Secondary (back-up) recording of live gig.

[Vagodeoz]

So I realiced many of us do live recording of gigs.
I`m thinking about how to do a back-up recording with my gear (Tascam US-1641 and inserts from the mixer), and I started wondering how does people do their back-up recording, and I though it would be nice to make a poll.
So, tell us if you do a stero bounce, or multitrack bounce, or 1:1 back-up recording, and tell us what equipment you use for the secondary recording (and if you use a 3-way splitter or what).

[Remoteness]

IMHO, a back-up recorder should have the exact amount of tracks as the main recorder.

The back-up recorder should also be independent of the main recorder.
If the main recorder fails, it should not take down the back-up recorder.
It's not a back-up if that's the case.

Man, I have gone redundant with the preamps too.
You could never be too safe.

When you say, "stereo bounce," or "multi-track bounce" are you referring to bouncing the tracks after the live performance?

If so, that IS NOT a back-up.

We usually use the same exact recorders.
If we're recording with X48s, we bring two of them.
Same goes with our HD24XRs or DR680s.

[Vagodeoz]

Wow. That is great. I whish we all would have the resources to work like that
And by multitrack bounce i meant for example using an 8 track recorder with 2 tracks for the drums (from the mixer`s submaster) and so forth.
Since I can barely afford one low end rig, I need to find another way to back-up. A cheap one, if possible with gear I already have.
So far my best option is my netbook with a 2 channel USB interface. One ambience mike and one mono out from the PA mixer. (If I`m lucky and I have enough time, I could use an aux send to make my own balance of instruments, since I almost always record small/mid gigs (max 1000 people). I know it`s far from ideal, but my other option is using my Tascam 414 mkII and a sh*tload of tapes, to record 4 tracks.
I was planning on buying a Zoom h4n so I could record a stereo amb and a stereo mix from the PA mixer, but I decided I better spend that money on a better primary recording rig.
By the way Remoteness, you use 3 way splitters? One for FOH, and one for each recording rig?

[RobAnderson]

When I am guaranteeing a multitrack recording, then I do a 1:1 backup splitting at the pre's or converters.

In some cases, when I am only guaranteeing a 2-TR recording, I sometimes bring a multitrack backup, but at the very least I have a redundant 2-TR machine.

[Tommy-boy]

For the events I record I usually have btw 2 - 4 mics (simple classical stuff). I usually have a netbook and external USB interface backing up 2 inputs. Use a splitter and take the transformer feed to the netbook.

This was not my first choice, but I already had the netbook and the interface. I use cubase as my DAW so it was easy to just install on the netbook and then take my dongle with me. Never leave home without your dongle!

-Tom

[audibell]

Hi.
Rather than use a 10-ish year old analog cassette tape deck, have you considered getting a 10-ish year old SVHS tape ADAT with 8 input channels? There are working ones listed at ebay ("adat 8 track") now from $20 to $100. You still need to take a feed from your/someone else's preamps.

A secondary backup, 2trk or multi-track, nearly always has to obtain a pair of signals from a source that is totally independent of the first recorder. So, if the mic preamps are part of the first recorder's (US-1641) interface, that usually won't pass signal when the netbook is re-booting. Always use an (office depot) UPS.

If you have access to the back of the external preamps, just use a $10 "Y" cable at each channel's output -> line level input to the ADAT. If you use Whirlwind 2way/3way splitters right after the mics, to control your own preamps, give the house the direct out and keep the isolated outs for you.
Tell us what you did.
regds,
WalterT

[Vagodeoz]

Even if the ADATs are 20 bucks in ebay, I live in Bolivia (South America) and having them shipped here would cost me 100 or 150 $ at minium.
For the stereo amb mics I will use a DMP3, so I can just split one of the signals and send a copy to the secondary interface.
And seeing how much people here strongly recommend a 1:1 backup recording, I think I just decided what my future rig will be.
My tascam will remain recording 16 tracks, and when it comes out I will buy the Behringer UFX1604 mixer, which you can use to record 16 tracks on a usb stick or hard drive. No computer required.
I have a question about the Y cables. It might be dumb but I don`t remember my ohmns and resistance classes.
A "Y" cables is a cable with 3 connectors of the same type right? (Plug or XLR), which splits one signal into two. That is made just hardwiring the connectors inside right?
And if that is the case, then it shouldn`t matter which of the 3 connectors I use for output and which ones for input right? (Considering for example that all 3 connectors are 1/4" Male).
I ask this becouse I don`t use preamps for my recordings. I take the lines from the mixer using inserts or direct outs. And I was wondering if it would be possible to make a "Y" snake. On one end it will have the connections to the mixer outs, and on the other end and in the middle it will have the connections for the primary and secondary recording rigs.

