Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Settings on digital recorders?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Central North Carolina
    Posts
    2,369

    Settings on digital recorders?

    A couple of months ago I finally broke down and purchased a digital recorder to make recording while practicing less burdensome than setting up the computer with Audacity and a mic, etc. After reviewing the options, I got a Tascam DR-05.

    I got this mostly for my bass trombone since I was basically starting from scratch with that and wanted to know how I sound, test the sound with different mouthpieces and lead pipes, work on embouchure, etc. Now I've just started using it on the tuba as well.

    It seems to be a good device. (I won't complain about the UI -- well, I guess I just did; but there's no point to that. Also, I won't complain about the documentation in the same way.)

    My only goal for now is to be able to record my practice session and play it back in such a way that what I hear from the recording is REALLY how I sound. (This does get into the general area of what "reality" really is in such a circumstance -- particularly given how digitized music works and electronic recording works in general. And I do have a Ph.D. in philosophy, so the nature of reality is always on my mind -- if we really have minds. But I'm trying to keep this as practical as possible.)

    A big problem is that there are so many possible settings on these things (I'm sure the DR-05 is highly similar to other models and brands in all of these), that it's very difficult to pick the one that yields the most "realistic" or accurate result on replay. Do I REALLY sound like THAT (since THAT sucks)? Or do I REALLY sound like THIS (which sucks less but sounds a little peculiar)?

    Why does the replay of the recording sound SO different than what I'm hearing from "behind the horn" as I'm playing? I mean, REALLY different. I was messing with it last night using my tuba, and got it sounding pretty good (at least with one mouthpiece) just by sticking with what is pretty much the "raw" default settings. But is that what it REALLY sounds like? Clearly (philosophy warning here), I have no objective way of comparing REALITY with the recording. I just have two different experiences: behind the horn and the recording. Okay. Enough philosophy (believe me, it gets way more complicated).

    It's even more problematic with the trombone -- which tends to sound even more different through the recording than from behind the horn. There, the raw/default approach doesn't seem to give a "true" (What IS truth, anyway?) result.

    So with that confusing conceptual intro ...

    How do people in general set up these devices to give them what they feel is the most accurate representation of their sound? I'm sure that this is to some degree relative to the room/auditorium/stadium that you're playing in (and there are "enhancements" on the device to try to mimic that). But I'm curious how people deal with this issue and what their settings are.

    Again, I don't expect answers to be specific to the DR-05. Any insight will be appreciated.
    Gary Merrill
    Wessex EEb Bass tuba (DW 3XL or 2XL)
    Mack Brass Compensating Euph (DE N106, Euph J, J9 euph)
    Amati Oval Euph (DE 104, Euph J, J6 euph)
    1924 Buescher 3-valve Eb tuba (with std US receiver), Kelly 25
    Schiller American Heritage 7B clone bass trombone (DE LB K/K10/112/14 Lexan, Brass Ark MV50R)
    1947 Olds "Standard" trombone (Olds #3)

  2. #2
    I don't know the settings available with your machine or what it would choose as default. However, in general:

    - You absolutely positively do NOT want automatic level control or even automatic limiting. Set it to manual level control and make sure your loudest notes don't to above -5 or so. Automatic level/gain control will take away your natural dynamics and probably make initial attacks sound distorted.

    - The microphone (built in or external) should be at least 10 feet away in an average room. For a very small space you might need to come in closer, and in a big space you might benefit from moving it back more. A microphone doesn't have the mental focus our ears do, so it records all sounds equally. Our ears/brain listen more to the direct sound and downplay the hall/room sound. So a microphone sitting where a human has a good listening experience may pick up too much room sound so your recording sounds boomy or distant.
    Dave Werden (ASCAP)
    Euphonium Soloist, U.S. Coast Guard Band, retired
    Adams Artist (Adams E3)
    Alliance Mouthpiece (DC3)
    YouTube: dwerden
    Facebook: davewerden
    Twitter: davewerden
    Instagram: davewerdeneuphonium

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Central North Carolina
    Posts
    2,369
    Thanks, Dave.

