Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: cabasa Mon 1 Aug 2005, 12:51

Hello everybody!

I need your help. I have to manage small DAW based on ProTools HD system. Budget: ~EUR40,000.00

I need to understand how is reasonable this compilation or not:

· I need ONE, but high class tube mic with ONE high class mic preamp/compressor/eq for recording pop-style vocals (in general). It would be very good for me to know outstanding industry-standard combination of studio mic/preamp for pop vocal recording (if it is)
· 2 or 8 ch. A/D converter for ProTools HD sound routing specially. Apegee Rosetta 200/800 is good solution (not orginal Digidesign Protools HD converters) I heard. Or anything else?
· Well, Protools HD cards + G5
· STANDALONE final compressor/limiter (like TC Finalizer etc.) for final mix processiong. The sound goes from HD digital OUT to final comp/limiter digital IN. Then it goes to the second G5 audiocard digital IN to Bias Peak (for example) to make final stereo mix bounce.
· I need 2-ch. D/A converter to send the final mix to studio monitoring interface (like Presonus Central Station http://nav.440network.com/out.php?mmsc=forums&url=http://www.presonus.com/centralstation.html ) to hear all the sound which I ugly did.
· Active acoustic monitoring system Genelec 31A or 32A. I like Genelec's hi freq "sharpy" sound.

That's all.
I ask you, gentlemen the professionals, to help and give me an advice to complete this kind of studio!
What the best indastry-standard couple of tube mic/preamp for pop-vocal recording? Converters for Protools HD? Final stand-alone compressor/limiter with aes/ebu in/out?
Neutral sounding studio monitoring interface? Active monitor system?

Thank you very much in advance and excuse me for my ugly english.

Emegical IM

Posted by: ourmanflinty Mon 1 Aug 2005, 14:36

Will you have 2 g5's? One with ProTools and one with Peak? Or one G5 with two interfaces? You didn't make it clear..

You could try a Trak 2 if you like Apogee. good mic amp, insert point for a dynamic unit then into ProTools. Acts as a D/A too, has two card slots, one for a Digi card and one for their firewire card?

Neve have recently released a mic amp, 1073dpa. It had a digital o/p option, 1073 dpd, or the 1081 channel for mic amp and eq section.

A Neumann will be good, m147,149, u87, u47!, akg c12 or even telefunken 251 if you absolutely must have the best...I had the chance to hear a telefunken once, we checked it against a u47 and it stood head and shoulders above the u47 which is a pretty hard thing to do! They are truly amazing for clarity, accuracy, detail, presence etc etc but it costs half your budget so forget it! . The akg c12vr is fantastic but perhaps too expensive. Go for a u47?

Posted by: cabasa Mon 1 Aug 2005, 16:27

Thank you for quick response, Simon!
I plan to have two G5s. I wrote I would like to have hardware final comp/limiter with digital ins/outs, something like TC Finalizer or better. It will be between Protools audio out (master output) in the first G5 and audio input of audio card in the second G5. I also plan to use Logic Pro 7 with much of soft synths. It is possible to use Protools HD and Logic 7 in one G5, one audio card (or two audio cards) simultaneously with no problems?
Do I like Apogee? I don't know. I only heardfrom my neiboths that Apogee converters sound better than native protools. I had no chance to compare, bacause I wrote here a meassage. Have you tried Trac 2? You wrote you like it. What do you think about Manley Voxbox combo http://nav.440network.com/out.php?mmsc=forums&url=http://www.manleylabs.com/containerpages/voxbox99.html
?
Thank you for Neve and Nemann!
Have you some infos about newest final compressors/limiters. I have TC Finalizer 96 now. I would like to have better than I have )

Posted by: Jsegura Mon 1 Aug 2005, 20:06

Trak 2 of Apogee is really good. Manley is good also. You can have both. You would have a good analogue sound and another digital. Apogee is better than Protools. Also watches RME and Metric Halo. They are very good.
Where I don't agree is with the monitors. I would listen to Dynaudio, ADAM or perhaps Barefoot Sounds. This is quality really. Genelec is far from these.

Posted by: cabasa Tue 2 Aug 2005, 00:17

Thank you, Jsegura!
What Dynaudio model you have advised me for ~20 m2 control room? M 1.5 or M2?
What about final compressor/limiter?

Emagical IM

Posted by: flemming Tue 2 Aug 2005, 00:51

For a 20ish m2 control room, it'd be overkill to go with M2s. Use M1.5s, they are brilliant, got a pair myself. Luv them!

