is doing.

258
CPU Usage Meter

I've had problems in the past where the CPU usage meter in Cubase was running at 50% but
my computer was actually running at 90%. I've noticed that with my newer computer the
Cubase CPU usage meter may say 50% but I may only be running at 30% in Windows. So
you may have to learn what your CPU meter is really telling you.

Scandisk

Another possibility is hard drive problems. I'd run Scandisk on the drive as soon as you have
a few hours where you don't need the computer. Go to My Computer. On each drive

· Right Click
· Select Properties
· Tools
· Check Now
Windows will have to restart to check the hard drive in which Windows is installed but others
can be done without a restart.

RAM

You may also want to make sure that your aren't maxing out your computer's RAM. I've
encountered situations where one stick of RAM would pop out or die leaving the system
running on half the RAM. I've encountered programs that have had runaway RAM that used
dramatically more RAM than they normally would. In this case a restart often helps.

Create A New Project

If a project becomes corrupted, the only option is to re-import your audio into a brand new
project. This is often a pain in the neck, but there really isn't any way around it if your project
is, indeed, corrupt. It's worth the hassle to get back on your feet. Cubase has a feature to a
save a project to a new folder and will render all the wav files to start at the same time. Other
programs likely have something like this, also. This can save centuries of tedious labor when

259
you import these wav files into a brand new project.

Clicks and Pops With Samples

If you are experiencing clicks and pops when you trigger samples, you are not alone. This
most often occurs when the hard drive is being pushed too aggressively. The good news is
99% of the time, the problem won't occur when you render your tracks down.

This is generally solved when you move the “work” from the hard drive to the RAM. Of
course, this requires more RAM. Most samplers have a feature called DFD (direct from disk)
or streaming which allows you to balance your RAM usage to hard drive usage when dealing
with samples.

MIDI Sequencing
After recording live rock bands for years, I switched over to Cubase so I would have the ability
to use a powerful MIDI sequencer with synths and samples. I consider it to be one of my best
decisions. I can now easily enhance my “organic” live rock band recordings with stuff from
the synth/sample world when appropriate or make my own productions that are entirely MIDI-
based. I feel like I can make anything and everything I want! In other words, MIDI makes me
feel empowered! I can create an orchestra thingy in the morning and then a rap beat that
night.

In the early days of MIDI sequencing, the sounds possible were very limited. These types of
sounds become prominent in many of the 80s synth pop and dance genres. I believe that the
word “corny” comes up often when describing tones from the past. Some people love them.
Some people hate them. Few people make up the middle. I have the interesting perspective
of being raised on synth/dance pop music from a cheesier (or debatable: more fun) era, but
also completely understand where a natural, organic band is coming from when they say that
they feel constricted by a click track. So, I can 100% relate to the person who leans towards
the stereotypes that MIDI methods of recording have led to in the past, but I also understand
just how exciting music made with MIDI can be. As always, it's not the tools, it's how you use
them.

260
261
 MIDI

An Explanation of MIDI
MIDI is just data. MIDI never directly deals with audio. MIDI allows you to capture the
performance, not the sound. Let me say that again. MIDI has no sound. MIDI is simply the
capturing of a performance. It's as if we could measure exactly what your fingers did to play
on a piano, guitar, or drum and then saved that. Because MIDI has no sound of its own, we
use this MIDI data to trigger synths or samples that make the actual audio. We can tell a
synth or sample exactly what notes to play, how hard to play them, when to stop playing
them, among other things which we'll get to later.

The New Era Of MIDI

There is a common perception that all MIDI productions have this same “unnatural” sound to
them. This “unnatural” is what we think of when we look at cheap, synth drums or really bad
emulations of pianos and other instruments. I think the stereotypical sound of the old school
drum machine best sums this up (still found on some standalone recorders)..

This is all in the past. The drum sounds in your Roland keyboard when you were in junior
high are long gone (or at least have been surpassed by an absurd amount). MIDI synths and
samples can sound incredibly real if you want them to!

In fact, I'm positive that each and every one of us has been fooled at one time or another.
The corny world of MIDI died when home computers became powerful enough for software
samplers. Now it is entirely possible to make incredibly lifelike sounding recordings. The
previous limitations of hardware sampler and synths are over. With the right producer at the
helm, there is no way to discern between a recording done entirely with samples and a
recording done in a very high end studio. This is the modern age. It happens to be much

262
less expensive to crank out recordings that sonically rival that of major mega studios because
we can use samples that were recorded by ultra mega studios.

RecordingReview.com forum moderator, Richiebee, illustrated the possibilities by taking a

stereotypical MIDI file and running it through modern samples. The results are astounding.

Take a listen.

The old era of MIDI production allowed for a snare sample. Yes, just one, single snare
sample. So you'd hear the same snare hit throughout the entire song. Listen to the snare fill
on an old New Order song and you'll know what happens whenever a snare hit is triggering
the exact same sample. (We call that the “machine gun” effect.)

While this sort of thing didn't bother anyone on a bunch of Janet Jackson hits, it's something
that is more acceptable in pop music than everywhere else. In more organic forms of music,
this kind of thing is distracting! A snare drum has a different tone when it is hit in the center or
in the edges. It has different tone depending on how hard you hit it or with which hand. It has
a different tone even when you attempt to make it sound exactly the same. You may not
notice this when listening to your favorite songs recorded with a real drummer, but you sure
notice it when the performance is supposed to sound real and all you hear is that one single
sample.

Now we have highly advanced drum samplers that are designed to rival that of the most real
of drumming situations. First of all, the first “modern” drum sample package I purchased had
10 DVDs worth of samples. We are talking 40GB of individual drum hits. This is a ton of
samples! I want to point out that this was for just a handful of drum kits. This was not one of
those “One Million Samples For $20” packages. The modern samples don't use 1 sample for
every drum hit. They use hundreds. Many of them even randomly grab variations even if
you use the same velocity over and over.

263
The old way of using samples on drums never took into account bleed from the other parts of
the drum kit. While bleed can sound undesirable in some situations, bleed is also a big part
of the 3D sound of professionally recorded real drums. The sound of the snare in the toms
and the kick in the overheads is a huge part of the sound.

When the old-style samplers triggered a hi-hat, then a kick, then a snare individually there
was no interaction. The modern drum samplers allow us to control the amount of bleed from
the snare into the kick drum mic. We can turn bleed off completely or we can crank it up. We
can even turn off the bleed of the cymbals into the other drums which effectively achieves the
sound of recording drums with no cymbals. Basically, we have the incredible ability to pull off
natural sounding recordings that would have been considered insane just a few years ago.
It's just up to the talent of the musician to bring that out. A sampler is a musical instrument.

All of these drum samples output to individual tracks in your mixer as if you had tracked the
real drums yourself. The process has really became very close to the real thing, only without
the expense of a $2,000 per day room.

Some people seem to think that this could work well for simple music, but for complicated,
intricate music it's not going to happen. Well, nothing could be further from the truth.
Granted, if you want a sound that isn't included in the library (maybe the sound of smashing a
guitar into the front head of a kick drum or something equally obscure) then they are right.
However, so much detail has gone into these modern sample packages to be able to adapt
from any situation from jazz brushes to death metal that the sky is the limit.

MIDI Doesn't Have To Be “Stiff”

Many old timers are often against MIDI because they claim that it sounds “stiff” or “sterile”. I
need to make sure we shoot that myth down right here and now. The days of just telling a

264
drum machine to keep a 4/4 beat at 120bpm are over. Let me rephrase that. The days of
simply firing up a drum machine at given tempo are over . These days, sequencers are very
powerful and are 100% capable of capturing a great human performance. In other words,
MIDI is just a data format and it happens to be very good at being able to capture a real
performance and play it back. There is no rule that says you have to push the Quantize
button or manipulate the performance within your sequencer at all.

When used in this fashion, there is absolutely no difference between capturing a performance
with microphones versus capturing it with MIDI and using samples.

MIDI can sound as real and natural as you want to make it. Because editing MIDI data is so
unbelievably easy, I feel that too many insecure musicians took the plunge and over-
perfected their tracks to the point of sounding sterile (and therefore non-perfect). It is much
easier and faster to program stiff sounding tracks than it is to program real sounding tracks.
We'll get into that later on in this chapter. Just keep in mind there are many ways to “enter”
MIDI data. There is no reason a person couldn't simply place triggers on a real drum kit and
capture MIDI that way while leaving the entire track 100% human.

What Is A MIDI Sequencer?

A MIDI sequencer is similar to those old pianos that would play songs automatically when you
put in a roll of paper with all the notes specified. Of course, a powerful sequencer like Logic
or Cubase is a little more advanced than a sheet of paper, but the concept is the exact same.
The sequencer allows you to record and edit MIDI data and then send it out to the synth /
sampler of your choice. This MIDI data tells the synth / sampler what to play.

You have control over which note was struck, when the note was struck, the length of the
note, the intensity with which that note was struck (known as velocity) and a ton of other
factors that I seldom use but are there for anyone who wants to take the realism of their

265
tracks to the next level. This is the simplified version as I'm not really that advanced of a MIDI
guy. There are dramatically more complex functions that allow you to slap some notes down
and then “humanize” a groove. The musical possibilities are absurd!

With a sequencer, you can create an entire song with nothing more than a mouse. You can
draw in each and every note. Of course, you are not limited to using a mouse. You can
“enter” MIDI data with an electronic drum kit, a keyboard with MIDI or USB out, a MIDI guitar,
or any other musical device that has a MIDI Out.

In the past hardware sequencers were the big deal. I know of no popular hardware
sequencers anymore as just about everyone who is into MIDI production is doing it from
within the computer. These days Cubase, Logic, Digital Performer, Sonar, etc. all contain
very powerful MIDI sequencers.

What Is A Synthesizer?
Synthesizers are basically tone generators. In their simplest form, they play back a sine wave
for each note. (Think of the “smooth” sound on your old 8-bit Nintendo that sounded like a
bad flute if you really used your imagination) . There are many, many ways to take this tone
generator and manipulate it into sounding like everything from a buzz saw to a snare drum to
an Enya-like ambiance. As far as I'm concerned, I'm 100% amazed that people are skilled
enough in using synthesis to create sounds that are as usable as they are. It's very
impressive what people can do by creating sound out of thin air and then messing with it.
With that said, synthesis is not a substitute for the real thing when the real thing is desired
(that's where samples come in).

There are, however, unreal sounds that make synths extremely powerful musical tools in the
right hands. In the right song, synthesizers are capable of going leaps and bounds beyond
that of what you heard back in the ‘80s synth pop days. If you aren't up on the modern

266
samples, you have no idea! Check out Absynth as an example of a modern synth.

In the old days, all synths were hardware (both analog and digital). Most synths were built
right into the keyboard, but there were also rack-mounted synths that needed a MIDI
controller of some type to receive MIDI data from. In time, computers became fast enough to
not only replicate synth sounds but to come up with some very exciting sounds on their own.

What Is A Sampler?
Samplers work entirely different than synths. A sampler takes a piece of audio that was
recorded (typically with a microphone) and plays it back when MIDI data triggers it. Because
samplers simply play back a real recording of a real instrument, they are capable of sounding
totally real. The only usual giveaway that samples were used instead of real tracking is the
fact that sample tracks tend to sound way better from an engineering perspective than tracks
often recorded at home by amateurs.

In the past, hardware samplers were limited by the amount of RAM available. It wasn't
possible to play back long samples with lots of sustain because samplers of that era couldn't
remember that many files. This meant that long, sustaining notes such as that of violins were
limited to a specific amount of time until they just cut off. The work-around to this was to take
the “sustain” portion of the sample and loop it until you released the note, then it would play
the “release” and “decay” portions of the sample.

Now modern samples have a feature where they will load up the beginning of the sample into
RAM but if the sample is long, the rest of the sample will be triggered real time from the hard
drive. This is a great illustration of how computers have revolutionized the world of samples
and made realistic performances possible.

267
The lack of RAM couldn't allow for as many samples to be loaded on an old hardware
sampler. Maybe only three or four snare drum samples were available so that you had the
option of “super soft”, “soft”, “medium”, and “hard” playing. The sampler triggers the sample
that is closest to the correct velocity. It will change the volume within those velocity regions to
make the difference between a velocity of 56 and 58. Modern samplers allow for infinitely
greater resolution. There are so many individual samples for one snare drum that you won't
hear the sampler ever hitting the same snare sample twice. In addition to having so many
samples, there are often multiple samples for each velocity struck in slightly different parts of
the drum to add even more realism. To take it even further, there are separate samples for
the left and right hands. So you could program a drum roll with left hand hard, left medium,
right hand hard, right hand medium for even more realism.

Hardware samplers work just like synthesizers. These are typically external, rackmount
pieces that required MIDI to be sent out of a MIDI sequencer and into the MIDI input of the
sampler. Toward the end of the ‘90s, computer technology allowed for drastic increases in
the size of RAM. It wasn't long before software samplers essentially took over. While there
are still purists who prefer the sound of their vintage synths to virtual instruments using
synthesis in the computer, I can't remember the last time I heard of a person using a
hardware sampler. They have pretty much gone by the wayside. Prices for hardware
samplers plummeted from $5,000 down to just a couple hundred bucks. (I'm surprised they
are still worth that! They are obsolete in every way I can think of.)

Update: I just received word that there is a resurgence in hardware sampler use by a few
high profile indie bands and hip hop groups. This is similar to driving a restored car from the
1930s that has 45 horsepower, gets 12 miles per gallon, has no radio, no air conditioning, no
heater, but somehow has a vibe to it. Don't ask me!

Loops
Loops have become popular in the past decade. The idea is to get one section of audio,
repeat it over and over, and then mix and match the various pieces. So maybe you have a

268
drum loop that is a straight 4/4: kick, snare, kick, and snare. You can then paste that loop all
over the place. Maybe you have a couple bass loops that are the same tempo. Maybe you
use a different loop in the pre-chorus and a different loop in the chorus. You add them
however you want as part of your song.

Loops are very popular with hip hop and electronic music. If the loops are of considerable
quality, it's not difficult to come out with a great sounding production with very little effort.
Programs such as ACID and Fruity Loops have become extremely popular.

Why I'm Not Big On Loops

I think that loops are an acceptable way of working in electronic genres of music, but that's
where they end for me. Rap and electronic music tend to be repetitive and rigid. Country,
rock, folk, and just about every other “less modern/more organic” genre requires a little bit of
human variety in the recordings. Sometimes you need a crash cymbal to jump out in a verse,
but what do you do if you can't find a loop with a crash cymbal?. There needs to be more
variation to avoid the boredom of sterility. It would take a huge loop library to be able to
conceive of every musical possibility. In fact, they have these already. They are called
sample libraries. They come one hit at a time so you have total freedom to make whatever
you want if you have a MIDI sequencer.

