Multi-Track Recording?

[Alnitak]

I apologize in advance--this topic is probably out there somewhere--but I wasn't finding what I was looking for in a quick search...so...

I'm wondering if someone can recommend a device which will allow me to record live rehearsals, but be able to capture each mic/instrument as a separate channel? I'd like to play around with mixing (totally new to me)--and can see how I could put together some re-mixing of our sessions--which I could later distribute to the band members for subsequent home practice?

I have a Yamaha mg16xu mixer, but the output of that is only a stereo (2 channel) mix. So I can do that and put all the instruments on one side and all the vocals on the other (or other configurations), but I get only two outputs.

What I'd LIKE, is to be able to get EACH instrument/vocal in a separate channel (to the best extent possible), recorded simultaneously, so I can remix later. Obviously each mic is a separate input, and each amp we have has a DI--so those could be separate. (I'll have to deal with mics for the drums later).

So, am I looking at thousands of dollars to be able to do this? Or can I somehow get our mixer to accept an input/output--for a separate piece of equipment--which would record each DI and Mic track by itself--as we rehearse as a group?

Thanks in advance!

 

[bholder]

Used to be thousands, yeah. Now get a good laptop, an interface with the channels you need (might be the hard part), and a DAW program and go to town.

 

[r_bnks]

TASCAM Model 24 Mixer / Interface / Recorder

This the best bang for the buck imo.
You can record 16 channels separately with built in preamp so only mics needed.
Alos you can record to your daw or to a micro SD card too.

We used it ilat our home studio with very good results before we switched to outboard preamp and gear which is the best but most expensive option.

 

[Alnitak]

Thanks for these replies!

To clarify, I already have a mixer (hopefully I don’t need to buy a different one with multi track recording capabilities built in). And I already have a good computer, with access to Cubase software. It’s the “interface” part I am wondering about…if there is something “simple” I can add to what I already have, so that I can get multiple, individual outputs, which can then be re-mixed/edited in (for example), Cubase. Thanks again!

 

[ahbass2500]

I used the old version of the Tascam rack mount usb interface to record rehearsals years ago. Works great once you get everything set up. Quite a bit cheaper than what the previous post recommended (noting the rack mount also has significantly fewer features). New version linked below. Several other manufacturers also make them. Some are nicer than others.

TASCAM US-16x08 USB Audio Interface

Effectively you need some type of USB interface with enough channels for your use, a decent laptop, and DAW software. Most interfaces come with a stripped down DAW software that should get you going fine.

 

[longfinger]

Any audio interface with 8 inputs will do. Many companies make them now.

If you want to leave the laptop at home, you can also look into a Tascam Portastudio like the DP-24SD.

 

[Tosh]

How much you spend will be determined by several factors
How many tracks? (typically multiples of 4 eg: 4, 8, 12, 16...)
What media do you want to record to? (SD card, USB drive, computer drive, or...?)
How many microphones vs line inputs? (eg: 8 mics, 12 lines, or 2 mics, 16 lines, or...?)

If you were to use a computer audio interface connected to a laptop, for example, you could use the Yamaha mg16xu's 6 busses to feed 6 line-level signals to the computer, then add 2 microphones (to capture the drums) for a total of 8 tracks. You might only need to spend around $400 - $500 for that.

In my jazz group, we have 5 players (drums, bass, keys, guitar, horns). We have 1 mic on the trumpet, & 6 on the drums. Add a room mic (to record our conversations) and that fills an 8 channel mic pre-amp. Those 8 tracks are connected via ADAT (optical link) into my main interface, where the bass, guitar, and keys all connect on line-level inputs. So, we're using 12 tracks total, recording into Logic X on a Mac mini. All of my mixing is done in the computer.

All of the equipment that I use for this project probably adds up to close to $10K (mics, stands, cables, monitor speakers, power distribution boxes, computer + monitor, software, interface, preamps, DI boxes, etc) but you wouldn't have to spend that much to get decent results. It depends on what your goals are.

