Audacity for recording

[Nancy Edwards]

Does anyone have experience using the Audacity website program for recording? I’m wondering how long, ballpark figure, it takes to download? I know it depends on one’s internet speed and computer/laptop speed, but I just want a general idea if it takes 1+ hours or 10 minutes? Also, can the laptop’s built-in microphone be used, or is an external microphone necessary? Anything in particular I should know before deciding to download and try to use it?
Thank you for any info anyone can give me –
Nancy

[charles-nix]

I have used it a small amount–just to chop off beginning and end of recordings.

You don’t mention whether you’re on Windows, Linux, or Mac–but all the files are 30-80 MB total. On our company 100 Mbs fiber connection, that’s 3-8 seconds.

If you’re on dial-up (is anyone still on dial-up?) I calculate 1.7 hours.

It will depend entirely on your actual internet connection download speed. It is unlikely Audacity’s hosting servers will throttle any download.

[charles-nix]

Sorry, I missed the part about microphones. Recording a harp will never work right on the typical laptop mic. They won’t have the required bass frequency response.

If you want a halfway decent recording, you need a quality mic that will go to 40-50 Hz. You won’t be able to plug that into your mic input either, because the sound card preamps rarely would have enough gain, and they are usually not very good either.

There are some USB mics that I’ve heard work decently, but no personal experience here. You can also do pretty well with one of the Zoom recorders, which have the mics built in. (like Zoom H4n).

Or you can get a USB interface that will have preamps and and A/D convertor built in.

Ebay is your friend for finding decent recording equipment at roughly half-price.

[Katia]

With Audacity, you won’t be able to “monitor” through headphones as you record, unless you’re using a USB microphone with a built-in headphone jack. (Unless that has changed in the past few years.)

I admit I’m not a huge fan of Audacity… I just figure I get what I pay for, and it’s better than nothing. I’ve had at least 2-3 buggy installs, though.

[Nancy Edwards]

Hi Charles and Katia, thanks for the replies. Charles, the laptop I would use with Audacity has Windows 10. It sounds like Audacity might be a little dicey and possibly not necessarily worth the effort, with not very good sound quality. I’ll have to think about it before I have the program take up my computer space. Thanks again!

[charles-nix]

Keep in mind that Audacity is primarily an audio _editor_ not a recorder.

You don’t mention what you want the recordings for, or what quality they need to be.

No software will give you better quality than the microphone and pre-amps you use. The typical laptop has a mic and sound card driven by low price, for use with speech, not music. You will never get a good recording from that, no matter what software you use. But “good” can depend on what you want to use it for.

I would generally not recommend recording straight onto a laptop, but use a dedicated recorder. There are too many places where latency can cause an issue, and laptops are really fiddly to set up and use, especially on location compared with a recorder. If you have to use the laptop, then you need a good USB interface and standard mic, or at the least a good USB mic. With the USB mic, your quality is forever tied to how good the analog to digital conversion and subsequent encoding built within that mic is.

[Nancy Edwards]

Charles, thanks for the info that Audacity is primarily for editing, I didn’t know much about it. What I’m interested in is multi-track recording. I teach yoga and facilitate meditation classes, and I want to record 2 or 3, or more, instruments to mix together into one piece. These would include harp, cello, percussion, keyboard, recorder, guitar, etc. The pieces would be New Age/meditative/relaxation style, and after I would have a few pieces of music I would like to burn them to a CD that I would hand out to the people that take my classes for them to use at home with their personal practice. The sound quality just needs to be decent/listenable, I wouldn’t need professional quality. Do you have any suggestions for a recorder that would not be too difficult to use and not too expensive, about $300 or less?
Nancy

[charles-nix]

Zoom H4n pro. Just over $200. Can be set up as 4-track simultaneous or a stereo pair plus two other tracks.

Two of the channels have dedicated built-in condenser mics, which are plenty good enough for your purposes. Channels 3 and 4 take separate mic inputs. The controls to do settings are a little fiddly working through the menus, but the basic controls you use all the time (Stop, Play, Record, Pre-amp gain, etc.) have dedicated buttons. It _will_ supply 48VDC phantom power to the external mics. It mounts on a standard camera tripod with a 1/4-20 screw.

If you are talking about layering the recordings, where you record one track at a time by yourself while listening to the other tracks previously recorded, I won’t be able to tell you whether/how to do that. If you are going to record multiple tracks all at once, then it will work fine.

The H6, which is a step up, is a more professional recorder with six independent tracks and six mic inputs, and no built-in mics. Mics good enough to do what you want will probably run $50-100 each on the used market. You will also need a mic stand for each mic.

There are other brands as well. Zoom is just what I’m familiar with. If you’re not going to do this a lot, consider hiring a sound engineer who is familiar with this type of recording to make the recording. It might be more cost effective than getting equipment and learning to use it and learning to mix and edit.

[Nancy Edwards]

Charles, it sounds like “layering” is what I’m wanting to do, for example, for a harp and cello duet, record myself playing the harp part on one track and then record myself playing the cello part on a second track and putting them together as the one piece. Thanks for the info on the Zoom recorders, I will look into them! Thanks again.

[Jennifer Fournier]

Try Studio One. It’s a powerful music recording and editing software. I record audiobooks and don’t use 90% of the features that exist for musicians. The quality of your mic will be more influential in the quality of your recording than which DAW you use.

[dancingpiper]

This is interesting information. I just started training in Harp for Healing and need to record some material for my assignments. The voice recorder on my laptop doesn’t record harp well, understandably. It sounds as if Audacity might be the ticket. Are there any reasons it would NOT be a good choice for this purpose? I’m technologically challenged and welcome all input!! Blessings, all!!

[charles-nix]

Yes, there are lots of reasons why Audacity is NOT a good choice for you. You need to reread the information above.

Audacity is (primarily) an EDITOR (DAW, Digital Audio Workstation). It will record, certainly, but is unnecessarily complicated for that purpose and requires a laptop to run. It works on a digital sound file–but the digital file is created by the mic/sound card/A-D converter. If you send garbage in, you get garbage out.

Your problems with quality are almost certainly that laptop VOICE microphones, and VOICE sound cards, are not made for MUSIC. Instruments require a much larger frequency response range, and far more fidelity in recording. Even Audacity will NOT improve a recording made through a stock mic with a stock sound card (which supplies the A/D conversion).

No recording will EVER be better than the mic it starts with, so get the best you can afford/need. After the mic comes the A/D converter, which also needs to be good quality. The most economical choice will likely be a standalone mic/recorder combination like one of the Zoom units discussed above.

If you want a standalone mic only, you must either use (in order of increasing cost and quality): 1) a separate mic for your sound card FOR INSTRUMENTS, 2) a USB mic FOR INSTRUMENTS (freq response 30 Hz to 20KHz), 2) a standalone mic with a USB interface. Option 1 will only get some better quality–it still depends on the D/A converter in your sound card, which may or may not be sufficient.

Either option 2 or 3 will likely cost as much (near to over $200) as a Zoom recorder, but will still leave you tethered to having the laptop on and setup to record. The standalone recorder is much simpler to use and much more portable.

The lower Zoom units (H-1, H-2, H-3, and H-4 are reputed to have slightly less quality mics and pre-amps than their semi-pro models, which start with the H-4n Pro.

[dancingpiper]

Thanks for the recap of information!! I will consult with my techno brothers and get their recommendations. I do have a small recording device I’ve used in the past but it died an early death. Get what you pay for… Again, thanks!!

[Author]

Posts