I personally feel like I'm using the wrong side of my brain when dealing with loops. I start
going through folders of loops looking for something cool. That's the idea anyway. In reality, I
find myself finding what is wrong with each loop and I kind of get into “picky mode” and I don't
put myself in “creative mode”. (It's the same thing that occurs when scrolling through presets
for too long.) I greatly prefer the power and endless possibilities of using synths and samples
with a MIDI sequencer. I can play any note I want. If I want my crash cymbal in a verse, I
add one. If the crash cymbal needs to be louder the second time through, no problem! I
don't feel like my hands are tied. I can easily make my own loops if I so choose (which I often

269
do when making my little pieces of electroruckus). However, with MIDI sequencing, I
increase the velocity of the drums in the 3rd chorus verse the 1st and 2nd chorus. I can ramp
up the intensity or the tempo.

I want to emphasize that there are dramatic differences between searching through folders
versus playing keys on a keyboard. The mindset is totally different. Searching through
folders hitting the preview button sounds like work to me. Beating on an instrument sounds
like fun to me.

When it comes to recording “organic” styles of music, the budget of the project may prohibit
us from hiring a real drummer. I may have to program the drums or have a drummer play on
my edrum kit. If I had to use loops, it would certainly save me hours of time, but it would
definitely sound like I have copied and pasted the same piece of audio all over the song. This
isn't rock music. This isn't country music. This isn't folk music. This isn't metal (most of the
time). This simply sounds distracting in many genres of music. It's worth the dramatically
larger time for me to go in and do my best to simulate a human performance. .

I also think that there are a lot of people who are intimidated by going into the manual mode
of sequencing synths and samples. I think if a person can choose a 3 note loop, they can
pound out 3 notes on a midi controller. I don't see a difference. I find that when dealing with
loops, I may do fine until I want to take the tune in another direction. Of course, this is a given
with the nature of the loops. By definition, loops repeat the same thing over. You can go your
own way with this repetition if you so choose, but only if it matches the loops you have at your
disposal. In these cases, I'm at the mercy of the loop library. I personally hate this. So,
while loops are a simple way of working quickly, with simplicity comes a lack of control. If you
feel you are limited by loops, consider working with a full blown MIDI sequencer.

If you happen to enjoy working with loops, don't let me stop you. I'm not trying to limit your
possibilities with looping, I'm simply trying to illustrate the limitations of looping for me.

270
MIDI Is Simple
MIDI is easy. You make sure your routing is correct and beat away on your keyboard. You go
into the sequencer and move stuff around, change notes, change velocities, or do whatever
you want. You can't mess up!

So just in case you are feeling a bit intimidated by the technology, don't! Relax. Sequencers
often have all kinds of fancy features, but you don't have to use any of them. Just hit record,
beat on your MIDI controller, and send that to a piano sample. It's as easy as that!

The fancy features are there to automate tasks that are a pain in the butt. In the beginning
skip them. Skip all of them. When you start feeling comfortable with fundamental operation
of the software then go in read about the capabilities in the manual. You'll surely find a 5
minute solution to a task that took you hours.

The Basics Of MIDI Routing

Many people get confused about the routing in MIDI. I think most of this is due to the fact that
they can't see what’s going on. A guitar player can see his guitar going into his pedals, going
into his amp, going into his speakers. With MIDI, these days, there are very few cables. Let
me simplify it.

In a simple setup, using a software sequencer (Cubase, Logic, etc) our MIDI controller has a
MIDI out which must send MIDI out of the controller and into the computer via the
conventional 5-pin MIDI port or via USB.

Neither USB or the standard 5-pin MIDI cable is better. These days most computers come

271
with a USB port, but few come with a MIDI input. If your audio interface has one: problem
solved - use it. We then need to record a MIDI track. Our goal is to get a few notes/dots on
the screen on that MIDI track. When we bang on the keys, we should see some kind of visual
confirmation on the screen somewhere that MIDI is indeed coming into the sequencer. (In
Cubase, you can find this on the “transport” bar with play and stop and such.) This lets us
know that MIDI is coming into the software at least.

If I don't see the little activity bar light up when I beat on my MIDI controller, there are a few
possibilities. Either I don't have the MIDI controller turned on, I don't have the MIDI cable
plugged into the controller, I don't have the MIDI controller plugged to the computer / MIDI
interface, or I don't have that MIDI interface specified in my recording software as the MIDI
input.

We then need to make sure our MIDI track is actually getting that MIDI data after we select
our MIDI IN port as the input for that particular track. Usually there will be some kind of visual
confirmation for that, too. You can have a number of MIDI IN devices (MIDI controllers like
keyboards, electronic drums, or MIDI guitars) so each track needs to be able to define the
desired input.

There is no sound playing, but we could arm the MIDI track, hit the record button, and go to
town without hearing any sound and still record some MIDI data. This is all it takes to record
MIDI data onto a track in a software sequencer. Of course, it's pretty tough to play well when
you can't hear what you are doing. With that said, this is a time for celebration because
you've conquered the first half of MIDI recording. Yes, it's that easy.

In review, we did the following:

1. Plugged the MIDI Controller into the computer

2. Set the input for the MIDI track in the recording software
3. Hit Record

272
So now we need to get our MIDI to trigger some kind of noise making synth or sampler. We'll
stay in the recording software and use virtual instruments although we could just as easily
route the MIDI data out of a MIDI OUT port (if we have one) and on to an external device of
some kind. In the virtual instruments window, I'm going to grab my sampler. By default,
there are no sounds loaded into the sampler; let's say I load up a piano sound into the first
slot.

Now we need to send out MIDI data to that sampler from our MIDI track.

Think about that 5-pin cable for a minute. That 5-pin cable was capable of sending 16
different MIDI channels to one device through it. So if we had a track for drums we could
send it through channel 10 and if we had a MIDI track for bass we could send it through
channel 2, until we went up to channel 16. This was useful when one single synth/keyboard
handled the drums, bass, piano, trumpets, etc for an entire song.

Each of these channels, which is easy to see in the sequencer, has a bunch of
patches/sounds/whatever you want to call them (128 of them). They are generally referred to
by the piano name like C4 is a “C” note in the middle of the keyboard. C#4 is one half step
higher than C4 and C2 is two octaves lower. That's how a piano works, but a C#4 could be a
snare drum and C4 could be a cymbal crash and who knows what is on C2. It could be
anything and it's totally up to the sampler manufacturer to decide. With our piano sound, a
C4 should actually be a C4 so that simplifies things just a bit.

People get confused quite a bit with drums when it comes to MIDI channels. People are used
to thinking of drums in terms of 10 tracks and therefor it's common to assume that a drum
MIDI part would use up 10 MIDI channels. This is not the case. An entire drum performance
will have no problem fitting on a single channel. The kick is one note. The snare is another
note. It's as simple as that. In fact, piano and guitar tracks often pass more MIDI data than

273
drums do and they work fine within a single channel.

Let’s go back to the piano sound in our sampler that it defaulted to channel #1. This means
that our piano sample patch is only going to receive MIDI data from channel #1. We need to
verify that our MIDI track is being sent on channel #1. Depending on what your recording
software defaults to, it could be sending that MIDI data on any channel.

Once the MIDI out is routed to the correct virtual instrument (our sampler) and is on the same
channel as our piano patch (channel #1), we should hear our piano sound.

We could fire up a tuba on channel #2 in our sampler. Our piano on channel #1 will have
nothing to do with it. They will be completely separate entities. If we were to change the
output of the MIDI track to channel #2, the piano would stop playing and the tuba would start.

So, putting it all together, the routing is fairly straight forward. It's as simple as:

1. Data out of the MIDI track

2. Into a specific MIDI IN, synth or sample on a specific channel

Putting It All Together

We mentioned previously that we really didn't have to be hearing any sound to record MIDI
data. I did this just so we could crawl a bit before trying to walk. Obviously, we want to hear
the instrument when we are playing and we can easily do that. Data can flow through a MIDI
track very quickly. So all we need to do after we have a MIDI track properly routed to a synth
or sample is click the “Monitor” button. This is essentially a switch that allows the track to
decide if it wants to pass on the signal that is already recorded (if any track has been
recorded) or take signal from the MIDI input and pass it on to the specified synth or sampler.

274
If everything is set up correctly and the Monitor button is engaged, you should be able to play
your pianos, synths, drums, and anything else all real time with your MIDI controller if you
have a low latency audio/MIDI interface.

Too Many MIDI Notes

There is just one problem. I mentioned that we have 128 possible notes with MIDI. I'm not
aware of any conventional piano that has 128 notes and I don't know of a sample package
that includes a piano with 128 notes. If we record MIDI data that was too low or too high to
fall within the range of that instrument, we are attempting to play notes that don't exist on that
instrument. No sound would play. Always make sure that if no sound is playing that you are
playing notes that are actually available for that instrument within the sample package. This
is usually made clear by the sampler software. Better still, develop an understanding for the
instruments you are writing for: their natural ranges and idiomatic uses. On a cello sample, it's
easy to start out playing low. Not too low. The lowest open string is C2. As you reach the
middle octaves, you'll hit a note and nothing will play. There is no reason to be alarmed. The
cello simply doesn't go that high.

MIDI Messages
For those of you are having a hard time understanding that MIDI is data, it won't take long
from checking around online for “MIDI Messages” to remind you that this is definitely a
computer language and not merely a tool for computer expression.

MIDI Messages are essentially the possible ways for you to express yourself musically with
MIDI. All of these can be manipulated to further enhance (or reduce) the realism in your MIDI
productions.

275
Velocity

A measurement of force with which you strike a note. This plays a major role in the volume
and tone of nearly all instruments. Most synths/samplers take full advantage of this.

Note On

This is the term to describe when you hit the note. Your sequencer will keep track of when
you struck the note, the velocity, and which note you struck.

Note Off

This is the technical term for when a note stops. Obviously, there needs to be a difference
between staccato notes and long sustained notes. This is how it is captured. In your MIDI
sequencer you can go in with your mouse and stretch the length of the note. This is
essentially changing the time time of the “Note Off”. You aren’t likely to see this message
recorded in your sequencer. The computer will take the Note On message, figure in Note Off
and return a Duration measurement into your sequencer. Ahh, computers.

Aftertouch

This is the measurement of the pressure the notes are being held down at any particular time.
While not all synths nor samples take advantage of this, aftertouch can allow for additional
expression. Let's say we hold down a pad to create a spacey atmosphere to a tune but we
want to back off of this a little bit midway, aftertouch allows us to keep on sustaining the note
without killing it. Another illustration are some violin patches. When a real human being
plays a violin they can vary the volume or vibrato of any note they wish. Without aftertouch, if
a note is struck at X velocity and sustained, that note sustains at X velocity. With aftertouch,
a huge palette of possible expression and intensity opens.

276
Pitch Bend

We've all played with the wheel on synths. It's fun to spend two minutes of your life hitting a
note and then monkeying with the joystick. While pitch bend has its defined uses with many
synths, the modern world of synths and samples don't always force you to use this as
“joystick” for pitch alone. Depending on the synth, you can control just about anything the
designer of the synth wanted to control. Don't underestimate the pitch bend knob.

Potential MIDI Problems

Latency

In order to play a piano part through your sampler, for example, it's usually not a big deal for
the MIDI to get into the computer quickly. Both standard USB and MIDI ports are fast enough
to pull this off. However, once the sound is triggered within the sampler, we want to hear it
immediately. We have no time to wait for the computer to think. This is why it's important to
use a real-deal audio interface designed for audio recording because stock soundcards are
notoriously high latency.

Sampler Click/Pops

Sometimes samplers will make clicks and pops (not much differently than an audio interface
in which the latency has been cranked down too low). To solve this, samplers have a “DFD”
(direct from disk) or “streaming” thingy which is their method for balancing between the
amount of RAM used and the amount of hard drive space used for temporary storage of
samples. If you are experiencing clicks and pops with your sampler, you may need to use
more RAM.

277
Excessive CPU/RAM Usage

Virtual instruments (both synths and samples) are one of the most demanding tasks a
computer can tackle. As mentioned above, there are very popular sample libraries where just
the drums will use 2GB of RAM. Synthesizers can put an enormous strain on your
computer's processor. Because real time MIDI-triggered production requires low latency, the
combination of high loads and low latency means you need a fairly modern computer
tweaked for maximum performance in order to do any serious MIDI work. Just like with
games, if your computer isn't fairly modern, good luck playing the latest virtual instruments in
any quantity. We discussed ways to squeeze more power out of your computer in the
computer nerd chapters.

When a computer is overloaded from excessive CPU/RAM usage while the track is being
played, it won't just stop. Recording software is designed to go! If you overload your
computer, most recording software will keep on playing and essentially this can lock your
computer up so intensely that even the Task Manager may not come up. This isn't really a
flaw of the computer, it's a flaw of the user. You must be responsible with your CPU usage
and keep an eye on the CPU meter in your recording software. If you are running low, it's
time to upgrade to a machine with more power or begin to use various tactics to reclaim some
CPU power before adding yet another synth to your computer’s work load.

Drum Programming
There are some insanely powerful drum samplers out there now that make it totally possible
to program drums that even a trained ear would have a tough time discerning from the real
thing.

These modern sample packages are flat out amazing sounding! The sounds are amazing, but
that's only a part of the picture. A huge part of sound of an instrument is the performance of
the musician using that instrument. In other words, the best drum samples in the world mean

278
nothing if the performance isn't also world class. A boring performance with great sounding
samples will sound boring.

Note: There are two sides to the performance in recording. There is the tonal side and there
is the musical intensity side. Because a robo drummer has played all of these samples and a
robo engineer has recorded them, you can be assured that at least the tonal side is not only
acceptable, but mindblowingly impressive. We just need to focus on the musical intensity
end.

With MIDI, we have a few ways we can go about this performance.

Electronic Drum Kit

We can use an electronic drum kit to “enter” the MIDI data. This is, by far, the preferred way
for me because I hate drum programming! When a real drummer plays the song, there is no
“programming”. (Honestly, I hate that word! I've done some real computer programming and
I don't see any correlation to looping arrays and looping drum tracks). It's entirely possible to
capture a 100% humanly natural performance with a relatively inexpensive electronic kit and
use it to trigger these killer samples I keep talking about.