You CAN run Logic and Tools on the same G5, but to be honest it's not working very well. Logic 7.X and DigiHD just doesn't communicate too good anymore (not too hard to guess who's to blame, eh? hehe), sorry.

As for hardware limiting, have a look at the new Waves box, it's better than the Finalizers which are harsh sounding and sorta showing their age. The System 6000 from tc sounds terrific (some of the best converters I've ever come across too) and is very versatile, but is also very expensive. You should also consider going for software limiting and get a powercore setup, there you have the finalizer, the system 6000 mastering, and the sony plugs. I don't really see the point in going from one computer thru a d/a then to an a/d and into another computer. Why not just bounce internally?

As for mic pre's it's really a matter of taste. Vintage Neve pre's (1073, 3311X, 1081, 1272 (if rebuild for mic input)) are very very nice, but also quite pricey and to be honest, you need to know a bit about eleectronics to keep them up and running. There's reissues available now, but they are extremely expensive. If you're into valves, get a couple of Neumann v72s (or the telefunken/siemens equivalents). PV76s are nice Neumann solid state pres. If you need something absolutely terrific, and you insist on the valve bit (which is silly if you ask me), get a voxbox, or even better a Fairman channel. The Fairman is absolutely beautiful in any way you can imagine. Top notch!

If we're talking top notch standard for pop vocals, I think your best bid would be something completely differrent, though: ELAM251 mic OR AKG C12 into a Neve 1081 pre, then into a Pultec EQ and then into a Teletronix LA2A compressor and then into a Fairchild 670 compressor (yes, two compressors!). Unfortunately that setup kinda took away all your money, so nothing left for the rest of the studio. But that's the top notch way to do it. I guarantee you if your vocals sound shit with that setup, you need a better vocalist! :-)

Posted by: keefer.k Tue 2 Aug 2005, 07:32

Dear Cabasa,

For 40K Euro (about US $45K), you can buy a nice small desk like API 1604 and a top multi-track like Studer A820/AMPEX MM1100 and leave the DAW world behind until it's time to mix/master. I'm not kidding. As far as value/build quality, these were the top of at least FIFTY YEARS of research and development by some of the smartest people using the best military spin-off technology. What we use with DAW systems is 10 years old technology at best, and a side-line of the hobbyist computer industry.

There are things you can do with a DAW that are completely amazing to a tape-only editor, but digital PCM workstations in this price range don't come close to the basic excellent sound quality that can be recorded with a great board and analog tape.

I have heard the glory of 2 inch 16 track, as fed through a little API desk. I hope that PCM or other digital recording can be this good, but it's not yet. It doesn't matter if the monitors are Mackie 824, Stax headphones, or $15K built-in custom monster main monitors, analog tape still sounds better as a master format. It costs more, but so what? Better is better. Better is getting *even* better with ATR Services tape. Not cheap: super-excellent.

Analog tape from 1963 plays back fine. Floppy disks from 1993 are marginal. Tape from 2005 will last 50 years in a cardboard box and play back fine in 2055. ProTools sessions will be unusable, even if readable. The companies don't support 3 software versions back, and will keep doing this. 2" tape is a genuine Standard, not a whim of company X.

As far as microphones, spend big. They hold their value and are easy to move. Don't discount older dynamics like EV 668, RE-55, big ribbons (AEA44/RCA44), or vintage ALTEC or WECo/ERPI mic's. They are cheap, compared to old AKG or Neumann. In LA, you can try everything.

PS: You don't have nearly enough money budgeted to pay the people who can actually make a studio happen. The room will cost about $80K (after you own the building) to come anywhere near the capability of this gear. This is true with a DAW as well.

The solution is to find a studio with most of what you want (rent the rest) with an engineer who can do what you want and pay them to record the talent. I can think of at least 6 good situations like this in Portland or Seattle.

Building studios is thankless!

Let the flames begin, and Cheers!

Karl Keefer
Portland Oregon

"Have soldering iron and Air-Vac, will travel."
Power Macintosh G4 Sawtooth, RME HDSP 52/96.
1992 Chevrolet Caprice 9C1 L05 G80 in fleet white.

Posted by: cabasa Tue 2 Aug 2005, 09:01

Thank you, Flamming for new info. I need a time to study over what you wrote! Thanks.

