Home Studio Essentials

Last night I took the advice of some folks who know a lot more about things like this than I do to replace the tubes that came in my ART MPA Gold mic preamp with some more expensive higher quality tubes that I bought online.

The MPA Gold is only about $300 but I've heard a lot of people say that if you replace the tubes that it comes with (which are cheap Chinese tubes) with some higher quality ones that you can make it so that it's quality is up there with a preamp with a cost over $1000. I don't know enough about this to say whether it's true or not. But it seemed worth a shot.

One of the cool things about this preamp is that it actually has two different inputs/tubes so I put in two different tubes so I could have some choice as far as different "colors." As each tube is supposed to have it's own sound.

I took some photographs of the process which took me about an hour. I'm sure a lot of people could have done it a lot faster but I had a lot of problems with my screwdrivers. Anyway, check out these photos:

The MPA Gold with the top taken off:

Took one of the cheap Chinese tubes out:

The USA built Sylvania tube I replaced it with:

Took out the second cheap Chinese tube. Put it up with the first one and another one(which I had taken out of my much cheaper MPA Art preamp previously.)
They all appear to be the same.

JJ Tesla ECC83 tube that I put in the second slot:

Where the tube goes:

Of course the important part is, what do they actually sound like? Well so far I've been pretty impressed. I've been using the MPA Gold both as a preamp for my Shure KSM condenser microphone and as a direct in for my bass guitar (I haven't tried it yet with my guitar.)

And last night after I replaced the tubes there did seem to be an increase in clarity and "warmth" but I'm not 100% sure. It's hard to say if it's not just a mental thing of wanting it to sound better so I don't feel like I wasted my money and time!

I don't have any audio samples to share yet, but I should have those by tomorrow.

I'm subscribed to four different magazines focused on recording: EQ, Recording, Electronic Musician, & Tape Op. Of the four I only have a strong opinion on is Tape Op, it's great. I highly recommend it. The groovy thing is Tape Op is actually FREE! The not so groovy thing is that it only comes out once every two months instead of monthly like the other three.

And while Tape Op is free it's not like the others are expensive. Each of them works out to about $1 per issue so they aren't going to break the bank.

Sure, about 75% of these magazines is advertisements for the latest gear, but if you can get through all of that, there tends to be some interesting useful information in there.

And yes I consider the "reviews" that these magazines include to be advertisements too! I think I've yet to read a negative review of anything since I've been receiving these magazines (which is since January or so.)

I've been going through some growing pains lately with setting up my recording stuff (including a lot of cool new gear) on a new computer (64 bit, quad core, 8 GB RAM PC)  and most of those pains seemed to be stemming from Windows Vista.

A couple of days ago I got to the point where I was getting really desperate as I was not able to get Reaper (my new favorite DAW) working along with lot of other really irritating problems (including a malfunctioning internet connection.) I decided that maybe I should try to install Windows 7 on my computer (dual boot style) to see if that would fix some of my problems.

I had heard a lot of good things about it but I was concerned that I would be let down. After all it's only in beta right now. I thought maybe I'd be "trading one set of problems for another."

I downloaded build 7077 (64 bit version) and installed it yesterday morning (I got my key directly from Microsoft.) I was expecting at least some pains getting things working and I figured there was a good shot that a lot of stuff wouldn't work at all.

So far that has not been the case at all. In fact I haven't run into a single problem yet. Everything seems to be working flawlessly and not every problem that I was having on Vista is gone. I'm actually shaking my head as I type this because I can hardly believe it.

Obviously I can't guarantee that everyone will have such a great experience with it, I only know my own situation but for me Windows 7 has definitely come to the rescue. It looks like Microsoft has finally got it right. An operating system that just plain works. Awesome.

Now I just hope they give us (those who are beta testing Win 7) an easy way of purchasing it when the final release comes out without having to reinstall everything again. I'm totally willing to pay whatever they are going to chart for it, I just hope they don't make it a pain in the ass to buy it.

As you may have heard The Beatles entire '60s catalog has been remastered and will be re-released on CD on 9/9/9. This release will include two box sets: One stereo box set (which will include A DVD with a short documentary about each Beatles album) and one mono box set. As a huge Beatles fan I'm very excited about this. But it's also interesting from a technical standpoint. How did they go about remastering The Beatles music? Check this out:

The re-mastering process commenced with an extensive period conducting tests before finally copying the analogue master tapes into the digital medium. When this was completed, the transfer was achieved using a Pro Tools workstation operating at 24 bit 192 kHz resolution via a Prism A-D converter. Transferring was a lengthy procedure done a track at a time. Although EMI tape does not suffer the oxide loss associated with some later analogue tapes, there was nevertheless a slight build up of dust, which was removed from the tape machine heads between each title.