Mouse

We can program the drums with a mouse. For electronic and hip hop genres where a rigid
drum track is okay, this is a great way to go. For styles that require an organic, natural feel,
this is a time-consuming mess. Each and every “hit” of the drums must be considered.
Velocities must be varied to simulate what a real drummer would do. The timing of each “hit”
must be considered. Things that a drummer does subconsciously like pushing the snare in
the fast-sounding parts and pulling the snare in the slow-sounding parts needs to be
compensated for. I do recommend everyone serious about getting into producing take the

279
time to program a song by hand at least once. Put in the ten hours it takes to come close to a
realistic drum performance with real groove and a natural, human vibe. It'll teach you more
than you ever wanted to know about drums, groove, and the rhythmic foundation of the song.

MIDI Keyboard

We can record MIDI drums with a MIDI keyboard (imagine that!). I could never get the feel for
this one. No matter how much I practice the drums Tone Loc's “Wild Thing” on my MIDI
controller, I never get it to sound right. It could be because I'm a terrible piano player. It could
be that keyboards are an awkward way of dealing with drums. I don't know. With that said,
I've seen people who are killer “drummers” on their MIDI keyboards. One advantage of the
MIDI keyboard is you can put the basic groove down in a way that is fairly natural, human
way. From there, you can go into the sequencer and add fills, adjust velocities and things of
that sort.

Real drums with triggers

We can use triggers with a real drum set. Many drummers feel more manly beating on the
big round things as opposed to beating on smaller mesh/rubber round things. (I'm aware that
there are legitimate issues with the feel of rubber.) Still, you have to figure out the cymbal
situation and deal with the volume. It's much easier to convince a drummer to play on a real
kit and then use trigger to blend in or replace much of the sounds. Of course, if you are
recording real drums with real cymbals, you are miking those cymbals and you will be
blending in tracks recorded in your room with the sound of the samples themselves.

Note: I've not been overly impressed with triggers as of this writing. Instead, I track as always
and during the mixing process I use a plugin called KtDrumTrigger to create MIDI data from a
soloed drum track. I like this method much better.

280
So which method of drum programming should you
use?
This is a very tricky question so I'm going to break the answer down into sections.

Real Drummers Recording MIDI

If you are looking for the most real drum performance possible with the least amount of
headaches in MIDI land, I think the only way to go is a real drummer on an edrum kit. When
I yell “Crazier!!” at a drummer, he beats on his drums like an animal and I’m a genius record
producer. When I yell “Crazier!!” at my computer screen, I get hauled off to the nut house.

Some drummers do fine with the rubber looking electronic drum kits. Other drummers hate
them. A big reason for this hatred is the feel of the drum changes specifically in the way the
stick bounces off the drum. This may sound strange to a non-drummer, but it is a big deal. I
could only imagine what it would be like to play a rubber guitar with rubber strings.

It takes a drummer some time to adapt to the feel of the rubber pads. (It needs to be said that
feel is a big part of drum head selection for real drums). There are also the fancier mesh
pads. Most drummers tend to favor these mesh things, but not all. Unfortunately, the mesh
pads are not cheap. If you've got a drummer buddy you can rely on for drum recording, go
with whatever style edrum kit he prefers.

That brings up the issue of finding a drummer. A great drummer may not be cheap either. If
you are recording a song that the drummer really has no vested interest in, you'll probably
need to motivate him to skip Monday Night Football to come down and record drums at your
place. You can usually find somebody to play drums on your project, but not all drummers
are as versatile as you think. Sometimes progressive rock drummers who do well playing
crazy stuff simply cannot play AC/DC. That always has to be a factor too.

281
Note: One trick to save cash is to tell Mr. Drummer that he'll have to bring his entire drum kit
down and then, at the last second, say “You know what: I really want to try out my new,
incredible drum samples. We'll just use my electronic drum kit. Don't bother bringing
anything but sticks!”. There is no better way to motivate a drummer to play for free than this.
It works better than beer and it works better than promises of wild women. Drummers are so
sick of hauling around enormous drum kits that they'll literally jump for the chance to play
drums without hauling 200 pounds and 600 pieces of gear around.

The biggest advantage, in my opinion, of working with a real drummer is the extreme realism
and extremely little time required when compared to the life-sucking experience known as
drum programming with a mouse. If you are working with a skilled drummer who can play,
then I'm sure it would be easy to come out with an awesome drum track in less than an hour
or two. For a band just blasting through a demo, they could easily get their drums done in a
few hours. Note: I'm of the opinion that if the technology saves time, put that leftover time into
making something great!

MIDI has incredible editing abilities and this makes putting together a killer drum performance
way easier and way faster. Editing together different drums with a razor blade and analog
tape had to be a total nightmare. Editing drum parts seamlessly in recording software can be
challenging as the cymbals ringing out in the background make a huge effect on the drums
playing on top of them.

Let's say the drummer hit a gigantically loud pair of crash cymbals and then a snare drum.
Let's say that snare drum is off time and we want to edit it out. When we record a second
take, lets just assume that the drummer only hit one crash cymbal at about half the intensity
he did on the first take and then played his snare on time. (Drummers never play the same
way twice in my experience). If we were to edit in our new take with the cut being
immediately before the snare drum, the old powerhouse cymbal crash sound would be cut off

282
and the new weeny-sounding cymbal decay would come in. It would sound unnatural, at
best.

Now, let's assume that the first take's snare drum was way early and we replace it with the
our second take with the snare on time. We will have a gap that needs to be filled where we
cut off the early snare drum. Maybe our second take will have what I call an “edit point”
somewhere where it matches seamlessly with the first take, but maybe it won't. This is a pain
in the neck for most drum editing with real drums. Note: Higher end software out there has
time-stretching features to solve this (to a point).

For every drummer who insists that everything must be totally natural (no electronic drums,
no MIDI, no sample replacement, etc), there is a drummer who is throwing headphones
across the room because he's just spent an hour trying to fix a difficult section and the take
where he nailed it has no edit points.

With MIDI, there are no edit points. Actually, scratch that. With MIDI there are infinite editing
points. All cymbals will decay naturally. You don't have to worry about if the first snare drum
was too early because you simply remove that hit. It's almost like having a time machine.

One of the most enticing things about using MIDI recording with a real drummer is you can
push a drummer to go over the top and do things they normally wouldn't do. If it doesn't work
out. No big deal. We'll just overdub that part. If a take is great, but he missed a cymbal, no
big deal. We move one dot one time. I do want a real performance but I'm paying this
drummer by the hour and fixing one little thing isn't that big of a deal. When I record a drum
performance, I'm looking for an exciting feel. The little slip-ups can be fixed.

Instead of overextending my brain listening to the way tom fill pushes slightly wondering if it
sounds real enough, I can just let a real drummer deal with it. The cool thing is with a great

283
drummer you can do four or five takes in 30 minutes, edit them together, change anything you
don't like, and call it a day. You can have a great sounding, killer drum track in the time it
takes to plug in the cables and put the mics on the stands when tracking real drums. I like this
because I have no insecurity about sounding “real”. Instead of focusing on whether the
programming sounds real, I instead focus on if the performance is “good”. In other words, I
can really focus on musical intensity.

When the band doesn't have the budget for a $2,000 per day room, I can't think of a better
way to track drums. The editing abilities alone make it dramatically easier to realize the
band's vision in a much shorter amount of time. While a person could certainly quantize and
use all the stereotypical MIDI tricks utilized in techno and hip hop, I just like being able to
adjust the velocity of a snare. If the groove is a little rushed, we can get in there and tweak it
a hair. If we screw it up, no big deal. We have our good pal, Undo.

To The Purists

Doing it the real way has its merits. In fact, the real way is usually preferred when we have
access to the zillion dollars worth of resources it takes to pull that off a truly pro level. Just
keep in mind that no classic albums that I'm aware of were done without label support of
some kind. Please, no arguments about whose money was being used. If you don't have a
label, you technically aren't doing it the “real way”, in my opinion. So let's scrap the idea of
“real way” right now and see if we can't make the best recording possible with the most
intense music possible with the resources we have at our disposal.

I think the reasons electronic drums received a bad name (cheesy sounds, weird feel, etc.)
have diminished significantly. With a well setup e-drum kit, there are few engineers who can
rival the sounds included in the kick butt samples these days. There are zero engineers who
can get the sounds of the modern killer samples on a piece of junk drum kit in your bedroom.
ZERO! (Unless your specific music calls for the bedroom drum sound.)

284
When you factor in how easy it is to save a tremendous performance with just one little flub
versus having to scrap the whole take, it's very possible the music can improve with these
new “cheesy” tools. It’s possible that your fans will have a more exciting experience listening
to your music done with electronic drums and never know the difference.

I'm of the opinion that in my studio (where we still have gravity and other laws of the land
which I'll get into later) the electronic drum approach with modern samples (not synth drum!)
is the way to go for 90% of the bands I work with. We have to balance the possible
expressive benefits of a real kit with all its downfalls.

Drum Programming With A Mouse

For those of us on a budget, we may not have the cash to jump into an electronic drum kit or
we may not have access to great drummers. If we don't feel comfortable on a MIDI
keyboard, the best route is the mouse. Of course, there is no “performance” per say with a
mouse. I look at it more like I'm painting or something. (Ironically, I'm a terrible painter.) It
really isn't that big deal to click on beat 1 and beat 3 for the kick drum, beat 2 and beat 4 for
the snare, and beats 1 through 4 for the hi-hat for your standard “straight” beat (I call it a
“straight” beat because I'm a total idiot in regard to musical terms.) However, the use for this
level of simplicity is almost zero if we are wanting anything resembling “natural” or “real” in
our drum performance.

Good, Real Drummers:

- Never hit the same drum with the same velocity/intensity....EVER!

It's important to note that this isn't exactly random. Drummers tend to play random AND
harder when they are excited or the song is peaking and random and softer at times when the
song is chilling out. When drummers are chilling out they are more inclined to sneak a hard,

285
aggressive hit in there at certain times. There will be certain beats that will always be hit the
hardest and some will vary randomly from take to take.

- Never hit the same exact spot on the drum.

Take a look at a drum head. It's clear that even experts don't hit the center too often. This
isn't exactly random either. I'm sure there is a correlation between how hard a drummer is
playing and what that drummer is playing that will determine where he is striking the drum.
For example, a drummer using the hi-hat will strike the snare differently than when that
drummer is using the ride cymbal. On certain fills, a drummer may use their other hand for
their snare and that may hit a different portion of the snare.

- Will naturally push and pull during the song.

This is an entire book in itself, but pay attention to any great recording with a real drummer.
The snare will be a bit early in parts that are supposed to be more intense or feel “faster”.
(Note: Before the people that measure music with a ruler jump out and say this is a sign of
bad playing, think again. This is the way it's been done for as long as music has been
around. This notion of music on a grid is the new, weird thing). Getting this part right with a
mouse is a time consuming mess. This groove stuff is tricky business and there are no great
ways to automate it. Simply “randomizing” the MIDI data is not the same thing because
drummers don't play completely randomly. Not if they are human. Maybe a monkey would
just hit stuff, but there is some kind of method to this drummer madness .

- Automatically have the right velocity/intensity for each drum when doing a fill. I've wasted
entire days trying to make fills not sound like the drums on an early 80s New Order recording.
It probably would have been more productive to just meditate or something. This is when it
occurred to me that I would rather just pay a real drummer and buy an electronic drum kit
than have to waste my limited time on earth trying mimic what a real drummer is doing.

- Automatically add ghost notes and other little do-dads without any thought. This ghost note
business can really add a bit of realism to a song. I generally take the “run over it with a tank”
approach to recording as opposed to digging for ancient artifacts with a paint brush. I tend to
take the sledgehammer to the face approach like in some kind of make-you-puke Oliver
Stone movie (Savior). This approach is great for making bold, intense statements but subtle

286
little drum things get lost. I'd rather Mr. I-Beat-Round-Things take care of this necessary
busywork so I don't have to think of the subtle stuff.

- Really know how to play drums. It's one thing to think you've got the concepts down for how
a drum beat really works. I think I fit into this category. It's another thing when a real
drummer says “a hi-hat click should go there”. I'd say “there?”. They say “Oh yeah!” as if it's
just a given to hit a hi-hat during a tom fill. It turned out that I had only scratched the surface
and had no idea what I was really doing.

So, as you can see, there are tons of little drum intricacies to think about when trying to mimic
a real drum performance with a mouse. I'm of the opinion that you will never get a drum track
perfect with a mouse. You could literally spend your entire life working on an entire drum
track. I'm not talking about for a complicated drum song either. I'm not speaking of jazz or
death metal. I'm speaking of simple pop music drumming. You could spend your entire life
programming the drums for a Goo Goo Dolls song! In fact, it may even be easier to program
death metal. Granted, there will be more notes to hit, but the emphasis on groove is
dramatically reduced. The tolerance for robotic playing is much higher.

Personally, I didn't get into recording/producing music so that I could become the world's
greatest simulator of real drums with a mouse. Note: No one throws panties at the world's
greatest simulator of real drums with a mouse. I got into this ridiculous craft because I
wanted to make cool music (and possibly the panties thing). So, you can take this whole drum
programming as far as you want to in regard to simulating the real thing or you can do
whatever makes the song exciting. It's amazing just how powerful you can make a drum
performance with a mouse in ten hours. Then again, I think I'll just give the drummer a case
of beer to beat on plastic things!

My Basic Approach To Mouse Drum Programming

Let me explain my basic approach to drum programming in the attempt to simulate a real

287
drummer's natural performance. I am, by no means, an expert.

I like to sit down with the songwriter and come up with the drum beats for the intro, verse,
chorus, bridge, outro, and all other parts of the song. I'll program these drums in very quickly.
These parts will all be quantized and I'll copy and paste any parts that appear more than once
for a song. Before you jump me for copying and pasting, please remember that the end
result had better not sound like it was copied and pasted. I'm very much against copying and
pasting in music. In this case, I'm simply trying to get the basic framework of the drum part
complete. The songwriter dude/chick and I will work on this until we get all the basic parts
down for the song. The drums will sound stiff, but all creative elements (minus fills) should be
present. Once we are happy with a stiff, boring drum performance, I could add some fill and
we'd be done. Unfortunately, we are only beginning.

Note: If we were doing hip hop or dance music, the drums would be finished.

After we have the drum framework laid out, I then highlight the entire drum MIDI track and
randomize the velocities. This is just step 1. I do this simply to break up the monotonous feel
of MIDI drums and so my brain doesn't adapt too much to the sound of the robotic drumming.
This still sounds bad, but it at least adds a random element to the process.

