| Author |
 Topic 
|
the3jsgrve
Location: USA
Posts: 442
|
 Posted - Wed Mar 12, 2003 11:39 am
|
|
|
Hi! I'm using Cool Edit Pro 2.0 in my small project studio. I've got half way decent equipment (Echo Layla interface, Alesis board and monitors, MXL condensor mics, etc.), but the sound I'm getting still sounds cold... digital... especially vocals. I've got an AutoTune plug-in that I'm extremely satisfied with, and I have the BBE Sonic Maximizer plug-in on the way to add clarity and depth, but I'm wondering if there is anything out there specifically to add warmth?
I can do alot with Cool Edit's graphic EQ, but it still doesn't sound as warm as I'd like.
I've heard alot about Antares Mic Modeling plug-in, and I know it won't make my mic sound like a Nueman (it's just a cheap MXL), but would it help? If so, where can I get it? I've had no luck finding any Antares software at all. Does anyone know if they are out of business? Is there anything else out there that might work?
Please help!
Thanks!
Josh
_________________
|
|
|
|
zemlin
Location: USA
Posts: 1156
|
|
the3jsgrve
Location: USA
Posts: 442
|
|
Posted - Wed Mar 12, 2003 11:54 am
|
|
|
Thanks! Any opinions on the software? (I have a feeling this is a dangerous question... but I'll ask anyway!)
Josh
_________________
|
|
|
|
the3jsgrve
Location: USA
Posts: 442
|
|
Posted - Wed Mar 12, 2003 12:07 pm
|
|
|
OK, I found the Tube plug-in on the Antares site, and it looks pretty good. I downloaded the 10 day demo (as well as the Mic Modeling demo), so I guess I'll see what I think. My question is, how does it compare to a cheaper real tube preamp (such as the ART Tube MP OPL or the PreSonus TubePre--both of which I can buy from Musician's Friend for less money)? Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Josh
_________________
|
|
|
|
groucho
Posts: 334
|
|
Posted - Wed Mar 12, 2003 1:54 pm
|
|
|
| the3jsgrve wrote: |
OK, I found the Tube plug-in on the Antares site, and it looks pretty good. I downloaded the 10 day demo (as well as the Mic Modeling demo), so I guess I'll see what I think. My question is, how does it compare to a cheaper real tube preamp (such as the ART Tube MP OPL or the PreSonus TubePre--both of which I can buy from Musician's Friend for less money)? Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Josh |
Well, normally at this point you'd be advised to check the archives, as this has been discussed quite a bit in the past, but every time I've checked the search page lately it's been dis-functioning (is that a word?).
Anyway, opinions vary. My personal opinion is that the Antares software is totally useless and, uh... smells bad. Yeah.
Of course that's just my opinion, and many seem to find uses for it. But I'm going through a period right now where I'm having less and less use for plug-ins. I've found it's *soooo* much more satisfying to get the damn song sounding good as it's being recorded, rather than mangling it with a bunch of stupid "enhancers" and "maximisers" and such after the fact. Even my beloved Ozone is getting less action these days.
I mean, judging from the many tunes I listen to on-line by other home recorders, that BBE plug-in should just be left alone. I smell its distrinctive odor on so many tunes. Yuck. "PUT DOWN THE HARMONIC EXCITERS AND BACK AWAY SLOWLY, SIR..."
Okay, I've had too much coffee today.
Cheers,
Chris
|
|
|
|
post78
Location: USA
Posts: 2887
|
|
Posted - Wed Mar 12, 2003 2:50 pm
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| My question is, how does it compare to a cheaper real tube preamp... |
I think that the general consensus on cheap tube gear is... Well, to quote groucho slightly out of context: "Yuck. BACK AWAY SLOWLY, SIR..." 
_________________
Answer = 1. Probably.
|
|
|
|
the3jsgrve
Location: USA
Posts: 442
|
|
Posted - Wed Mar 12, 2003 2:53 pm
|
|
|
Chris,
Yeah, I was having issues with the search engine as well.
I absolutely agree with the thought process... I do my absolute best to get the sound as great as possible during recording. However, I very much appreciate the flexibility of processors given my lack of expensive hardware.
I do, however, hope to make enough money to buy some better hardware (mics, preamps, etc.) someday. What do you use/reccomend?
Thanks for the input!
Josh
_________________
|
|
|
|
groucho
Posts: 334
|
|
Posted - Wed Mar 12, 2003 5:01 pm
|
|
|
| the3jsgrve wrote: |
Chris,
Yeah, I was having issues with the search engine as well.
I absolutely agree with the thought process... I do my absolute best to get the sound as great as possible during recording. However, I very much appreciate the flexibility of processors given my lack of expensive hardware.
I do, however, hope to make enough money to buy some better hardware (mics, preamps, etc.) someday. What do you use/reccomend?
