Lower-volume solutions for recording?

[krankguitarist]

I'd like to stop using direct-in for my recordings...my PODxt just doesn't seem to cut it anymore. I'm starting to mic up my amps, but I'm still living with my parents and my mom is *very* sensitive to noise. Good thing I didn't decide to become a drummer...

Basically, I need to figure out a way to take the volume down a bit. I'd build an isolation box for my cab...but...my studio is rather small, and an isolation box for either my 2X12 or 4X12 would be friggin huge. Probably not gonna happen.

I'm considering buying an attenuator, or maybe picking up a Randall ISO cab. All I need to do is take the volume down a bit. down to the point where I am no longer rattling the walls and killing all living creatures within a three foot radius. I don't want the solution to have a significant negative impact on the quality of my recordings though.

Anybody have any ideas/input? Share your experiences perhaps? Thanks in advance...

 

[Guitar Guy]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

What kind of amp are you using? If it is tube with 6L6 or EL34, maybe you should try some thd yellow jackets and convert it to EL84. this might let you crank the amp a little more for recording. It is much cheaper than getting a power attenuator, although it will still be kinda loud.

 

[JammerMatt]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

Two ideas. You could go the attenuator route. Of course you will be in the 200-300 dollar category. Or, you could try the volume-pedal-in-the-loop trick I'm doing these days. BAsically works like this. I got myself a Morley LIttle Alligator on the Fleabay for about 30 bucks. I've heard good reports from the Music Man unit also. Put it in the effects loop. Turn the volume down, turn the master volume up. Similar effect as an attenuator.

I have found that you WILL lose some top end sizzle. On the attenuator side, you will start hearing negative effects when you attenuate too low, so it's just the price of doing business. Either way, your big amps wants to run large, so attenuating in any way is going to affect things.

The PODXT is a great unit. I would look at your soundcard as possibly the source of any recording woes. If it's a Soundblaster or anything like mine - it loses some of the mojo also - no matter what you're using at the front end.

In the end, unfortunately, you cannot have it all. Big amps and quiet houses don't mix. I know. I live in one. At least you're not married yet... that's when the real fun begins.

 

[Artie]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

Instead of building a box that a cab fits into, why not just build a dedicated iso-cab? Something like this:

Use any 8", 10", or 12" speaker. Pop in an SM57 with an XLR connector output. Might work.

 

[JammerMatt]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

Interesting concept for sure.

 

[Marinblues]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

Instead of building a box that a cab fits into, why not just build a dedicated iso-cab? Something like this:

Use any 8", 10", or 12" speaker. Pop in an SM57 with an XLR connector output. Might work.

A local amp builder, called Cicognani makes this "Brutus Isobox" thing which is similar:

http://www.donatobegotti.com/products/brutus_isobox.asp

M.

 

[krankguitarist]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

The PODXT is a great unit. I would look at your soundcard as possibly the source of any recording woes. If it's a Soundblaster or anything like mine - it loses some of the mojo also - no matter what you're using at the front end.

I'm using an E-mu 1820m for my soundcard/interface right now. Here's a link:

http://www.emu.com/products/product.asp?product=9871

Been running it with fatso-flex cables on either end, with and without a buffer in front and an aphex guitar xciter afterwards...I dunno, I just cant get it *there*. For what I'm doing, its a great tool, but not an end-all-be-all answer.

Instead of building a box that a cab fits into, why not just build a dedicated iso-cab? Something like this:

Use any 8", 10", or 12" speaker. Pop in an SM57 with an XLR connector output. Might work.

I had considered building one of those...but...to be honest another reason why I'm not building an ISO box is because I'm pretty awful at woodworking. I don't quite have the tools for the job...and my skills are petty dull. It'd be worth it for me to save myself some of the hassle and buy one of these:

 

[JammerMatt]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

I'm using an E-mu 1820m for my soundcard/interface right now. Here's a link:

http://www.emu.com/products/product.asp?product=9871

Been running it with fatso-flex cables on either end, with and without a buffer in front and an aphex guitar xciter afterwards...I dunno, I just cant get it *there*. For what I'm doing, its a great tool, but not an end-all-be-all answer.

Sounds like you've got that covered.

 

[krankguitarist]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

Well, I pulled the trigger on one of the Randall ISO cabinets. The guys down at Sam Ash cut me a real good deal since they're not in stock at the moment. Hopefully It'll only be a couple of weeks before it gets here. But...we'll see.

I just wanna get some cool recordings done .

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

You could always get a single smaller, less efficient speaker for your amp . . . that alone would cut the volume down considerably.

 

[Markk]

Re: Lower-volume solutions for recording?

And you're mom never leaves the house?