I make the possible range of drum velocities fairly wide. In fact, I want it wide enough that I
sometimes say “where did that snare go?” and then I manually have to raise the velocity of
that snare hit a little to make it work. I've found that using a very wide range of drum
velocities is the only way to keep the drums from sounding fake. This will, of course, depend
on the samples you are using. Real drummers vary the intensity of each strike much more
than I initially realized. So now I go overboard with it right from the start. I can always change
it later.

288
Once we have randomized velocities and have all the major parts of the song programmed, I
now look at this track as one single performance. There will be no more cutting and pasting.
Each chorus will be programmed differently from the one before it. The same goes with the
versus. I think that cutting and pasting has a way of killing the vibe of a song even if it's
subconscious for songs that require a natural, human performance.

Now it's time to listen. It's pretty much a given that there will be certain sections of the song
where a real drummer would play harder than others. Generally speaking, a drummer
pounds more aggressively in the choruses than he would in the versus. I would immediately
go in and highlight the louder sections and boost the velocity of those parts that need to be
louder. How much? I don't know. I can't hear the song. It depends. Just try to make the
part fit the song. You figure it out. Play with it. Make sure you are using a function that does
not remove the randomness of the velocities we applied earlier. The velocities should still be
random, but should be louder.

Cubase has a “logical editor” that allows us to add X amount of velocity to each note. This
keeps our randomized sound, but allows us to maybe crank up the chorus by 10 or 20
velocity units. Sometimes these functions work very well. Other times, they do not feel right
or the original randomization is just wrong for the song. There are probably specific snare
hits that the drummer will always hit harder than other times. Again, the velocity that
drummers strike the drum with is not exactly random. Software cannot pick up on this.
Regardless, I want the velocity of the song to sound good throughout the song.

About this time, I usually find that I need my snare drum and kick drum to fit into a specific
range of random velocities and I need my cymbals and hi-hats to fit into another range of
random velocities. I can't recall ever triggering a cymbal or hi-hat with a velocity as high as
127! That's total death for the metal round things and for my ears! I can't recall ever using a
kick drum with a velocity as low as 42 except for maybe ghost notes. I would totally make fun
of a drummer who hit a kick drum that hard in real life during a loud section. The range it

289
works will depend on how the samples are set up. With the samples I'm used to working with,
I generally keep the snare in the 100-127 region for loud sections. The hi-hat and cymbals
tend to be quite a bit lower than that, usually in the 60-80 region, but it's depends on if we are
dealing with open hi-hats or closed hi-hats and how those fit into the song.

Note: This is entirely dependent on the samples you are triggering.

At this point in time, I go through each part of the song to make sure the velocities sound
good. I need the drums to change quite a bit. I want to hear the tone of the snare vary a little
bit with each hit. If there are drastic differences in level, we'll use compression to even these
out. I need to hear the more intense parts of the song in the drums. I need to hear the drums
sounding a little bit reserved in the quiet parts of the song.

Once the velocities are in order, it's time to screw up the timing. At the moment, the drums
are stiff and boring. We can drastically improve the feel of the song by getting those drums to
push and pull. We also want to add a hint of randomness in regard to the timing of each
drum just to make the track more human. I always struggle with this because there is a fine
line between too stiff and too loose. I always felt like I would be the biggest idiot in the world
if my sequenced drums sounded sloppy!

It's very important to understand that we aren't just randomizing the timing of the drums for
the sake of randomization. This won't do us much good. In fact, I'm positive that it would
sound worse than the stiff drumming. We are working on the timing of the song to increase
the emotional intensity of those drums.

Theoretically, the quantized sound should be perfect, right? This depends on how you define
perfect. I've probably already beat the topic of musical perfection to death, so I won't go into
too much depth here. If you measure musical perfection with a ruler, then the quantized

290
sound is technically “perfect”. If you measure musical perfection with goosebump meter
(WAY more accurate than any stupid ruler) then you may find that this quantized sound isn't
all that perfect at all. In fact it's holding back our music. This is not how “perfect” drummers
play.

You can see that clearly illustrated here.

So, the sound of quantized drums sucks and the sound of just blindly hitting the timing
randomizer sucks also. What does a person do? It's called hard labor. If I'm super serious
about a song, I'll go in, turn off the snapping-to-grid in Cubase, and literally adjust each and
every drum hit by hand. These are the days where I consider maybe going back to school
and getting a degree in accounting! (What's the difference!)

In order to preserve my sanity and also to keep music recording ranking higher than
accounting on my “fun” list, I seldom do this “by hand” stuff. (Note: If there is anything about
music recording that makes the idea of being raped in prison, or even worse, being an
accountant, higher on the fun list, find a way to eliminate this. Music recording should be
fairly sacred. If it's not fun to record music, you are better off doing lawn work or something.
Go out of your way to make recording fun, when possible. Granted, not every moment of
music recording is going to mimic the end of the movie “Major League” or “Goonies” but if
there is something that makes you not want to go back to your recording room, eliminate it!)

I have made the decision that doing this “by hand” is only going to happen if I'm really
motivated. I'm motivated by promises of world domination, free food, and one more thing.
What was it? Oh yeah! MONEY! If I'm doing a song just for fun and I don't get a chance to
rule Earth, get a free meal out of the deal, or don't get about $1,000,000 transferred to the
Swiss bank account I just imagined, I avoid this like the plague.

291
Let's get to it. The most important thing is the snare. The snare controls way more of the feel
of the song than I had ever realized previously. I just never took notice of the way that the
snare takes a song that stays locked at 140bpm and transforms it into a song that feels faster
in some parts and slower in others. For all practical purposes, the kick drum stays fairly tight
with the downbeat, but the snare can vary quite a bit.

Say we are working with an intense chorus that we want to sound exciting and “fast” as
possible. In this case, I want the snare out front. I definitely do not want it landing on exactly
beat 2 and beat 4. I want it ahead. How far ahead? How should I know? I'm not
programming your song! Experiment. Listen. You'll figure it out. Try extreme settings and
see what happens.

As mentioned above in the prison rape analogy, I need a little extra motivation to program
each individual drum by hand. Luckily, the really good MIDI sequencers (like the one in
Cubase SX3) have functions that really help with this. They have included tools to help with
groove. I'm not sure if I just skipped the manual on those or what, but I've had better luck
with “logical functions”. It basically just means “smart MIDI thing” to me.

I set Mr. Logical Function Accountant (Cubase Logical Editor) to take all the snare hits and
randomly push them ahead in the song by X range. What range? How should I know? I
haven't heard your song! Experiment. I'm not sure if Cubase uses the same units as
everyone else or not, but they are called “ticks” in Cubase. These are PPQ or “parts per
quarter note”. I can't remember ever pushing more than 10 ticks. So now the snare is going
to be ahead by 1-10 ticks. In this case, it NEVER comes in late enough to actually land
perfectly on beat 2 and beat 4. Never! If we want this part of the song to push, there is no
reason to let it slip into neutral territory.

If you have never noticed this “pushed snare” phenomenon, pull up 20 of your favorite drum
songs that you believe were played by a real drummer. Really pay attention and tap out the

292
timing. If you don't notice the snare moving early in the driving parts of the song, you
probably aren't listening with enough detail. When you train your brain to listen at this level of
detail, it's blatantly obvious. If you don't hear it now, wait until you program a few songs. You
can really hear it on punk stuff because the guitars and bass are usually pushing ahead of the
beat too. If you were to fire a song like this up in your recording software and look at the grid,
you'd see that on 2 and 4 the snare and guitars are ahead but not so much on 1 and 3.

Now I like to highlight the kick drum section. The kick drum hits can't push nearly as far as
the snare drum The kick really needs to stay fairly anchored to the the downbeat. If we were
to push the kick and snare ahead by the same amount, the two would sort of cancel each
other out. There would be no noticeable change in “feel”. With that said, I don't want the kick
drum locked on beat 1 and beat 3 perfectly. I want to vary it some. So maybe I'll use Mr.
Logical Function again and move the kick drum with a range of +2 to -2. This means that the
kick drum could be moved ahead by 2 ticks or moved behind by 2 ticks. This is a fairly subtle
setting. For all I know, no one will hear it, but it makes me feel better knowing that all the kick
drums aren't on 0. There is no drummer ever in the history of the universe who would land on
zero every time.

Now that the kick and snare sound pretty fun, I’ll bet our hi-hats and cymbals sound strange,
at best. They are still locked to the quantized grid. The hi-hats and cymbals should be pretty
close in time with kick and snare. I find it distracting to hear a snare and a hi-hat immediately
behind when the two should be struck simultaneously. So, I go in by hand and just sort of
quickly drag each hi-hat hit to more or less match that of the snare and kick drum. I don't
measure. I don't look at numbers. I don't try too hard. I want a chaotic element in the hi-
hats. I'm just trying to reduce the “distraction factor”. When I play the track back the drums
should sound fairly real. They should be dynamic. Elements should change. It should sound
fairly human. If the drum track is dynamic, fairly real, and fairly human, that part is done for
now.

293
I repeat this process for each individual section of the song. I decide if I want a given part to
push aggressively, push lightly, stay neutral, pull just a bit, or pull heavily. There are times for
all of these in any typical song I record. A good, real drummer does this automatically with
zero brain power. (You can bet on it!) A good drum programmer must do this with tons of brain
power, unfortunately.

The final step is making sure that our dynamics work. If our random dynamics aren't working,
change them. There will be snare hits where you say “that sounds weird” because it is too
loud or too soft for the given section in the song. It's no big deal to adjust them even if the
programming ends up being not-so-random.

In the end, it doesn't really matter what settings you used. The only thing that matters is the
intensity of the song. If you can excite the listener or make them feel something, you win.
Only you can figure out exactly what this means to you in this particular song. I hesitate to
give too many specific values because there is tremendous variety from song to song and
part to part. This stuff, like just about everything in this dumb book, it trying to make sense
about a subject that is mostly trial and error. It's extremely important to be able to adjust to
whatever the song calls for. Don't ever hesitate to use extreme values and push the limits to
what you can get away with. Just make sure you have the “taste” to know when what you are
doing is good or bad.

Q: Drum Samples: Are you worried about songs

losing their individuality?
There is some concern, I guess, that when everyone starts using the same samples that the
world of drums loses its individuality. Up to this point, no two albums sound the same for me.
No band ever sounds exactly the same from album number one to album number two even if
the sound of the band hasn't changed. I guess if a band used the same drum samples for
two consecutive albums those albums could lose their individuality a bit. Am I worried? Not

294
really. If a band can stick around long enough to make a second album I'll be surprised.
Even with the same samples, drummers themselves still sound uniquely different. It has
much to do with how hard they hit the drums and their playing style in general, and how all
that playing combines with all the other playing. If the modern, ultra-realistic drum samples
have done their job the subtleties of the drummer should come out.

Even with the same exact drum samples, is anyone really going to notice that the Slipknot-
style song has the same drum sound as John Coltrane-style song? Who is to say? I guess
in the long run, songs could lose their individuality, but I think it is human nature to ditch
individuality anyway. We travel in herds. I guess we are all still fighting off the lions and the
bears. When one revolutionary album comes out fifteen clones are out in the next three
months anyway. In the end, what difference does it make? Bottom line. I can record robo
pro-sounding drums using samples or I can fight my room, drum tuning, and a billion other
things. I can use great-sounding samples or make a trip to a nearby studio and rent out a
great-sounding room and an engineer for $1,000 per day, if I can get a deal. It's simply more
economical to record with the samples.

With that in mind, the samples are tools. They help with the process, but I'm still gonna do
stuff to the drums. Why? I'm not sure. I have problems. I actually think the bigger issue is
when this hi-fi sounding drum track from mega sounding samples is combined with not-so-
mega sounding guitars, vocals, etc. This is the real dilemma! When all of that stuff finds a
way to combine with the samples in a way that really works, then we can worry about
sounding like everyone else.

I do want to mention that there will always be bands who insist on using their real drums and
even when we layer the same old samples on top of them the individual sound of the player
always comes out. (At least it does for me.) The work I've done using the same samples is
practically impossible to pick out.

295
Q: Do you have to think like a drummer to program
great MIDI drums?
A: I don't think so, but it can’t hurt. I think it's more important to think like a great songwriter
or a great producer. In other words, you simply need the ability to realize your own vision in
regard to the music as a whole. There is no magical drummer logic. (It's often quite the
opposite).

There is no rule that says that just because a person has been beating on round things for
years, he/she will be able to come up with “better” drum parts than you. I've certainly had
problems with session drummers over the years who needed to play straight beats and
instead wanted to play weird, dumb polyrhythms. I'm not implying that polyrhythms are weird
and dumb all the time, but they certainly were in the sessions I'm talking about. So, in that
situation, sometimes being a drummer is a bad thing.

Then again, a drummer has been hitting round things a long time and has probably already
been in this situation before. That drummer has probably already thought of possibilities in
this situation and may have a better idea what will work and what won't work. However, I
usually find that when I produce, I need to push a drummer this way or that way to get the
most out of the song. So, I personally believe that most powerful way to get a great drum
performance is with a great drummer and a great producer working together for the sake of
the song.

When it comes to programming, however, I'm not exactly sure how much benefit there is to
being a drummer. I guess it's possible for a non-drummer to have a boring drum track and
not know why that drum track is boring. That is certainly a possibility and a drummer would
be able to solve it immediately by saying “Oh, switch to your ride here and do a fill there”.
Then again, there could be some creative benefit from not having a clue what you are doing
and simply making music.

296
I think it's all in how you approach it. If you go into a recording scared that it won't sound
natural, you will probably make a recording that sounds like you were scared that it wouldn't
sound natural. If you go into a record with the mentality that you are going to make
something that is musically intense and powerful, the end result will be musically intense and
powerful. You don't lose points because you hit a snare and two cymbals at the same time
regardless if this would require a three-armed drummer.

Much of this discussion depends on your needs. I'm of the opinion that a person who needs
real sounding drums should just use a drummer. There is a huge difference between
programming drums for jazz music and programming drums for Nine Inch Nails or Madonna.
How important is the “real” factor? The more “real” you require your performance to sound,
the more you need to think like a real drummer. There are many great songs out there that
don't utilize real drums or real drum thinking and are better for it. However, when the song
calls for the sound, energy, and feeling that only a human being is capable of, nothing beats
recording a real drummer.

When you toss the rules out, there could definitely be instances where a real drummer
couldn't hope to compete with programming. Regardless of what you decide, do it for the
power of the music and make sure to make a bold statement when you do it.

Q: How Do I "Convert" MIDI To Wav

I've probably gotten 150 emails this month alone from people needing help "converting" MIDI
to Wav. I'm glad people are understanding that MIDI is just data, but that's only the half of it.

