Microphone vs interface: Which is more important?

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by BoneDigger

In the grand scheme, which has the biggest effect on recording quality? In other words, would you be better suited investing more money into a great interface or a great mic setup?

This is assuming the room is great and all other variables are off the table.

Todd

Hi Todd…

I'd take a better mic with an average interface rather than the other way round. I can upgrade the interface more inexpensively than the mics.

I have quality mics which have accompanied me through many interface changes/upgrades/switches.

Interfaces don't affect the way I capture the space, mics do.

This is just my approach…

[BoneDigger]

I presently use an MAudio interface. My mics are entry level, like the MXL v67g. I was considering upgrading to an RME Babyface which is $700. But, I don't want to get into a situation where I upgrade then feel obligated to drop $700+ on a new mic as well. I want to avoid that "endless loop" if I can.

So, I would be better off just keeping my present setup?

Todd

[ChuckS]

I got an interface about 6 months ago and started to use computer based recording. I was using a Zoom H4 prior to that; sometimes using internal mics and sometimes using external preamps and mics.

I got a Focusrite Scarlett 6i6. The 2 preamps seem quiet and plenty of gain. I paid $225. I also got a pair of ADK A6 mics/mounts for $400. I already had an Oktava MC-012. This level of gear seems about right for me, and it seems to be a good balance between mic quality and interface quality. At this point the weakest parts of my recordings are my playing, my room, and my experience in recording techniques. I doubt I could notice or benefit from better gear unless I improve those other areas as well.

[rick-slo]

In the final analysis some questions just can't be answered definitively and the best comment may well be "it just depends".

[Bob Womack]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

In the final analysis some questions just can't be answered definitively and the best comment may well be "it just depends".

About twenty years ago I read an article in Mix Magazine about microphone selection that boiled down to "it just depends." I picked up that particular virus. It is probably the bane of my RECORD forum existence.

Bob

[GuitarsFromMars]

Originally Posted by BoneDigger

I presently use an MAudio interface. My mics are entry level, like the MXL v67g. I was considering upgrading to an RME Babyface which is $700. But, I don't want to get into a situation where I upgrade then feel obligated to drop $700+ on a new mic as well. I want to avoid that "endless loop" if I can.

So, I would be better off just keeping my present setup?

Todd

Depends on what you want to sound like. Tracking acoustic guitar is difficult even with expensive gear. I have older gear but I have RME FF 400. I have been through 4 interface upgrades: Lexicon/Presonus/Echo/RME. I have a good friend who does amazing mic mods. I still have the V67G, but I have used that mic a great deal since I started recording.

SDC's like the Neumann/Shoeps cost a bundle for a well maintained pair.

They do sound amazing on a smaller body guitar.

BTW, I should have stopped with the ECHO, but I wanted RME preamps.

[KevWind]

It is an interesting question An I agree very hard to be definitive.
Generally speaking it really does "depend". A major factor in "it depends" is what are you actual goals for recording.

I would say there are three "general" categories of goals and in consecutive order they usually represent more expense.

#1 archiving level, for use in practice, rehearsal , and recall for songwriting

#2 personal publishing level, like youtube, soundcloud, etc.

#3 professional level for actual pro use or personal desired level, for commercial grade CD's , files, etc.


And one more thought is (while not exclusively again very general). To my mind better Mic's will tend to give more articulation and presence by clarity of detail.

Where better conversion will tend to give more clarity and presence by less artifact.

Better Mics and Pres will tend to be much more individually and combo specific and different from other comparable units.

Better conversion will tend to be less individually specific and different from comparable units.

And while better mics and pres tend to be a bit more immediately or easily noticeable, I think the importance of better conversion is more subtle but equally important in moving from a sound ( for lack of better terms) that may be detailed but tends to be more two dimensional and flat'ish or lacking depth, to one that starts to have more three dimensional presence.

[Rick Shepherd]

My advice is to buy the best you can afford, and even then you have to choose equipment that sounds acceptable to you. Then, there is learning to use the equipment to get optimal results. It takes research, trial and error, and that takes time.

[arashaw]

This is a pretty broad statement but the more expensive gear tends to have less self noise compared to the cheaper gear? For instance, a km184 might be "too Bright" to "Harsh" or what ever folks say all the time, but they are quiet to me, with a really strong signal. A cheaper mic might "beat it" but might be louder. So for me, my purchase is based on less hissing as well as tone quality. Again, when you get to a certain level, things are pretty close.

