naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Setting Up Bunker for Home Mixing

Subject: Setting Up Bunker for Home Mixing
From: "Scott Fraser" scottbfraser
Date: Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:57 am ((PDT))
<<I'm trying to set up my Mac Pro in a basement 'bunker' for listening/ 
mixing. At the moment the sound just comes out of the Mac monitor  
speakers.
I already got some recommendations for near field speakers from the  
forum. Do I need any additional hardware to set this up for a quality  
listening experience?>>

Ideally you'll want to add an audio interface, but for the moment you  
can connect the audio output of the Mac to active monitors. It's not  
very elegant, nor is it a critical listening scenario, but it will get  
you sound into the speakers, provided you get powered speakers.

<< Do I need to invest in a top-of-the-notch audio card?>>

Even a middle of the road interface is going to give you very good  
audio. In the Mac world there are many outboard FireWire or USB audio  
interfaces, & very few actual soundcards which fit in the PCI slots.  
Unlike those for PCs, the PCI audio cards that I'm aware of for Macs  
are parts of much larger, much more expensive pro systems.

<<Is there a handy way to take advantage of the S/PDIF digital audio  
output? >>

If the speakers you purchase have a SPDIF input you could do this,  
however you will be stuck with always having to make volume  
adjustments for listening level in software. I suspect you'll tire of  
this quickly & want to have a physical volume knob within reach.  
Alternatively with certain interfaces you could run the SPDIF out of  
the Mac into a SPDIF input on the hardware, although you gain  
absolutely nothing doing this over sending audio via the FireWire or  
USB connection most interfaces will be utilizing anyway.

<<I have Adobe Soundbooth and Cubase SL but I have no idea if these  
are suitable for editing wildlife sound. What SW do you use/recommend?>>

I use Digital Performer. I have no experience with Soundbooth or  
Cubase, but basically all DAWs can do extensive editing processes,  
some more intuitively than others.

<< A friend mentioned Pro Tools ('radio journalists standard')>>

ProTools is a standard in the recording industry. It comes with  
specific proprietary hardware requirements which end up making even  
the lite version an expensive alternative. Every serious DAW available  
can do everything that ProTools can do, & with the same level of  
quality.

<<For listening in a small basement room - would you recommend  
acoustic foam?>>

Only if you have noticeable slapback echoes which are coloring the  
overall sound of the room. If the room appears overly bright sounding,  
perhaps if most of the boundaries are concrete, you may get just as  
much an improvement in sound by laying down a thick carpet. Too much  
absorption, though, can create an overly dead room, which is just as  
problematic as an overly live room. Adjust in small increments.

<< Is that at all necessary? Would it enhance listening or is that  
intended for making/concealing noise.>>

'Acoustic' foam absorbs mostly high frequencies. It will do nothing at  
all for concealing noise, i.e. stopping incoming external noise.  
Neither will it do anything whatsoever to stop sound you create in the  
room from traveling into the rest of the house. Used indiscriminately  
it can unbalance the audio spectrum, resulting in a preponderance of  
low mid & bass response in a room. Used judiciously along with other  
treatments it can tame some problems in rooms with excessive flutter  
echo caused by bare walls. Generally the primary problems in smaller  
listening rooms are in the lower frequencies, but if you hear multiple  
repeated fast echoes when you clap your hands in the main listening  
position in your room, you have problematic flutter echoes & a few  
strategically placed pieces of foam can knock those down. Compressed  
fiberglass panels (e.g. Owens-Corning 701, 703 & 705) do a better job  
of this with a wider bandwidth extending into the mid range.  
Additionally foam deteriorates over time (15 to 20 years in my  
experience) into sticky gooey particles, while fiberglass maintains  
structural integrity essentially indefinitely.

<<Anything else I ought to know?>>

Yes, but one small step at a time is probably better than  
informational overload.

Scott Fraser








<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU