In article ,
Peter Larsen wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article ,
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

For recording speech you want a mixer with a half decent
compressor/limiter.

Many ppl have managed without compressors just fine.

Depends on how you define 'fine'.

My defintion of fine is "avoided disturbing modulation of background
noise".

So you just preset levels and let things happen? Because every time you
move a fader the background will change too. Personally I'd rather have
well balanced voices with a sensisible dynamic range. Intelligibility is
likely to be the order of the day with this sort of recording. Oh - and a
good compressor used sensibly won't produce objectionable pumping.

The OP suggests it will be for recording public meetings with
multi-mics. So by nature no real chance to pre-set levels at a
rehearsal - especially if there are questions from the audience. Of
course if recording to good digital you could simply record leaving
plenty headroom. But then you'll likely end up with a dynamic range
far too great for home listening.

And what issues may there be that either freeware or modestly priced
software, say sam-ultralite, aka magix home studio or sam lite, aka sam
9SE or something to that effect can not solve?

If he's going to multitrack then of course it can be sorted later. But
there's no need to go to these lengths.

I record speech (as well as other things) for a living and even on
drama where you do get a rehearsal I'd end up with clipping on
occasion without the use of a compressor.

You *do* manage to avoid clipping the mic input pre, right?

Of course. Mic amp clipping isn't a problem with decent gear- if you know
how to use it.

In my case, an SQN mixer - which has probably the
finest one available for this sort of thing.

IMO the questionee needs a "12 channel" Behringer mixer sans digital
effcts and the required number of external phono-pres. He can even get
one tossed in with one of the software packages that comes to mind,
Magix Audio Restoration suite (or something to that effect), multiple
distribution versions, one of those comes with phono-pre amp. There's a
neat lil' sound editor included, as I recall this with compression
capability. There is also Adobe Audition for those that want to use more
money and of course also SAM9.

Of course like all these aids you need to know what it does and how to
use it.

True, the simpler the better, not just for the novice user, for any
user.

--
*Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sep 1, 1:24 am, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article ,
Eeyore wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
For recording speech you want a mixer with a half decent
compressor/limiter.
Many ppl have managed without compressors just fine.

Depends on how you define 'fine'.

The OP suggests it will be for recording public meetings with multi-mics.
So by nature no real chance to pre-set levels at a rehearsal - especially
if there are questions from the audience. Of course if recording to good
digital you could simply record leaving plenty headroom. But then
you'll likely end up with a dynamic range far too great for home listening.

I record speech (as well as other things) for a living and even on drama
where you do get a rehearsal I'd end up with clipping on occasion without
the use of a compressor. In my case, an SQN mixer - which has probably the
finest one available for this sort of thing.

Of course like all these aids you need to know what it does and how to use
it.

--
Sounds like I have a real learning curve ahead.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message

For recording speech you want a mixer with a half decent
compressor/limiter.

They are relatively rare, particularly if you're talking equipment that is
not fairly expensive.

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message

For recording speech you want a mixer with a half decent
compressor/limiter.

They are relatively rare, particularly if you're talking equipment that
is not fairly expensive.

Still? I'm not terribly up to date on the cheaper end of the market but
expected 'they'd' have got this sorted by now. Although I can quite
understand Behringer expecting you to buy an outboard one from them as
well. Although those are often far to complex for a simple task like this.

--
*A plateau is a high form of flattery*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote

For recording speech you want a mixer with a half decent
compressor/limiter.

They are relatively rare, particularly if you're talking equipment that
is not fairly expensive.

Still? I'm not terribly up to date on the cheaper end of the market but
expected 'they'd' have got this sorted by now. Although I can quite
understand Behringer expecting you to buy an outboard one from them as
well. Although those are often far to complex for a simple task like this.

Inbuilt comp/limiters seem to be unique to expensive mixers designed for
location recording like your own.

Graham

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message

For recording speech you want a mixer with a half decent
compressor/limiter.

They are relatively rare, particularly if you're talking equipment that
is not fairly expensive.

Still?

True.

I'm not terribly up to date on the cheaper end of the market but
expected 'they'd' have got this sorted by now.

While there are a lot of cheap mixers with EFX, its all reverb-oriented.

I think that the only mixers that Behringer makes that has built-in
compression/limiting are digital.

Although I can quite
understand Behringer expecting you to buy an outboard one from them as
well.

A lot of mixers are used for live sound, and compression and limiting can
make live sound very complex and hard to manage, when feedback starts being
an issue.

Most compression and limiting I see used for SR is packaged as amplifier
management, along with the crossovers.

Although those are often far to complex for a simple task like this.

That's just it. The OP's basic need could be filled by a sub-$100 mixer,
particuarly if he didn't have clients he wanted to impress with an expensive
piece of equipment.

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message

For recording speech you want a mixer with a half decent
compressor/limiter.

They are relatively rare, particularly if you're talking equipment
that is not fairly expensive.

Still?

True.

I'm not terribly up to date on the cheaper end of the market but
expected 'they'd' have got this sorted by now.

While there are a lot of cheap mixers with EFX, its all reverb-oriented.