As for splitters, I have decided I won`t buy and use them since a) They are a lot of money, especially delivered to Bolivia. and b) Most gigs I record are small gigs and festivals. Nothing more than 2000 people at most. Usually between 200 and 500. Anything bigger than that is an international artits, therefore probably not interested in doing a live CD in bolivia..
Also most of this gigs have very poor equipment and connectionsm, and I`m sure that if I pass the PA lines through my gear (I wanted to buy 2 x ART 8 channel splitters), and something goes wrong with the PA (which happens almost every concert I record), I will be the one to blame by the PA staff and therefore the organization.
Last gig I recorded they were using a Behringer mixer and it burned out in the middle of the festival :-S and they had to bring another one to continue with the other bands. Problems like that can be easily blamed on me, and can be more difficult to isolate/detect with a setup like that.
I think I have come to the conclussion that having splitter-snakes is the most pro way to do it. So pro that it would be difficult to make it work with the non-pro gigs I usually record. I think the best thing for me (at least for a couple of years) is to use the inserts, since most mixers I have worked with either don`t have direct outs, or have post-fader direct outs.
It happened to me that I was recording a gig and a band used a compressor on the bass, so I kindly removed my insert cable, they connected theirs, and I used the direct output instead.
The first song the engineer wanted to get the sound right on the drums so he kept the fader down, and therefore I got no signal from the bass on the first song...
What I have been doing in those cases, is that most compressors have dual outputs (1/4" and XLR), so the insert "Y" cable uses the 1/4" output and I use the XLR output.
What I still have to figure out is what to do with non dual outputs compressors.
The last gig I asked the PA engineer not to use a compressor, becouse I wasn`t going to be able to record it, since it didn`t had dual outputs, the mixer had no direct outputs, or free aux sends, or free submasters...
Luckily he is my buddy so it was fine, but I would like to find a solution for that in the future.
Maybe a single "Y" splitter cable would do the trick...

[Petrus]

Usually Orpheus running 2-6 channels to laptop, then SD722 with separate mics like DPA4060* as backup. Or vice versa. Never had any hicups so far.

*) there is usually an AB pair to Orpheus, so I just tape the DPAs to the same mic holders: practically identical backup.

[philper]

My answer is all of the above, depending on client budget. I can't give them twice as much recording gear for the price of a single setup. I have a discussion about what this gig worth to them and what my experience has been with failures and smaller problems, and we decide together what can be done for the money available.

phil p

[Vagodeoz]

Thanks a lot philiper! What you just said is great.
Actually it`s kinda what I do when it comes to budget.
I always use the same gear (It`s a tascam US-1641 with a laptop so there really isn`t much of a choice here), but I like to get to know about the concert before I even throw a number.
There are some great recordings that even if they pay you only enough to cover your costs, they are worth doing becouse of the status it gives your mobile studio.
But nice work philosophy :-)
I will keep that in mind.

[d_fu]

I used to do stereo bounces to DAT...

I now use a standalone hard drive recorder, either Fostex D-160 or VR800 (16 and 8 channels, respectively).

Both only do 16 bit (a compromise I will live with on live recordings), and the VR800 will only do 44k. But it's a small practical device otherwise (see pic).

If I need more or want both recordings at 24 bit, I use a second laptop.

D.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

IMHO, a back-up recorder should have the exact amount of tracks as the main recorder.

The back-up recorder should also be independent of the main recorder.
If the main recorder fails, it should not take down the back-up recorder.
It's not a back-up if that's the case.

Man, I have gone redundant with the preamps too.
You could never be too safe.

When you say, "stereo bounce," or "multi-track bounce" are you referring to bouncing the tracks after the live performance?

If so, that IS NOT a back-up.

I agree with Steve.

A back-up is a separate set of mics through a complete second chain into a second recorder.

So - there was no option to vote this in your poll.

I record on HDD backed up to CF on the main recorder with the same number of tracks.

I will often have a second set of mics to a second recorder.

Sometimes I split the mics and record on two recorders.

It depends on the project and what is required.

A recent project with stereo digital mics. - I split the AES3 - one recorded at 24/88.2 and the split output sample rate converted to 16/44.1 and recorded on DAT.

There was also a totally separate analogue system recorded to 24/8.2 to a second flash recorder.

You can see the set-up below (this was just before I upgraded to the Nagra VI and was using Fostes FR-2s as bit-buckets):-

[David Spearritt]

Originally Posted by John Willett

A back-up is a separate set of mics through a complete second chain into a second recorder.

It's all about managing risk. I think the option above is crazy because the risk of quality mics going down is vanishingly small, so this is overspending on the problem. As one proceeds down the chain towards the HDD, the risks increase. Where one splits the signal to the backup device is where the risk gets worthy of mitigation.

Where does everyone split to backup in live recordings, this is an interesting question?

