FinnArild

That's right. In 99% of the cases the input fader on your computer should sit on 0db, and then you adjust what you put in.

Behringer makes good, inexpensive mixers. I have the Eurorack 1622 FX-Pro which I'm very happy with. Depending on your requirements, I'd suggest something between that and the UB802. It's practical to have things hooked up constantly, so I like more channels. Then I can have 2 mics - my guitars, synth, and return from the computer all on the mixer. You use the bus system to select what you record. You can route any of the channels to a bus output (even on the UB 802!), so by connecting the bus output to your computer input you get a very flexible system. (Just don't route the output from your computer back in again 8-) ) Some links: The UB802 The 1622

Yes - the thing is, you want the optimal input into your computer. So some sort of controlling the level in is neccesary. If you have a too low level into your soundcard and then boost the input in your software, you will get all the noise that is in the analog headroom; To illustrate: Low analog signal (S=signal, N=noise): S S SNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN SNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN High analog signal (same) S S S S S S SNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN SNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN Now what you get in, you boost - right? So if you get a low signal in, you also boost the noise. Solution: High volume early on in the chain. With a mixer you can balance this effectively.

Yep - a mixer, or some sort of control over the input is essensial. My next setup will be based on a laptop (albeit high-end) and I expect an increase - not decrease in performance.

I would say: "A double phono to stereo mini jack" Or if the outputs are jacks: "Double jack to one stereo mini jack"

1: You put the spice in before you use the processor. 2: Because it's easier when the farmer comes to collect them 3: A Parametric is a metric paramedic; a graphic is a good looking paramedic (metric).

Basically, you should strive to get all your peaks as close to 0db as possible, but not over. I strongly recommend using a compressor/limiter on recording to achieve this. I believe the usage of compressors is explained elsewhere on this web.

Phantom power is 48V sent through the ground cable of the XLR. Condenser microphones need power to work, so you either need batteries or phantom power.

What you can do on tape which until recently has been tough to do digitally, is the compression that tape provides. But plugins like Magneto handles that fine now. I think there's really no reason to record to tape anymore. 8 tracks - that's no more than I use for my backing vocals :-) ...

Hmmm ... I think SM 57 is dynamic, and will not need phantom feed. But an XLR is better anyway. The suggested mixer is a smaller version of my mixer, and I can reccomend it.

That would be: Favourite: Echo. Not do without: Compressor.

Since this is a discussion about mixing, I'll go through what I do when mixing. When all recordings are done, all voice tracks are tuned and good, first of all, I clean up the tracks. I turn all the faders down, then I make sure I have kick, snare, ride/hihat and the rest of the drums on four seperate tracks. Then I hit the mono button. I start all mixes in mono. I start with the kick - I turn it up to around 0db, and eq it so it sounds good. I follow up with the bass guitar, and listen through it all to make sure the bass guitar and kick follow nicely. I might do some editing or even re-recording at this point. Then fade up the snare - eq it and maybe add some reverb. So I turn up the hihat and cyms a bit low (I sometimes tweak them more in the end, but usually they take care of themselves since they're in their own frequency range - sort of) and the rest of the drums. Then I follow up with the voice. I make sure the voice is nicely above the drums and bass, and that it has it's seperate freq. range. I usually compress the voice 2:1 on recording and then 2:1 in the mix. Then I turn up the other instruments, one by one, and make sure they don't collide with each other eq wise, - most importantly; not colliding with the voice. Finally, I hit the mono button, and play with the stereo perspective - this is when everything really works or falls apart. If it's a bad mix, it's often better to make a note of what doesn't work, and start again from that point. An bad decision often snowballs other bad decisions later on. Then I master it down and run it through Waves L3 (if you haven't got it, get it) and take the mix around to listen on different equipment. I now know my speakers so well, I usually don't need to tweak much - but always some.

Well, mine doesn't record at 24 bit at all :-) ... Yes - I guess I'll be switching when I buy new gear too. I'd like to have it all on a laptop, next time.

I'd say CD, Letter, Bio, Picture, Lyrics - in that order of importance. Pack it up nicely in a cardboard/plastic folder. Remember to put your contact information everywhere - especially on the cd and cd cover.

I beg to disagree. I have used my Soundblaster Live card together with the KX drivers for a couple of years now and apart from lacking multiple in/out I manage fine.

After calling most of the record companies I ended up taking only 2 days from work to do the last calling rounds, pack the stuff and just send it out instead of meeting them -- they weren't interested in that. I sent out 25 demos to different record companies in and around Oslo. 8 rejections so far . But there's still a lot I haven't heard from. I'll do a telephone round after Xmas. I kinda got the impression that things were busy now before Xmas. If I get no reaction, I've got plans ready: 1. Produce one of the songs for radio and send out promo 2. Gather band and do some gigs. 3. Try to find manager/producer to "get me known" 4. If all else fails - gather money and give it out on my own label.

Something like that. It's a pretty common name in Norway. Personally I don't have any problems with (most) Swedes. I guess there may be some petty resentment since it's only 100 years (this year, actually) since we were made independent from Sweden. There may also be some history from 2nd world war although a lot of Norwegian have Swedes to thank for being alive today. But anyway - this is a huge digression (notice how I managed to write "huge" without the use of versals). That is, of course, true. I only wanted to point out that you don't _have_ to use a computer to make good music and that often (and especially for beginners) it's more of an obstacle since one has to learn all kinds of other stuff than music.

I haven't tried photoshop elements, but I've use Photoshop Album, which is _the_ best photo-album software in my opinion. As for Linux sequencers, I tried Muse once, but it is a long way from production ready. The truth is; very little Open-Source software is. It's usually made of a group of more or less skilled programmers with little or no project management. The few who does succeed are those who combine it with a commercial license, so-called dual licensing. Examples; Apache, Mysql, Trolltech (where I am webmaster) ... I do hope for some dual-licensed Linux audio software, but the wait maybe long.

Again, no - Linux doesn't have the applications with the featues I need. I'm sure it will come, though.

Next week I'm doing a round on Oslo's record companies - 35 in all. I've prepared it all I think: biography, letter, pictures, demo cd (dah!) and lyrics all wrapped up in a little folder. I'm doing this out of my vacation from work, so making sure I get the most out of it; I wanted to ask you all for any advice you might have - what to say/not say wear/not wear - anything at all you might have.

Tom, there's nothing wrong with putting a band together play your stuff live and taping it. A lot of times it's much better. You learn much more about music too, that way. Doing home recording on a computer, you usually need to learn a whole lot more about computers than music. If you can't gather a band; write your songs down on paper with lyrics and chords over it. Play it to friends and others. Tape it with a regular tape player. A (too) well kept secret that all good producers know; it's the songs and lyrics that matter, not the production.

I don't know if I agree - I think you should use whatever makes you sound better. If it is to rehearse 4 times a week you do that, if auto tuning makes you sound better do that. It's results that count, after all. Auto tuning is really only like frets on a guitar - a development in the technology of music. In 20 years nobody's gonna think two times about it.

All the pros use autotune of some sort. The good thing with it, is that you can concentrate on feeling and rythm and not ditch otherwise great takes only because it's a little out of tune. But as all tools, it's overused; specially for the "Live after love" song, I thought it was totally unneccesary. Cher has a too good voice to be produced to death like that. On the other hand, the record sold millions, so who am I to criticise.

Opera isn't bad either, and that I managed to type without hitting capslock all the time ;-) ..

Gimp is quite good, have used it a lot on Linux. For professional use it doesn't beat Photoshop, though - a pity it's so damn expensive.