I think "converting" may be a little off base. It's like wife beaters calling what they do
"teaching". We don't run our MIDI through some little utility that spits out a wav file like
converting a wav file to mp3 or something. That's not what is going on.

297
What is going is you run this MIDI data to a synth or sampler. Then the synth or sampler spits
out audio. I guess some of you could call this process "converting" but that's a stretch in my
book. (Get it? This is my book! Sorry, that's not very funny.) Anyhow, we now have sound
spitting out the outputs of our synth/sampler.

When people ask about converting MIDI to wav, they are really asking what to do with audio
coming out of their synth/sampler. Let's get to it.

Hardware

We are assuming you already have the MIDI track recorded.

When you hit record, the MIDI track is "played" and the stream of MIDI data hits the
synth/sampler, triggers the noise, and spits it out to outputs.

To record this audio using hardware, the outputs of the synth/sampler need to be sent to
inputs 1/2 (for stereo) of your audio interface. You record it just like you would vocals or a
microphone.

Virtual Instruments (Software)

In you are using virtual instruments within your recording software, "converting" is easy. The
audio output of the synth is already directly routed to a channel in your software's mixer. All
you need to do is render the output of just that channel the synth is using. It's super easy in
most recording software.

If that isn't an option (yuck!) you can simply solo the channel and render the stereo output just
like you would a full mix. You probably want to turn off any processing you may be doing on
the 2bus (see glossary).

298
You'll want to import the wav file into your project then and ditch the virtual instrument to save
CPU power. (I usually hang on to the MIDI track just in case I screw something up.)

299
 Glossary

A/D Converter
(See Converter)

Absorption Coefficients
This is a complicated way of saying the frequency response of material used as sound
absorbers when applying acoustic treatment to your room. By looking at the absorption
coefficients, we can tell if our targeted frequencies will actually be absorbed by this material.

The most obvious issue with acoustical absorption is the fact that the low end is not absorbed
by most of the urban legend recommendations (carpet, egg crates, etc.). By looking at the
absorption coefficients we can immediately tell if the product is going to absorb low end. If
the product absorbs high end and midrange reflections but ignores low end, our room will
begin to sound boomy, or worse; room modes will run rampant.

Analog Inputs
In layman’s terms, analog means a physical wave. An A/C (alternating current) electrical
signal is analog. Sound in the air is analog. A speaker is an analog device that creates sound
waves. In the modern recording world, where digital is king, analog signals must be converted
to digital signals to be used by the digital device.

Analog inputs are found in an audio interface. Audio interfaces with built in preamps only
need an XLR or 1/4” input plugged into their analog inputs. Audio interfaces that do not have
built in preamps require that you plug your mics and instruments into a preamp connected to

300
the audio interface. Both cases represent analog inputs because the sound has not yet been
converted to digital.

The reason we have to specify “analog inputs” is because the manufacturers will potentially
mislead people with their claims of a “10 Channel Audio Interface” or “26 Channel Audio
Interface” when there significantly fewer actual analog inputs. See the audio interface chapter
for details.

Anechoic Chamber
This is a room designed to measure the frequency response of speakers and such. It's a
room that has about as close to zero reflections as possible. From what I'm told, being in
such a room is scary because the human ear will never ever hear this type of sound under
natural circumstances.

Arming
If you were to hit Record on your recording machine nothing would happen until you actually
had a track that was armed. Physically switching a track so that it will record when you press
the record is known as arming. We require this functionality because we may not want to
record over our guitar tracks we did last week when fixing a vocal today.

Arrangement
The way a song is structured and the various layers are introduced and taken away. For
example, the decision to start a song with just an acoustic guitar and vocal, introduce hi-hats
in the first pre-chorus, and then slam the song into overdrive in the chorus make up
arranging. Arranging is about highlighting what needs to be highlighted, taking away what will
be distracting, and basically lining up all the individual pieces of the song together for
maximum musical intensity. One of many handy uses for music manuscript paper.

The arrangement is extremely important to audio engineering. An example would be an

301
acoustic guitar where the player is only hitting the G, A, and then A# notes on the Low E and
the bass player is just hitting a G low the Low E. It will become difficult to hear what the
instruments are doing individually. By moving the bass an octave up to the next G, the
notes within the acoustic guitar will become dramatically clearer. It's up to the person doing
the arranging to gauge the musical effectiveness of each decision.

ATA
ATA is a format of connecting hard drives and CD-ROM drives to the computer’s
motherboard. It's been an accepted standard since the late 1990’s but by the mid 2000’s had
been slowly replaced by SATA.

Audio Interface

An audio interface is a device that allows you send audio to and from your computer. An
audio interface is essentially the same thing as a soundcard. However, we usually don't refer
to consumer-grade soundcards (like the stock soundcard in your computer or Soundblaster
cards you can purchase at Best Buy) as audio interfaces.

An audio interface must be low latency. A signal must be able to travel from a microphone, to
a preamp, to an audio interface, to the computer, to the software, back through all this mess
again, and into your headphones real time. Most soundcards made for gaming are way too
slow to handle this process. If you attempt to use a high latency soundcard for music
recording, you will experience an undesirable delay when attempting to monitor anything real-
time that passes through the computer..

Because of latency, a real-deal audio interface is highly recommended for recording music.

302
There are other reasons to use an audio interface. The conversion from analog to digital
(A/D) is going to be more accurate and better sounding with a real deal recording audio
interface.

If you are looking for an audio interface and aren’t exactly sure which one is right for you, I
highly recommend the Home Recording Soundcard Wizard I created. You can quickly search
for the exact features you require and ignore the features you don’t need. The Soundcard
Wizard will save you 10 hours of research.

Automatic Delay Compensation

Automatic Delay Compensation is a feature found in some recording programs that
automatically compensates for the processing time caused by plugins.

If you have zero plugins on an audio track #1, it takes X amount of time for your recording
computer to play back that track. If you have another track (audio track #2) with a
compressor on the insert, your computer will take X + compressor plugin processing time to
play back the audio. Let’s just say it takes an extra 3ms to play back the track with the
compression on it. In this case, audio track #1 is now out of sync with with audio track #2. If
the tracks are similar in nature, this can cause problems with the timing of the performance
and lead to comb filtering (which is an audio engineering nightmare!)

Most good recording programs have Automatic Delay Compensation. This means the
program automatically adds up the processing time of each track and aligns all the tracks so
that they play at the same time without any phase problems.

303
Autotune
Autotune is a product made by Antares which was developed to modify pitch of single-
instrument tracks. If a musicians had an incredible take, but there was a pitch problem, the
take could be saved by fixing the pitch. However, the result is that too many singers rely on
autotune to fix their pitch problems. While autotune can help improve the pitch of a recording,
it's not magic. It doesn't work perfectly.

Autotune is the tool of choice for those looking for the “Cher effect” which quantizes all
pitches in a vocal to the closest note in the scale. This is also known as the “T-Pain” sound
by the younger crowd.

Aux Send
An Aux Send is part of the routing on a mixer or virtual mixer in a recording software
application. It allows you to keep your vocal routed as it normally would be, but also send a
signal to another bus for further processing. The most popular use of Aux Sends is reverb
and delays. To add space to a vocal, a reverb processor or plugin is placed on Aux #1 and
then the vocal track is sent to Aux #1, whose output goes to the 2-bus.

Any track on a mixer can be sent to an Aux Send. It's very common to use one or two reverb
algorithms for all the reverbs on an entire song and then adjusting the reverb level for each
instrument by tweaking the amount of level sent to the aux.

Axis
Axis deals with the positioning of a sound source in relation to a listening device (like your
ears or a microphone). If you have a speaker pointed directly at your head, it’s known as
being “on axis”. If the speaker is pointed directly towards your head, but your buddy with you

304
is to the side, the speaker is “off axis” to him.

With speakers, it’s always an issue of how the high end changes when you are off axis from
the speaker. Obviously, if the high end is not shooting right at you, it will be less audible. The
low end is much less directional. This is why studio monitors usually have a “sweet spot”.

Miking can also be done off axis with the mic in relationship to a speaker in a guitar amp, for
example. If the mic is shooting directly at the cone, the mic is “on axis”. If the mic is turned so
that it’s not shooting directly at the speaker, it is considered “off axis”. The angle at which we
mic our instruments can have a dramatic effect on the captured sound of that instrument.

Bandwidth
“Q” is another word for bandwidth. It’s a term most often found in parametric equalizers. Let’s
say you bump 1kHz up by 6dB with a parametric EQ. If you use a very narrow Q (or high
number) the bump affects other frequencies much less. In this example, 500Hz is probably
not touched at all by the bump. But if you lower the Q, the EQ processing will effect a much
wider range of frequencies.

Just remember the “width” of the parametric EQ's boost or cut is called “Q”.

Bass Traps
A bass trap is a form of acoustical treatment that is designed to absorb the low end
frequencies bouncing around the room. There are many different designs for bass traps that
are intended to absorb various frequencies.

Bass traps are a requirement in control rooms because most control rooms have radical
ambience in the low end causing inaccurate monitoring conditions. These low frequency
problems are caused by room modes. The reason you should be concerned about room

305
modes is they are the number one reason for mixes not translating to the outside world even
though they may sound great on the studio monitors you are mixing on.

Bleed
Bleed is the extra stuff that gets into the microphone. For example, if you record a floor tom
track, you will still hear plenty of kick, snare, cymbals, and other toms. This is called bleed.
In some instances, bleed is a terrible thing that should be avoided. In other instances, bleed
is HIGHLY welcome and can add a 3D quality to the recording. Generally speaking, I happen
to like instruments bleeding into the mics of other instruments in moderation. It does add
something good to the music in most cases.

Boost
Boost is a term used in equalization. When we say “Boost 2K by 3dB” we mean “increase
2,000 Hz by 3 decibels on a parametric equalizer.

Bounce
A bounce or “bouncing” is the process of combing multiple tracks together to make room for
more tracks. This is used in situations where you have a limited track count. It's more
common to do this with tape machines or all-in-one standalone recorders, but it can also be a
great way to free up tracks in recording software with limited track counts.

Breakout Box
A breakout box is found on many multichannel soundcards that connect to your computer
through a PCI card, but every USB 1.1, USB 2.0, or Firewire audio interface IS the breakout
box.

In order to reduce the noise of your recorded tracks, all analog to digital conversion are done

306
in a box that is several feet away from your computer and connected a computer via a cable.
The idea is that your computer can add noise and distortion if analog signals get too close to
it. So, soundcards convert the signal to digital before it even gets to the computer. It’s also
just plain handy not to have to connect the rest of your gear’s cables to an already over-
cabled computer.

Bus
A bus is a term used to when discussing the routing of signals. A bus is any place on a mixer
or recording software where signals can be combined. It’s like a city bus. Signals get on,
travel a while and then get off. For example, if we had 10 mics on the drums, we could route
all 10 drums mics to the drum bus. The advantage of this is substantial. We can now apply a
compressor across all the drums at the same time. We can EQ all the drums at the same
time. We have a single fader that can control the volume of all the drums at once.

It's common to use several busses in a mix. I'll often use a bus for drums, a bus for electric
guitars, a bus for lead vocals (if the vocals are doubled or there is more than one lead vocal
track), and a bus for background vocals. This can greatly simplify the mixing process but still
leaves you the option to apply processing to the individual tracks.

A common question is “What is a 2-bus?”. A 2-bus is the master fader or master stereo out.
On a mixer it's usually the fader on the far right. This is where “mastering” style effects can
be placed.

Cardioid
Cardioid describes the pickup pattern of a microphone of most dynamic and some condenser
microphones. Cardioid microphones are also called directional microphones. If you point the
mic at the ceiling, the mic will pick up sound coming from the ceiling and reject sound coming
from the floor and to a less degree, the side walls. For a detailed explanation of “Cardioid”
see the chapter on Microphones in Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering.

307
Chipset
In layman's terms, a chipset is a series of circuits connected together inside a computer. For
recording, you just need to understand that most audio interfaces have at least one chipset
they don't get along with. This is true for all Firewire, USB 2.0, USB 1.1, and PCI devices.
Do the research before purchasing any equipment using these types of connections.

Clipping
When an amplifier has been pushed to the point of the distortion, the audio signal is clipped.
Ideally, a theoretical waveform looks like a pretty sine wave that’s very smooth. An audio
amplifier has a limit to how much output it can push out. If an audio engineer tries to push too
much signal (or too big of waveform) out of that amplifier, the amplifier can only make the
waves so tall which turns the peaks of the waveforms into essentially horizontal lines. If a
waveform is distorted enough, it starts looking more like a “square”. The term “square wave”
comes from waves that have this quality.

Clipping, or distorting, a guitar amplifier is often a pleasing thing. Clipping a digital signal is
almost always an unpleasing thing.

Clock
See Wordclock

Chorus
Chorus is an effect that manipulates pitch of a signal and blends it with a dry signal to create
a spacey type of sound. For a further explanation of “Chorus” see Killer Home Recording:
Murderous Mixing.

Comb Filtering
Comb filtering describes a situation where combining multiple signals causes the resulting

308
signal's frequency response to look like a comb. The resulting tone is nasally, unfocused, and
highly undesirable. For a detailed explanation, see Audio Engineering.

Condenser Microphone
Examples of condenser microphones include Neumann U87, AKG 414, Audio Technica AT-
4050, and Oktava MK-012. When people think of the stereotypical “studio mic” they usually
think of a condenser mic in a shockmount. Condenser mics require phantom power. Tube
condenser mics typically have separate power supplies and don’t use phantom power.

Condensers do get used for most of the pretty stuff. They are used most of the time on drum
overheads, vocals, and acoustic guitars. You can pretty much use a condenser mic on
anything you want and it most cases it will take it, but there are times when condensers bring
out the details that are not flattering to the instrument.

There are two types of condenser mics: large diaphragm and small diaphragm.

Small diaphragm condensers look like pencils. They are long and skinny. They are usually
exceptionally fast and this gives them the appearance of being bright. Large diaphragm
condensers are what everyone thinks of as “studio mics” and are much larger. They are
typically used for vocals.

Every studio should have a variety of condenser mics. When it comes to getting detailed,
sparkly sounds, it’s tough to beat a condenser.

Control Room
The control room is the room where most of the work is done by the engineer or producer.
You often see the big boy studios that contain an enormous mixing console, racks and racks
of gear, and a window view of a glorious live room.

Since critical audio decisions are made in a control room, it is extremely important that the
acoustics of this room be amazingly flat and the studio monitoring extremely accurate. This is
the one major flaw of recording at home. Seldom are control rooms in home recording
studios accurate. This leads to mixes that don't translate well to the outside world.