Thanks for the input!
Josh |
Ah... I used to say exactly the same thing: "I know plug-ins aren't the best, but I can't afford hardware, so...". Believe me, I know where you're coming from. I can almost guarantee that you and everyone else on this board have more equipment than I do. And I've *still* found that, even working with minimal gear, taking the time to get the absolute best sound you can with what you've got will generally yeild a better result than doing a lot of "fixing' later.
Obviously, there's a certain amount of processing that's gonna happen - without compressors, reverb, eq,. etc. it's pretty damn hard to make it all happen. But what I'm mainly talking about are these "magic, fix-it" plugs like the Sonic Maximiser or the Anteres stuff and all the other tube simulators, exciters and maximisers out there.
I'm becoming increasingly convinced that these types of plug-ins are really only ways to compensate for shortcomings or laziness earlier on in the process. And even that's a misleading statement because I don't believe there really is any way to compensate for not getting a good workable sound in the beginning,
And I think you can do that even with just an SM57 and an ART preamp. Just takes a little futzing around. And I'm starting to think that if you do it right, most of the time you're not going to need these gimmicky plug-ins.
Obviously there's exceptions to everything (and admittedly it can be fun to goof around with these plugs in search of odd sounds).
Cheers,
Chris
|
|
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
|
Posted - Wed Mar 12, 2003 5:05 pm
|
|
|
I usually don't see what good it does to offer one's opinion on something IF they don't own it, or have never used it. The Antares Mic Modeling software... I own it, and have used it quite a bit! You are correct in your assumption, it won't make your mic sound like a $2,000 mic... if your bent on getting that sound, pony up the cash. That said, while I admittingly bought into the hype upon first buying the software, I quickly came to the conclusion that while it "won't turn turds to tulips", it does have some very useful purposes. I use it on all types of signals, (not just mics) often. It does work... just not quite like everyone wishes that it did. Play with the demo and be your own judge.
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
 |
|
|
|
the3jsgrve
Location: USA
Posts: 442
|
|
Posted - Wed Mar 12, 2003 6:08 pm
|
|
|
Good word. Thanks for the advice. I'll let you know what I think of it in a few days.
Thanks again!
Josh
_________________
|
|
|
|
Craig Jackman
Location: Canada
Posts: 909
|
|
Posted - Thu Mar 13, 2003 6:05 am
|
|
|
Getting the best sound from your mic is mostly dependant on using good mic technique. Try placing the mic cliser to the vocalist, and try moving it up and/or down in relation to the singers nose and throat. The technique part come in with explosive consonant sounds (p, k, d, etc.) our when the singer cranks it up a notch and forgets to move back a little.
I'll agree that you are working at cross purposes adding a BBE to gain clarity, then complaining that the result isn't very warm.
Antares? Fun to play with, but ultimately pretty well useless.
_________________
Craig Jackman
Production Supervisor
CHEZ/CKBY/CIOX/CJET/CIWW
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada |
|
|
|
the3jsgrve
Location: USA
Posts: 442
|
|
Posted - Thu Mar 13, 2003 8:07 am
|
|
|
Well... the BBE unit isn't in yet. I plan on using it mostly on the acoustic and bass tracks in this current project, and maybe on the final mix. We'll see how it sounds when I get it.
Thanks, by the way, for the advice on mic placement. That's something I'm learning along the way. Any advice on mic placement for a Fender Twin type guitar amp???
As for the Antares software, I installed it last night and played with it a bit. I was pleasantly dissapointed.
The tube software didn't do a dang thing except for boosting my low end and adding a cheap distortion--both of which I could have done in CEP. The verdict: well... to quote previous advice, "Yuck. BACK AWAY SLOWLY, SIR..."
The mic modeling software did actually seem to have some value. If I were recording with an SM57 or SM58, I could choose that mic as my input mic and a high-level Neuman as my modeled mic, and it would give me a much warmer sound. I did appreciate the flexibility of the program (the ability to preserve the treble or bass from the original sound, input level, output level, tube saturation, etc.), and I did manage to warm up the vocals that I was previously complaining about. However, the program is really targeted at people with dynamic microphones who just need help. Since I have a couple of OK condenser mics and my board is a pretty good preamp, it really didn't do much.
Basically, it appears to me that the mic modeler has a pretty complex EQ system built into it, and it takes what we know mathematically about the frequency response of the chosen input mic and boosts or cuts EQ levels to "match" the chosen modeled mic. None of my MXL mics are even an option, so I just had to choose the closest thing I could find (a Rode). In the end I did get the warmth I wanted, but I then had to do some massive EQ work to make the vocals fit the song again. The modeler boosted the bass and cut the treble so much that the vocals were extremely muddy and boomy. Perhaps if I recorded the vocals with the 4-band on my board set flat and then didn't do anything else to them until after the modeling... we'll see.
