Its selection covers every microphone type from condensers to dynamics to ribbons and beyond. T-RackS Mic Room has a collection of over 20 classic and contemporary models to choose from. It’s a microphone-modeling module that allows producers to process and “re-mike” their physical microphones to sound and perform like some of the most popular studio microphones of all time. You can EQ it as much as you want, but you won't achieve the smoothness level of a high-end mic because the native harshness of the cheaper solution it's embeded in the microphone's character.IK Multimedia has announced the T-RackS Mic Room for Macs and PCs. That type of fake high-frequencies sounds so unnatural and fatiguing, which also makes the vocal thinner too. The harshness will always be there, maybe in a less obvious way after the processing, but still obvious enough. Yes you can tame harshness, but you just can't fix the fake top-end of a cheaper solution. I've already got through that experience countless times. I assure you that once you finish the song, in the mix you'll hear U87 more natural and silky-er. Then mix the vocal as you would regulary do so you make sure both are processed to the "record standard" point and see which one sounds better and less fatiguing in the mix.
Take a great vocal, make a song with it and ask her/him to record twice so you can shootout the U87 and NT2000/NT2A. I'm not trying to get douchy or something, but try it for yourself. Adele's Hello was recorded through high-end gear, the comparission between Rode NT2000 and U87 it's not relevant in her scenario, because her team will always ensure the highest standards. Well, back on our own subject, believe me, AFTER PROCESSING, both mics will have a different level of smoothness and a certain vocal will just sound best if tracked through that high-end microphone. I didn't or was trying to make a confession? lol!Ĭlick to expand.Happy thanksgiving to you too! HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO YOU AND THE REST OF THE AUDIOSEX FAM! But that's a whole different story on its own.Īnyway my 2025 Tax bet still stands if I ever get to get it However, the sad part is, these folks exist.
Ik multimedia t racks mic room software#
"Some may even choose not to demo the software with fear that it does actually work and crush their false assumption" It could have been a sub $2000 mics for all we know (although, I'm pretty sure it wasn't) but we wouldn't know just by listening to it. But until somebody pull the recording session and see the name of the mic or was there physically then it is hard to tell We can all assume and guess base on certain nuance coming out.
I have no idea so far which mic was used for Adele's "Hello" (or the trillion songs I've listened to over the years) and that goes for every other engineer out there, period! It just sound great. However, it is not that the $600 Rode is sooooo awful that there's no technical mixing method to treat its results and upgraded to come close to the U87.
Ik multimedia t racks mic room full#
And I know for sure even in a full track, the Neumann is still a winner. I mean, of course, taking both mics and sing on them acapella style without any processing on empty would make the Neumann a clear winner by a long shot. That "harshness" you are talking about is treatable in current mixing world A little more time and dedication but it is treatable. Both recorded with a Rode NT2000 ($600) emulated/mix accurately, and that Neumann U87 ($3199) From the top of the head, it is gonna be hard for most to know which mic the vocals are coming from. Nah, my point is, I bring out a track fully recorded with a band. Click to expand.I didn't or was trying to make a confession? lol!
0 kommentar(er)