309
Converter
A converter is a device that converts an analog signal to digital or converts a digital signal to
analog. All digital recording systems must use a converter at some point since all speakers
require an analog signal to produce sound and all digital equipment requires digital signals to
function.

The converters can have a subtle effect on the quality of recording. For most home recording
people, the converters included in an audio interface are very good. The most hardcore of
engineers will find the subtle improvement in high end converters pleasing to the ear. (If you
want to hear high end converters in action, see The Interrogator Sessions.)

Convolution Reverb
Convolution reverb utilizes a technology which samples an acoustical space, giving you the
ability to apply that acoustical space to any instrument you want. Convolution reverbs allow
you to create your own reverbs from real acoustical spaces (or anything else reverberant, like
a pie tin or cardboard box).

Most convolution reverb plug-ins will allow you to sample your own spaces with an impulse.
This impulse is a burst of sound. The impulse will bounce around the room. Analyzing the
resulting recording, the software then can remove the impulse part of the sound and figure
out what is left. It seems to work fairly well at capturing the sound of a given room. This
process requires an immense amount of mathematical computation, making it a processor
hog.

Copying and Pasting

Just like your word processing software can highlight a section, copy it, and then paste it
elsewhere, the same can be applied to audio recordings. A chorus could be copied and
pasted 3 times so the band doesn't have to play the chorus 3 times.

310
Cut
Cut is a term that is used in equalization. When we say “Cut 2k by 3dB”, we mean “reduce
2,000Hz by 3 decibels on a parametric equalizer.

D/A Converter
(See Converter)

DAW
DAW stands for Digital Audio Workstation. It’s a fancy way of saying “computer used for
recording”.

Decca Tree
A stereo miking scheme utilizing three omni mics forming a triangle. It's most popular in
gigantic rooms for recording orchestras and such. The results are not usually so effective in
small rooms typically found in the home recording environment.

Delay
Delay is a time-based effect used to create space on a track. It's most obvious form is the
“echo”, but delay can be used as a excellent alternative to reverb. For a more detailed
explanation of delay, see Killer Home Recording: Murderous Mixing.

Drivers
All hardware devices within a computer are just a heap of capacitors, resistors, and other
electronic components until we give them “instructions” on what to do and explain to the
operating system of the computer what it should be doing with a particular component. These
“instructions” are called drivers.

311
You will need drivers for any audio interface, Firewire card, USB card, and practically anything
else you add to your computer. In some instances, your computer will already have the
drivers you need.

DI
DI stands for direct injection. The most common applications are bass and acoustic guitar.
With a DI, the signal goes straight out of the guitar through a cable, into some device, and
straight to the soundcard. You can record without making a sound in the room or at least not
much sound. See the Chapter on Recording Bass for a further explanation of bass DI.

Digital Inputs
Many audio interfaces allow you to input a digital signal to increase the total number of
simultaneous inputs using an external A/D Converter.

A digital input expects the signal to be already converted from analog to digital.

There are several formats of digital signals. S/PDIF is probably the most popular but only
passes a stereo signal. ADAT Lightpipe is cable of sending up to 8 tracks depending on the
sample rate of those tracks per Lightpipe connection. AES/EBU (a relative of S/PDIF) is
capable of sending two signals, but is usually found on more high-end equipment.

For a detailed explanation of “Digital Inputs”, see the Audio Interface chapter.

Direct Monitoring
Direct monitoring refers to the ability of an audio interface to bypass the computer to allow for
zero latency monitoring (via either headphones or studio monitors) while tracking. Without
direct monitoring, a vocal must pass through a microphone, to a preamp, to an audio interface
(the audio interface may have the preamps built in), to the computer's hardware, to the

312
computer's operating system, to the recording software, back out to the operating system,
computer hardware, audio interface, and into the headphones.

Astonishingly, this is very possible with a low latency audio interface if the computer is up to
the task. There will always be a little latency with this method, but few can hear it.

However, there are times when it would be preferred to run a vocal mic straight to a preamp
and then immediately to the headphones. This frees up the computer to focus on playing
back the previously recorded tracks and recording the new vocal.

The one disadvantage of direct monitoring is that it usually is not possible to apply plug-ins to
effects to headphone mix without applying them to the recorded track. I like to hit vocals
hard with compression in the headphones quite often. Some singers like a little reverb or
delay. I prefer to use the plug-ins within my recording software.

Dry
Dry refers to a condition where a track has no effects applied to it. If a vocal sounds “dry”,
this means that it sounds like the singer is singing straight into your ear without any space
around it.

Effects often have a “mix” control between “wet” and “dry” which allows you to blend in the
amount of “wet” signal you'd like. This is very useful on an insert, but not as useful on an
auxiliary send.

Dual Boot
Dual boot describes a computer setup in which there are two operating systems installed.
When the computer starts up, it asks which operating system you'd like to load up. On my
laptop, I have my main operating system which I do web work and such on. Then I have a

313
second operating system that has been fully optimized for recording. For more details, check
out Killer Home Recording: Setting Up.

Ducking
When the Nazis are lobbing their 88mm cannons at us and I yell, “Duck!” it means I want you
to get the hell out of the way. Ducking is similar. It means we send a signal (maybe a lead
vocal) to the sidechain input of a compressor (maybe electric guitars). When the vocal kicks
in, the guitars “duck” (compress) and get out of the way. When the vocals back off, the
guitars leap out just a bit.

Dynamic Microphone
Examples of Dynamic mics are the Shure SM57, Shure SM58, Sennheiser MD421, and
ElectroVoice RE20. Dynamic microphones require no phantom power to operate. While
many dynamic microphones are often referred to as “live mics” by beginners, this is an
inaccurate claim. Dynamic microphones are typically on all sorts of instruments in many
more studio situations than is often assumed.

For a detailed explanation of dynamic microphones, see the Microphones chapter.

Early Reflections
Early reflections refer to the first, distinct reflection you hear in an acoustical space. Early
reflections refer to both room acoustics and reverb effects. Early reflections have a big effect
on the way our ears interpret distance of the instrument in a mix. For a further explanation on
“Early Reflections” see the acoustics chapters in Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering.

Feedback
Feedback is another word for an endless loop. The most popular example of feedback is the
electric guitar amp. The sound from the amplifier actually causes the strings of the guitar to

314
vibrate, which then causes sound to come out of the electric guitar, which causes the strings
to vibrate even more. This is feedback or sometimes called “infinite sustain”.

In a live sound situation, the vocalist sings into a microphone. Sound comes out of the
monitors and mains. If the sound level from the speakers is louder than the sound of the
singer (from the mic's perspective) that sound gets back into the mic, which comes out the
speakers, and we once again have an endless loop.

Another situation is with delay effects. The signal is delayed by X milliseconds. By increasing
the feedback setting, we actually send the delayed signal back into the front input of the delay
causing it to delay yet again.

Flutter Echo
Flutter echo occurs in environments that need acoustic treatment. When you clap your
hands, it's natural to hear reflections, but flutter echo is the extra ringing quality. Untreated
parallel walls can be one cause, but flutter echo can also occur in corners or in places where
too many reflections occur too quickly. Generally smaller rooms suffer from flutter echo the
worst. Flutter echoes also generate comb filtering and room modes.

Freezing
Freezing is a feature used in DAWs to conserve CPU power while mixing. Freezing allows
you to take a track and automatically render it down, replace the CPU intensive effects,
samples, or synths with a single wave file. The result is a dramatically reduced load on your
computer's processor. With a touch of a button, you can “unfreeze” a track to restore all the
original effects, synths, and samples for further manipulation.

Figure 8
Figure 8 describes a mic's pickup pattern. Some mics pick up sound from one direction

315
(cardioid). Some mics pick up sound in a complete circle all around the mic (omnidirectional).
A figure 8 mic picks up sound from the front of the microphone and the back of the
microphone but rejects the sides strongly. This makes it good for recording two singers with
one on each side of the mic. There are a number of other applications for this. Anytime you
need to pick up two sources but need to reject the sound coming from the sides, the Figure 8
can be used.

Figure 8 is also good for letting the room into the mic which can lead to more natural
sounding tracks. Figure 8 patterns yield the strongest proximity effect of all mic patterns.

For a more detailed explanation of “Figure 8”, see the chapter on Microphones.

Filter
A filter is frequently found in a parametric equalizer. A high-pass filter is used to completely
remove all frequencies below a certain point (only letting the high frequencies pass through)
and a low-pass filter is designed to remove all frequencies below a specific frequency.

Firewire
Firewire is not so much a term for audio, but more of a high speed port on your computer.
Firewire is also known as IEEE 1394. Sometimes they just refer to it as 1394. Firewire is the
most popular method for connecting an audio interface to a computer.

Recently, external DSP processing via Firewire has become popular. In other words,
processors designed to power plugins can be used via the Firewire port. Check out the
Focusrite LiquidMix as an example.

Formant
A formant is the meat of the sound of a vocal or instrument. Let's assume we want to pitch

316
shift a vocal up 2 half-steps. If we simply shift the entire vocal we'll also be shifting up
breaths, consonants (such as the “s” and “t” sounds) that have no real pitch value, and who
knows what other kinds of noises. It doesn't take long before the vocal sounds like Alvin and
the Chipmunks.

We can shift just the formants up 2 half-steps. This sounds dramatically more natural. It
sounds as if the vocalist just sang higher if a top-notch pitch shifter is used. This keeps all the
idiosyncrasies the same and only shifts the “meat” of the vocal with pitch content.

Fundamental Frequency
If we were to listen to a sine wave via a synth or other tone generator, we'd hear a signal that
is free of any harmonics. The sound we'd hear would contain one single frequency. This is
the fundamental frequency. When we deal with acoustical instruments we find that the
differences between instrument are defined by their harmonics that may be lower or higher
than that fundamental frequency.

For example, if we were to strike the 7th fret on the A string of a Bass (E) we'd technically be
striking the same note on the same octave as an acoustic or electric guitar would if it were to
hit an open E. The fundamental frequency of all three instruments would be the same, but
the strength of the harmonics above and below the fundamental frequency would allow us to
discern between a bass guitar, an acoustic guitar, and an electric guitar.

Gain-Based Effects
Gain-based effects are effects like EQ and compression that alter the level or volume of the
signal.

Time-based Effects are effects like reverb, delay, and chorus. These effects manipulate the
time of the signal.

Gate
A gate is a processor that lets us allow only the portion of the signal that exceeds the
threshold to pass through. A common practice for a gate is to use it on the close mic of the

317
snare drum to reduce the amount of hi-hat bleed. The gate is set to close (not let signal pass
through) when the signal of that snare track falls below a threshold. When the level of that
track crosses the threshold (when a snare drum is struck) the gate opens up and the signal
passes through.

Gates are popular for reducing noise, reducing apparent bleed in drum tracks, using the
gated reverb trick (popular in the ‘80s), and many other techniques.

General MIDI (GM)

General MIDI served in the Revolutionary War along with Roosevelt. So I just cracked a joke
(however bad) in a glossary. I think that is against the rules.

Regardless, General MIDI is essentially just a standard that was agreed upon where all
preset sounds would follow the same order. This makes it possible to send a MIDI file
composed on one General MIDI synthesizer out to another GM synthesizer and the music
play back as originally intended.

General MIDI was more prominent and useful back in the “drum machine” era when entire
compositions were usually created on a single synthesizer. As sample libraries have replaced
synth sounds more and more and the technology in MIDI sounds has grown by leaps and
bounds the need for General MIDI has declined. MIDI is still used quite a bit online, on some
video games and on phones.

Gobo
A gobo is a divider that comes in handy for a ton of recording situations. A gobo is a partition
designed to minimize the bleed between instruments in a live recording. A gobo covered in
absorbing material may be used to knock down the ambiance in the drums for a room that
may be a little too live.

318
Gobos can be as simple as sheets of plywood. For a great discussion of Gobos see the
Beginner Construction Stuff in Killer Home Recording: Setting Up.

Golden Ratio
There is an optimal ratio for the dimensions of a room that provide amazing room acoustics
by evening out room modes. This is now known as the Golden Ratio. The Golden Ratio as
been used in numerous cathedrals around the world that stand out for their tremendous
acoustics.

Recording studios have extremely specialized acoustic needs, especially in control rooms
where accuracy of the monitoring system is important. Room modes wreak havoc on the
accuracy of the studio monitors in a control room. Building a room with the golden ratio will
help even these modes out before treatment is even applied.

The Golden Ratio is: 1 x 1.6 x 2.6

Generally 1 is the height of the room. So a room with a 10' foot ceiling should be 16' feet wide
and 26' feet long. A room with an 8' ceiling would be 12.8' wide and 20.8' long.

Harmonic Content
Some signals contain no harmonic content. These are known as pure sine waves. You often
hear these when dealing with old school synth sounds, old Nintendo games, or early ring
tones. If you were to check this signal on an oscilloscope (a machine used to look at
waveforms when working with electronics) you would see that the waveform is a perfect,
super-simple wave form like you would see in a science book. Now, if you were to strum a
guitar string or make any other noise that can be picked up by a microphone (except a flute)
and take a look at its waveform you would see much more going on. The waveform would

319
not be nearly as pretty and smooth. You would see/hear the fundamental frequency which is
the main, dominant frequency for that sound. You would hear/see harmonics appearing in
higher octaves. On top of all of these, we also have frequencies showing up that aren't
necessarily perfect octaves of the fundamental frequency. Much of this is the character that
separates the sound of an acoustic guitar from that of a piano or a distorted electric guitar.

The best analogy I have to explain harmonic content is adjusting the gain of an electric guitar
amp from 2 to 3. The signal becomes more saturated with distortion when the gain
increases, but we also hear more “stuff” happening at in the upper midrange frequencies.
This is a hit-head-with-sledgehammer example of harmonic content.

In the most extreme of cases, a clean, electric guitar sounds similar to an acoustic guitar (I
said similar! Work with me here!) When we crank the gain up to 10 on a high gain amplifier,
the sound is nothing like an acoustic guitar. This is a robo extreme example of harmonic
content.

In drastically more subtle terms, it's possible that using one mic, preamp, compressor, eq, etc
will give us a bit more harmonic content in a vocal track, for example. (This is one of the
reasons that tube mics are so popular on vocals.) From an audio engineering standpoint, I
would not necessarily call this distortion even though this is technically what it is. This extra
harmonic content gives the vocals more life and more air. It makes them sound prettier. The
vocals sound more alive but not in a way that that required EQ to get it. There is simply more
“action” going on in those upper midrange frequencies.