 

[_One//Man//Mutiny_]

Behringer XR18, I use mine exactly for that reason, works great! Got all the drums mic’d in the room and the bass and guitars direct to eliminate bleed through. Vocals, I typically add later due to my overheads almost always catching the singer’s vocals. But that’s due to me having all this crammed into a small spare bedroom, but it absolutely can record a full band no problem, just be aware of your environment and knowing that there’s a reason multitracking is the norm, you can do it but it’s a learning experience all itself to get the best isolation you can while recording a band live, it’s incredibly efficient when the band is tight and you have everything isolated and everything set properly, it’s a lot of work but it has huge payoffs, especially if you play in a band with the same people with a relatively constant “sound” I have everything set to scenes and a template, so if we feel the creative juices, I just open it up and everything is level matched on my daw and the mixer and all I do is hit record!
They also make the XTouch and extender, which are super cool. You can toggle between controlling the digital mixer setting levels and into the DAW for mixing.

 

[ClusterFlux]

Zoom H6: Stereo Mic + 4 tracks (a total steal at $230), or 6 independent input tracks with the XLR capsule ($90 extra)
Zoom H8: Stereo Mic + 6 tracks (a steal at $300) or 10 independent input tracks with the EXH-8 module ($150 extra)

• Both come with a really good stereo microphone
• They're much more portable and robust than a laptop + audio interface
• They save each track as a WAV file which you can easily import to any DAW
• They can be used as an audio interface

Either of these are, IMO, a no-brainer for recording rehearsals or demos.

 

[DirtDog]

Your existing mixer won't work for use case you described. All you'll be able to get is a stereo mixdown, as you've realized.

So, you'll need an digital mixer/interface with at least as many analog inputs and digital outputs you need (for all your instruments, voices, etc). 12-16 tracks in and out is pretty bog standard for this type of gear these days.

You've got a range of choices, but you're looking at the $500 to $1000 price range for the mixer/interface. eg. Behringer XR-12/16, Presonus 16R, Soundcraft UI16 and the like.

You'll need half-decent computer with lots of storage (external 1TB SSD is a good option) AND some recording software (DAW or similar). The current USB. 4.0 spec handles this amount of audio bandwidth just fine.

My band is currently doing some pre-production jamming for a new album's worth of material. I record our jams using a Presonus 16R into a MacBook Pro running Presonus Capture. We're using 9 or 10 tracks right now (we're a trio: guitar - 1 or 2 channels, 1x bass, 3x vox and 4x drum mics). We also use Presonus Universal Control mixer app for monitoring purposes (we're all on IEMs). They both run concurrently on the MBP. Capture simply captures each track's raw audio input independently of Universal Control. I then do all my post-production in Logic by importing all of the individual tracks recorded using Capture, edit accordingly and share mixes back out to the band as stereo WAV files.

 

[JeezyMcNuggles]

I apologize in advance--this topic is probably out there somewhere--but I wasn't finding what I was looking for in a quick search...so...

I'm wondering if someone can recommend a device which will allow me to record live rehearsals, but be able to capture each mic/instrument as a separate channel? I'd like to play around with mixing (totally new to me)--and can see how I could put together some re-mixing of our sessions--which I could later distribute to the band members for subsequent home practice?

I have a Yamaha mg16xu mixer, but the output of that is only a stereo (2 channel) mix. So I can do that and put all the instruments on one side and all the vocals on the other (or other configurations), but I get only two outputs.

What I'd LIKE, is to be able to get EACH instrument/vocal in a separate channel (to the best extent possible), recorded simultaneously, so I can remix later. Obviously each mic is a separate input, and each amp we have has a DI--so those could be separate. (I'll have to deal with mics for the drums later).

So, am I looking at thousands of dollars to be able to do this? Or can I somehow get our mixer to accept an input/output--for a separate piece of equipment--which would record each DI and Mic track by itself--as we rehearse as a group?

Thanks in advance!

Focusrite

A model with enough inputs to accommodate your band.

 

[definenredefine]

What does the USB port on your mixer do? Is it just for firmware updates? If so, then you probably would need an interface, which is what you're looking for anyway...

 

[logdrum]

Thanks for these replies!

To clarify, I already have a mixer (hopefully I don’t need to buy a different one with multi track recording capabilities built in). And I already have a good computer, with access to Cubase software. It’s the “interface” part I am wondering about…if there is something “simple” I can add to what I already have, so that I can get multiple, individual outputs, which can then be re-mixed/edited in (for example), Cubase. Thanks again!