Keefer.k! I 100% agree with you about tape technology, sound, philosophy, not marketing Pop-music industry in my region force over me to do ProTools-based studio, c'est la vie Thank you anyway

Posted by: flemming Tue 2 Aug 2005, 10:08

Hi Keef

Yeah, and API/Studer combo is lovely!! Then again, it's not very versatile, and even though the 2" might be able to play back in 50 years (after a quick tour thru the oven), how likely is it that you can find a well calibrated 2" studer in 50 years? When did anyone last put a new 2" deck on the market? Let's face it, tape is history. Unfortunately. It was fun. But it's over. It's even difficult to buy new tape these days ...

I totally agree with you about the problems with standards in the digital world. Basically, you have to stick with your old computers when you upgrade, else there's no chance in hell you're gonna be able to play back those old (hehe) 1992 recordings. On the other hand, this isn't new. If you upgraded from a 16 to a 24 track tape machine, you had to keep the 16 track to be able to play back your 16 track tapes. And that was IMMENSELY more expensive than buying a new computer and not selling the old one is today.

These days, with A/D technology and all, I don't really feel the tape/digi discussion is very interesting anymore. Digi sounds great now. It didn't 5 years ago. And it CERTAINLY didn't 10 or 15 or 20 or 25 years ago (many people forget that digital recordings actually started in the mid 70s), but I'm quite happy with it now. True, you don't get saturation and tape compression, but that's OK. Just go for something else squashing the stuff. It's music, there are no right ways or wrong ways of tracking it. Whatever works on the way in! Which brings me to what I personally think is the more important bit: INPUT! You can never have too many new AND vintage mics, pres, eqs, and comps. They all have different flavours, and if you use high quality stuff on the way in and good modern A/Ds, chances are you'll have a great sound, plus you'll have the editing capabilities expected of modern day studios.

On a more philosophical level (sorta), I think the whole editing process is kinda cooler now than it used to be. Many engineers (especially older ones) talk about the good old days when people could play and and and, but to be honest in the good old days you did millions of takes, punching sylables in and all, and it wasn't any better. Obviously, if you had someone who could actually sing or play a great first take all was great. It still is. But that's not the norm, and never was. At least not since the advent of multitrack tape. But I digress: What I REALLY like about editing in the digital realm is the fact that what used to be boring cleaning up jobs on tape has today become an intricate part of the creative process. I love that I as a producer am much more involved in the actual music making by the choises I make in editing, and I love the freedom of being able to track whatever I want to without having to think about track counts etc, you can really go out on a whim these days, try out stuff etc, without having to worry about anything. That's cool. Granted, you have to be a good judge of when things start to get overdone (which a lot of people aren't, unfortunately), but again, that's not really that different from the albums of yesteryear. The shitty, overproduced, poorly conceived albums from back then just aren't played anymore, but BOY were they there!!! :-)

Posted by: keefer.k Tue 2 Aug 2005, 19:01

>Yeah, and API/Studer combo is lovely!!

It is. It is a relatively short signal path, both in and out, even compared to most analog mixers. To build an API 1604 with new parts (it can be done!) might cost $150K, but my friend just got a used one for $12K. I know of another in better condition for $16K. Eliminating A-D/D-A converters from the signal path is very flattering for most programs.

>Then again, it's not very versatile,

Actually, when sound quality is the first priority, a mixer like this is about the best that can be done. No, it doesn't have DSP, it doesn't have VST or automation: it sounds good like few other signal paths in the price range do. There's a DAW after the tape to take care of hacking/chopping/blending needed for modern pop production.

What is on the tape is as clean an clear as we can make it. The sound only gets worse from there, no matter the process.

> 2" might be able to play back in 50 years (after a quick tour thru the oven)

Sticky-Shed Syndrome is DONE. No modern tape will have it, just as 3M 111 and 203 is perfectly dry and good after 40 years. AMPEX/Quantegy 456 from the 80's-90's has SSS, but can be baked correctly and repeatedly for perfect playback. A non-issue.

>how likely is it that you can find a well calibrated 2" studer in 50 years?

More likely than finding a working ProTools Mix^3 with a full set of functioning plug-in authorizations. Ampex and Studer hardware is fully documented and could be manufactured in a machine tools factory. Computer hard/firm/soft ware is something of a miracle that it runs at all when new. End-user troubleshooting computer hardware/software of 2003 in 2043? No way.

>When did anyone last put a new 2" deck on the market?