For expensive gigs, we split after the mic pres into a mixer that feeds two recording systems, so mitigating A/D and recorder failure. For routine live radio work we split inside one recorder and feed a second, ie HDD failure.

Compromise based on risk assessment seems the sensible approach.

[0VU]

Originally Posted by John Willett

A back-up is a separate set of mics through a complete second chain into a second recorder.

That level of backup is fine if you only use a couple of mics (or some other small/simple setup) and are working on closed sessions rather than live public concerts. Try it on something larger where using 40, 60, 100+ mics has more serious space and visual considerations (not to mention serious rigging time implications when doubling everything in a rig that size), or in small, intimate chamber music/recital concerts where every mic you want to place leads to delicate negotiations over size, colour and position vs. sight lines and visual obtrusiveness and see how far you get.

Sometimes a complete double mic rig might be an option but ime not often. Doubling up on key solo spot mics or presenter mics is pretty normal though. On multitrack recordings, splitting either before or after the preamps is pretty normal (the latter being perhaps more usual) and on stereo work either splitting a mix to multiple machines/converters or taking the output of a stereo converter to multiple machines are both normal practice. That said, I've done jobs using over 100 mics which split on stage (at mic level) to three separate OB/recording trucks each handling a full mix with multitrack and stem mix/stereo/surround recordings. It's a lot of work! I guess a lot comes down to budgets and perceived importance of the job. Usually I try to split multitrack records before or after the preamps and stereo jobs normally via buffered AES/EBU distribution amps on the outputs of the converters or, occasionally, via splitting the outputs of the mixer to separate converters. The last time I linked a pair of recorders in series (digital out to digital in - second machine clocking from its digital input) - on the basis that the most likely failure is media, something went wrong in the first machine (wildly guessing at some kind of clocking problem) which caused it to stop recording followed about half a second later by the second machine. That'll teach me to be lazy! (Luckily the stero mix/broadcast path was separate and carried on unaffected.)

As David says above "Compromise based on risk assessment seems the sensible approach."

You can see the set-up below (this was just before I upgraded to the Nagra VI and was using Fostes FR-2s as bit-buckets)

I was under the impression that you did this because you were testing the new digital mics, and decided to do it as a separate parallel recording because you didn't want to rely upon them instead of your trusty MKH rig.

[Vagodeoz]

Agree with you David. You said it in two words: "Risk Management".
I also think that dual everything (including mikes) is waaay too much, so much that it didn`t even cross my mind that some people would do that :-S that is why I didn`t even put it as an option (sorry about that).
But I don`t agree with what you do, that the first recorder feeds the signals to the second.
The idea of having dual back-ups is that if something goes wrong with one, the other one still works.
HDD failure is one of many things that can go wrong.
Ideally if one of the recorder lights on fire during the show, the other one should still get the lines.
I think I would rather have "Y" splitters hard wired to feed both recorders.
I know it`s easier said that done. I don`t use that technique (I don`t even do back-up recordings, but I`m working on how to do a 1:1 backup recording with my gear).

[Foldedpath]

The general rule here is that I trust analog more than digital. I carry extra mics and have redundant outboard preamps, so I can always swap things around if something doesn't work, when I first plug it in at the gig. Once it's plugged in and working, I don't worry about it.

On the digital side, I'm more paranoid. I feel more comfortable not having all my eggs in one A/D converter basket. So I use outboard preamps and split there, feeding two different recorders with their own A/D (currently a DR-680 and a laptop through a Fireface). I'm thinking about ditching the laptop and just using two DR-680's so it's more of a 1:1 mirror, and to make the rig more compact. But maybe there's an advantage in having the backup being on different media... I'm still trying to think that one through.

If I did really high-profile jobs, I'd have more redundant backups. It wouldn't make sense for the small-town stuff I'm involved in. Trusting the analog side, and doubling the digital side, is enough for me.

[Rick Sutton]

I split after the preamps to two 8 channel recorders. I also carry extra mics , preamps, small mixers etc, but the main redundancy is always in the separate recorders.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by David Spearritt

It's all about managing risk. I think the option above is crazy because the risk of quality mics going down is vanishingly small, so this is overspending on the problem.

It all depends on the importance of the project, the number of mics used (I had the others anyway) and time available.

Originally Posted by 0VU

That level of backup is fine if you only use a couple of mics (or some other small/simple setup) and are working on closed sessions rather than live public concerts. Try it on something larger where using 40, 60, 100+ mics has more serious space and visual considerations (not to mention serious rigging time implications when doubling everything in a rig that size), or in small, intimate chamber music/recital concerts where every mic you want to place leads to delicate negotiations over size, colour and position vs. sight lines and visual obtrusiveness and see how far you get. ----- <snip> ----- I was under the impression that you did this because you were testing the new digital mics, and decided to do it as a separate parallel recording because you didn't want to rely upon them instead of your trusty MKH rig.