You need an interface to get audio into your DAW. You do not even need a mixer. What you have is a {A mixer. However it is still not completely useless

Your existing mixer won't work for use case you described. All you'll be able to get is a stereo mixdown, as you've realized.

It has 4 sub groups and a stereo mix down, he can get six inputs into the interface if the interface has 6 inputs. Direct to DAW sure only stereo

Anyway OP - How many instruments and/or mics do you want to record simultaneously. That would determine how many channels your interface can have. In reality most project studios probably can do 8 at most but those get pricey. My recommendation is to get a 4 channel Audient/Focusrite/Tascam with ADAT/lightpipe expandability.
In my use case for example here I recorded drums (I had 6 mics) saxophone, bass, keyboards and mic guitars and a singer, at the same time live in a warehouse type space. I used my Antelope Audio Zen Tour (not big but fully featured) which has 4 mics and 4 line/instrument level inputs and a 16 channel ADAT lightpipe. I borrowed an Audient EVO 8 which has the auto-gain feature to mic the drums and the guitar cab and the Rhodes and connected that to my Zen Tour via an optical cable. Then I used the Zen Tour mic pre to record sax and vocals, bass, a live stereo mix and the synths into a fully loaded Mac Mini with Apple Silicon. I played and the sax and watched the gain as well. Until our "tracking guy arrived". I had a 8 fader Behringer control surface to control my DAW instead of moving the faders via mouse and that was helpful specially that I am also playing. I think that is the most live tracking I have done in one shot without a dedicated recording mixing desk. The Antelope Audio interfaces are top notch.

Having said that, those new TASCAMs porta studio into SD cards are good. I had an older system that I gave to my friend but that one did not interface with a DAW but was self contained and you can mix and master on it.

short story - You will be fine with a 2 input interface if you are tracking yourself only. If you get a 4 input you can track a drumset with 2 mics - 3 or 4 even better

TASCAM - you have the mixing desk feel of fader control but they are not so portable and I have not tried them myself and TASCAM is known for keeping thing proprietary.
Any other 2-4 inout interface with no traditional faders is all you really need. You will be using your mouse to control faders and it is not bad. You can get surface controllers buit make sure they are supported by your DAW. Even something with 1-4 faders is good. some MIDI controllers can also do fader control

I highly recommend the interfaces that have auto level control Audient EVO 8 is I have tried. It is really good

DAW - Cubase is a b**tch to learn and is more for people who do complicated orchestral stuff. I recommend Reaper or if on a Mac just pay the perpetual, multiple install Logic Pro. It has so many features for the beginner and the pro.

Maybe this will confuse you more but that is that. We have to start somewhere.

 

[Carl Hillman]

I apologize in advance--this topic is probably out there somewhere--but I wasn't finding what I was looking for in a quick search...so...

I'm wondering if someone can recommend a device which will allow me to record live rehearsals, but be able to capture each mic/instrument as a separate channel? I'd like to play around with mixing (totally new to me)--and can see how I could put together some re-mixing of our sessions--which I could later distribute to the band members for subsequent home practice?

I have a Yamaha mg16xu mixer, but the output of that is only a stereo (2 channel) mix. So I can do that and put all the instruments on one side and all the vocals on the other (or other configurations), but I get only two outputs.

What I'd LIKE, is to be able to get EACH instrument/vocal in a separate channel (to the best extent possible), recorded simultaneously, so I can remix later. Obviously each mic is a separate input, and each amp we have has a DI--so those could be separate. (I'll have to deal with mics for the drums later).

So, am I looking at thousands of dollars to be able to do this? Or can I somehow get our mixer to accept an input/output--for a separate piece of equipment--which would record each DI and Mic track by itself--as we rehearse as a group?

Thanks in advance!

I think you're going to find that tracking separate instruments at a rehearsal is a pain, and will take twice as long as you think it will.

If you're intent upon recording individual instruments, it is better to have somebody come in and set mics, get levels, and engineer, while you and the band take care of the rehearsing part.

It's doable, but everybody's got to have plenty of time and patience, and you've got have the ability to focus on two different, attention-dependent tasks at once.

 

[Alnitak]

I used the old version of the Tascam rack mount usb interface to record rehearsals years ago. Works great once you get everything set up. Quite a bit cheaper than what the previous post recommended (noting the rack mount also has significantly fewer features). New version linked below. Several other manufacturers also make them. Some are nicer than others.

