Page 1 of 2
#1
Hey, all!

I'm rather new to recording my guitar and have never actually done so, but I am really interested. I did some basic research and decided using an audio interface was the best option as far as recording goes. I was considering the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 or 2i4. Would I need to have a microphone to use these or could I plug a cable straight into the Scarlett from my pedal or amp using something like this: http://www.zzounds.com/item--HOSSTXM?

Scarlett 2i2: http://us.focusrite.com/usb-audio-interfaces/scarlett-2i2
*le me *le forum person
#3
You can, in fact, plug directly in using a 1/4" jack - either directly from the guitar or from your amp or pedal's line out.
Current Gear:
LTD MH-400 with Gotoh GE1996T (EMG 85/60)
PRS SE Custom 24 (Suhr SSH+/SSV)
Ibanez RG3120 Prestige (Dimarzio Titans)
Squier Vintage Modified 70s Jazz V
Audient iD22 interface
Peavey Revalver 4, UAD Friedman BE100/DS40
Adam S3A monitors
Quote by Anonden
You CAN play anything with anything....but some guitars sound right for some things, and not for others. Single coils sound retarded for metal, though those who are apeshit about harpsichord probably beg to differ.
#4
Scarlett's don't sound much good.

You're likely to overload a 2i2 input stage and forma the money of a 2i4 you can get a mackie onyx blackjack which sounds much better.

You can't go from the amp to the interface unless your amp has a line or headphones out.

You could simply go from the guitar to the interface with your everyday guitar cable and use amp sims from there.
Also if you wanna record direct guitar only you might wanna consider an unbranded guitar link.
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#5
Quote by Spambot_2
Scarlett's don't sound much good.

You're likely to overload a 2i2 input stage and forma the money of a 2i4 you can get a mackie onyx blackjack which sounds much better.

Scarletts sound just fine.

The 2i4, granted, sounds a lot better. Because it has a pad button.

Besides, if we're gonna bitch about "sounds good" (which is a stupid exercise, since it's all based on opinion), then TS might as well get himself a Tascam 1800 for $279 on Amazon. (Don't actually do that. It's way more than you need.)


@TS:
Have you considered using some of the free amp sims in the Amp & Cab Sims thread? https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1522593
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Aug 21, 2014,
#6
The scarlett 2i2 is the best sounding interface I can think of for the money, but for just a bit more money you can find stuff that sounds much better.

By better I mean more faithful to the source material.

Converters in scarlett's are nice for the money, but the pre's would barely be nice for half the money - they don't have much bass extension, they definitely don't have much clear highs, and they sound sooo dark compared to just about everything.

Also again, since the 2i2 doesn't even offer the option to set the input gain low enough not to be overloaded by most guitars TS might wanna get the 2i4, and for the money of a 2i4 there are again better sounding interfaces.

The onyx blackjack, the duo capture EX and the UR22 are the first ones that come to mind.

Also I don't really see the correlation between what TS wants and the US-1800.
TS wants to record direct guitar, maybe a mic, and instead of suggesting an id22 or a crimson or a duet you're suggesting an interface with 16x4 i/o channels.

Anyway, it's a direct guitar recording, there's little reason why one would spend a lot of money to get a good sounding one since it's gonna be heavily modified anyway and you can correct most stuff, though if we don't wanna care let's go for a guitar link, and if we wanna care let's not spend money on something that has good reviews in the interfaces sticky which costs as much money as better sounding stuff.
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#7
So for a bit more cash (around 200&euro what would you suggest Spambot? I checked the Onyx and it seems that its specs are lower than the 2i2. The UR22 one seems better. Anything you have experience of being better than the above in that budget?
#8
Well if you were to record mic's and/or other instruments ass well, or you think you will in the near future, I'd go for an interface in that price range, yep.

If you only wanna start out and record direct guitar, I suggest saving money and getting an unbranded guitar link, which is hella cheap and it'll give you an idea of how things work.
If you like it, then you can upgrade to something better sounding and with more options.

Also the onyx's specs are far better looking than the scarlett's as far as I remember, so what specs are you referring to exactly?
As for the UR22 I can't even find the specs of that

The one I have experience of being better than everything in its price range is the onyx blackjack.

Also again, the 2i2, but there's no comparison between the two if ya ask me.
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#9
The onyx is 48kHz, 24bit whereas the 2i4 is 24 Bit/96 kHz. You 'll just say that it's a not perceivable audible difference, but marketing-wise (to those not in the know) I guess the 2i4 wins just because of those numbers :P

here's the ur22 http://www.thomann.de/gr/steinberg_ur22.htm
Last edited by Deledhel at Aug 21, 2014,
#10
Damn I thought it went to 96kHz like its bigger brother

I also am not gonna claim that you can't benefit from the difference between 48kHz and 96kHz when recording, all of the other things being equal.

Still, that sounds better than any other interface for that money I know of.

Also have you had a look at the rest of the specs?
Quoting just a couple - the A-weighted AD conversion dynamic range on each input and output of the blackjack is 114dB, while on the 2i4 it's 105dB for the input and 104dB for the output; also the blackjack can properly drive high z headphones - 8mW @ 600ohm, while driving the same headphones the 2i4 would put out around 1.3mW

As for the UR22 specs I meant the more in depth specs.
Noise floor, ADA dynamic range, crosstalk...
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#11
Ok I did a whole lot of reading (headache d'oh ) and I am between the NI Komplete Audio 6 and the Rolland UA-55 Quad capture. Both of them had the odd bad review but most reviews were positive.

I have a gift coupon for Thomann so the difference between those two and the budget friendlier models is negligible so I think I am gonna invest in a better piece of equipment (even if I am kinda noob)
#12
Quote by Spambot_2
The scarlett 2i2 is the best sounding interface I can think of for the money, but for just a bit more money you can find stuff that sounds much better.

The 2i2 isn't actually designed for quality instrument recordings. That's what the 2i4 is for.

For the reasons you mentioned.
#13
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
The 2i2 isn't actually designed for quality instrument recordings. That's what the 2i4 is for.
None of them is if ya ask me

Though, seriously, the main difference between the 2i2 and the 2i4 apart from the more i/o options is that the 2i4 has a 10dB input pad.

Apart from that, they are the same thing.
The ADA specs are the same, the headphones output power is more or less the same, the noise specs are the same, the THD is the same on everything because they use the same pre's and there's when the pad is disengaged the signal path from input to converter's the same.

Well I don't have schematics, but that's what I would assume considering they have the same pre's and the same converters and the almost same specs.

So I don't understand, why is it that you say the 2i4 is better in the recording of hi-z signals?
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#14
Alright, thanks everybody!

So basically, what I'm hearing is that the 2i2 is not going to be good...get a Roland or Steinburg (or Mackie, but because I know nothing of the specs and the reviews are a lot worse on it, I probably won't go for that) or a 2i4. I totally forgot about Roland (somehow) and since if they make it, it's probably the best in its class, I'll probably go for that. Thanks a whole lot to Spambot_2.

BTW, I know absolutely nothing about how to read the specs on an interface, so any explanations would be fantastic.

(Why does everyone keep calling me TS?)
*le me *le forum person
#16
Quote by Spambot_2
None of them is if ya ask me

Honestly, I have no idea where you're getting this from.

Though, seriously, the main difference between the 2i2 and the 2i4 apart from the more i/o options is that the 2i4 has a 10dB input pad.

Apart from that, they are the same thing.
The ADA specs are the same, the headphones output power is more or less the same, the noise specs are the same, the THD is the same on everything because they use the same pre's and there's when the pad is disengaged the signal path from input to converter's the same.

Yes...and the input pad makes all the difference for instrument recordings.

Quote by uto998
Alright, thanks everybody!

So basically, what I'm hearing is that the 2i2 is not going to be good...get a Roland or Steinburg (or Mackie, but because I know nothing of the specs and the reviews are a lot worse on it, I probably won't go for that) or a 2i4. I totally forgot about Roland (somehow) and since if they make it, it's probably the best in its class, I'll probably go for that. Thanks a whole lot to Spambot_2.

Yes. There's advantages and disadvantages to all of them, but yes.

(Why does everyone keep calling me TS?)

It stands for "thread starter".