Headroom
Every audio electric circuit has a maximum amount of input signal (voltage) that it can handle.
As headroom increases, the maximum input signal without clipping also increases. This term
is used often to describe microphones or preamps that may need a pad but can also refer to
how much signal you have left before clipping within your recording software. The term

320
“headroom” essentially applies to any stage of the recording chain that can be overloaded.

High-Pass Filter
(See “Filter”)

Hi-Z Inputs
In electronics land "Z" stands for impedance or resistance. "Hi-Z" actually refers to high
impedance which is found in guitar amp land. A Hi-Z input provides an input that is matched
to that of an electric guitar. Plugging an electric guitar directly into a mic preamp without Hi-Z
will result in a loss of upper midrange clarity.

IEEE 1394
(See Firewire)

Impedance
Impedance is an electronics term measured in ohms. It means resistance. Having a
complete and total understanding of impedance is not critical in recording, but there are a few
areas that you need to be aware of.

You sometimes see impedance switches on preamps. These switches affect the amount of
input impedance on the preamp. The relationship of the output impedance of the microphone
and the input impedance of the preamp can have quite an effect on the frequency response /
tone of the recorded signal.

The same concept comes up in audio interfaces with Hi-Z inputs designed for recording
electric guitar directly (not my favorite method). Hi-Z stands for “high impedance”. While you
could run a standard XLR microphone into a line level input, it will never sound any good

321
because the impedances are not matched properly. This is solved by the use of a DI box.

In The Box
In the old days, recording was done on analog tape. To mix the song, they’d send all channels
from the analog tape to a console (giant mixer). The mixing engineer would play with volume
levels, EQ, add effects, etc and the final result would be spit out the stereo outputs of the
mixer.

These days, all of this can be done inside the computer. We refer to mixing within the
computer as “in the box”. If a person is doing all their mixing “in the box” there is really no
need for a mixer at all because the software is taking care of it.

Integrated Audio
Integrated audio is not so much a term that directly effects home recording so much. It’s a
term that deals more with the computer side of things. Essentially, integrated audio means
that your computer’s motherboard comes with a soundcard built in.

While integrated audio is fine for casual listening, it is NOT designed for audio recording and
music production. It is HIGHLY recommended that you only use a soundcard that was
designed for computer recording.

Keying
This is the process of sending signal to a sidechain input. The signal being sent is known as
the “key”.

322
Latency
Latency is the amount of time it takes a signal to process within a computer. It has a huge
effect on monitoring. A low latency audio interface is required if you plan on hearing yourself
while cutting vocals and monitoring through your recording software or if you plan on playing
a virtual instrument (such as a synth or sample) from within your recording software.

Low-Pass Filter
(See “Filter”)

Line Level
Line Level refers to the level of signal required for certain audio equipment to function
properly. Microphones require a preamp to boost their signal up to line level. Drum machines,
keyboard, etc. usually output a line level signal by default

Map
A map is a term used in synth land to describe where the preset sound are located. For
example, General MIDI is a map. It defines where the piano is going to be and where the
helicopter sounds are. Some companies began moving their preset sounds around and when
MIDI was played through these synths, it came out sounding all wrong. Trumpets would
trigger snare drums and it ended up just being chaos. So, they came up with the idea of just
loading a map to route specific sounds to where they are supposed to go.

This is not something most of us are going to deal with when recording at home especially if
we are using a software sequencer to create our MIDI productions.

Mastering
Mastering is the third and final major step in the recording process following tracking and
mixing. Mastering the process of evening out levels, going for the same tonal vibe on all
songs, reducing the “distraction factor”, and making the album sound like an album and not

323
just a collection of mixes.

Microphone
A microphone is a device that converts changes in air pressure into electricity. When a
musical instrument (or any other noise for that matter) is played, a sound wave is shot
throughout the room. If you put your hand in front of your mouth and sing, you can actually
feel the sound shooting out of your mouth. These vibrations are a combination of frequencies.
A microphone can convert these vibrations into alternating current you see on the screen of
your recording software.

That's a stupid, sciency explanation. For the real explanation see the chapter on
Microphones.

Microphone Preamp
After a mic converts sound waves to electricity, the electricity produced is very small. In order
to use the signal coming from microphones in mixers, soundcards, etc., we must bump up to
“line level” with a mic preamp.

For a more detailed explanation preamps, see the chapter on “Mic Preamps”.

Mixing
Just like the name suggests, mixing is the combining of numerous audio tracks into one
stereo track. The combining of these tracks is quite an art and takes years and years to truly
master. Mixing has been around as long as recording. In the days of the huge recording horn,
it took the form of, “The trombone is too loud. Take one step back, trombone player, and don’t
play so loud.” Mixing has been made even more complicated by electronic recording and the
use of multiple microphones.

324
MIDI
MIDI was invented to allow us to record the performance… not necessarily the sound. For
example, a person starts pounding away at the MIDI keyboard. We can record that
performance and then run it through a different sound. It could be piano, a synth pad, trash
cans or violin samples.

For a further explanation of MIDI, see the chapter on MIDI Sequencing.

MIDI Controller
A MIDI Controller is that contraption that looks exactly like your stereotypical synth keyboard.
The only difference is a MIDI controller doesn't make sound. It can't. It has absolutely no
method for output audio. What it does do is output MIDI which you then use to trigger synths
and samples.

Mixing Console
A mixing console is that huge contraption that you picture in any big time recording studio that
allows the manipulation of individual audio tracks and then combines them into one stereo (or
5.1 track).

While the mixing console still has its place, more and more professionals are mixing inside
the box.

The big names in mixing consoles are SSL, Neve, Trident and API. There are others, but
these are the consoles you hear about the most.

Mono Compatibility
If a mix is a “mono compatible” it means that mix still sounds okay on a mono audio system.

325
It's possible for stereo tracks to completely disappear when listening on a mono TV or maybe
the background music at the mall.

For a further explanation of “Mono Compatibility” see the chapter on “Audio Engineering
Principals” in Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering.

Motherboard
A motherboard is a component inside a computer. The motherboard is the large circuit board
that everything in your computer connects to. The CPU/Processor, RAM, video cards,
soundcards, hard drives, and CD-ROMs all connect to your motherboard.

Some motherboards don’t work so well with certain computer audio equipment (see Chipset)
so it’s always a great idea to research a manufacturer to make sure that your equipment
meets their specifications.

mp3
An mp3 is a compressed digital audio format that is very popular online. It is designed to
sound okay but offer extremely small file size and very fast downloading. You DO NOT want
to render your mixes to this format. You want to render your mixes to the .wav format. mp3 is
just a great file type for web distribution and for generic hard disk portable music players.

Multi-track Recording
Multi-track recording is notion of recording all our microphones onto to separate tracks to
allow for their individual manipulation during the mixing process. The alternative is to record
the entire band live straight to a stereo source.

326
Noise Gate
A noise gate is simply a gate with minimal controls that is designed to kill all the noise when
there is no signal present. See “Gate” for a full explanation.

Computer-based recording has reduced the need of a noise gate to practically zero. With the
computer we can simply cut out the parts we don't want in a track in less time than would be
required to set the controls of a gate. Noise gates are popular in high gain electric guitar
situations or, but I've not heard a gate that ever helped the tone. They simply reduce noise
when the guitar isn't playing. Same thing for live vocal and drum mics. They are handy to kill
the stage noise of live mics until the musicians start playing. As already stated, we've got that
covered in the computer already.

Null
A null refers to place in a microphone's pattern where it picks up little or no signal. This
doesn't not apply to omnidirectional microphones because they pick up sound equally in a
360 degree circle. For figure 8 microphones, this is the side of the diaphragms of the mic.
For cardioid microphones, the null is toward the rear.

Omnidirectional
Omnidirectional mics pick up sound in a full 360 degree circle around the mic, making them
ideal when you want to pick up sound from all sides. For example, when a group of singers
circle around a microphone, the odds are strong that the mic is set to omni mode.

Omnidirectional mics do not have proximity effect. This means you can get right up on the mic

327
without any artificial boost to the low end. You can also get farther away without any artificial
cut of the low end.

For a further explanation on “Omnidirectional” check out the chapter on Microphones.

ORTF
A stereo miking scheme where two microphones spread outward instead of inward like in an
X/Y miking setup. This is hard to describe. Take a look here.

Overclocking
Many computers allow you to increase the processor speed of the computer beyond that at
which it was rated for. The benefit is increased performance, but the drawback is more heat
and a great chance of frying your computer. This is known as overclocking.

Overdub
An overdub is when an instrument is being recorded to either replace tracks that had already
been recorded when the band played live or add an additional layer on top of previously
recorded tracks.

Pad (microphone)
Different microphone designs have different limits to the amount of signal the electronics
inside the microphone can handle without clipping. Extremely loud sources can overload the
internal electronics of the microphone and distort the signal. A pad is a device that knocks
this signal down by a specific amount of dB.

Pads are often built directly into condenser microphones but can also be used “in-line”

328
between the microphone and the preamp. This “in-line” method is useful when recording an
extremely loud source that overloads the preamp following the microphone.

Pad (synth)
A pad is a genre of tone created in synths that has swells into a long sustaining quality. A
note stuck on a pad generally takes so long to build up to be audible that it's impossible to
play complete melodies with any complexity and be able to make out what is actually being
played. Pads are great for creating atmosphere and aura around a track.

Panning Law
Most recording programs come default with something called a panning law. Basically, it goes
like this. Let’s assume we have a mono recording of an electric guitar, for example. If we pan
that guitar 100% to the left speaker, the right speaker isn’t helping a bit. So, it makes sense
that the signal would be half as loud than if both the right and left speaker were playing this
same signal (which would be center panning). So, audio recording software manufacturers
incorporate panning laws to compensate for the much louder signal when both speakers are
playing back a signal.

This is simply a personal preference. You will always compensate for levels after making
adjustments, so there is no direct benefit for one way or another. I always just leave mine at
the default setting.

Parallel Compression
Parallel compression is one of the essential Mixing 201 tricks. An overwhelming majority of
my mixes use parallel compression. What is it? Think of a series circuit. In a series circuit,
current flows from device A to device B to device C to device D. In a parallel circuit, current
can flow from device A to both B and C at the same time. Both B and C can flow to device D.

329
So how does all this electronic stuff affect recording? Route your drum tracks so they go
straight to the 2-bus (master fader). Use an Aux Send to shoot the signal into a compressor
where we can smash the drums aggressively and then blend them back into the normal
drums. So, we really have “clean drums” going to our Master Fader and we have our
smashed drums meeting up with them, being the same yet compressed and different. The
result is a bigger and better controlled sound that has some of the benefits of compression
without all the damage of straight compression.

Because we have the original signal and a second signal, we can get very wild with our aux
send. We can smash the living crap out of the snare drum to get whatever effect we are
looking for while at the same time just lightly blending that crushed sound into our mix.

For a more detailed explanation of parallel compression, see Killer Home Recording:
Murderous Mixing.

Parametric EQ
A parametric EQ (equalizer) is a tool that allows the boosting and cutting of specific
frequencies. Most people are familiar with graphic equalizers that allow you to draw a smiley
face. Graphic EQs use fixed frequencies. Parametric EQs differ in that they allow you to
adjust the frequency you cut or boost to find the exact frequency you'd like to manipulate.
Additionally, parametric equalizers allow us to select how wide the boost or cut is. This is
known as bandwidth or Q.

PCI cards
“PCI cards” is not really an audio term. They are more of a computer term. PCI cards fit into
PCI slots on your motherboard. If you look at the back of a desktop computer you will see a
number of horizontal slots at the bottom. These are where the PCI cards go. PCI cards make
it possible to add and remove components from a computer system.

330
Typical uses for PCI cards include modems, networking cards, video cards (although most
use AGP now), and last (but not least)… soundcards.

Many audio interfaces and DSP processors use PCI cards.

Phantom Power
Condensers and some modern ribbon microphone designs must be powered by electricity to
function properly. Usually this is 48V, but it can be different depending on the design of the
microphone. Most mixers and preamps come with phantom power built in. If a preamp,
mixer, or audio interface does not come with phantom power built in, you will have to
purchase an external phantom power supply. It's always recommended to purchase preamps
and such with included phantom power because external power supplies are generally
expensive.

Phase
Phase is the time relationship between two sound sources. It's probably the most powerful
audio engineering concept you should understand that doesn't directly involve music. A large
section on the subject of phase is included in the Killer Home Recording: Audio Engineering
since a full explanation of phase is beyond the scope of this glossary.

Plugin
A plugin is essentially an audio processor in software form such as reverb, compression,
delay, etc. There are many popular formats including VST, Direct X, Audio Units and RTAS.
Any one recording software application will support a maximum of a few specific formats.

Polarity
Polarity is a switch that you’ll find on many preamps, consoles, and just about every piece of
recording software known to man. Many times the polarity button is labeled “phase”. Phase

331
and polarity are often confused as they are related, but not exactly the same.

The easiest way to understand polarity is to toss up two identical tracks into your recording
software. Make sure the are both panned dead center. Take one of the tracks and hit the
“phase” or “polarity” button. This basically flips the waveform so that when it used to go up it
now goes down. It’s the equivalent to reversing the left and right leads on a speaker.

Think back to science class in school. If you took two identical waves, flip one upside down
(or in other words, flipped the polarity) and recombine them, the two would always cancel out
each other. As one wave is going up, the other is going down.

In this situation, we are talking about two identical waves on a computer. If you panned
each .wav file to opposite speakers, you’d start to hear things again (although it would sound
comb filtered). This is the real world acting upon our wav. The acoustics change the sound
coming from each speaker enough that they don’t cancel each other completely.

The real function of the polarity button is to solve problems with miking.

For a more detailed explanation of “Polarity” check out the chapter on “Mixing”.

Pop Filter
A pop filter is a device, usually circular, that is placed in between the vocalist and the
microphone to block excessive pops from causing rumble. It usually contains a stretched
piece of fabric although designs using metal are also available.

Preamp
(see Microphone preamp)

332
Predelay
Using the Predelay parameter in our reverb effects, we can adjust the amount of time before
the onset of reverb. If the predelay is set to zero, the reverb begins immediately. If we set the
predelay to 50ms, the start of the reverb will be delayed by 50ms.

For a further explanation of Predelay, please check out Killer Home Recording: Murderous
Mixing.

Printable CD-Rs
Like the name suggests, a printable recordable CD has a surface that is ready to be printed
on with an inkjet style printer. A printable CD-R usually comes with a white or silver label that
is essentially a piece of paper is course enough to absorb the ink from a printer.

Proximity Effect
The proximity effect describes how the low end increases as you move closer to the source
with your microphone. This is a property of figure 8 and cardioid microphones but does not
apply to omnidirectional microphones. The inverse also applies; meaning the low end will
decrease as you move farther away from a source.

