Audio Interfaces 101

[Reist]

One thought - you say you bought the same model as me?!? That is a pretty old model. I know that the software bundled with it does not work on my Mac because it is too old (OS 9). Could it be tha you are using a later version of Windows that doesn't like the old hardware?

Um, I'm pretty sure it's not the same model - same company for sure, and it came with cubase le, I think. Since I've plugged it into my computer, it's crashed more than a few times, and I can't figure out what the problem is - it says something about the midi not working.

I guess I'll check for the actual error message tomorrow ... it'll be more useful for you guys to have some idea what the problem is, I guess.

[Lunkhead]

Good luck with the Lambda, Jon. It looks like it ought to provide everything you need at this stage. I hope it works out and does indeed make recording easier and more productive. (Otherwise you're probably going to be pissed at us. )

[JonPorobil]

I mentioned previously that I had considered buying one before. A friend of mine already has an Alpha that he used for recording all the voice-acting for a feature-length animated project. He used me as an audio consultant, and made the purchase on my recommendation. It saw us through the project and has served him well since.

Which is to say, if the Lambda doesn't do what it ought to, I won't take it out on y'all.

...too much.


Not sure if I'll have it in time for "Back from Juvie," but probably for the fight after that. I'll bounce this thread again when I get the first song recorded on it.

[JonPorobil]

It came in.

Really clean-sounding recordings. It's nice. However, it horribly distorts playback when recording. I actually have to use my internal sound card to monitor when using the Lambda to input. Anyone have any idea what's going on there?

[Billy's Little Trip]

I remember having that problem when I first set up my Firebox. Unfortunately I can't remember what fixed it because I did so many things. But I "think" it had to do with drivers that didn't load right. I went to the Firebox forum on the webz and that was where I got my help. Don't be in a rush on those help forums.

Does the disc that came with you Lambada also have it's own on screen control panel and mixer? I'm thinking that might have been my issue. The control panel has to load every time your OS loads up. Plus I have to open the Firebox mixer even though I don't use it, or I can't hear my guitar, mics, etc, unless I turn on the monitor button. But once I set the Firebox mixer and cranked up the levels, never another problem with it.

[Lunkhead]

So Jon, your song is up, and the sound quality is pretty decent. How did the recording process go?

[JonPorobil]

Pretty well. I've updated the drivers, and it still doesn't monitor properly, but the recording is great. I've been doing playback through the internal sound card, which is a little awkward, but gets the job done.

I need to figure out how to change my computer to receive input in mono, but that's just a matter of taking the time to tinker with the settings on my recording software. For this track, it recorded to the left-channel only, so I had to manually copy the left track and paste it to the right for every track (except for the "Everybody!" near the end, which I let slide, since it didn't sound bad).

So basically, the whole setup is still a little kludgey, but it's worth it for the extra shine.

Speaking of which: I was amazed at how little effort it took to get the guitar and vocal parts both to really pop out. The guitar in that track has a slight bass cut in the EQ and some mastering reverb on it, but is otherwise clean; it just sounded right the first time. And the vocals just felt easier, for some reason. All the background/harmony vox are first takes.

Once I figure out what's causing the interference when trying to monitor and record simultaneously, I'll be one happy camper.

Oh, hey, also. This might be a question for another thread, but my Lambda came with Cubase LE 4. Anyone here use it? Is it worth installing?

[Lunkhead]

I use Cubase 4. I haven't used any other similar software much, so I can't really compare them, but I think Cubase LE would probably be good enough for most of what you'd want to do. You might need to get some of the free plug-ins from the free plug-ins thread. What do you use now?

[jast]

Anything up to and including Cubase Essential 4 (or up to and including the SE versions before the version 4 series) doesn't support volume envelopes. How lame is that?

[JonPorobil]

I use Cubase 4. I haven't used any other similar software much, so I can't really compare them, but I think Cubase LE would probably be good enough for most of what you'd want to do. You might need to get some of the free plug-ins from the free plug-ins thread. What do you use now?

I use Adobe Audition 1.5, and I'm actually quite happy with it. I just figured, hey, since I have this new software, maybe I should try it? I'll probably install it sometime in the next couple of weeks and tinker with it, unless someone can provide a pressing reason to switch over immediately.

Anything up to and including Cubase Essential 4 (or up to and including the SE versions before the version 4 series) doesn't support volume envelopes. How lame is that?