Also, the Audioboxes are decent.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Aug 21, 2014,
#17
Quote by uto998
BTW, I know absolutely nothing about how to read the specs on an interface, so any explanations would be fantastic.
Allright I'll try and break them down for you, though I'mm gonna be really brief and simple so if you wanna know what they are in depth look them up on google and read stuff.
I'mma use the onyx blackjack's specs sheet to give you example values.

EIN, or equivalent input noise, is the noise that a device will add to a signal passing through it.
It's measured in (x)dB, usually with a 150ohm source impedance at the maximum input and/or output gain of the device, it's usually around -130dBu and lower is better.

Frequency response, it's how the different frequencies of the input signal will be affected.
Measured in +- (x)dB between (y)Hz and (z)Hz, less dB is better.

THD, or total harmonic distortion, is the distortion applied to a signal, it's measured in <(w)% at (x)dB, possibly between (y)Hz and (z)Hz, it usually goes from 0.0001 all the way up to 5, it's also used in worthwhile power amps ratings (for example <0.0001% THD 100w RMS, 20Hz-40kHz, 2 channels), though don't mind guitar amps, their power ratings are plain made up.
Anyway, lower is better.

Crosstalk, it's how much two or more channels "share data", so for example how much of the output signal is picked up from the input.
It's measured in (x)dB, possibly between (y)Hz and (z)Hz, between two or more channels, it's usually around -90dB and lower is better.

The common mode rejection ratio is very basically the rejection to crosstalk in a differential amplifier, measured in <(x)dB, possibly between (y)Hz and (z)Hz, it's usually around 50dB and higher is better.

Maximum levels are maximum input and output levels.
Measured in (x)dB, may be around whatever value, and higher is better.

ADA dynamic range, or AD/DA dynamic range, or AD dynamic range and DA dynamic range, is the maximum level the digital to analog and analog to digital converters can handle before clipping, it's measured in (x)dB, it may be around whatever value and higher is better.

The rest you can pretty much figure out yourself.

A couple other consideration - if you see [spec name] @ (x)Hz instead of [spec name] between (x)Hz and (y)Hz it's because specs at single frequencies (usually 1kHz) look better than specs at frequency ranges.

Also the "A-weighted" you see near the ADA converters' specs mean "in a real world setting", so refer to them instead of the not weighted specs' when considering.

Last consideration, most important of all, specs are often "cooked", and they don't tell you how stuff sounds, so something that looks very good on paper might sound bad and vice versa.

Don't buy stuff because it has good specs, buy stuff because it sounds good.
Quote by uto998
What about the mBox by Avid since it's basically built to take a guitar cable straight into it?
Every interfaces we talked about until now have an input designed to receive a guitar signal.

Also the M box is overpriced for what it is if ya ask me.
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Honestly, I have no idea where you're getting this from.
I used them to record stuff.
I listened to them.
I'm getting this from personal experience.
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Yes...and the input pad makes all the difference for instrument recordings.
The input pad is an input gain reduction, it's as simple as that.
It's useful when you don't have enough headroom or when you designed your input stages on a hurry and/or on the cheap.

Let's take the onyx blackjack into consideration for comparison.
The gain range of the 2i4 instrument inputs goes is +10 to +55dB, and the pad reduces the input gain of 10dB so as a result you have an input gain going from unity to +45dB.
The gain range of the onyx blackjack's instrument inputs is -20 to +40dB, so you not only have more attenuation at your disposal, you don't even need a pad.

Again, pad's are needed when you need more attenuation, and while you will likely need them because cheap equipment doesn't have much headroom, if you have an input with enough headroom you don't need a pad.

Pad don't make stuff sound better, they don't change the input impedance, they only reduce the incoming signal's amplitude, which is needed only if you don't have enough headroom.

If your guitar didn't output a signal strong enough to overload a 2i2's instrument input, then the sound of it recorded through a 2i2 and through a 2i4 would be the same sound.
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Also, the Audioboxes are decent.
Audiobox's have the same reputation of 2i2's - they seem to have inputs too hot to record direct guitars without clipping the input signal.
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#18
Again, thanks Spambot_2 for all your input. What I meant about the mBox being built for guitar is that it has a 1/4" jack for input instead of the XLR input. And it does come with ProTools Express, which I'm not sure about how good that is, but would be pretty nice because I would be able to record some original music (also what I'm wanting to do). (Do you really live in Italy?)
*le me *le forum person
#19
Quote by Spambot_2

I used them to record stuff.
I listened to them.
I'm getting this from personal experience.

