recording question

PNS128 · #1 03-25-2008, 06:03 PM

hey. my band is looking for something we can use to record ourselves during rehearsal (seperately or simultaneously, it doesn't matter), possibly for a new demo, and for just whenever we think of a riff that we don't wanna forget. so. we have a 16-channel behringer mixer, so we certainly dont need a lot of inputs. a suggestion was the
Fostex MR-8: http://www.musiciansfriend.com/produ...age?sku=240344

we're thinking $250 or $300 for a price range, but we possibly could stretch that. do you guys have any other ideas? any help is appreciated. =D

**Blackbird** · #2 03-25-2008, 09:00 PM

This is more of a "Recording Gear and Equipment" Question. I'll move it there.

When you get the answer and make a recording, you can post it in "Recordings"!

**baba** · #3 03-26-2008, 08:53 AM

If everything you play goes through the mixer, including drum mics, you could just use an aux send from your mixer and then mono or stereo out into a one or two input recording device. This eliminates the need for a recording device with many inputs.

There are MANY ways to do this. Your budget, the quality of the recording, and requirements to post mix individual channels within the recording will dictate what you need.

ChrisG19 · #4 03-26-2008, 11:59 AM

Zoom H2

or

Zoom H4

We use the H4 for recording rehearsals with pretty decent results.

topper · #5 03-26-2008, 12:08 PM

If you or a band mate has a decent laptop, you can get a decent PCMIA sound card and record direct to the laptop.

Steelers Fan · #6 03-26-2008, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PNS128

hey. my band is looking for something we can use to record ourselves during rehearsal (seperately or simultaneously, it doesn't matter), possibly for a new demo, and for just whenever we think of a riff that we don't wanna forget. so. we have a 16-channel behringer mixer, so we certainly dont need a lot of inputs. a suggestion was the
Fostex MR-8: http://www.musiciansfriend.com/produ...age?sku=240344

we're thinking $250 or $300 for a price range, but we possibly could stretch that. do you guys have any other ideas? any help is appreciated. =D

We have that exact recorder. It works great. Buy a larger compactflash card though. You get around 3hrs of total track recording time with a 1gig card. I output the finished bounced tracks to a computer via USB for detailed editing.

PNS128 · #7 03-26-2008, 05:34 PM

"steelers fan", that's precisely what i was thinking. not looking for the Zoom products, just not interested in field recorders.

**baba** · #8 03-27-2008, 08:45 AM

This Fostex only has two inputs, so I assume it can only record two tracks at once. It also maxes out at 8 recorded tracks. It also only does 16 bit, not 24 bit recording. The mic sucks.

Since you don't want a portable field recorder, why not use a computer? You could get a 2 input interface from M-Audio or someone else that is equal or cheaper, does 24 bit, and will not limit to 8 tracks. IMO there are much better options.

For instance, this is $200: http://www.musiciansfriend.com/produ...ace?sku=241710 Take the remaining $100 and buy a SM57, SM58 or other quality value mic.

hunta · #9 03-27-2008, 09:45 AM

I wouldn't discount the field recorders too easily. I have a decent amount of studio gear and a portable laptop setup, and I would definitely go with something like a Zoom H2/H4 or Edirol R-09 kind of thing over a standalone multitrack recorder. You're going to end up paying more money for a multitrack recorder for a lower quality unit, because you're not just paying for the recorder, you're paying for a cheap mixer and cheap editing capability. That might be alright but most multitrackers only can record 2 inputs at a time, so for a live band situation there isn't really much editing you can do. If you do want to do some editing or some master effects on it, it's much easier to just dump your tracks into a computer and edit later (with either one).

Some people still love those multitrackers, but I don't think they're a real good investment. That one you linked also records on compact flash, which is pretty much a dead technology (for some reason they still use it on the cheaper multitracks). The included 128 meg card that comes with the fostex will only let you record for 5 minutes. The hard drive based recorders are generally much more expensive. Plus, the field recorders mentioned come with built in mics, or you can use external mics.

Also, +1 for using an inexpensive interface with a PC for recording. Another +1 for getting a couple SM57s or 58s.

Good luck with whatever you choose.

**baba** · #10 03-27-2008, 10:10 AM

hunta is dead on.

PNS128 · #11 03-27-2008, 09:05 PM

we wouldnt be using the fostex mic. we have an SM58, a bunch of Digital References (cheap but decent), and an AKG condenser. and i know it only has 2 inuts simultaneous, but thats all we'd need. we'd put everything through the mixer, and technically we'd only need ONE. right?
and i know someone who has the MR-8, and the recordings sound beautiful to me. i dont notice the fact that it isnt in 24 bit

**baba** · #12 03-28-2008, 09:14 AM

Understood. If you just want to get songs down to listen back to rehearsal, you can use damn near anything.

That said, if you are only using one or two inputs I still think a field recorder or computer interface is a better value. All the mixing functions and hooha in the MR-8 will not even be needed. You are paying for stuff you don't need. With the field recorder you have ease of use, insane portability, and higher bit depth. With the computer interface you would get all the mixing functions the MR-8 will do and more if you ever expand your needs, reduced cost, and higher bit depth, BUT reduced portability if you don't have a laptop.

The decision is up to you, but everyone's posts in this thread have outlined the considerations. Any of these options will work for just micing a room or directing out of a mixer during rehearsal.