[DoryDavis]

Has anyone tried any of this new technology? Emulated pre-amps and compressors and limiters etc.
Getting great reviews so far.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by DoryDavis

Has anyone tried any of this new technology? Emulated pre-amps and compressors and limiters etc.
Getting great reviews so far.

I have not used UAD
But UAD and it's on board DSP processing is certainly considered by many to be one of systems that are at the top of game. And the price for the Apollo Twin is attractive.
And there is no question that emulation technology is getting better and better very good and close to analog sound (although there will always I suppose be some debate)

Of course EQ's, comp/limiters, reverbs etc. plugin emulations, are not really new technology. If I am not mistaken the pre amp emulations is what is new to this UAD offering. And the way they can be inserted into the virtual mix console. One option I think is very interesting in this UAD unit is the ability to track with some plugins via DSP with virtually no delay. Although limited on this unit to only two analog inputs at a time. And of course many here on this forum actually track "dry" particularly the solo guitar folks. But there is something to be said for the ability to add a bit of comp and or eq on the way in, for singers and players that get a wide variance in the dynamics.

I have used Slate Digital VCC ( virtual console collection) with the emulations that it has of classic consoles and while I can't say how accurate they are in recreating the originals, I can say do sound quite good

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by DoryDavis

Has anyone tried any of this new technology? Emulated pre-amps and compressors and limiters etc.
Getting great reviews so far.

I've used UAD cards for ages. I have an Apollo, but not the twin. Seems like a very nice interface/preamp. The DSP stuff is excellent, lots of great EQs, compressors, reverbs. People will nit about whether the emulations are as good as the real thing - some say yes, some no, some same the emulations are better - but most of us have never heard most of the real things, and couldn't afford them anyway, so it's a bit beside the point. The plugins are useful and very high quality. I've probably used at least some UAD plugin on everything I've recorded or You Tubed in the past decade.

Be aware that the costs add up. You buy the box and get a few initial plugins, and then there's this one for $250 that you just have to have, and that one for $199, and ... They offer sales and discount coupons to keep you coming back for more :-) Nicely, you can try any plugin for 2 weeks without buying - just click a button to start the trial. And the trials all reset each time you actually buy something, so you get quite a bit of time to contemplate spending more money (which usually works out to UAD's benefit in the end)

[DoryDavis]

Thanks Doug and Kevwind,

Well, Sweetwater had a demo with full warranty, a Twin Solo, so I went ahead and did it. I have been considering this for over a year. I should get it today and can mess with it over the weekend.
I have a friend, Doug to your comment, who says the same thing, that the plug ins add up. No doubt about that. I didn't know they re-set. I'm going to sell my Apogee One and my Duet to offset these costs. Pretty excited but a bit intimidated, looking at some of the tutorials. I wish there were a book to buy on this but I don't see one anywhere.
in terms of the sound, my feeling is you'd have to have really good speakers and really good ears to really tell the difference anymore, and I have neither, ha! I'll post on my progress if anyone is interested. One thing I've read is that the unit itself is very well put together, feels good and solid. Maybe that's neither here nor there but I like the sound of that....

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by DoryDavis

Thanks Doug and Kevwind,

Well, Sweetwater had a demo with full warranty, a Twin Solo, so I went ahead and did it. I have been considering this for over a year. I should get it today and can mess with it over the weekend.
I have a friend, Doug to your comment, who says the same thing, that the plug ins add up. No doubt about that. I didn't know they re-set. I'm going to sell my Apogee One and my Duet to offset these costs. Pretty excited but a bit intimidated, looking at some of the tutorials. I wish there were a book to buy on this but I don't see one anywhere.
in terms of the sound, my feeling is you'd have to have really good speakers and really good ears to really tell the difference anymore, and I have neither, ha! I'll post on my progress if anyone is interested. One thing I've read is that the unit itself is very well put together, feels good and solid. Maybe that's neither here nor there but I like the sound of that....

Unless I am reading it wrong, this unit applies this preamp modeling at recording time and thus you make a commitment at recording time. With the UAD card (and other plug-ins) you apply changes after recording time. You can experiment, changing the sound of the recording to taste while preserving the original raw recording.

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by RRuskin

Your signal is only as good as the weakest link in the chain but it all starts with the microphone. Garbage in = Garbage out. Clean in going to tinker toy preamp = tinker toy sound. No amount of processing will make things better - only different.

+1

But how often are all things equal? I've head one guitar sound like out of tune crap with one player that sounded great played by another.

Regards,

Ty Ford