Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
It is PCIe, or USB, or lastly firewire. It has at least four excellent
very low noise universal input preamps, and at least four outputs. It doesn't make the mistake of having a lame 'mix' knob that is supposed to balance line input monitoring and DAW output - it has separate knobs for each, or better, has no knobs and relies on software for all of this. It costs around $300 - $350. Where is it? Thanks, Tobiah |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Oh, alternatively, no preamps at all, and I'll use the
inserts on a 1402VLZ Pro. On 05/21/2014 10:56 AM, Tobiah wrote: It is PCIe, or USB, or lastly firewire. It has at least four excellent very low noise universal input preamps, and at least four outputs. It doesn't make the mistake of having a lame 'mix' knob that is supposed to balance line input monitoring and DAW output - it has separate knobs for each, or better, has no knobs and relies on software for all of this. It costs around $300 - $350. Where is it? Thanks, Tobiah |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On Wed, 21 May 2014 12:55:15 -0700, Tobiah wrote:
Oh, alternatively, no preamps at all, and I'll use the inserts on a 1402VLZ Pro. On 05/21/2014 10:56 AM, Tobiah wrote: It is PCIe, or USB, or lastly firewire. It has at least four excellent very low noise universal input preamps, and at least four outputs. It doesn't make the mistake of having a lame 'mix' knob that is supposed to balance line input monitoring and DAW output - it has separate knobs for each, or better, has no knobs and relies on software for all of this. It costs around $300 - $350. Where is it? Thanks, Tobiah You are not alone. I recently tried to upgrade my old laptop to 24/96 or 24/192, and did not find a suitable solution. I am still using an M-Audio Transit, which supports 24/48 in both directions, but 24/96 for input OR output, but not both (I think due to limitations of its USB 1.1-only operation). So I'm stuck at 24/48. All I want is hi-def, full duplex, with 1/4" phone jacks for each channel. I don't want any knobs, buttons, "blinkin lights", or anything extra. I just need it to accept the line-level outputs from my mixer and convert it to digital for the computer. I keep thinking, "How hard is this for them to do? Why are their no products?" I tried a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2, and the drivers failed to install. I learned that their technical support to the US market is crap, and I won't try any of their products again for a while. After that I searched again and learned about a couple of new USB audio interfaces from Tascam (US-322 and US-366) but it seems the drivers are not mature yet. Both produts are too complicated with too many knobs, but maybe later I'll reconsider. That's as far as I got; the old laptop is not worth spending a lot of money on. |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
oops ... a couple minor corrections of my post:
On Thu, 22 May 2014 08:15:23 +0000, I, Jay Ts wrote: I just need it to accept the line-level outputs from my mixer and convert it to digital for the computer. and of course handle D/A to get analog out of the thing. I keep thinking, "How hard is this for them to do? Why are their no products?" there* |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Jay Ts wrote:
On Wed, 21 May 2014 12:55:15 -0700, Tobiah wrote: Oh, alternatively, no preamps at all, and I'll use the inserts on a 1402VLZ Pro. On 05/21/2014 10:56 AM, Tobiah wrote: It is PCIe, or USB, or lastly firewire. It has at least four excellent very low noise universal input preamps, and at least four outputs. It doesn't make the mistake of having a lame 'mix' knob that is supposed to balance line input monitoring and DAW output - it has separate knobs for each, or better, has no knobs and relies on software for all of this. It costs around $300 - $350. Where is it? Thanks, Tobiah You are not alone. I recently tried to upgrade my old laptop to 24/96 or 24/192, and did not find a suitable solution. I am still using an M-Audio Transit, which supports 24/48 in both directions, but 24/96 for input OR output, but not both (I think due to limitations of its USB 1.1-only operation). So I'm stuck at 24/48. All I want is hi-def, full duplex, with 1/4" phone jacks for each channel. I don't want any knobs, buttons, "blinkin lights", or anything extra. I just need it to accept the line-level outputs from my mixer and convert it to digital for the computer. I keep thinking, "How hard is this for them to do? Why are their no products?" Because y'all want it too cheap, and your perceived needs don't include some basic features in which most of the market at that level is interested. I tried a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2, and the drivers failed to install. I learned that their technical support to the US market is crap, and I won't try any of their products again for a while. After that I searched again and learned about a couple of new USB audio interfaces from Tascam (US-322 and US-366) but it seems the drivers are not mature yet. Both produts are too complicated with too many knobs, but maybe later I'll reconsider. That's as far as I got; the old laptop is not worth spending a lot of money on. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On Thu, 22 May 2014 10:15:34 -0700, hank alrich wrote:
Because y'all want it too cheap, and your perceived needs don't include some basic features in which most of the market at that level is interested. Well, some of us need just a very simple but good interface. It is a relatively simple design to put a hi-def codec in a box with a USB interface on one side and 4 audio jacks on the other. Nowadays, there is no shortage of decent codecs to use: http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/co...ml#PA157_stDiv I think the M-Audio Transit originally sold for about $100, and I'm willing to pay more than that for an upgrade. I guess it's unfortunate that "simple" doesn't make so much money for the manufacturers. |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Scott Dorsey wrote:
hank alrich wrote: All I want is hi-def, full duplex, with 1/4" phone jacks for each channel. I don't want any knobs, buttons, "blinkin lights", or anything extra. I just need it to accept the line-level outputs from my mixer and convert it to digital for the computer. I keep thinking, "How hard is this for them to do? Why are their no products?" Because y'all want it too cheap, and your perceived needs don't include some basic features in which most of the market at that level is interested. You stick a MADI card in the machine, you get yourself a nice A/D with a MADI interface from any place from Weiss on the high end to RME on the low end, and you go. No, it's not cheap... but it will last you a long time and when the computer standards all change you get a MADI card for whatever the next thing that comes along is. And, although the hardware is very expensive compared with the low end consumer stuff, it's still extremely cheap considering how it sounds and considering what comparable hardware would have cost you a decade ago. --scott Well said. Hell, my MIO is so nicely amortized now, and looks to run as long as I do. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Jay Ts wrote:
On Thu, 22 May 2014 10:15:34 -0700, hank alrich wrote: Because y'all want it too cheap, and your perceived needs don't include some basic features in which most of the market at that level is interested. Well, some of us need just a very simple but good interface. It is a relatively simple design to put a hi-def codec in a box with a USB interface on one side and 4 audio jacks on the other. Nowadays, there is no shortage of decent codecs to use: http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/co...ml#PA157_stDiv I think the M-Audio Transit originally sold for about $100, and I'm willing to pay more than that for an upgrade. I guess it's unfortunate that "simple" doesn't make so much money for the manufacturers. There is some very simple stuff that also happens to be very good or even excellent. But it's built for those who are serious enough about audio quality not to be shopping on price primarily. My Metric Halo 2882 has no knobs, and a few little buttons, with no display other than metering. It is dead simple in layout and "features". It sounds excellent, interfaces pretty well with a range of sources, is reliable under road conditions, and versatile. It was neither cheap nor exhorbitantly expensive. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
"hank alrich" wrote in message
... Jay Ts wrote: On Thu, 22 May 2014 10:15:34 -0700, hank alrich wrote: Because y'all want it too cheap, and your perceived needs don't include some basic features in which most of the market at that level is interested. Well, some of us need just a very simple but good interface. It is a relatively simple design to put a hi-def codec in a box with a USB interface on one side and 4 audio jacks on the other. Nowadays, there is no shortage of decent codecs to use: http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/co...ml#PA157_stDiv I think the M-Audio Transit originally sold for about $100, and I'm willing to pay more than that for an upgrade. I guess it's unfortunate that "simple" doesn't make so much money for the manufacturers. There is some very simple stuff that also happens to be very good or even excellent. But it's built for those who are serious enough about audio quality not to be shopping on price primarily. My Metric Halo 2882 has no knobs, and a few little buttons, with no display other than metering. It is dead simple in layout and "features". It sounds excellent, interfaces pretty well with a range of sources, is reliable under road conditions, and versatile. It was neither cheap nor exhorbitantly expensive. There's a lot of choices in that price range that will work and sound just fine. The big hurdle is finding one where you can get the drivers installed and running properly, and that varies a lot between companies. I haven't had a chance to play with many of these recently, but my past experience was that Echo and M-Audio seemed to value the PC market enough to make sure their installers worked on most version of Windows. Mike covers this in his reviews - so take a look the http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com/product-reviews/ Sean |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On 5/22/2014 10:32 PM, Sean Conolly wrote:
There's a lot of choices in that price range that will work and sound just fine. The big hurdle is finding one where you can get the drivers installed and running properly, and that varies a lot between companies. Drivers were an iffy thing early on, but many companies, particularly those who make lower cost interfaces, are using drivers written by just a couple of software developers who work with the most common chips. Also, Windows seems to have settled down, as has the Apple Core Audio which, apparently, is a good enough standard, as is the computer hardware, so that people can write for it and be reasonably sure that it'll work. The thing about price range, as I believe Hank pointed out, is that when it comes to the number of devices that must be built and sold in order to meet what the marketing department determines to be the competitive price, means that the features that most potential customers want, or think they want, or features included in competing products. It doesn't save money to make a version with some parts or features left out when you know that you aren't going to sell truckloads of them. There's nothing wrong with having a mic preamp that you aren't going to use. It's better, if you don't need the mic preamp, to get a higher quality interface without one, at a commensurately higher price - if you actually need the better quality. But you won't get a less expensive version of a modestly priced interface without a preamp. Below a certain selling price, it's simply not worth designing, documenting, and marketing. -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Mike Rivers wrote:
On 5/22/2014 10:32 PM, Sean Conolly wrote: There's a lot of choices in that price range that will work and sound just fine. The big hurdle is finding one where you can get the drivers installed and running properly, and that varies a lot between companies. Drivers were an iffy thing early on, but many companies, particularly those who make lower cost interfaces, are using drivers written by just a couple of software developers who work with the most common chips. Also, Windows seems to have settled down, as has the Apple Core Audio which, apparently, is a good enough standard, as is the computer hardware, so that people can write for it and be reasonably sure that it'll work. The thing about price range, as I believe Hank pointed out, is that when it comes to the number of devices that must be built and sold in order to meet what the marketing department determines to be the competitive price, means that the features that most potential customers want, or think they want, or features included in competing products. It doesn't save money to make a version with some parts or features left out when you know that you aren't going to sell truckloads of them. Given that packaging and powering represent about the same cost for the goody with eight I/O's as for the one with four ins/outs, and that meeting regulatory requirements for powering, EM and RF emissions, and the rest of the design and development stages will, too, it's tough for any company to meet niche demands near the bottom of the price ladder. There's nothing wrong with having a mic preamp that you aren't going to use. It's better, if you don't need the mic preamp, to get a higher quality interface without one, at a commensurately higher price - if you actually need the better quality. But you won't get a less expensive version of a modestly priced interface without a preamp. Below a certain selling price, it's simply not worth designing, documenting, and marketing. Especially when the modern inexpensive solid-state preamp is essentially the line amp with a different gain setting. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Tobiah wrote:
It is PCIe, or USB, or lastly firewire. It has at least four excellent very low noise universal input preamps, and at least four outputs. It doesn't make the mistake of having a lame 'mix' knob that is supposed to balance line input monitoring and DAW output - it has separate knobs for each, or better, has no knobs and relies on software for all of this. It costs around $300 - $350. Where is it? Thanks, Tobiah Why does a Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 not do what you want? It's $250 street. -- Les Cargill |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
hank alrich wrote:
Jay Ts wrote: On Wed, 21 May 2014 12:55:15 -0700, Tobiah wrote: Oh, alternatively, no preamps at all, and I'll use the inserts on a 1402VLZ Pro. On 05/21/2014 10:56 AM, Tobiah wrote: It is PCIe, or USB, or lastly firewire. It has at least four excellent very low noise universal input preamps, and at least four outputs. It doesn't make the mistake of having a lame 'mix' knob that is supposed to balance line input monitoring and DAW output - it has separate knobs for each, or better, has no knobs and relies on software for all of this. It costs around $300 - $350. Where is it? Thanks, Tobiah You are not alone. I recently tried to upgrade my old laptop to 24/96 or 24/192, and did not find a suitable solution. I am still using an M-Audio Transit, which supports 24/48 in both directions, but 24/96 for input OR output, but not both (I think due to limitations of its USB 1.1-only operation). So I'm stuck at 24/48. All I want is hi-def, full duplex, with 1/4" phone jacks for each channel. I don't want any knobs, buttons, "blinkin lights", or anything extra. I just need it to accept the line-level outputs from my mixer and convert it to digital for the computer. I keep thinking, "How hard is this for them to do? Why are their no products?" Because y'all want it too cheap, and your perceived needs don't include some basic features in which most of the market at that level is interested. I want it way too cheap, and they have what I want. Life is good. I tried a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2, and the drivers failed to install. I learned that their technical support to the US market is crap, and I won't try any of their products again for a while. After that I searched again and learned about a couple of new USB audio interfaces from Tascam (US-322 and US-366) but it seems the drivers are not mature yet. Both produts are too complicated with too many knobs, but maybe later I'll reconsider. That's as far as I got; the old laptop is not worth spending a lot of money on. -- Les Cargill |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Jay Ts wrote:
On Wed, 21 May 2014 12:55:15 -0700, Tobiah wrote: snip I tried a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2, and the drivers failed to install. I learned that their technical support to the US market is crap, and I won't try any of their products again for a while. So why did the drivers fail to install? 64 vs 32 bit issues? WinXP vs. Win7? I have a Scarlett 18i20 and it works *just great*. I use it with Reaper for my cue mix here at home on a $400 Win7 desktop from 2011. The only real annoyance is that I have to log out and log back in to get Windows to clean itself when I start tracking. But I run this thing as an Internet computer and all that. It doesn't work 100% with crufty old n-Track 3.0 but I live with that. No, their support didn't help with that but if I wanted things to work I could upgrade n-Track or just use Reaper. As it says in the book "The Stand" - the world moved on. snip That's as far as I got; the old laptop is not worth spending a lot of money on. Ach. That's not getting any better If you can prize loose $1k for a laptop these days, they're very good if you buy the right one. I use a very nice 8-core Toshiba at work and it screams. -- Les Cargill |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
"Les Cargill" wrote in message
... I have a Scarlett 18i20 and it works *just great*. I use it with Reaper for my cue mix here at home on a $400 Win7 desktop from 2011. I think that's where I'm headed for my laptop. That and a little Behringer ADA8000 will give me plenty of mic and line inputs for recording a jam or a gig without too much hassle. But the built-in recorder for the A&H QU-16 is soooo tempting, and it comes with a great digital mixer :-) Sean |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On 5/21/2014 1:56 PM, Tobiah wrote:
It is PCIe, or USB, or lastly firewire. It has at least four excellent very low noise universal input preamps, and at least four outputs. It doesn't make the mistake of having a lame 'mix' knob that is supposed to balance line input monitoring and DAW output - it has separate knobs for each, or better, has no knobs and relies on software for all of this. It costs around $300 - $350. Where is it? Thanks, Tobiah Any one look at the Steinberg UR44? Don't think it has the mix knob like the UR22. A friend of mine keeps telling me she does not like the sound of Yamaha pre-amps, used in the Steinberg product. (Prefers Soundcraft and Motu to Yamaha). Danielle |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Sean Conolly:
But the built-in recorder for the A&H QU-16 is soooo tempting, and it comes with a great digital mixer :-) .... and it gives you the option of having recorded a noise stream instead of the gig! ;-) Happened to some friends of mine a few months ago with a rented QU16. A&H seems to have revised the firmware a few times. No, I do *not* know, which version did not record properly in this particular, sorry... Fortunately, it wasn´t important to have a recording of the gig. Rather for self-control by the band afterwards. Besides that, I found, that the QU-16 is almost unusable in dark live mix situations. The buttons are *not* backlit and the LEDs above/under them are so bright, that one can´t see anything clearly in a radius of ca. 3 cm around them. :-\ You definitely need a small lamp... On the paper, it´s a nice feature-packed mixer, but in the reality "out there", it has too many small bugs. |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Sean Conolly wrote:
"Les Cargill" wrote in message ... I have a Scarlett 18i20 and it works *just great*. I use it with Reaper for my cue mix here at home on a $400 Win7 desktop from 2011. I think that's where I'm headed for my laptop. That and a little Behringer ADA8000 will give me plenty of mic and line inputs for recording a jam or a gig without too much hassle. But the built-in recorder for the A&H QU-16 is soooo tempting, and it comes with a great digital mixer :-) Sean Looks great. I looked very seriously at the ZED-R16 but it took up too much space, as compact as it was. In very few square feet, I have a lot of instruments; having the mixer be on the computer saves me ten or so sq. feet. I'm not running a studio-as-a-business. The Scarlett also means I can have two RU plus laptop worth of recording gear to do live remote recording, not that that has any interest. -- Les Cargill |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On 5/24/2014 7:46 AM, DanielleOM wrote:
Any one look at the Steinberg UR44? Don't think it has the mix knob like the UR22. A friend of mine keeps telling me she does not like the sound of Yamaha pre-amps, used in the Steinberg product. (Prefers Soundcraft and Motu to Yamaha). How does your friend know that the problem is with the preamps? Is she setting the gain properly? -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On 24/05/2014 11:46 p.m., DanielleOM wrote:
On 5/21/2014 1:56 PM, Tobiah wrote: It is PCIe, or USB, or lastly firewire. It has at least four excellent very low noise universal input preamps, and at least four outputs. It doesn't make the mistake of having a lame 'mix' knob that is supposed to balance line input monitoring and DAW output - it has separate knobs for each, or better, has no knobs and relies on software for all of this. It costs around $300 - $350. Where is it? Thanks, Tobiah Any one look at the Steinberg UR44? Don't think it has the mix knob like the UR22. A friend of mine keeps telling me she does not like the sound of Yamaha pre-amps, used in the Steinberg product. (Prefers Soundcraft and Motu to Yamaha). Danielle Might be phsycological .... geoff |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On 5/24/2014 6:04 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 5/24/2014 7:46 AM, DanielleOM wrote: Any one look at the Steinberg UR44? Don't think it has the mix knob like the UR22. A friend of mine keeps telling me she does not like the sound of Yamaha pre-amps, used in the Steinberg product. (Prefers Soundcraft and Motu to Yamaha). How does your friend know that the problem is with the preamps? Is she setting the gain properly? I know she has used a lot of equipment over the past 20 years in both live sound and recording situations. I know she likes the Motu preamps and the preamps Soundcraft uses in their mixing boards. She has a quite of variety of microphones, including the ones I own. :-) For a while she had one of the Grace audio preamps to use. I have no doubt that she knows how to set a gain properly. I think her comments come from experience with Yamaha live sound mixing boards. (not the low cost MG series). I have to wonder if those preamps have a similar tonal character / response as the ones that Steinberg/Yamaha used in the UR44. Actually I am thinking perhaps a lot of this is personal preference. I just saw another post where the writer wrote that he prefers the pre-amps in the Steinberg UR series to the ones in the Focusrite Scarlett series. It's been a weird weekend so far. I did get my Soundcraft mixer back a week ago and managed to do some recording. Friday I installed Sonar X3 primarily to be on the same page as my friend. An hour after installing the new software I get a call that she wants to borrow my mixer, and the one mic and cable I have here, as she is short equipment for a full band recording she had to do yesterday. I think she goes a little crazy when it comes to drum kits and really gobbles up the channels. She borrowed my board as she was short two mic preamps. Knowing what she has their she must have been planning on using 16 channels. As I really wanted to play with the new software installation, I went and found a driver for the Zoom G2.1u multi EFX guitar pedal I have here. Although older, Zoom brought out the 64 bit Win 8 compliant driver. I installed it OK and it worked fine with Reaper. I could not get it to work properly with Sonar X3. It recorded but somehow I managed to turn my Sonar installation into a "clicking sound" generator. Still have not fixed it. Some how I need to come up with a solution where I keep a DAW together without equipment being yanked out of it for live sound gigs or the needs of my friend. Danielle |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Mike Rivers wrote:
On 5/24/2014 7:46 AM, DanielleOM wrote: Any one look at the Steinberg UR44? Don't think it has the mix knob like the UR22. A friend of mine keeps telling me she does not like the sound of Yamaha pre-amps, used in the Steinberg product. (Prefers Soundcraft and Motu to Yamaha). How does your friend know that the problem is with the preamps? Is she setting the gain properly? People say, again and again in public, how bad the big Yamaha digital mixers sound. Then I listen in Jim Finney's livingroom to a pair of Meyer 833's, while he is playing back live mixes of Asleep at the Wheel, with whom he has nearly 30 years at FOH and road mgmt. The sound is as good or better than that of their studio albums, done on API, etc., kit. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On 5/25/2014 7:28 AM, DanielleOM wrote:
I think her comments come from experience with Yamaha live sound mixing boards. (not the low cost MG series). I have to wonder if those preamps have a similar tonal character / response as the ones that Steinberg/Yamaha used in the UR44. The Yamaha and Steinberg design teams are in different countries - Japan and Germany respectively. They did manage to get together for the Nuage console/control surface for Nuendo, though the UR series interfaces uses a preamp similar to that in the MGP mixer series, which is "based on" a preamp developed for their professional live sound mixers which, from its description and a couple of reviews I've read, appears to be very similar to the circuit that Mackie has been using for years. This is why I say that the preamps in these mid-range products, whether consoles or interfaces, while not exactly the same circuit, are similar. If there's a difference between one product and another, it isn't likely to be solely because of the preamps. Actually I am thinking perhaps a lot of this is personal preference. I just saw another post where the writer wrote that he prefers the pre-amps in the Steinberg UR series to the ones in the Focusrite Scarlett series. Writers tend to like what they're writing about at the moment. If there's a real problem, they'll write about that as a problem, not a preference. And since no two mic preamps sound absolutely identical, one can have preferences, and preferences can change. If he reviews a MOTU next month, he might write that he prefers its sound to that of the Focusrite but not mention the Yamaha. You should be looking at other features besides the preamp. For one thing, none of them are going to be so bad that you won't want to use them, and for another, you can always use another preamp with the interface that's otherwise best for you. You may find that the built-in preamp is fine for nearly everything you do, but a certain combination of mic and outboard preamp is just right some times, so you can use it. You're only paying about $5 each for the built-in preamps so it's not like you're buying something expensive that you don't like to use. As I really wanted to play with the new software installation, I went and found a driver for the Zoom G2.1u multi EFX guitar pedal I have here. Although older, Zoom brought out the 64 bit Win 8 compliant driver. I installed it OK and it worked fine with Reaper. I could not get it to work properly with Sonar X3. That sounds like a kind of iffy combination. Some how I need to come up with a solution where I keep a DAW together without equipment being yanked out of it for live sound gigs or the needs of my friend. As I recall, your requirements were pretty minimal. Have you thought about something like an Allen & Heath ZED-10 mixer? It has two channels of USB in and out which have a little flexibility in what goes to the computer, you have four mic inputs with two of them having instrument DI alternates and two having line level alternates, and you have all the direct (really zero) latency monitoring comfort of having a real mixer. It's not very big, and too small for your friend to want to borrow. -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
DanielleOM wrote:
On 5/24/2014 6:04 PM, Mike Rivers wrote: On 5/24/2014 7:46 AM, DanielleOM wrote: Any one look at the Steinberg UR44? Don't think it has the mix knob like the UR22. A friend of mine keeps telling me she does not like the sound of Yamaha pre-amps, used in the Steinberg product. (Prefers Soundcraft and Motu to Yamaha). How does your friend know that the problem is with the preamps? Is she setting the gain properly? I know she has used a lot of equipment over the past 20 years in both live sound and recording situations. I know she likes the Motu preamps and the preamps Soundcraft uses in their mixing boards. I know I have been surprised by the good performance of some MOTU preamps in a small interface at a home studio in Austin where I've done a couple of mandolin overdub sessions. In general I'd say I like Soundcraft mic pres, too, but in specific I'd say they aren't the same across the line. I know I still think the Mackie Onyx pres are surprsingly good, as is the EQ. She has a quite of variety of microphones, including the ones I own. :-) For a while she had one of the Grace audio preamps to use. I have no doubt that she knows how to set a gain properly. I think her comments come from experience with Yamaha live sound mixing boards. (not the low cost MG series). See my remark in another post. People say this stuff and then a pal of mine delivers _world class_ mixes from Yammie live consoles all over the planet. There are various levels (heh) of "knowing how to set gain". I have to wonder if those preamps have a similar tonal character / response as the ones that Steinberg/Yamaha used in the UR44. Actually I am thinking perhaps a lot of this is personal preference. I just saw another post where the writer wrote that he prefers the pre-amps in the Steinberg UR series to the ones in the Focusrite Scarlett series. It's been a weird weekend so far. I did get my Soundcraft mixer back a week ago and managed to do some recording. Friday I installed Sonar X3 primarily to be on the same page as my friend. An hour after installing the new software I get a call that she wants to borrow my mixer, and the one mic and cable I have here, as she is short equipment for a full band recording she had to do yesterday. I think she goes a little crazy when it comes to drum kits and really gobbles up the channels. She borrowed my board as she was short two mic preamps. Knowing what she has their she must have been planning on using 16 channels. As I really wanted to play with the new software installation, I went and found a driver for the Zoom G2.1u multi EFX guitar pedal I have here. Although older, Zoom brought out the 64 bit Win 8 compliant driver. I installed it OK and it worked fine with Reaper. I could not get it to work properly with Sonar X3. It recorded but somehow I managed to turn my Sonar installation into a "clicking sound" generator. Still have not fixed it. Some how I need to come up with a solution where I keep a DAW together without equipment being yanked out of it for live sound gigs or the needs of my friend. Get something from MOTU and be done with it, until she asks to borrow it. g -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On 5/25/2014 3:54 PM, Frank Stearns wrote:
(hank alrich) writes: -snips- See my remark in another post. People say this stuff and then a pal of mine delivers _world class_ mixes from Yammie live consoles all over the planet. There are various levels (heh) of "knowing how to set gain". With the "big" Yamaha digital consoles, such as the older M7CL, this hits the nail right on the head. The thing can sound mediocre-to-annoying, or it can sound pretty good. My take is that for good sound, you need to keep the levels up nice and hot (but not clip) until you get to a master -- take out the "excess" gain there, rather than starting with low signals at the A-Ds. ("Excess gain" being the typical PA system practice of running power amp pots wide open, which typically adds 10 dB of gain you often don't want or need (nor do you need the noise it brings up). Unity is more often at the 2 o'clock position on the pot.) Anyway, what I can surmise is that at least in that generation of console you don't get 24 bits, you get more like 18-19 bits, with the other 5-6 bits being perhaps used for carry from DSP arithmetic. And, it's likely that in conjuction with that they truncate rather do floating point, have a wider internal buss, dither, or whatever. They do have a price point to keep, and those consoles do quite a bit for the money. When I got better about keeping good levels from the front end, shows started sounding sweeter (and I've been chasing sweetness in that system every time I do something there -- it's elusive, but possible if one strains a bit). But yes, gain structure very important in those beasties. Frank Mobile Audio I had recently hosted an acoustic open mic for 4 years. I would say that my experience was very similar with the small set up I was using. Even though my equipment was not high end by any means, I do believe it was better than what I saw at most small open mic local events. For equipment I used Shure Beta dynamic mics Soundcraft EFX8 mixer Powered JBL EON 10 speakers A couple passive guitar center brand DIs (for instrument cables) Studio Projects VTB1 From my experience, I also found getting that sweet spot on the gain was critical to getting a good sound. Too little and it seemed all of the dynamics and life were lost. I would try to adjust the gain at the power signal, so that could keep reasonable signal levels in the mixer. If I had too much amplification at the powered speakers, the LED indicators on the output could not be used at all. I did very little EQ tweaking at the open mic, and the little I did was primarily done to take that lower end boom sound out of dreadnought style guitars. I must have be doing something right, because we did get frequent good comments about the sound quality. But I would agree there's people out there that use gains in ways that actually seem strange to me. I see too many where people plug guitars into line inputs. Eyes would glaze over if I tried to explain the importance of input and output impedance and division of the signal at different frequencies. I saw another where the host always kept his fader levels up and then used the gain knobs to control the volume. I found that little VTB1 came in handy for taking some of the harshness off of guitars with old under saddle piezo pickups. I think piezo pickups now are much better than the early ones. It was only tool I had that seemed to take the harshness off of those older pickups and still leave some life in the signal. I recall one performer there where I found myself debating on what do with the vocal. He kept enough distance from the mic, where I don't think there was any real proximity effect. However he had this voice with a huge amount of lower end resonance that I found to be a little bit overwhelming. I would tone it down a little with the EQ, but I was always afraid to go too far with that because I kept thinking if I went too far the amplified voice would not sound like him. Danielle |
#27
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Gain Structure (Maybe we'll get back to: Audio interface features)
On 5/26/2014 8:53 AM, DanielleOM wrote:
From my experience, I also found getting that sweet spot on the gain was critical to getting a good sound. Too little and it seemed all of the dynamics and life were lost. I would try to adjust the gain at the power signal, so that could keep reasonable signal levels in the mixer. If I had too much amplification at the powered speakers, the LED indicators on the output could not be used at all. This is indeed important. You want to keep the mixer working in its designed range. My usual procedure is to play something into the mixer, set the mixer input gain so that with the channel fader and master fader 2/3 to 3/4 of the way up (the "unity gain" position if it's marked) you can get an eyeball average reading in the 0 to +10 ballpark on the output level meters. Just where depends on how the meters are calibrated and their resolution. Some have only one LED between 0 (the nominal design center) and just below peak. Then adjust the power amplifier gain or the powered speaker input level so that what you're hearing from the speakers is loud enough. If you can't get it loud enough without clipping, then you need more power. But I would agree there's people out there that use gains in ways that actually seem strange to me. I see too many where people plug guitars into line inputs. Eyes would glaze over if I tried to explain the importance of input and output impedance and division of the signal at different frequencies. If the plug fits, that's where it goes, right? It's a common mistake among users who don't know the characteristics of the various inputs. Some people will plug a mic with a 1/4" plug into those line level jacks, too. I saw another where the host always kept his fader levels up and then used the gain knobs to control the volume. Actually, that's not a bad way to start. When you have the power amplifier gain set correctly, set the master fader and all the faders that you're using to their "unity" position, then do a rough mix using the input gains on the channels (if there are any). This will assure that neither the input channels nor the mix bus is clipping. Once the gains are in the ballpark, unless someone changes instruments and there's a big difference in the level going into that mic, you can leave the gains alone and mix with the faders like you're supposed to. I recall one performer there where I found myself debating on what do with the vocal. He kept enough distance from the mic, where I don't think there was any real proximity effect. However he had this voice with a huge amount of lower end resonance that I found to be a little bit overwhelming. Well, you know what he sounds like without the PA, just make him sound like that with the PA. Simple? -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
On 05/23/2014 11:16 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
Tobiah wrote: It is PCIe, or USB, or lastly firewire. It has at least four excellent very low noise universal input preamps, and at least four outputs. It doesn't make the mistake of having a lame 'mix' knob that is supposed to balance line input monitoring and DAW output - it has separate knobs for each, or better, has no knobs and relies on software for all of this. It costs around $300 - $350. Where is it? Thanks, Tobiah Why does a Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 not do what you want? It's $250 street. I wanted at least four preamps, although using my 1402VLZ Pro preamps is a possibility. I could eliminate the mixer altogether if the interface had four or six equal or better preamps. |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Audio interface features.
Frank Stearns wrote:
The thing can sound mediocre-to-annoying, or it can sound pretty good. My take is that for good sound, you need to keep the levels up nice and hot (but not clip) until you get to a master -- take out the "excess" gain there, rather than starting with low signals at the A-Ds. ("Excess gain" being the typical PA system practice of running power amp pots wide open, which typically adds 10 dB of gain you often don't want or need (nor do you need the noise it brings up). Unity is more often at the 2 o'clock position on the pot.) See, this kind of thing DRIVES ME UP THE WALL. A lot of inexpensive consoles have gain controls in the feedback loop in such a way that the distortion spectrum and (in the case of some brand M products) sometimes even the frequency response changes as you adjust the trim. You add to that nonlinearities... problems like you describe where you need to keep the gain way up indicate to me a possible dead band issue where you get crossover distortion at low level. And I am just TIRED OF THIS. There are a lot of older consoles where you can just pot everything up anywhere and as long as it isn't clipping and it is above the noise floor it sounds the same as it does at any other gain setting. Why can't I get this on newer gear? It's not that it's digital either, there are plenty of inexpensive analogue consoles that are very, very touchy about operating levels. When I got better about keeping good levels from the front end, shows started sounding sweeter (and I've been chasing sweetness in that system every time I do something there -- it's elusive, but possible if one strains a bit). But yes, gain structure very important in those beasties. And what everybody liked about the PM-1000 is that it wasn't so important.... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Balanced audio input on an audio recording interface | Pro Audio | |||
M-Audio DMP3 mic pre. Lots of features-how does it sound? | Pro Audio | |||
Looking for these features in HU | Car Audio | |||
FA: M-Audio Quattro USB 4-In/4-Out Audio/MIDI Interface ($20 starting bid - no reserve) | Pro Audio | |||
FA: M-Audio Quattro USB 4-In/4-Out Audio/MIDI Interface | Pro Audio |