At any rate, the vocals sound good now, so all's well that ends well. And in the mean time, I've got this thing free for 9 more days, so I might as well play with it, but I don't expect to fork out the $200+ when it's all said and done unless I find some better way to use it.
Thanks for all the help! I'll gladly take all the advice, pointers, and suggestions I can get!
Josh
_________________
|
|
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
|
Posted - Thu Mar 13, 2003 12:46 pm
|
|
|
To each his/her own. The biggest problem with the Mic Modeler software is.... people not being familiar with the sound they're trying to target. Seriously, if a person is trying to emulate a RCA tube mic, chances are they don't have one, have never used one, and... quite frankly don't have a clue what they're trying to accomplish in the way of "modeling". Like most transformations.... the best advice is, forget nomemclature, numbers, settings, etc.. and use your ears. I have arrived at sounds using the software, where the "source" mic wasn't remotely close to the actual mic used. Most folks, try to put their mic (or something close) in as the "source" and then the target mic. But sometimes, you have to play around with both "source" and "output" mic selections to find a sound you might be looking for. Don't get me wrong, (again, the software won't make your Peavey mic sound like a matched pair of B&K ribbons) but it can work wonders for someone who doesn't have a closet full of mics. 
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
Craig Jackman
Location: Canada
Posts: 909
|
|
Posted - Fri Mar 14, 2003 5:56 am
|
|
|
| the3jsgrve wrote: |
| Thanks, by the way, for the advice on mic placement. That's something I'm learning along the way. Any advice on mic placement for a Fender Twin type guitar amp??? |
Try mic'ing the back of the amp ... it's open back isn't it? Try a combination of mic's on the front, one close, one farther back. Try small changes in placement on up close mics ... start in the center of the speaker and work your way out.
The best sound I ever got out of a guitar amp, was a pair of mics, one 3' in front and one 3' behind, then panned fairly hard L/R ... watch the phase between you may have to switch one. Turn it up loud, compress and a touch of EQ. Done.
_________________
Craig Jackman
Production Supervisor
CHEZ/CKBY/CIOX/CJET/CIWW
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada |
|
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
|
Posted - Fri Mar 14, 2003 8:29 am
|
|
|
| Quote: |
| Any advice on mic placement for a Fender Twin type guitar amp |
Of course the sound your after mandates the necessary mic placement. FWIW.. I use a SM57 on one 12" speaker near the grill, turned on a 45 degree axis pointed at the edge of the speaker. I put a Sennheiser 421 on the other speaker in the same manner. I use a Shure AX5S condenser about 2-3' away (centered) and have at times put an additional small diaphragm condenser on the back. I don't use the back mic technique much. If you want more low-end information, try placing the amp against a wall (to close the back up some). Play with the actual amp position to get a nice tone balance out front. I have also laid the twin on it's back and dropped a mic (condenser) from overhead and used it for double-tracking. It doesn't sound all that great by itself, but for double-tracking, it can give you other mixing options. Experiment and have fun!!
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
the3jsgrve
Location: USA
Posts: 442
|
|
Posted - Fri Mar 14, 2003 11:18 am
|
|
|
Thanks! I'll definitely give those ideas a shot!
Josh
_________________
|
|
|
|
monopoli
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 33
|
|
the3jsgrve
Location: USA
Posts: 442
|
|
Posted - Mon Mar 17, 2003 3:15 pm
|
|
|
monopoli,
I couldn't find any kind of TrakPak--which is fine since I already have a couple of condenser mics--but I also can't seem to find a VC3Q on the Joe Meek website. Any other preamps you could recommend?
...and just out of curiosity, which VST wrapper are you using?
Thanks,
Josh
_________________
|
|
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
|
Posted - Mon Mar 17, 2003 9:23 pm
|
|
|
The TrakPak is actually a "package" put together by Joe Meek that bundles a JM47 Meekrophone with a VC3Q Pro Channel preamp with the necessary cabling and assessories (power supply and shock mount) all in a neat little carring case. Does it sound good? Sure! Is it cheap? NO! The cute little bundle will run you about $1300!!
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
monopoli
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 33
|
|
Posted - Tue Mar 18, 2003 1:50 am
|
|
|
I paid far less for the Trakpak (at the time something like 1.600 guilders which would be like 700 euro now) It still was a lot of money for me but well worth it, cause I use it on everything (the VC3Q also has a line-in through which I record guitars and organ and such)
I use the Spin Audio VST DX wrapper Pro. They also have a free version which can load one plug-in at the time.
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
|
Posted - Tue Mar 18, 2003 6:13 am
|
|
|
Yea, $1300 is Joe Meek's "list" price. I would imagine I could get it for half (or less than half) through Guitar Center with a little "persuasion".
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
| |
Topic
|
All Forums
add warmth to mic sound?
