On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 09:52:18PM +0200, Robin Gareus wrote:
Sounds very good to me. I've heard pro studios do
worse with much more
expensive equipment. I prefer the dry raw sound [2] here for the demo.
Same here. I've heard *much* worse.
If I would
improve the quality of my recordings, where should I spend
more money?
I don't think you have to. Tweaking mic positions and adjusting the mix
will have greater impact in this stage.
Agree. Experiment with mic positions. And the final result you can
evaluate only in the context of a complete mix.
If you really really want to waste some cash: one can
never have good
enough Mics and analog preamps :) but you'll have to go up an order of
magnitude on the price-list for it to make a significant difference - if
any.
Very true. If a mic is OK, which means it doesn't distort and it has a
clean polar pattern and frequency response, you can make it sound like
any similar good one with a bit of EQ. Finding that bit of EQ may not
be obvious. But that doesn't change the simple fact that there's a lot
of myths about expensive mics and their subjective qualities, and that
most of it is nonsense.
You're fine on the digital side. the Echo Layla
has only 20 bits but
that's plenty here. Don't worry about this.
Certainly not if you can get one for $50 !
The weakest part of your setup are probably the KRK
Rokit 5 monitors.
Yep.
--
FA
A world of ext haustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)