So...opinion. Ok, then.

The input pad is an input gain reduction, it's as simple as that.
It's useful when you don't have enough headroom or when you designed your input stages on a hurry and/or on the cheap.

Let's take the onyx blackjack into consideration for comparison.
The gain range of the 2i4 instrument inputs goes is +10 to +55dB, and the pad reduces the input gain of 10dB so as a result you have an input gain going from unity to +45dB.
The gain range of the onyx blackjack's instrument inputs is -20 to +40dB, so you not only have more attenuation at your disposal, you don't even need a pad.

Again, pad's are needed when you need more attenuation, and while you will likely need them because cheap equipment doesn't have much headroom, if you have an input with enough headroom you don't need a pad.

Pad don't make stuff sound better, they don't change the input impedance, they only reduce the incoming signal's amplitude, which is needed only if you don't have enough headroom.

If your guitar didn't output a signal strong enough to overload a 2i2's instrument input, then the sound of it recorded through a 2i2 and through a 2i4 would be the same sound.

Yes...and? I don't see how the fact that the 2i4 has a pad and that the Onyx Blackjack doesn't is actually an issue.

Audiobox's have the same reputation of 2i2's - they seem to have inputs too hot to record direct guitars without clipping the input signal.

I was not aware of this.
#20
Quote by uto998
What I meant about the mBox being built for guitar is that it has a 1/4" jack for input instead of the XLR input.
The interfaces we mentioned have neutrik combo inputs.
They accept both 1/4" jacks and XLR connectors, so you could plug a guitar lead in there directly as well.
Quote by uto998
And it does come with ProTools Express, which I'm not sure about how good that is, but would be pretty nice because I would be able to record some original music (also what I'm wanting to do).
Pro tools is a plain bad program, technically-wise.
It needs a ****in' lot of resources to run properly.
Also it uses a proprietary plugin format, which is a pain in the ass.

It's popular thanks to two things - lotsa people like the workflow if they are working with audio, and it was the first program who properly did what it still does.
Now though there are lotsa programs that do that as well as that.
Better, some may even argue.

If you wanna record and edit stuff, try every DAW you can try and then decide which one you prefer working with.
Then stick to that.
Quote by uto998
Do you really live in Italy?
From the day I came out of my mother's womb, if you exclude vacations.

Why the question, if I ma ask?
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#21
I just got a 2i4 a while back.

I plug the bass directly into it and turn the pad on because the bass signal is strong

I use an SM57 for guitar

this is what I did the other day http://profile.ultimate-guitar.com/JohnProphet/music/play1275449

Yes u can also plug the gtr directly into the 2i4 and then use amp sims for your tone. There are a million vids of that on utube.


oh yeah, surely you can go from one of the line outs or whatever on your amp thru the 2i4. I havent tried it yet but u can probably go straight from a distortion pedal thru the 2i4 and then use some kind of cabinet simulator and maybe it will sound good...who knows.

I havent done much direct gtr into the 2i4 yet because it seems weird playing lead or crunch rhythm with a bare gtr lol
Last edited by JohnProphet at Aug 21, 2014,
#22
Quote by JohnProphet
Yes u can also plug the gtr directly into the 2i4 and then use amp sims for your tone. There are a million vids of that on utube.


oh yeah, surely you can go from one of the line outs or whatever on your amp thru the 2i4. I havent tried it yet but u can probably go straight from a distortion pedal thru the 2i4 and then use some kind of cabinet simulator and maybe it will sound good...who knows.

I havent done much direct gtr into the 2i4 yet because it seems weird playing lead or crunch rhythm with a bare gtr lol

Ok, great...

But none of this is anything constructive. It's opinion-based, what you prefer.

(Yes, you're off ignore. People just quote you a lot anyway. lol)
#23
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
So...opinion. Ok, then.
Well how else are you supposed to give advice and to know what sounds good and what doesn't in the first place, reading reviews?
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Yes...and? I don't see how the fact that the 2i4 has a pad and that the Onyx Blackjack doesn't is actually an issue.
I was trying to make clear the point that a pad doesn't make stuff sound better or any different for that matter, to point out that your claim that the 2i2 isn't made for high quality instrument recording and the 2i4 is is either based on reasons that I still don't understand, or based on wrong assumptions.