I have been involved in the purchase of several analog 2" decks for commercial recording facilities in the past 3 years. They were a good value and are quite excellent.

The last 2" available new in North America was the Otari MTR-series.

Just because a thing is no longer profitable to make in quantity doesn't make it unsupportable junk.

Just as you see nice 1953-1974 Volkswagen Beetles putting around with happy owners, you may notice like-new analog tape decks for a "really long time". There is a significant industry surrounding resurrection/refurb and preservation of these old machines.

>Let's face it, tape is history.

Sorry, You are just wrong. ATR Services is releasing new blank tape to compete with Quantegy. The new era of analog tape quality has just begun.

> Unfortunately. It was fun. But it's over. It's even difficult to buy new tape these days ...

Wrong. See above.

>I totally agree with you about the problems with standards in the digital world.

And you accept it as there appears to be no options?

<snip>
>If you upgraded from a 16 to a 24 track tape machine, you had to keep the 16 track to be able to play back your 16 track tapes.
<snip>

Nope, not the whole machine, just the head stack in a shoe box. We have this now. BTW: 24 track is not an "upgrade" it's a trade of sound quality for track count.

>These days, with A/D technology and all, I don't really feel the tape/digi discussion is very interesting anymore.

You need to rent some time in a high-end recording/mastering facility. A head-to-head comparison of all-analog compared to the best digital is still different. PCM digital is still the least expensive distribution method, but let's not fool ourselves that it's the best possible.

>Digi sounds great now. It didn't 5 years ago. And it CERTAINLY didn't 10 or 15 or 20 or 25 years ago

I will concede "better than before", but not yet "great", in the under $10K 16 analog i/o realm.

>you don't get saturation and tape compression

You don't get saturation or tape compression unless the recorder is mis-aligned or the user is not following instructions. What goes in comes out. Try peaking a digital converter at +15 dB over zero for some ugly results.

The point is to reliably capture the performance on the best possible media. Post-processing is likely to be in a variety of devices including DAW systems. It's not about Analog vs. Digital, it's the best Analog we can get, then optimized for content and Digital manipulation and Digital distribution (disks or web).

>It's music, there are no right ways or wrong ways of tracking it.

Some ways are quite a bit better than others.

Karl Keefer
Portland Oregon

Posted by: flemming Wed 3 Aug 2005, 00:31

I'm not gonna waste my time going into a tape vs. digital discussion with you since you're quite obviously one of the fanatically religious types there. It'd be a futile debate. I will say though that I think I've had my fair share of high end recording experiences over the years, and I still like digital. I DO prefer having a lot of nice old analog outboard gear and a desk on the way in, but I LIKE editing, I think it's a lot of fun. If it's done for the right reasons (namely: music).

Anyway, just wanted to say that I think it's slightly uncool of you to patronize someone you don't know by implying that my experience isn't up to par just because I (along with something like 95% of all other engineers in the world, mind you!) don't agree with you. Not a great way to make new friends! :-)

Posted by: keefer.k Wed 3 Aug 2005, 19:16

>....since you're quite obviously one of the fanatically religious types there.

Wow, just because I use Macintosh and PC DAWs and like analog tape as a pre-DAW capture format? I'm ready to investigate the next great thing, but not to give up what has and does work.

I'm still hoarding a pair of SoundDesigner II/AudioMedia II systems because they work. Ready for a museum, but working.

Maybe I wasn't clear with the background. Most of the time when we are in studio/mastering facilities, the point is "the project". We HAVE to get it done on-time and (fingers crossed) under budget. This is not a time for A-B subtle comparison of signal paths.

With pre-planning, and investigation of several options, future projects may sound just a tiny bit better at no additional cost to the client. Under pressure is no time to make those choices, the producer/engineer has to Know.

> I LIKE editing, I think it's a lot of fun. If it's done for the right reasons (namely: music).

I totally agree with you that editing on a DAW is fun. It's non-destructive, doesn't wear out a master tape, and uses pretty inexpensive gear.

>Anyway, just wanted to say that I think it's slightly uncool of you to patronize

Not degrading your experiences, not patronizing. Hoping to hear success stories and ways that things worked.

>someone you don't know by implying that my experience isn't up to par just because I (along with something like 95% of all other engineers in the world, mind you!) don't agree with you. Not a great way to make new friends! :-)

I bet some of the listees are already my friends. We don't have to agree on everything to benefit from each others experiences. My favorite people aren't much like me at all :-)

Cheers.

Karl