#1
hi i was wondering which would be best for recording a simple acoustic project with me singing and playing guitar, probably for electric stuff too but not so much. I have looked into hardware such as a boss br-600 which seemed good i liked the idea of the electronic velocity sensitive drum-pads and then linking this up with either a sm-57 or 58 would the sm-58 stand up to instruments qualitywise and vice versa. However there is the alternative which would be to purchase a program which could record and use probably a mixer of some sort to do that. I have looked into the br-600 method more as i have a friend who has it but i was interested to see which would be cheaper and in the end get a better result? Thank you any help will be appreciated! O ye and price range im not really sure how much i should be looking to spend for decent recordings id like to sort of limit to around £400 with maybe a little more on top of that. Anyway thank you.
#2
i dont really know much about recording n stuff but im curently borrowing a friends BR 600 and i think its great...it has 2 michrophones built in so recording acousticly is easy...iv done just that and it sounds good
#3
I don't understand why you need electronic drum pads if you're only going to be recording acoustic guitar and voice, but the quality of any recording you get will depend a lot more on the mics you use, the mic preamps and your soundcard than the software, with the number of tracks you're using you could get perfectly good results using cheap/free software and something like:

Mic suitable for acoustic guitar (you might get better results with a condenser mic like the Rode NT1 than an SM57)> £100 mic preamp (which will have a much better preamp than any mixer in that price range) and £100 soundcard (eg M-Audio 192)

So you could do the whole thing for about £300 and still have £100 left over to buy sequencing software.
#4
Cheers guys i liked the idea of the electronic drums because of the sort of stuff i like to listen to like John Frusciante and John Mayer who both use drums. I dont have a drum kit so i thought this would probably be the best option for using drums? Or could this be done more effectively with just using sequencing software like you said. Would an eight track machine like the br600 be basically too much for what it is that im trying to do?
#5
Yeah, I'm a big believer in software sequencing. It's completely flexible and upgradeable. When's the last time you took your hardware to the music store to get it updated with the latest and greatest? And can the Br 600 show you the wave form on each track?

Also, you can get as deep as you want into the features. If you want something simple, a free program is perfect. If you decide later you want to really get into this more, you can buy a nice, yet simple sequencer like Cakewalk or Cubase. You can spend just a few dollars to keep it simple, or blow several hundred on the producer level versions and have everything you could ever think of at your fingertips.

A piece of hardware is finished being what it is when you buy it. It can't be any more or less and you're stuck with whatever it is. Software is perfect for poor people like us because of the flexibility of its nature. Not to mention, the features you get with a simple software sequencer will be insane compared to what a hardware recorder can offer.

The hardware recording machine is far inferior and somewhat archaic at this point.
#6
lol when you put it like that it seems much simpler and more obvious what to do! thanks il look into the sequencers iv used audacity before but il probably go more complex because i didnt like it i felt it was too simple which is exactly what its supposed to be i guess anyway again thanks.
#7
No problem. I'm a Cakewalk guy, so I'm a little biased to that program. You can assign real time effects to each track - tons of effects to choose from. All the basics like reverb, chorus, flange and so forth, plus amp sims, FX pad, compression - lots of virtual toys. All of these are applied to the recorded "dry" track - so it's destructionless. You can change it anytime you want.

The effects can be applied to the track or the whole mix. You can even download effects from other people all over the web - music nuts that create their own VST and DXi plugins.

Really opens up the possibilities when you get into PC recording.

Good luck, I hope it works out for you.
#8
thanks again one more thing if i was to get cakewalk to record to would it still be beneficial to get a mixer and use the effects from that rather than use the in built effects from the software which would be better or is dependant on what i would end up buying?
#9
Quote by Vague Ideal
thanks again one more thing if i was to get cakewalk to record to would it still be beneficial to get a mixer and use the effects from that rather than use the in built effects from the software which would be better or is dependant on what i would end up buying?


Would be better to use software effects. Because, when you use the effects from the mixer, they're permanent - it gets recorded that way. So if you decide later that there's too much reverb or something, too bad - you'll have to re-record it. If you use the software effects - the real time effects - they can be added, changed, removed, whatever you want without re-recording anything.

Most of the time you want to record instruments dry and apply the effects later. And that's why. You want to be able to change the effects as instruments are added and tracks built and etc. When you use hardware effects they destroy the original intelligence, so there's no going back.

Now, if you're using a hardware effects processor as a "plugin", or doing some funny routing scenarios then that probably doesn't matter.

All that said, I still use hardware effects as well. Usually for guitar and vocals - crazy combinations from my pedals and processor. I know going into it that I can't go back and change it, so I'm careful to get the effect how I want before I record. I think most people use a combination of both. Although, 90% of my effects are real-time software generated.

Does that answer your question?
#10
It does and youve answered all the others I was wondering about previously so again thanks!