So, again, what is it the reason why you claim the 2i2 isn't made for high quality instrument recording and the 2i4 is?
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#24
I think the problem is Luca, that every time the rest of us recommend the 2i4 (which we all believe sounds fine) you feel the need to push your opinion that it sounds bad. Notice how we don't constantly belittle your blackjack suggestion? it's a matter of politeness.

As for the 2i4/2i2 thing, here's my understanding of crazysam23_Atax's statements about them. The reason the 2i4 is more appropriately designed for instrument recording is that because of the level of gain on the scarlett preamps, it essentially needs a pad to do the job well. Therefor the 2i4 is better for instruments than the 2i2 because the pad brings it's gain into a more usable level for instruments. The blackjack has a lower gain, so it doesn't need the pad to put it's gain in that range.
#25
Quote by chatterbox272
I think the problem is Luca, that every time the rest of us recommend the 2i4 (which we all believe sounds fine) you feel the need to push your opinion that it sounds bad.
My problem's all of you then, who think the scarlett range sounds fine, either because you're not picky on your audio equipment or because you simply have never heard something better sounding in that price range.
Or maybe because you base your opinions on stuff read somewhere.
Quote by chatterbox272
Notice how we don't constantly belittle your blackjack suggestion? it's a matter of politeness.
I don't keep saying the scarlett range doesn't sound much good because I don't like you guys, I keep saying that because that's my experience.

Also everytime I say that somebody pops in and says "it's sound just fine", "you're the only one that thinks that" and such.
I argue it does not, both because I tried a scarlett along an onyx blackjack and a fast track pro usb with the help of a mackie 1202VLZ, and because of the specs.

Then somebody else comes in saying "The 2i4, granted, sounds a lot better. Because it has a pad button." or "The 2i2 isn't actually designed for quality instrument recordings. That's what the 2i4 is for." or "Yes...and the input pad makes all the difference for instrument recordings.", which are pretty damn inaccurate and confusing statements.
Attempts to shed some lights on what they actually want to mean are ineffective, until now at least.

I get that he wanted to say the 2i4 is better for recording direct guitar because it has a pad and therefore it can avoid clipping the incoming signal, what I was trying to do is getting him, and TS and everybody else who will have a look at this thread for that matter, what a pad is and why "The 2i4, granted, sounds a lot better. Because it has a pad button." is plain wrong, and it's confusing for whoever doesn't know what a pad is and does.

I'll not stop advising people not to buy scarlett's until I'll be convinced they sound good, and from what I heard they don't.
I'll also not stop trying clearing up such statements as the ones I quoted, and I will put up the same argument everytime such statements will be repeated, until someone will get what the problem is and stop writing that stuff.

In the end, I'd rather have people that don't like me and know both what they're talking about and how to explain it properly, instead of being considering polite for agreeing with something that goes from being arguable to being plain wrong.
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#26
I'll be honest - the higher end wall powered Saffires/Scarletts sound much better than the bus powered ones. They get more current to the pres and sound better as a result.
Current Gear:
LTD MH-400 with Gotoh GE1996T (EMG 85/60)
PRS SE Custom 24 (Suhr SSH+/SSV)
Ibanez RG3120 Prestige (Dimarzio Titans)
Squier Vintage Modified 70s Jazz V
Audient iD22 interface
Peavey Revalver 4, UAD Friedman BE100/DS40
Adam S3A monitors
Quote by Anonden
You CAN play anything with anything....but some guitars sound right for some things, and not for others. Single coils sound retarded for metal, though those who are apeshit about harpsichord probably beg to differ.
#27
Quote by chatterbox272
I think the problem is Luca, that every time the rest of us recommend the 2i4 (which we all believe sounds fine) you feel the need to push your opinion that it sounds bad. Notice how we don't constantly belittle your blackjack suggestion? it's a matter of politeness.