Wow, that is lame.

Didn't obscurity used to swear by Cubase back when I was new? How did he do all that stuff with no volume envelopes?

[Billy's Little Trip]

Jon, I use Cubase LE and I know Quimby does also. I've pushed it to it's limits and back over the past two years, so I can be of a lot of help if you make the switch.

As far as your left channel only issue. If the track you're recording on is stereo, you have to switch it to mono. Your interface is set up where mic 1 is left and mic 2 is right, mic 3 is left and mic 4 is right and so on. The only time you'd leave a track that you are recording, in stereo, is if you import a stereo track or you are coming out of a guitar effect/keyboard with two cords (or stereo cord) plugged into mic 1 and mic 2 on your interface. I have done this, but I have found that I'd rather record two mono tracks and pan them. I get a much fatter sound. Then get my stereo sound after it's mixed down.

[Rabid Garfunkel]

The only time you'd leave a track that you are recording, in stereo, is if you import a stereo track or you are coming out of a guitar effect/keyboard with two cords (or stereo cord) plugged into mic 1 and mic 2 on your interface.

Au contraire, mon frere... it's also useful for (if your interface only has two physical ins, like, say, a 1/8" stereo microphone jack on your computer) tracking 2 things in a single pass, like a guitar & vox, guitar & bass, snare & kick, &c. Hard pan each input to L & R, click record, ROCK!, click stop, then split the stereo track into 2 mono tracks for maximum mixing flexibility.

[JonPorobil]

Oooh, good idea!

[Billy's Little Trip]

The only time you'd leave a track that you are recording, in stereo, is if you import a stereo track or you are coming out of a guitar effect/keyboard with two cords (or stereo cord) plugged into mic 1 and mic 2 on your interface.

Au contraire, mon frere... it's also useful for (if your interface only has two physical ins, like, say, a 1/8" stereo microphone jack on your computer) tracking 2 things in a single pass, like a guitar & vox, guitar & bass, snare & kick, &c. Hard pan each input to L & R, click record, ROCK!, click stop, then split the stereo track into 2 mono tracks for maximum mixing flexibility.

OK, let me see if I understand this:

1. You said "it's also useful for tracking 2 things in a single pass, like a guitar & vox...etc." If you have an interface with two physical ins (mic1 and mic2) why wouldn't you plug in your vocal mic to in mic1 and your guitar into mic2 and record to track1 mono and track2 mono at the same time?

2. You said, "if your interface only has two physical ins, like, say, a 1/8" stereo microphone jack on your computer." Wouldn't that be 1 physical jack? And yes, if you were using your computer sound card and the stereo 1/8th" jack, you'd want to record on a stereo track, I guess. But tell me, when you say, "like, say, a 1/8" stereo microphone jack on your computer" to record vox and guitar in a single pass, were you meaning to take, say, a stereo Y splitter that has two 1/4" female sockets and Y to one 1/8" stereo male so you can plug in a vocal mic and a guitar each into the Y splitter that plugs into an 1/8" stereo plug on the computer sound card? In this case, yes, your method would work. But Jon has a new interface and doesn't have to do this.

[Lunkhead]

I think if you have two discrete input channels, and your software lets you do this (which Cuabse does), you will generally want to do one of the following:

1) Record one mono sound source into one channel to one mono track
2) Record two mono sound sources into two channels to two mono tracks
3) Record one stereo sound source into two channels to one stereo track

Case 1 would be, for example, recording just vocals, just direct bass or guitar, just a mono mic'ed acoustic, etc. Case 2 would be, for example, RG's scenario of micing vocals and guitar and singing and playing at the same time, or if you've got one person playing direct guitar and one playing direct bass, or two people singing into their own mics, etc. Case 3 would be, for example, stereo mic'ing an acoustic guitar, direct recording a stereo sound source like a keyboard, etc.

[Rabid Garfunkel]

My treating a stereo input like two discreet inputs hurt's Albatross's brain too. But then, he's got an interface that doesn't need the kludgey approach.

@ Lunk's example #2: You mean you can assign the left & right ins as separate mono channels instead of one stereo channel in the Cubase family? I've really got to start reading these fucking manuals!

[Billy's Little Trip]

Lunk's three methods are how I do all of my recording.

[Eric Y.]

I had very bad problems with my Lexicon Omega... as have many other confirming the same problems I had on the Lexicon support msg boards...

