Audacity - free recording programme

Discussion in 'Computer Corner' started by johnflugel, Dec 31, 2010.

  1. johnflugel

    johnflugel Active Member

    Can anyone give me opinions on the effectiveness of this programme to record rehearsals with their band?
  2. fretty

    fretty Member

    Audacity is a brilliant program. I don't use it to record external sound though, I use it to record internal sounds from youtube etc.

    I guess if you have a decent mic then it will record well but then again same goes for any recording software. Audacity lets you tweak the recording though in the way of amplification, pitch tempo etc (also perfect if you want your band to play backwards or if you want to invert the pitch at the click of a button :p).
  3. KMJ Recordings

    KMJ Recordings Supporting Member

    Audacity's fine, John.

    What you'll hear is more governed by the room, where you put your mics, what they are and the audio that order.
  4. Robin Norman

    Robin Norman Member

    Audacity as a program is fine John.

    The only problem I had was the situation with only getting a mono recording, might have been the settings but I just couldn't sort it. A decent audio interface would no doubt help though.

    I got round it in the end by buying a small handheld digital mp3 recorder, works brilliantly and not overly expensive.
  5. phildriscoll

    phildriscoll Moderator Staff Member

    If you need to record in mono in Audacity, details are here
    however, I'm sure that in general a stereo recording would be better for forensic work on a rehearsal. Audacity allows you to apply a large range of effects. If your rehearsal room has a fairly dry acoustic, you may be tempted to add some reverb to make things sound sweeter, however if the purpose of the recording is to identify and rectify faults and make improvements to your playing, leave the recording dry and you'll hear the sins more clearly :)
  6. MartinT

    MartinT Member

    I haven't used Audacity for live recording, but I have used it for transcribing an LP to CD. It works fine, gives you lots of control, both over the recording from LP and over the CD output.
  7. johnflugel

    johnflugel Active Member

    Thanks chaps!
  8. ploughboy

    ploughboy Active Member

    Likewise, I use it to record straight to my laptop via an M-Audio two input box and two matched AKG's. in the bandroom it captures a good impression of what actually happened (that's not always a good thing). Also we now use it to go straight to hard drive for GCSE and A Level performance recordings, makes burning the Cd's to send to examiners quicker when everything's already saved on the HD!
  9. Neillyboy

    Neillyboy Member

    Can I also suggest a free software download called kristal. In my opinion its better than audacity in the fact that its much quicker and simpler to set for recording and it also shows input levels. Not to mention that its multi track recording (as is audacity) function is good too especially if several recordings have been taken.

    Sorry, just throwin out a great alternative there too.
  10. phildriscoll

    phildriscoll Moderator Staff Member

    Just to be clear, kristal is only free as in 'you don't have to pay for it' if restricted to personal, educational and non-commercial use. Audacity is free in a much broader sense, as in 'freedom' - you can do what you will with it, including copy it, modify it and give it away, and the only essential restriction is that you must not remove that freedom if you pass it on to someone else. This is a much much better kind of 'free'! One great spinoff is that it has made it possible for external contributors to modify the software so that it works across all the major operating systems, Windows, Mac and GNU/Linux instead of just running on Windows as Kristal does.

    I've not used Kristal, and it may be that it is a simpler program to use, but Audacity seems to me to be very easy to set for recording, and the input and output level meters are shown in the meter toolbar.
  11. Neillyboy

    Neillyboy Member

    I wouldnt use either anyway, as I have protools with a 002 rack and several top end mics. If i location record, I take it back to my studio and mix and edit it, then master it before listening to the product.
    But for purposes of quick recordings, either kristal or audacity does the job.

    Kristal is easier to edit and mix as the layout is similar to protools in the fact there is a mix window and an edit window. But each to their own.

    Maybe im goin off topic here.