As for the 2i4/2i2 thing, here's my understanding of crazysam23_Atax's statements about them. The reason the 2i4 is more appropriately designed for instrument recording is that because of the level of gain on the scarlett preamps, it essentially needs a pad to do the job well. Therefor the 2i4 is better for instruments than the 2i2 because the pad brings it's gain into a more usable level for instruments. The blackjack has a lower gain, so it doesn't need the pad to put it's gain in that range.


For one, I don't want to come to Luca's defense, but apparently someone has to because some people can't keep their cool.

I agree with what Luca is saying and I am rather glad he said the 2i2 and 2i4 sound bad and explained why because now I know what to listen for and realize I would've wasted money on the Scarlett.

Besides, he doesn't keep saying that you're wrong and that his onyx is way better than your stuff, he's just saying he doesn't like the 2i2/2i4 and wouldn't recommend them. Now I wouldn't either. Again, I agree with Luca and value his experience and faithfulness to reply.

In fact, I'd be happy if we'd all just stop talking about the Scarletts or more expensive models of them, because I've already thrown them out the window, so whoever recommends them will be ignored by me and probably everyone else who thinks Scarletts are not in agreement with their opinion (which, according to most people on this thread, is apparently useless if you don't like the Scarlett )
*le me *le forum person
#28
And, Luca, the reason I asked if you really lived in Italy was because my great-grandparents are from Italy.
*le me *le forum person
#29
Quote by uto998
I agree with what Luca is saying and I am rather glad he said the 2i2 and 2i4 sound bad and explained why because now I know what to listen for and realize I would've wasted money on the Scarlett.
Well this is a bit drastic, but thanks

Problem with the scarlett's, their pre's sound pretty bad.

Though they aren't as bad as a waste of money, and again, I can't think of a better interface for the money of a 2i2, so if one needed a way to record 2 mic's at the same time and for his life he could spend no more than €120, a 2i2 would be his best bet in my opinion.

Also if someone had a couple nice pre's he might as well use them with the 2i2 and the result would probably be pretty nice.

And the same should apply to you if ya ask me - don't recommend or avoid recommending stuff because someone on the internet says it sounds good or bad.
Listen to as much stuff as you can and then recommend stuff, else you risk writing inaccurate and/or plain wrong stuff yourself.

Though thanks again for the support
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#30
Quote by chatterbox272
As for the 2i4/2i2 thing, here's my understanding of crazysam23_Atax's statements about them. The reason the 2i4 is more appropriately designed for instrument recording is that because of the level of gain on the scarlett preamps, it essentially needs a pad to do the job well. Therefor the 2i4 is better for instruments than the 2i2 because the pad brings it's gain into a more usable level for instruments. The blackjack has a lower gain, so it doesn't need the pad to put it's gain in that range.

Exactly.
#31
All I want is for everyone to go to hell...
...It's the last place I was seen before I lost myself



Quote by DisarmGoliath
You can be the deputy llamma of the recordings forum!
#32
Quote by ChemicalFire


I would quite like some popcorn.

Thanks everybody for your input. Whatever I decide on and eventually get, I'll record and try to put some recordings up on this thread, so if you don't want to hear them, unsubscribe from this thread.

*le me *le forum person
#33
Quote by crazysam23_Atax
Ok, great...

But none of this is anything constructive. It's opinion-based, what you prefer.

(Yes, you're off ignore. People just quote you a lot anyway. lol)


Its opinion based except for the small fact that I linked a recording made WITH a 2i4.

Its one thing to SAY a 2i4 is good or bad...but its a lot better just to let someone hear a recording. Then they can decide.

I know its an odd concept on this board....actual PLAYING. Im weird like that
#34
You posted a recording of a guitar passing through a distorted amp, then a mic, and then your interface.

The interface there was the thing that made the less difference in the chain, arguably after the guitar, and since you didn't record the same thing with another interface we don't know if that recording sounds like that because of the 2i4 or because of the amp settings or because your cable had a capacitance considerably lower than all of our cables have.

While you did provide us with a recording made with a 2i4, if you didn't it would have made veeery little to no difference considering what and how you recorded it, and the face that you didn't record the same chain with a different interface.

Also you signed up this month, how would you know what is odd on this board and what isn't?
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#35
Quote by JohnProphet
Its opinion based except for the small fact that I linked a recording made WITH a 2i4.