I may be coming to the party a bit late here, but I'd second this comment.
It might have been specific to my computer, which was pretty state-of-the-art in 2002... but when I switched from soundcard-1/8"-input to the Omega USB interface, I was experiencing latency issues like you wouldn't believe. Everything I recorded during that period sounds very "off", rhythmically, and people often commented on it. No matter how hard I tried to keep on top of the beat while multitracking, the parts wouldn't line up quite right. I sold it and switched back... now have lower sound quality and very limited functionality, but at least I don't sound like a moron who has no sense of timing.

Also re: condenser mics... I'll also second the statement about the difference between cheap condenser vs. dynamic being very substantial. And I'll do even take it a step farther. A few years back I upgraded my $90 SM-58 for the $60 MXL V57M and have been nothing but thrilled with the results. The difference in quality, clarity, and warmth cannot be put into words. Obviously condenser mics start around this range and go into the multi-thousand-dollar range, and if you are a fulltime professional recording studio you will find they are probably worth the inevestment, but for my own personal needs, this is probably the highest quality as well as most cost-effective mic I would ever need.

[Eric Y.]

You mean you can assign the left & right ins as separate mono channels instead of one stereo channel in the Cubase family?

I don't know about cubase... but I've got a co-branded generic version of cakewalk (came bundled with the lexicon omega -- the most useful part of that particular purchase) which gives me the options, when arming each track for recording, to set it to record 'input a, left channel'; 'input a, right channel'; or 'input a, stereo channels' - {the 'input a' would be my sole soundcard line-in; there were more lettered inputs when I still had the usb interface installed}.

[Märk]

My treating a stereo input like two discreet inputs hurt's Albatross's brain too. But then, he's got an interface that doesn't need the kludgey approach.

@ Lunk's example #2: You mean you can assign the left & right ins as separate mono channels instead of one stereo channel in the Cubase family? I've really got to start reading these fucking manuals!

Start a new project in cubase, then hit F4. Depending on how you have it set up, the 'Input' and 'Output' tabs should show your audio channels. If they're not all there, or you want to change them to (for instance) 8 mono in/outs instead of 4 stereo, just right click in the window and select 'Add bus>Mono'. Use the drop-down in the right column to assign various channels to each (now separate) buses. As a general rule of thumb, odd-numbered channels are left and even-numbered are right. I usually keep the default output bus as just 'Stereo Out' because I don't really use any outboard gear or do anything fancy with sends/inserts. Also, you can again right click on any one of the buses you just added, and set it as default. Now, when you add a track in your project, you can assign input as mono from any of the channels you added! Saves a hell of a lot of disk space over recording everything in stereo when you're recording a mono signal anyway. And if you want to apply stereo effects, just make a Group track in stereo and send the track to it instead of Stereo Out. Cool, huh?

[Lunkhead]

Latency can mean different things and can have a variety of causes. If the problem you were having was one that was widely reported on their forums, then there probably wasn't much you could do, but for reference for anybody else out there, who might not know about latency, one important feature to look for in an audio interface is "zero-latency monitoring" or "live monitoring". This is a feature that lets you hear the signal you're recording in real time as you're recording it, so there isn't any delay between playing/singing and hearing yourself in your headphones. (Hardware that doesn't have that type of monitoring introduces a delay because what you're playing/singing has to be digitized and sent to the computer then sent back to your hardware and converted back to analog before you hear it.) This would be important if you were, for example, recording a guitar part along to a bass part, or a vocal part along to a guitar part, etc. If you're using monitoring that has latency (like the monitoring feature of your audio -software-) you'll basically never be able to record something that will sound like it's on the same beat as the tracks you've already recorded. This feature has become fairly standard on recent audio interfaces, it seems like. One common feature I've seen is a knob that lets you control the blend of what you hear in your headphones, so you can mix the live sound from your inputs and the playback from the computer.

[Reist]

yo, I have a question.

I've owned a Tascam US-144 for nearly a year now, and haven't had any issues with it. However, I recently purchased a new computer using windows vista (64 bit), and the driver on the cd didn't work (because the driver was for 32 bit operating systems). Naturally, I went to the tascam website and downloaded the driver for 64 bit systems they had on the site. Upon installing this driver, the interface still doesn't work and my computer no longer can playback any sound. Of course, this really pisses me off. What should I do?