    I do have all that automatic stuff turned off, and the level seems to be set well. I practice in a 20'x20' room with 10' ceiling and with about a 6' opening in one wall to another room. The ceiling is laminate and the floor is slate (!!). So it's pretty live. There's not much else in the room except for a baby grand piano and trombone and tuba assorted cases.

    I'm currently using the built-in stereo mics on the DR-05 (part of the "ease of use" goal), but may try my Audio Technica AT220 if I can find a USB->phono adapter (I know there's one around here somewhere).

    I think the tuba recordings are now pretty accurate. One surprise is that when I use my Schilke 66 mouthpiece, it sounds great from behind the horn (nice bass tuba sound with richer upper harmonics), but not so good on the recording. Similarly for the Miraphone TU-17. What sounds best on the recording (across the range) is the Wick 2XL. I suppose that shouldn't be too much of a shock since those Wick mouthpieces were designed specifically for the Besson-style compensating horns.

    I've got a 3XL coming to try out in a couple of days. I'm hoping it will give me some of the feeling and versatility of the Schilke and Miraphone mouthpieces, but with more of the sound of the 2XL.

    Then I'll try the same set-up with the trombone and see what it sounds like.
    Gary Merrill
    Wessex EEb Bass tuba (DW 3XL or 2XL)
    Mack Brass Compensating Euph (DE N106, Euph J, J9 euph)
    Amati Oval Euph (DE 104, Euph J, J6 euph)
    1924 Buescher 3-valve Eb tuba (with std US receiver), Kelly 25
    Schiller American Heritage 7B clone bass trombone (DE LB K/K10/112/14 Lexan, Brass Ark MV50R)
    1947 Olds "Standard" trombone (Olds #3)

  4. #4
    I've got the big brother to your DR-05 and it took me a while to make peace with it. I find it really useful for judging some aspects of my playing and really useless in judging others.

    The good:

    - Rhythm
    - Tempo
    - Pitch
    - Phrasing

    The OK:

    - Articulations
    - Dynamics

    The bad:

    - Tone quality


    I find that if I limit my listening to the specific dimension I'm focusing on in my practice session, I get a lot out of these recordings. If I start judging my playing overall based on what the recorder captures, I want to pack up my horn and not play for a week.
    Adrian L. Quince
    Composer, Conductor, Euphoniumist
    www.adrianquince.com

    Kanstul 976 - SM4U

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Central North Carolina
    Posts
    2,369
    Quote Originally Posted by adrian_quince View Post
    The bad:

    - Tone quality


    I find that if I limit my listening to the specific dimension I'm focusing on in my practice session, I get a lot out of these recordings. If I start judging my playing overall based on what the recorder captures, I want to pack up my horn and not play for a week.
    VERY interesting. What I've been MOST concerned with is tone quality. And that's what I've been most disappointed in. My intuition is that I CAN'T sound like that, or people wouldn't tolerate my playing in the ensembles I'm in. But then how do I change things so that the recording DOES reflect how I sound?

    I also know that I can "tune" the tone quality of the playback by changing (for example) the values in the "effects" menu pertaining to the type of room/auditorium/studio/whatever I'm playing. But that just brings me back to the question of "How do I know how to set these in order to get an accurate playback result?"

    Example:

    If I use my Schilke 66 mouthpiece in my Wessex EEb tuba, the tone quality in the playback sounds "dull" (lacking in color and resonance?). It doesn't sound AT ALL like it does from "behind the horn". From behind the horn, it sounds like a great bass tuba sound: a bit bright and resonant overall while not particularly "sonorous" in the contra register. Same for my TU-17 mouthpiece.

    Using my Wick Heritage 2XL, I get a better tone quality in the recording in the lower register, but still overall nothing like what it sounds like behind the horn.

    I just got a Wick Classic 3XL on trial, and the playback of IT sounds fairly close to the sound from behind the horn. But is it? How can I tell?

    I notice on YouTube that a lot of people post examples of their playing. At least in the case of the tuba ones (and a number of the trombone ones), they get very positive responses ("Yeah, that's really great.", etc.) . But to me it often sounds like crap in terms of tone quality. But other examples (often Tom McGrady, for instance) sound great.