I think that the only mixers that Behringer makes that has built-in
compression/limiting are digital.

Although I can quite understand Behringer expecting you to buy an
outboard one from them as well.

A lot of mixers are used for live sound, and compression and limiting
can make live sound very complex and hard to manage, when feedback
starts being an issue.

Oh indeed. But I wasn't saying it was compulsory to use one - all those I
know can be switched out of circuit. But even in a 'live' situation a
limiter can prevent over driving the power amps and possible damage to the
speakers, etc. I also think foldback chains should have a catcher again to
prevent nasties down the line when things go wrong.

Most compression and limiting I see used for SR is packaged as amplifier
management, along with the crossovers.

Ah.

Although those are often far to complex for a simple task like this.

That's just it. The OP's basic need could be filled by a sub-$100 mixer,
particuarly if he didn't have clients he wanted to impress with an
expensive piece of equipment.

Even for the most simple sound recording on location I use my SQN mixer.
The compressor /limiter on that is either off or on. It's really just a
'soft' limiter. And I really wouldn't be without it. For more complex
stuff I have an 8 channel Audio - that too has a built in limiter.

All you have to do is listen to a large percentage of interviews on TV
news etc to realise just how essential a *decent* mixer with limiter is.
And of course an operator who knows how to use one.

--
*All generalizations are false.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Aug 31, 4:31 pm, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article .com,
Adrian wrote:

Can anyone recommend a stereo audio mixer? The immediate and primary
purpose of the same will be to mix the output from three microphones.
It will be good if I had the ability to direct the output one or both
output channels.
The need is to record small public meetings commencing with some live
music (piano) followed by a talk.
However, at some point I would like to be able to mix turntable and
line inputs at home. It seems wasteful to buy two mixers when one
might suffice. For this secondary purpose I need two turntable inputs
and/or two or three line inputs. Switchable turntable/line inputs
would be acceptable.

Sounds like you're into a disco mixer if you want cartridge inputs.
Personally I'd go for a Behringer or Mackie and use external pickup
pre-amps.

For recording speech you want a mixer with a half decent
compressor/limiter.

--
Cartridge input seems to just cloud the issues these days. I will
either use turntables with pre-amps, or forgo turntable input
altogether. I have very little vinyl.

Adrian

Adrian wrote:

Hi,

Can anyone recommend a stereo audio mixer? The immediate and primary
purpose of the same will be to mix the output from three microphones.
It will be good if I had the ability to direct the output one or both
output channels.

The need is to record small public meetings commencing with some live
music (piano) followed by a talk.

However, at some point I would like to be able to mix turntable and
line inputs at home. It seems wasteful to buy two mixers when one
might suffice. For this secondary purpose I need two turntable inputs
and/or two or three line inputs. Switchable turntable/line inputs
would be acceptable.

Output will be to a Behringer UCA202 and a Notebook computer.

Many thanks for your input to my thought process!

The only mixers that have magnetic cartridge inputs are 'disco' mixers. These
will be overkill for your original application and 'disco gear' is almost
invariably of lower audio quality than purpose designed microphone mixers, hence
not a good choice since it'll also not be optimal for your original application.

I do know of one example where quality has not been sacrificed .............
(since I designed it !)
http://www.studiomaster.com/fusion.html

But you may find it difficult to find one. You don't say where in the world you
are for example !

The alternative would be to buy a cheap but adequate mic mixer and ditto disco
mixer. Look at Behringer for example. Maybe for example ....
http://behringer.com/UB1202/index.cfm?lang=eng
http://behringer.com/DX626/index.cfm?lang=eng

Graham

On Aug 31, 7:04 pm, Eeyore
wrote:
Adrian wrote:
Hi,

Can anyone recommend a stereo audio mixer? The immediate and primary
purpose of the same will be to mix the output from three microphones.
It will be good if I had the ability to direct the output one or both
output channels.

The need is to record small public meetings commencing with some live
music (piano) followed by a talk.

However, at some point I would like to be able to mix turntable and
line inputs at home. It seems wasteful to buy two mixers when one
might suffice. For this secondary purpose I need two turntable inputs
and/or two or three line inputs. Switchable turntable/line inputs
would be acceptable.

Output will be to a Behringer UCA202 and a Notebook computer.

Many thanks for your input to my thought process!

The only mixers that have magnetic cartridge inputs are 'disco' mixers. These
will be overkill for your original application and 'disco gear' is almost
invariably of lower audio quality than purpose designed microphone mixers, hence
not a good choice since it'll also not be optimal for your original application.

I do know of one example where quality has not been sacrificed .............
(since I designed it !)http://www.studiomaster.com/fusion.html

But you may find it difficult to find one. You don't say where in the world you
are for example !

The alternative would be to buy a cheap but adequate mic mixer and ditto disco
mixer. Look at Behringer for example. Maybe for example ....http://behringer.com/UB1202/index.cf...x.cfm?lang=eng

Graham- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You designed a nice mixer. However it is overkill for my needs. I am
going for a Behringer.

Thanks for advising

Adrian