Punch In/Punch Out

This term became popular back in the days of analog tape. If a particular vocal phrase was
not acceptable, the engineer would press play while the vocalist sang along and not hit the
Record button until they hit the moment that phrase that needed to be replaced was starting.
This is known as punching in. The engineer had to quickly turn off the Record button to avoid
replacing the good vocal that was already recorded that they wanted to keep. Turning off the
Record button is known as punching out. Note: In modern computer recording recording
software, by default, will not erase or record over audio files. In the old days engineers took

333
pride in their ability to punch in and out quickly and accurately. Instead, in modern recording
software new audio files are created so the importance of punching in and out is diminished
as you can always adjust when and where a new take is used instead of an old take.

Q
(See “Bandwidth”)

Quantized Grid
When you open up a MIDI sequencer, a grid will be formed that illustrates beats 1, 2, 3, and 4
(with 4/4 time). It's possible to use the quantize feature to snap all the playing to be in
“perfect” time from a mechanical standpoint (not always the perfect time from a musical
standpoint). While it started with MIDI, the idea of quantizing a performance to a grid has
spread over to audio tracks. It's fairly popular these days to take a drummer's performance,
push a few buttons, and make all snares and kick drums land exactly on the beat. I'm not
much of a fan of this sort of thing. Some say it improves music. I have my doubts.

Reamp
Reamping is a modern tactic of sending a recorded signal back through a speaker (and
amplifier, of course) and re-recording it. There are endless possibilities with reamping. A
person could record a clean, DI of their electric guitar and then “reamp” it through a guitar
amp(s) later. A person could run a snare drum back through a speaker which is setting on
snare drum and mic the ambience of the room. A person could simply run an instrument
through a speaker and mic the room. The is how old-school echo chambers work. This is still
an awesome way of getting reverb.

Reverb
Reverb is the ambient sound you hear bouncing around the room. Let's start with a single
delay/echo. The “bounce” off the wall is clear and obvious. HEY!...hey. YOU!...you. Now

334
add up a thousand zillion of these distinct delays bouncing off every surface in the room. At a
point where the number of delays increases to the point that they are totally indistinct we
enter the world of reverb. This is the sound we associate with singing in the shower or yelling
in a school gym. Reverb can be natural or it can be simulated with electronics and computer
plugins.

Reverb Time
Reverb time is also known as RT60. This is the amount of time it takes for an ambiance to
decay by 60dB. This is the standard in which rooms are judged. You may hear that a given
room has a 3 second reverb time or RT60. This means it takes 3 seconds for the sound to
drop 60dB. Another room may have an RT 0 of .8 seconds. In this room, it will take .8
seconds for a sound to drop 60dB.

Ribbon Microphone
A ribbon microphone is a unique design (like a dynamic or condenser) that is known for its
thick, dark tone and lack of tolerance for rough handling.

For a full explanation of ribbon mics, see the chapter on Microphones.

RMS Loudness
You’ll hear the words “RMS” and “Peak” used quite a bit in anything that has to do with
electronics. In the audio world these terms pop up when we're speaking of the amplitude
(volume) of an audio signal.

“Peak” is a little easier to understand and explain. Essentially, “Peak” is the value of the single
loudest part of any audio signal. If you take a look at a mix you’ve done, it’s easy to see that

335
the peaks are probably made up of kick and snare drum hits.

“RMS Loudness” is basically the average volume of the mix over time. A good way to illustrate
this would be to solo your drum bus so that you can only hear drums playing. Now very slowly
bring in a track of whispering. Keep it very very low in the mix. This would have very low RMS
loudness. So even if the drums are pounding, the space in between the drums is almost
nothing. The very quiet whispers don’t do much to make the RMS loudness that great. Now
mute the whispers. Now bring up some very loud distorted electric guitars. I’m thinking of
electric guitars that are constant down strokes like you’d expect to hear in an old punk rock
sound. Make them very loud. Now, in addition to the pounding drums, we have a constant
audio signal that is quite loud. The signal of the guitars does not really change in volume
much. While the drums have clearly defined transients (boom - pop - boom – pop) the
guitars are a constant (gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh).

RMS Loudness has a lot to do with modern mastering. Modern music sounds much louder
than music did 20 years ago if you keep the volume at the same level on your stereo. This is
achieved by smashing down the loud stuff and then pushing the volume back up to the point
that maximizes the volume limits of the CD.

Robo
A term used to describe an increase in intensity. A babe is a female with desirable aesthetic
attributes. A robo babe is a female with ultra-desirable aesthetic attributes.

Roll Off
(see “Filter”)

Room
You’ll often hear recording engineers refer to “the room”. Sometimes you’ll hear them use the
words “room mic”. The “room” is referring to the sound of the reverb in a given space, as well
as the space itself. When I recorded guitar amps in my home, I’d keep the amp by the kitchen

336
and then run a “room mic” into the foyer to capture natural ambiance. A “room” mic is there to
capture the ambient sound reflections bouncing all over the place.

Room Mode
Room mode is an acoustical term. It means sound bounces of a wall, comes back, and
smacks right back into itself out of phase by an amount determined by the size of the room
and frequency we are dealing with. Theoretically, with zero absorption (which I'm pretty sure
is impossible) a wave could bounce off a back wall and if you were standing in the spot where
that wave ends up being 180 degrees out of phase with the original signal zero sound will be
heard. However, if you were to walk to the place in the room were both waves were perfectly
in phase you'd find that the sound doubled in volume.

As you can imagine, there is a huge difference between hearing zero sound out of your studio
monitors versus hearing a specific frequency twice as loud! Of course, this is the theoretical
side that doesn't take into account a zillion other factors. I'm just trying to convey the
concept.

Room more are why it is so important to find the ideal location for your studio monitors and
listening position. Room nodes are also why acoustical treatment is so important in control
rooms where accuracy is paramount.

That's the simple explanation. This topic can get as complicated as most of us can stand.

Room Node
(See Room Mode)

RT 60
(See Reverb Time)

RTAS
RTAS stands for Real Time Audio Suite and is the plugin format of Pro Tools.

337
Sampler
A sampler is piece of hardware or software that will play back a recorded audio file when
triggered by a MIDI signal.

A sampler makes it possible to grab your MIDI controller and play a few notes. By changing
the various samples loaded into your sampler hardware / software you can play back a totally
different instrument. For example, you can change from a flute, to an acoustic guitar, to a
harmonica to a piano just by loading up samples.

SATA
SATA stands for Serial ATA. What does ATA stand for? Who cares! Basically, SATA is a
faster version of ATA that allows for more data to be sent to and from hard drives and CD-
ROM devices in a shorter period of time. SATA devices mounted outside the computer are
referred to as eSATA.

Sensitivity
Speakers have a rating called sensitivity which describes how loudly a speaker will play when
given 1 watt of power. The standard is to place the measurement microphone one meter from
the speaker. This gives you an idea of how efficiently a speaker handles power.

Sequencer
A sequencer is a device that allows you to record and edit MIDI compositions. A MIDI
sequencer is a lot like those old pianos that allow you to put the roll of paper in and the piano
automatically play. In fact, this is exactly what a sequencer does.. among other things.

Sequencers can be hardware or software. These days, the hardware versions are found on
high end keyboards but most people are using software sequencers found in audio recording
software like Cubase, Logic, or Sonar.

338
For a more in-depth look at Sequencers, see the chapter on MIDI Sequencing.

Shelf
There are two types of shelf: a low shelf and a high shelf. A low shelf is found on many
parametric equalizers. A low shelf boost will boost the signal of all frequencies below a
certain frequency (which you set). A low shelf cut will reduce the signal of all frequencies
below a certain point.

A high shelf works the same way except that it will affect frequencies above a certain point.

Sibilance
When a vocal has extremely loud, painful, and overly dramatic “ess” sounds we refer to this
as sibilance. There are other tones that can be considered sibilance such as “t” sounds.
Generally speaking, any portion of the vocal in the 4k-12k range that is painful is considered
sibilance.

Sidechain
A sidechain is an additional input found on many compressors and gates to allow you to use
one particular signal to trigger the compressor and then actually apply that compression to
another signal. For example, a very popular trick in mixing is to clamp down on the bass
guitar subtly every time the kick drum hits. We do this by sending signal from the kick drum
via an aux send to the sidechain inputs of a compressor that is placed as an insert on the
bass guitar or a bus that the bass guitar flows through. When set properly, when the kick
drum is struck we'll notice that the kick drum is a bit more there.

A sidechain can also be used as a gate. For example, let's say we place a gate on our stereo
overheads and we want to bring the snare out a bit. While in a conventional pop song the

339
snare should be the loudest peak in the overheads it's very possible that we'll get all kinds of
“false positives” when using the overhead tracks themselves. It would be much more reliable
to send a signal via aux to from one of the snare close mics. By doing so, we can adjust the
gate so that every time the snare hits, the gate closes in the overheads. Note: In this
example, we'd be using a gate subtly. Maybe when the gate is closed we only reduce the
signal 3dB. We may not want to reduce the signal infinitely when the gate is closed like you
often see/hear in noise gates.

S/PDIF
S/PDIF refers to one method that digital signals are passed in and out of a digital recording
system. For a great explanation on S/PDIF, see the Audio Interface chapter.

Staccato
This is a musical term that means playing short, choppy, or abrupt notes with minimal sustain.

Studio Monitors
A pair of studio monitors is nothing more than a pair of speakers that you use to track and mix
your recordings on, but studio monitors often sound vastly different from home stereo
speakers. Studio monitors are intended to be accurate so that your mixing decisions translate
well to the outside world. This means that the decisions you make in mixing that sound good
on these speakers should also sound good on home speakers.

Track
A track is what we refer to one single piece of recording audio. In most cases, this refers to a
single microphone. If multiple mics have been submixed together (maybe 3 mics were used -
two guitars and a synth were combined together to form one signal) they would be referred to
as one single track.

340
Tracking
Tracking is what we often call the “recording process”. It's the part where the actual music is
played and the actual performances are captured.

Transient
A transient is a fast peak. If a long, swelling pad that takes 5 seconds to reach full volume is
on one side of the spectrum, a transient is on the other. When I think of transients I think of
the initial attack of a snare drum or the pick attack on an acoustic guitar.

Virtual Instrument
A virtual instrument or VSTi is a synth or sampler that is built into the computer. This means
that the synthesizer is actually inside the computer and you no longer need to purchase
expensive keyboards to get top notch sounds. Today, it's extremely popular to use a MIDI
controller and trigger sounds inside the computer via either samplers or virtual instruments.

For a more advanced explanation of Virtual Instruments, see the chapter on MIDI
Sequencing.

Vocal Comping
It's extremely rare for the vocals you hear on albums to be recorded in one single take. It's
normal for a singer to go through 2, 3, or 30 takes and then piece the whole thing together to
form one take with super intensity. The process of putting together all these pieces is called
vocal comping (short for compiling). Back in the tape machine days, this was a time
consuming process, but modern recording software has made it a breeze. (The mechanical
assembly process.. the great vocal is still really tough!)

Voiceover
This is essentially the recording of talking. Voiceover is used often in documentary films to

341
add narration on top of video but also includes work such as TV or radio commercials or
movies.

VST
VST is the most popular plugin format. Developed by Steinberg, VST plugins work with
Cubase and many other software programs. There is an enormous pool of free VST plugins
online.

VSTi
(See Virtual Instrument)

wav File
.wav file is the uncompressed format used to store digital audio onto CDs. Tracks recorded
onto PC are, by default, .wav files and you’ll more than likely render down to a .wav file.

Wordclock
Wordclock is the signal used to keep multiple digital signals from different converters in sync.
If two audio interfaces are to be used or an audio interface and an external converter are to
be used in tandem, they both must be fed the same wordclock signal to keep them in sync.
Without wordclock, clicks and pops are a huge problem, but some people even notice a
reduction in sound quality. Wordclock signals often flow through BNC connectors (which are
independent from the cables the digital audio flows through), but converters using S/PDIF or
ADAT Lightpipe can send wordclock through the same cables the digital signal is passed
through. In other words, S/PDIF and wordclock signals do not necessarily require additional
BNC connectors to use wordclock.

342
X/Y Miking
X/Y Miking refers to take 2 mics (usually the same model) and creating a 90 degree angle
with the mics so that their diaphragms are almost touching but they are pickup up sound from
essentially different directions.

For more on X/Y Miking, check out the Audio Engineering Principals chapter.

343
 Post-Book Junk

In Review
We have covered WAY too much crap in Killer Home Recording: Setting Up. If you read all
the way through it, I suggest you take a cooking class or maybe join a summer volleyball
team. Why? Because you need a woman. If you happen to be female, my advice still
stands.

Let's go over what we've talked about.

We've gone into detail as to whether this epic disaster known as computer recording is worth
jumping into or if you'd be happier with a standalone recorder.

I suspect I may be part of the Salem float test, but I did take on the Mac vs. PC argument
without being overly biased towards either side.

We've covered audio interfaces, recording software, cables, and PC optimization in great
detail.

We've covered what gear is needed for electric guitar recording, bass recording, drum
recording, and overall choices for microphones. We've gone into detail on every piece of
recording gadgetry I can think of and hopefully made the process of selecting your initial
recording gear dramatically easier.

We've given advice for what all the mega-broke asses should do. (It's strange that a lack of
money is compared with a donkey in the cliché. It must be a western capitalist thing.)

Worst of all, we've included guides to troubleshooting your problems.

344
We shed some light on the whole MIDI sequencing thing that often requires several hours of
nose contortions before it starts to make sense.

I hope you think our glossary was helpful. I'm just upset that I couldn't really fit anything
offensive into it.

Still Have Questions?

If you have a specific problem that wasn't answered in Killer Home Recording: Setting Up, DO
NOT HESITATE to ask on the Recording Review forum. Make sure to email me the link to
your thread and I'll answer it as soon as I can.

Feedback
I'd love to hear what you thought of Killer Home Recording: Setting Up. Don't hesitate to
telling the world what you liked, what you didn't, what was good, and what was bad.

If you REALLY liked it, do me a mega favor! Grab a video camera, tell people what you
thought, and toss it on Youtube!

If you liked Killer Home Recording: Setting Up, be sure to check out the other Killer Home
Recording titles.

Tell Your Friends! I'll pay!

If you liked Killer Home Recording: Setting Up be sure to tell your friends. It would be
incredible if you could write a short blog or forum post about Killer Home Recording. I'm
generous with my affiliate commission and will hand out a hefty percentage to any sales you
send my way. Check out my affiliate program for details.

345
The Killer Home Recording System

346