From the onset, considerable thought was given to what audio restorative processes were going to be allowed. It was agreed that electrical clicks, microphone vocal pops, excessive sibilance and bad edits should be improved where possible, so long as it didn’t impact on the original integrity of the songs.

In addition, de-noising technology, which is often associated with re-mastering, was to be used, but subtly and sparingly. Eventually, less than five of the 525 minutes of Beatles music was subjected to this process. Finally, as is common with today’s music, overall limiting - to increase the volume level of the CD - has been used, but on the stereo versions only. However, it was unanimously agreed that because of the importance of The Beatles’ music, limiting would be used moderately, so as to retain the original dynamics of the recordings.

When all of the albums had been transferred, each song was then listened to several times to locate any of the agreed imperfections. These were then addressed by Guy Massey, working with Audio Restoration engineer Simon Gibson.

Mastering could now take place, once the earliest vinyl pressings, along with the existing CDs, were loaded into Pro Tools, thus allowing comparisons to be made with the original master tapes during the equalization process. When an album had been completed, it was auditioned the next day in studio three – a room familiar to the engineers, as all of the recent Beatles mixing projects had taken place in there – and any further alteration of EQ could be addressed back in the mastering room.

Following the initial satisfaction of Guy and Steve, Allan Rouse and Mike Heatley then checked each new re-master in yet another location and offered any further suggestions. This continued until all 13 albums were completed to the team’s satisfaction.

I purchased a lot of new gear today online (mostly from GuitarCenter.com)

Here's a look at what I bought and why I bought it:

E-MU 1616M PCI Audio Interface

I did a lot of research on what audio interface to buy to replace my PreSonus FP (which stopped working with Vista 64.) And after taking everything into consideration I decided this was the best option.

The specs are incredible for the price. It uses the same audio converter chip as the very expensive Pro Tools HD system and it has a 120db signal to noise ratio. You can record at 24bit/192Khz if you want. I read many rave reviews about it's great sound quality and it's low latency. I can't wait to try it out for myself. It's actually my first PCI audio interface, I've always gone the 1394 route before.

The 1616M can be purchased online for about $400 (that's what I got it for) and according to all of the reviews I read, it's quality is closer to that of an audio interface that costs well over $1000.

I can also get a card so that I can hook it up with a laptop in the future if I want. If I need more inputs then I can link another unit to this one. So there is a good amount of flexibility too.

If you are considering purchasing this product you need to make sure you have an open PCI slot on your PC (or that there's something you don't mind removing.) And yes you need a PC, this audio interface does not work with Apple computers. It does apparently work well with both XP & Vista. Both the 32 bit and 64 bit versions.

You may notice that there's also a 1616 version without the M that costs about $100 less. That M is important as it stands for mastering quality audio. All of the reviews I've read says there's a substantial difference in audio quality and that the M is definitely worth that extra $100.

Go to GuitarCenter.com to order it online.

Art MPA Gold 2 Mic Preamp

I've read a lot of great things about this preamp as far as it being a great sounding piece of tube equipment for the price ($300.) In particular I've read that it sounds really great if you replace the the tubes that it comes with so I got a variety of different tubes to try out with it. I've never replaced tubes like this before, but it's apparently very easy to do.

The best tubes are supposed to be the vintage "NOS" tubes (NOS stands for "New Old Stock.") When I get a chance to try the different tubes I bought (which include some NOS ones along with some much less expensive newer ones) I will definitely post some comparisons on this site for people to check out.

If you're looking into getting replacement tubes look for the 12AX7A kind. I'm going to include a small listing of 12AX7A NOS tubes below for you to check out.

Buy NOS Replacement Tubes On EBay:

US Auctions Australian Auctions Austrian Auctions Belgian Auctions Canadian Auctions French Auctions German Auctions Hong Kong Auctions Indian Auctions Irish Auctions Italian Auctions Dutch Auctions Polish Auctions Singapore Auctions Spanish Auctions Swiss Auctions UK Auctions

Best Match Time: ending soonest Time: newly listed Price: lowest first Price: highest first Price + Shipping: lowest first Price + Shipping: highest first

CBS 12AX7A 12AX7 NEW OLD STOCK TUBE    US $9.99

Vacuum Tube NOS RCA 12AX7A ECC83 Grey Plate    US $9.99

A VINTAGE TUNG SOL 12AX7A ECC83 NOS NIB VAC TUBE    US $19.99

Electro-Harmonix 12AY7 Tube Mic Preamp

I read that this is the best tube preamp under $200. Actually I've read that it's the only real tube preamp for under $200 as the other ones are actually "hybrids" but marketed as tube. I've read a lot of great things about it, particularly how it sounds on vocals. I'm looking forward to trying it out.

Art Tube MP Studio Mic Preamp

A lot of folks have negative things to say about this but it's only $30 so I figure I might as well check it out for myself because I've heard that it can be quite useful too. I'll try out some of the different tubes I bought in this as well to see what happens.

Nady Pop Filter

I actually didn't have a pop filter. I used to have one but I'm not sure where it's gone to.

12AX7A Tubes
(for my ART MPA Gold 2 and to a lesser extent my ART TUBE MP)

Ruby Tubes ECC83 (new)
JJ / Tesla ECC83 Gold Pin (new)
JAN Sylvania (NOS)
US Made Preowned (NOS)
Mullard 12AX7 (new)

I used Reason for a disturbingly long time before I realized I should select the ASIO driver in the audio preferences for the least possible latency/glitchy sound problems.

I'm hoping that you come across this entry if you are experiencing the same problems I used to have and like I did you are trying out all of the DX and MME options (and messing around with the sample rate and the buffer size) trying to get rid of the latency, not realizing that the best results can easily be yours by simply selecting the ASIO option.

Click here for the WIKI entry on ASIO.

For some reason, no matter what I do I can't get this site to look right in IE. It's centering a lot of stuff I don't want to be centered and I have no idea why.

So yes, this site is best viewed in Firefox. I highly recommend Firefox for browsing the internet anyway, it's a lot better than IE. Download Firefox for free.

But I know a lot of people still use IE (unfortunately) so if anyone has a good idea of why I'm having this IE centering problem let me know (in a comment) because I would love to fix it.

There's a very interesting interview with Sufjan Stevens in this month's issue of Tape Op. I find it amazing how many things he did "wrong" and still ended up with good sounding recordings. Check out this list of things he did "wrong" when recording 2003's Michigan.

1. Used 32 kHz sampling rate (instead of the usual 44.1 kHz.)
2. Mics: Only used two SM57s and one C 1000. No mic preamps.
3. Mixed the album on his headphones. He doesn't even own monitors.

What does this tell us? I think a lot of us (including myself) spend too much time worrying that we don't have the "perfect" studio setup. So what! Work with what you have. A lot of us have much better setups than Sufjan Stevens had for Michigan and I think that album sounds great. We have no excuses.

Playing & Recording

I like to record my bass guitar direct in playing with a pick and using my WAVES GTR3 plugin (which is awesome for bass and guitar btw) to fatten up my sound. I play with a pick to get a more even sound. I find that when I play with my thumb, my sound is not as even and it can be more difficult to correct with compression. If you are a good bass player maybe you won't have this issue (I'm not good.)

Compression

I think compression is often overused these days but the bass guitar is one place where it's usually needed. Start off with a compression ratio of 4:1 with an attack of 25 ms and a 500 ms release and then tweak things to your liking.

EQ

There's no set rules on how to EQ your bass but here's a hint to get you going: Try boosting the 400 Hz, 800 Hz, or 1600 Hz frequency. Notice that I said "or." That means figuring out which one sounds best, not boosting all three!

If you are getting a "muddy" or a "boomy" sound then try lowering the 120 to 200 Hz region.

Mixing

In the end you have to mix everything together. Set your panning for each instrument and set your levels. What am I getting at? Well the compression and EQ that sounds best on the bass on it's own may not be what sounds best when everything is playing together. You have to find "space" for each sound in your mix. That may mean further adjusting your compression & EQ.

You may also want to wait to do any compression and EQ until you get to this final point. I've often seen this recommended, but it's something I've never been able to do. I usually like to start twiddling with things right from the get go. I think it depends on what kind of music you are trying to create and what your own creative process is like.

For some reason acoustic design is one of the last things that a lot of people think about when trying to get the best sound possible in their home studio. The truth is that improving your home studio's acoustics may be the best thing you can do to improve the sound of your recordings, this is particularly true if you are recording a lot of vocals and acoustic instrumentation. On the other hand, it's obviously not true at all if you are only using direct ins (i.e. recording your electric guitar directly into your system rather than micing the amp.)

Maybe the reason that most people put off acoustic design is they find it mysterious or confusing. Or perhaps they think with the space that they have there's nothing they can do to improve their sound. And while it may be true that they may not be able to get a "professional" sounding recording space acoustically, there is still likely room for much improvement.

Acoustic design is too big of a subject to cover in just one blog post. My main goal with this post is to get you thinking about the importance of acoustic design. There will certainly be much more on this subject here in the future, including information on what you can use to improve your home studio's sound even if you don't have any money to spend.