TASCAM US-16x08 USB Audio Interface

Effectively you need some type of USB interface with enough channels for your use, a decent laptop, and DAW software. Most interfaces come with a stripped down DAW software that should get you going fine.

OK--So just to make sure I understand the cabling...I would run (for example) a vocal microphone directly into this Tascam, then use one of the outputs on the back to return it to my Yamaha mixing board? That way, I'd get the first vocal "in" for recording purposes, but would be able to get it back to our mixer to push through our PA. Is that what the "outputs" on the back are for? If so, this may work--as we have 4 vocals going (and I'd like to capture them each individually). The rest could go from the Amp DI out--directly into the Tascam and no output would be needed because each instrument would already be amplified in our rehearsal space. But I'd capture each signal separately, which is what I'm shooting for (all other aspects of recording live sound/bleeding/etc. notwithstanding!).

So I guess my question on this one is...is that what the outputs are for? Going from the Tascam back into the Yamaha mixer and then out to the powered mains.

Thanks!

 

[Alnitak]

What does the USB port on your mixer do? Is it just for firmware updates? If so, then you probably would need an interface, which is what you're looking for anyway...

The USB on the Yamaha does allow me to download/record. I thought this was only two channels myself (and DirtDog) but it may be that the Groups can expand this to six (logdrum)? So I need to take a closer look at those. But for what I had in mind, I don't think six will be enough anyhow.

 

[Alnitak]

I think you're going to find that tracking separate instruments at a rehearsal is a pain, and will take twice as long as you think it will.

If you're intent upon recording individual instruments, it is better to have somebody come in and set mics, get levels, and engineer, while you and the band take care of the rehearsing part.

It's doable, but everybody's got to have plenty of time and patience, and you've got have the ability to focus on two different, attention-dependent tasks at once.

Oh, I think you are already correct. My hope is that I can "baby step" my own personal learning--and get closer to my goal of understanding what I need to do a reasonable job. Then I might be in a position to assist other interested groups--as that "person coming in". Currently I'm the only person in our group who seems to have any real interest in taking the time to learn how to record, listen, analyze, etc. and see if/how/where we might make ourselves better--and use the sonic spectrum in more efficient ways. So, it's likely a "solo" project regardless. And I'm OK with that.

 

[Alnitak]

To Tosh:

These are great questions and it's helping me learn what I might need. And in the short time today that I've been following some of the suggestions here (thanks to EVERYONE!) I'm seeing already that I MIGHT benefit by simply upgrading to a 16 channel digital mixer--capable of recording individual tracks. Currently we have four (sometimes 5) vocals going, two different guitarists, two keyboards (one player), bass (me!) and drums. So, in a perfect world, five vocal mics, 5 instruments and drums (which I would think at a minimum would need at least 2 mics). So right there is 12. So, I'm actually thinking 16 (if multiples of 4 is the standard), just for a little wiggle room.

I imagined downloading to my computer and using SD cards for starters.

And yes, this may be more than I was thinking--but I really wasn't sure WHAT to think when I started. And...Christmas is coming up here...

 

[singlemalt]

The original vision, everything miked or direct on to individual tracks, for a remix is really ambitious. You’re looking at
Snarky Puppy/Cory Wong/Vulpeck level of production. Check any of them out on YouTube.

Besides the scads of gear, there’s the facility. Without good isolation, all those mikes are going pick up bleed from other tracks. It would be a challenge with a power trio and two singers live in a room.

Live recordings have inevitable tempo fluctuations. That’s part of the charm and energy. DAW’s are really locked into the grid.

I’d try to get as balanced a sound as I could in the room, and utilize as many direct inputs as possible, mix at the board, and play it live in takes. For rehearsals that would be really nice. You’ll be able to flesh out parts and arrange stuff. If the mix and as many isolated tracks as possible went into individual tracks in your DAW you’ve got a great scratch track to build from. Eventually, the original group live recording, with its inevitable bleeds might be replaced.

 

[sawzalot]

Get a Behringer x32 Rack. Not too expensive on the used market and it can record all 32 channels (16 physical inputs on the Rack) onto SD cards.