Yes, that was the very first outing of the KM-D and it was prudent to have a complete separate rig.

But on a recent one I ran a complete separate back-up rig - but again it was solo piano with a couple of mics and easy to do.

On more complicated stuff I recorded on the Nagra VI's HDD and back up to CF - but I will have other stuff available to re-plug if it's a session.

If a live recording I would probably run a parallel main pair as safety, so that at the very least I will have this.

Although I have quite a few mics., I do tend to like to use as few as possible.

[MSD160]

How much recording time do you get out of a D160? Are they still worth picking up for live back-up at events?

[Savagery]

I use a Dell Laptop running SONAR, hooked up via firewire to a Presonus Firestudio + Digimax(s). As a backup, I have an HD24 running from the analog outputs of the FS/Digimax. I made 6 8channel DB25 -> TRS snakes, 3 hardwired in each rack, terminating in 3 DB25 connectors in a rack plate mounted to the back. So, I just connect the straight through DB25 cables from the interface rack to the backup rack, and I'm good to go.

The nice thing about analog from the Presonus units, is that the computer doesn't affect them if it crashes. I have tried crashing SONAR, pulling the firewire cable, restarting the computer, pulling the battery and unplugging... not even a click or pop in the analog to the HD24. Short of turning off an interface (in which case only 8 channels at a time are lost), I'm safe. I can live with that amount of backup.

Also, in the HD24 rack, I have a 1U Tripp-Lite UPS, which I plug everything into. Everything gets tested on a regular basis, and I feel pretty confident... my fingers are permanently crossed

IMO dual micing is pushing the limits of both sanity and practicality. I will dual mic the President, but that's as far as it goes.

[hbphotoav]

PreSonus StudioLive 24.4.2 here. FW out through PreSonus Capture to HDD; analog out (3xDB25->TRS) to a HD24; 2-mix analog out (RCAs) to Edirol R09HR.

On classical gigs, I'll often track different mics through the Ensemble, the Mackie 1220 or 1640, or the PreSonus, as a comparison/backup. Same split to the HD24 (TRS out of the channel insert jacks on the Mackies).

And, I'll sometimes run a SPDIF to a Tascam CD recorder or analog to a Edirol R09HR as a quick 2-mix, which is often what the client wants for immediate feedback re: the performance. Everything I do is live capture of events... no session work.

HB

[thedoner]

Originally Posted by 0VU

That level of backup is fine if you only use a couple of mics (or some other small/simple setup) and are working on closed sessions rather than live public concerts. Try it on something larger where using 40, 60, 100+ mics has more serious space and visual considerations (not to mention serious rigging time implications when doubling everything in a rig that size), or in small, intimate chamber music/recital concerts where every mic you want to place leads to delicate negotiations over size, colour and position vs. sight lines and visual obtrusiveness and see how far you get.

Sometimes a complete double mic rig might be an option but ime not often. Doubling up on key solo spot mics or presenter mics is pretty normal though. On multitrack recordings, splitting either before or after the preamps is pretty normal (the latter being perhaps more usual) and on stereo work either splitting a mix to multiple machines/converters or taking the output of a stereo converter to multiple machines are both normal practice. That said, I've done jobs using over 100 mics which split on stage (at mic level) to three separate OB/recording trucks each handling a full mix with multitrack and stem mix/stereo/surround recordings. It's a lot of work! I guess a lot comes down to budgets and perceived importance of the job. Usually I try to split multitrack records before or after the preamps and stereo jobs normally via buffered AES/EBU distribution amps on the outputs of the converters or, occasionally, via splitting the outputs of the mixer to separate converters. The last time I linked a pair of recorders in series (digital out to digital in - second machine clocking from its digital input) - on the basis that the most likely failure is media, something went wrong in the first machine (wildly guessing at some kind of clocking problem) which caused it to stop recording followed about half a second later by the second machine. That'll teach me to be lazy! (Luckily the stero mix/broadcast path was separate and carried on unaffected.)

As David says above "Compromise based on risk assessment seems the sensible approach."



I was under the impression that you did this because you were testing the new digital mics, and decided to do it as a separate parallel recording because you didn't want to rely upon them instead of your trusty MKH rig.

Agreed. Multiple sets of mics on a medium to large multitrack remote gig is not realistic, but maximizing "risk management" certainly is.
I do 24ch of Presonus Dmax 96. Analog outs to PTHD, digi outs to HD24. Everything on UPS. Works like a charm.

[leddy]

Mics do fail on occaision.

I recorded in a room once where there had been a water leak and the carpet was still damp. The resulting humidity caused one of my mics to die. It worked once I got it out of there.

At another gig, I had one mic that was really picking up RF interference.

I know there are mic choices that mitigate these issues too, but it's a good reminder to consider these things.