Its one thing to SAY a 2i4 is good or bad...but its a lot better just to let someone hear a recording. Then they can decide.

I know its an odd concept on this board....actual PLAYING. Im weird like that

Um...what?

Quote by Spambot_2
Also you signed up this month, how would you know what is odd on this board and what isn't?

He's been pissing off the MT regs (including me) for the last month. He must have gotten bored of being told he was wrong (because he actually was) and decided to come here.
Last edited by crazysam23_Atax at Aug 22, 2014,
#36
Quote by Spambot_2
You posted a recording of a guitar passing through a distorted amp, then a mic, and then your interface.

The interface there was the thing that made the less difference in the chain, arguably after the guitar, and since you didn't record the same thing with another interface we don't know if that recording sounds like that because of the 2i4 or because of the amp settings or because your cable had a capacitance considerably lower than all of our cables have.

While you did provide us with a recording made with a 2i4, if you didn't it would have made veeery little to no difference considering what and how you recorded it, and the face that you didn't record the same chain with a different interface.

Also you signed up this month, how would you know what is odd on this board and what isn't?


The bass is direct and there are clean ovdubs as well as the main dist gtr. At least it gives dude some clue of possible sound quality. SM 57 is a standard mic, no mystery there. Eventually the guy will probably use that exact setup.


I do think its pretty odd to hear people talking to infinite degrees about music theory or this that or the other and so few have ANY music online for anyone to listen to. You dont find that odd? That would be odd on any board
#37
He wants to record guitar, the bass is not clear and the track is full of stuff.
What we're hearing in your clip is the amp, the mic placement and the mic.
Also the overdubs aren't clean, they're still passed through the amp and some fx.

Also, for the audio thing, music theory doesn't need anything to be discussed, and sound quality needs you to have the device you're interested in there in your hands for you to try.
We don't put much audio here because everybody's setup sounds different, and a lot of people aren't good enough to make a setup sound the best possible, hence we keep everything down to words.

If you wanna post clips at least let us hear something useful - how sine sweeps are affected by the interface, so we get a frequency response chart, though you need a sine sweep generator for that, or a DI'd clean guitar, which still would be relatively useful because of the different cables and guitars, and guitars are passed through fx processors in any case so again, that would be only relatively useful.

Or you could make comparisons, that would be useful.
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#38
Quote by Spambot_2


If you wanna post clips at least let us hear something useful - how sine sweeps are affected by the interface, so we get a frequency response chart, though you need a sine sweep generator for that, or a DI'd clean guitar, which still would be relatively useful because of the different cables and guitars, and guitars are passed through fx processors in any case so again, that would be only relatively useful.

Or you could make comparisons, that would be useful.


True enough but I dont exactly have a full electronics lab here lol
#39
Then even your opinion alone is welcome!

Though, same thing as the others, please don't post suggestions based on stuff you read on the internet - base your suggestions on your experience.

Also don't blindly suggest one interface or another just because you own it and it sounds just fine so it's good or similar stuff.

Not to say you did that already or anything, on the contrary, though just please try and don't help turning this section into a mess.
Name's Luca.

Quote by OliOsbourne
I don't know anything about this topic, but I just clicked on this thread because of your username :O
Quote by Cajundaddy
Clue: amplifiers amplify so don't turn it on if you need quiet.
Quote by chrismendiola
I guess spambots are now capable of reading minds.
#40
Quote by Spambot_2
Then even your opinion alone is welcome!

Though, same thing as the others, please don't post suggestions based on stuff you read on the internet - base your suggestions on your experience.

Also don't blindly suggest one interface or another just because you own it and it sounds just fine so it's good or similar stuff.



wait wait. You say base my suggestions on my experience. And then you say DONT suggest an interface just because I own it and it sounds fine?

arent those 2 statements totally opposite?


Im pretty sure the strongest recommendation one could give is "I OWN it and I like it" lol. I just posted it to show that it doesnt suck or anything. IMO it basically just passes the signal thru. My amp sounds like my amp

Seriously, if one has a decent interface there isnt going to be a HUGE difference in them. Do you seriously think you could do a blindfold test and know the difference between a 2i4 and an onyx or something else? I know I couldnt, I dont think my ears are THAT good
Page 1 of 2