    Maybe I'll just email Tom and ask him how he does his recordings.
    Gary Merrill
    Wessex EEb Bass tuba (DW 3XL or 2XL)
    Mack Brass Compensating Euph (DE N106, Euph J, J9 euph)
    Amati Oval Euph (DE 104, Euph J, J6 euph)
    1924 Buescher 3-valve Eb tuba (with std US receiver), Kelly 25
    Schiller American Heritage 7B clone bass trombone (DE LB K/K10/112/14 Lexan, Brass Ark MV50R)
    1947 Olds "Standard" trombone (Olds #3)

  6. #6
    Gary,

    There are two huge factors to get good sound. First is the room. If you are playing in a small room you will not get a very good recording. I'm guessing the room you describe will make it sound very echo-laden and bright/hard. If you can get to a good room for some recording, then you'd have a better idea. Church sanctuaries are often very good.

    You may want to upgrade the microphones with a good external. Here is one similar to what I use and it is better than the built-in mics on either my Zoom or Edirol

    https://www.amazon.com/Audio-Technic...dp/B004SNPD4I/
    Dave Werden (ASCAP)
    Euphonium Soloist, U.S. Coast Guard Band, retired
    Adams Artist (Adams E3)
    Alliance Mouthpiece (DC3)
    YouTube: dwerden
    Facebook: davewerden
    Twitter: davewerden
    Instagram: davewerdeneuphonium

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Central North Carolina
    Posts
    2,369
    Thanks, Dave. The mic may be the key. Here's what I have, and it's worked well when recording to my computer via Audacity or even Free Sound Recorder: https://www.amazon.com/Audio-Technic...ca+at+2020+usb.

    Since it's a USB mic, it won't work with the DR-05 unless I have a USB/phono converter -- which I can't seem to find. I just ordered a couple of adapters.

    It's a bit disappointing that the mics on these small devices aren't better.
    Gary Merrill
    Wessex EEb Bass tuba (DW 3XL or 2XL)
    Mack Brass Compensating Euph (DE N106, Euph J, J9 euph)
    Amati Oval Euph (DE 104, Euph J, J6 euph)
    1924 Buescher 3-valve Eb tuba (with std US receiver), Kelly 25
    Schiller American Heritage 7B clone bass trombone (DE LB K/K10/112/14 Lexan, Brass Ark MV50R)
    1947 Olds "Standard" trombone (Olds #3)

  8. #8
    Unfortunately, the mics on these recorders are optimized for a couple of primary use cases: pop music and spoken word. In both, highs are prioritized, so the frequency response is almost the exact opposite of what makes brass sound good.

    In terms of a playback setting, you're going to want to find a setting in tuning the playback that brings out the bass and mid ranges, while dialing back the treble. This will sound closer to life that it might otherwise.

    You should also have more luck with your Audio Technica than the built-in mics, just because of the larger diaphragm size. There are also $100-200 ribbon mics out now that would give a much more natural feel to any brass recording you do.
    Adrian L. Quince
    Composer, Conductor, Euphoniumist
    www.adrianquince.com

    Kanstul 976 - SM4U

  9. I was thinking about this today!

    I have a DR-40 and do not use it regularly, even though I wanted to when I bought it.
    All the fiddling around - getting the mic out, finding out where to put it, setting up a stand, etc. is what's stopping me from doing it more often.

    Has anyone used clip-on mics before?
    My thinking is that if I take the time ONCE to work out where the mic should be and what the level should be, and then every time I just need to clip the mic on and I'm ready to go.

    Back to the original question:
    The beginning of the following video by Audio Technica might give you some ideas on how to set up your mic.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xt1SJoU6Us

  10. In a big room with good acoustics you can get get a pretty fair representation of tone quality with 1 mic.

    This video was recorded on a Zoom Q3 placed at back of the hall.
    From memory I chose to have AutoLevel set to ON because I had to plant the recorder up there before the concert and had no chance to check levels so I didn't want to get it wrong.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WXpMlGhTHk

    Another thing is, I always record in WAV. People will say that most people can't hear the loss of quality when a file is compressed to MP3 and I would agree, except that some recorders leave ugly noises (aliasing?) as a part of the recording/compressing all in one process. I just make sure I clear my SD card each time before I use the recorder so I don't run out of space.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •