What should I upgrade?

[mrlizard]

Originally Posted by Scruffy

fair play. apologies for being a dirty merchant of misinformation.

I didn't actually know this so I'll take this chance to ask if I've spent roundabouts 100 quid on a condenser unnecessarily?

*cringes at the expected response*

Depends whether it works for you or not. There is a common misconception that condensors are better microphones. To an untrained ear the hyped top end and low end bump of a cheap condensor can sound really appealing, problem is its not always useful, theres a place for dynamic, ribbon and condensor mics in recording, you just have to find whats right for a particular application.

If i were looking for a one mic for all type thing and my budget was 100 quid, i'd probably get a good dynamic over a condensor. The good thing is, if you get a good dynamic as well as your condensor you've got 2 options and you're more likely to get in the ballpark of the sound you're trying to achieve.

[alladir]

Right, so I now have my Shure 57 (seemed a good first mic, at least). Now comes the part where I choose a soundcard. What exactly should I look for in a sound card though? I'll be recording all the parts myself so I won't need a rediculous number of inputs. I just want the best "quality" I can afford, for recording and for playback.

[mrlizard]

Originally Posted by alladir

Right, so I now have my Shure 57 (seemed a good first mic, at least). Now comes the part where I choose a soundcard. What exactly should I look for in a sound card though? I'll be recording all the parts myself so I won't need a rediculous number of inputs. I just want the best "quality" I can afford, for recording and for playback.

Problem is, we don't know how much you can afford. if you're minted get apogee. If you're skint get M-audio. The mic pre's are never gonna be that good in these things, more usable the more expensive you get. If you wanted an 8 channel soundcard with 8 mic pre's, i'd look at the focusrite sapphire or the motu 8pre, then you've solved your master section and headphone mix problems as well.

[alladir]

Cheers thanks! I'll take a look :]

[alladir]

Hi everyone! I've eventually (almost) decided on the M-Audio Audiophile 192. It seems perfect for me. However, I'm not totally sure on the difference between the 2 sets of outputs it has. The manual lists:

- Main Outputs 1 and 2: These are balanced/unbalanced 1/4" TRS output connectors, located on the breakout cable. Their output signals can be assigned only via your DAW application, however their overall level is affected by the WavOut 1/2 level faders in the software mixer panel. Connect these outputs to your headphone amplifier, auxiliary amplifier, or external recording device, if applicable.

- Monitor Outputs 1 and 2: These are balanced/unbalanced 1/4" TRS output connectors, located on the breakout cable. Their output signals are derived from the outputs of the Audiophile 192's internal direct monitoring mixer. Connect these outputs to your amplifier or powered monitors.

And the Sound on Sound reviewer says: "However, I can't help feeling that after fitting four D-A converters to feed the main and monitor stereo outputs, M Audio's designers have missed a trick in not letting you access all four from software, for true two-in/four-out analogue I/O — with the additional stereo digital I/O, this would give the 192 a distinct edge over similarly priced competitors"

I don't know what this means. What would you use the 2 outputs for, and what are their limitations? At the moment I'm considering getting a decent set of headphones to do most of my work (Sony's MDR7509 maybe) while regularly checking on monitors (probably something like Alesis M1 MkIIs). Do you think this soundcard would allow this?

[mrlizard]

Originally Posted by alladir

Hi everyone! I've eventually (almost) decided on the M-Audio Audiophile 192. It seems perfect for me. However, I'm not totally sure on the difference between the 2 sets of outputs it has. The manual lists:

- Main Outputs 1 and 2: These are balanced/unbalanced 1/4" TRS output connectors, located on the breakout cable. Their output signals can be assigned only via your DAW application, however their overall level is affected by the WavOut 1/2 level faders in the software mixer panel. Connect these outputs to your headphone amplifier, auxiliary amplifier, or external recording device, if applicable.

- Monitor Outputs 1 and 2: These are balanced/unbalanced 1/4" TRS output connectors, located on the breakout cable. Their output signals are derived from the outputs of the Audiophile 192's internal direct monitoring mixer. Connect these outputs to your amplifier or powered monitors.

And the Sound on Sound reviewer says: "However, I can't help feeling that after fitting four D-A converters to feed the main and monitor stereo outputs, M Audio's designers have missed a trick in not letting you access all four from software, for true two-in/four-out analogue I/O — with the additional stereo digital I/O, this would give the 192 a distinct edge over similarly priced competitors"

I don't know what this means. What would you use the 2 outputs for, and what are their limitations? At the moment I'm considering getting a decent set of headphones to do most of my work (Sony's MDR7509 maybe) while regularly checking on monitors (probably something like Alesis M1 MkIIs). Do you think this soundcard would allow this?

Usually when you are recording you have a seperate headphone mix for the performer. One way of doing this is having a seperate set of outputs controlled by the recording software, so you can have a totally separate mix, like an auxilary send from each channel in the software.

Rather than allowing you that option, the audiophile lets you to mix input signals with the output signal from the software via the soundcards monitor mixer. So you still have the same mix you are playing back, only you can mix in whatever is plugged into the audiophiles inputs with zero latency. This kind of limits what you can do with it a little.
It depends how you are recording, if you are doing it all yourself with headphones on, you wont need another mix. If you are recording other people playing and you want to hear a different mix from them then you could use the monitor mixer but it's not ideal, it wouldn't give you control over individual elements on playback, only the input volume. Use the headphones when you're recording by all means, but i'd suggest mixing on the monitors or you'll get a funny idea of phase and how much bass you're putting on things.

You mentioned mic's earlier in the thread. The soundcard you've chosen doesn't have mic pre's in it, you couldn't plug a mic into it unless you ran it through a mixer/preamp first.

You'd also need a headphone amplifier and some sort of master section. I really wouldn't recommend just plugging the monitor 1's into the audiophile, if something goes wrong and you get a spike through them/ something plays back full blast unexpectedly you'll see why. Everytime you turn your computer off its going to go BANG!!!!

You'll notice earlier in the thread i suggested looking at an interface like the motu 8 pre, this would do all these things just fine, perhaps a tad on the expensive side, there are other cheaper ones. but you're really looking for an interface with at least 2 mic pre's, line inputs, headphone output and an analog master volume control so you don't blow up your ears/monitors.

[alladir]

Originally Posted by mrlizard

Usually when you are recording you have a seperate headphone mix for the performer. One way of doing this is having a seperate set of outputs controlled by the recording software, so you can have a totally separate mix, like an auxilary send from each channel in the software.

Rather than allowing you that option, the audiophile lets you to mix input signals with the output signal from the software via the soundcards monitor mixer. So you still have the same mix you are playing back, only you can mix in whatever is plugged into the audiophiles inputs with zero latency. This kind of limits what you can do with it a little.
It depends how you are recording, if you are doing it all yourself with headphones on, you wont need another mix. If you are recording other people playing and you want to hear a different mix from them then you could use the monitor mixer but it's not ideal, it wouldn't give you control over individual elements on playback, only the input volume.

So both outputs will play the same thing, except one output has the input mixed in?

Originally Posted by mrlizard

Use the headphones when you're recording by all means, but i'd suggest mixing on the monitors or you'll get a funny idea of phase and how much bass you're putting on things.

I'd love to but for this year, for reasons beyond my control headphones with occasional monitor checks are the only option.

Originally Posted by mrlizard

You mentioned mic's earlier in the thread. The soundcard you've chosen doesn't have mic pre's in it, you couldn't plug a mic into it unless you ran it through a mixer/preamp first.

You'd also need a headphone amplifier and some sort of master section. I really wouldn't recommend just plugging the monitor 1's into the audiophile, if something goes wrong and you get a spike through them/ something plays back full blast unexpectedly you'll see why. Everytime you turn your computer off its going to go BANG!!!!

Is this for reasons of convenience (to avoid loud noises) or to avoid actual damage to the equipment? I suppose I was mislead slightly by the diagram on the M-Audio site (http://www.m-audio.com/images/en/con...ophile_192.gif) which indicate a direct connection to the moniters. Would getting a passive model with a seperate amp avoid this problem? And if I chose this option, could that same amp be used for headphones or do they require their own?

Originally Posted by mrlizard

You'll notice earlier in the thread i suggested looking at an interface like the motu 8 pre, this would do all these things just fine, perhaps a tad on the expensive side, there are other cheaper ones. but you're really looking for an interface with at least 2 mic pre's, line inputs, headphone output and an analog master volume control so you don't blow up your ears/monitors.

Thanks for all your advice. It's really helpful since my budget means I have to buy correctly first time. As regards the interface (for mic pres, line out etc.), I'm willing to get a cheaper one with fewer inputs but I don't want to compromise on audio quality so much. In your experience, does such a thing exist or do they usually bundle quality with having many inputs (like they generally seem to with sound cards)?

[mrlizard]

Originally Posted by alladir

So both outputs will play the same thing, except one output has the input mixed in?



I'd love to but for this year, for reasons beyond my control headphones with occasional monitor checks are the only option.



Is this for reasons of convenience (to avoid loud noises) or to avoid actual damage to the equipment? I suppose I was mislead slightly by the diagram on the M-Audio site (http://www.m-audio.com/images/en/con...ophile_192.gif) which indicate a direct connection to the moniters. Would getting a passive model with a seperate amp avoid this problem? And if I chose this option, could that same amp be used for headphones or do they require their own?



Thanks for all your advice. It's really helpful since my budget means I have to buy correctly first time. As regards the interface (for mic pres, line out etc.), I'm willing to get a cheaper one with fewer inputs but I don't want to compromise on audio quality so much. In your experience, does such a thing exist or do they usually bundle quality with having many inputs (like they generally seem to with sound cards)?

Plugging active monitors into a soundcard means your at the mercy of the software volume controls, if you're worried about loud noises, which you seem to be, i wouldn't advise it.

you can do all the things you mentioned, you still won't be able to plug mics into the thing though.

There are plenty of interfaces with mic pre's avaliable, but the cheaper you go the more problems you'll have ie. master section, seperate outputs, routing flexibility, sound quality. You could spend 100 quid on a soundcard that'll do all the things you want but be a pain in the arse, or you could spend a little bit more on something that'll be a breeze, it depends whether you want to put up with it or not. Personally i think its easier to be creative when things just work.

[alladir]

Thanks so much for steering me in the right direction. I'm so close to the knowledge standard to be able to buy now. Just one final question: does a breakout box from a PCI card increase latency (I mean by an amount that could be measured in milliseconds)?

[mrlizard]

Originally Posted by alladir

Thanks so much for steering me in the right direction. I'm so close to the knowledge standard to be able to buy now. Just one final question: does a breakout box from a PCI card increase latency (I mean by an amount that could be measured in milliseconds)?

no,

there are other advantages though, you can keep all your cabling neat in a rack, the convertors are far enough away from all the computers fans and PSU that you can lower the noise floor a bit.

Latency shouldn't really be an issue with any soundcard these days, most sequencers have delay compensation, and as long as you're recording with the buffer low enough you could get away with monitoring through the software. Make sure you select the right driver in the software though, i've come across alot of people using ASIO multimedia drivers instead of the M-audio ASIO for example.

[alladir]

Originally Posted by mrlizard

Latency shouldn't really be an issue with any soundcard these days, most sequencers have delay compensation, and as long as you're recording with the buffer low enough you could get away with monitoring through the software.

Ahh, so the USB option is open to me then? I guess I was a little to worried about latency. I have 2Ghz AMD Athlon.

Once again, thanks for sticking with this thread... you've been really really helpful and it's appreciated!!

[mrlizard]

Originally Posted by alladir

Ahh, so the USB option is open to me then? I guess I was a little to worried about latency. I have 2Ghz AMD Athlon.

Once again, thanks for sticking with this thread... you've been really really helpful and it's appreciated!!

No worries, hope it works out for you.