Content
Thread
Forum
Date
Note: to all of those too lazy to read a page or two that make up the "introduction to recording" sticky, find the time and the will and go read it anyway.
Quote by guitarmageddon0
Would it be possible to just run the microphone through an interface and then into the computer to get a completely dry + uncolored signal
This would be the impossible part - a seriously transparent pre is usually expensive, and the interface would still color the sound.
Quote by guitarmageddon0
and then have him "reamp" that signal through his preamp?
You could try running the signal from the interface to the DI box to the inst input on the pre (if it has one), but unless you were going for a particularly colored/distorted sound I would let it go.
Bias did a very good job of making their software seem very good, while in reality it's nothing special.

If you haven't already, flip the switch on your interface from line to instrument.
It matters a lot is a single sound is in a full mix, yes.
Your monitoring chain may also be part of the problem - your speakers/headphones might sound pretty dark.
Try the free trial of everything and decide what you like best.
Don't bother with pro tools if you're just starting out.
It's a 5-pin din cable, also called midi cable.
If you look for them on ebay, the ones called 5-pin din will be generally cheaper.

Out from the controller, in on the interface.
If you also want to send info to the controller, so to make lights light up and show you info (if the controller supports it, that is) then you also need another cable just like the other one, going from the output on the interface to the in on the controller.
For hard rock I'd get a harley benton G212 vintage and play mix and match with speakers - see if you can find a second hand T75 and switch one of the v30s for that.
Quote by keir118
These won't work good together nor singularly - the head is a very cheap solid state head and the other is a very cheap cab with cheap speakers, they may look good and stroke your ego but if you want stuff that big to sound good you'll have to pay more than that.

I mean they will work and they will be loud, but expect them to sound fizzy and dull.
Quote by Anthony1991
You've got to match the Ohm sockets
that's true for tube amps, but solid state amps only need the amp's output impedance to be lower than the cab input's, so 4ohm out into 8ohm in is fine.

You have to halve the nominal power output of the amp for each doubling of the impedance, so you'd get a 60w power output.

Quote by Anthony1991
The speakers won't be any good so the overall tone of the amp won't be all that nice. Do you really need a 4x12? They're absolutely massive and in general you just don't need them, you'd be better off with a good 2x12 or even a 1x12.
He's right OP lugging a 4x12 cab around is a pain in the ass, and if you want to play venues a PA system and a mic in front of your cab will make you sound so much louder and clearer to the audience it's not even funny.

If you want a cheap cab get yourself a harley benton G212 vintage.
I'm guessing that was some attempt at getting people to watch the guy's youtube vid
You don't sound like you want an actual guitar amp to me.

Having a guitar amp would make it a bit easier and quicker for you if you wanted to start playing right away, but because of how guitar speakers (speakers in general but guitar speakers in particular) are designed they sound better at higher volumes, so having a guitar amp that you will only play at very low volumes would be a wast of money - you could get an audio interface and a pair of speakers (decent speakers possibly) and play through an amp sim on your computer, and that will potentially sound better than any yamy TRX.

That way you would do everything in your DAW - play, record, play along, create backing tracks...

You don't seem to have a clear idea of what a DI box does, you may want to read through the introduction to recording sticky in this section or look up what DI boxes are/do on google.

If you don't know what audio interfaces are and what kinda stuff you would need to record, def have a look at the introduction to recording sticky.
The lexicon native reverb pack, I especially like the studio and room algorithms.
Oddly enough, their imitation of the M7 is heavenly, better than a lot of other settings
According to focusrite the converters are the same.
The difference in preamps sounds negligible.

So yeah you might use whatever inputs if your only concern is sound quality.
Quote by jaspervdv
Guitarrig is disliked by a group of people, but it is around for a reason, and heard some awesome tones created with it.
It's around as much as marshall MG amps, and with a hell of a lot of post production you can make a marshall MG sound good enough, but I don't see that as a reason to keep using MG amps.
Quote by jaspervdv
positive grid bias (everybody seems to love that one)
Bias is shilled by everyone, and the people who praise it so much seem to have never tried it.
Quote by jaspervdv
and the lepou amp sims (those are free)
These are a very very solid choice OP.
Quote by jaspervdv
But if you don't have some experience with the software it could be hard to get a good (recording) tone.
This is probably true OP, practice with the software you use and you'll lear to use it as you'll learn to make actual amps sound good/better.
Quote by jaspervdv
But it will still sound nothing like a real bass guitar.
Unless you get a good sample library and you program everything nicely enough, that is.

OP, have a look at the list of amp sims, cab sims and impulse responses in the recording section.
I'd highly recommend Ignite Amps Emissary for the stuff you mentioned, and LePou's stuff is also very solid.
If you want to invest some money into this I'd recommend bx_rockrack pro.

Also remember you need a cab simulation, that usually comes in form of impulse responses/IR files, which are the representation of how a sound should be changed (it's also used for reverbs), and an IR loader, like LePou LeCab 2.
Quote by krisis99
Pro Tools
Any reason you use pro tools instead of any other DAW like reaper, studio one, logic, reason and so on apart from the fact that they've probably told you it's the "industry standard" at the audio engineering course you attended?
Quote by krisis99
Do I just take the main out's to the MBox line in's?
Yes.
Quote by krisis99
What I'm most concerned with is the latency because the mixer has some really bad latency issues in cubase.
Latency depends on the computer's processing power, the data interface (usb, firewire, ...) and the drivers.
The main outs on the mixer are analog so that won't introduce any latency.
If the MBox also introduces too much latency, your drivers are up to date, and you have properly set up the i/o buffer size, then you need a more powerful processor.
Quote by krisis99
What would you guys think of micing the amp and running the preout at the same time?
I think you can't do that easily, and the resulting sound won't justify the hassle.
Quote by krisis99
Do you think it would be too muddy? I understand that you would have a completely different tone using the pre out. I just don't want to buy another 1/4 cable just for that if the experiment isn't worth my time.
The amp doesn't sound much good and that wouldn't make it sound any better.
To do what you're planning you also need a 1TS to 2TS cable, or, if you want to do it properly, a splitter box, connecting the pre out to something would cut the sound going to the power amp, so you won't get any sound from the speaker.
Quote by krisis99
Lastly, does anyone know if this mixer has any fader control capabilities in PT?
No, you can't.
You can't control anything with these faders apart from the mixer.
Quote by krisis99
I haven't set anything up yet so I was curious to find out some answers before I start.
Consider switching to something that's not pro fools.
Ahem, pro tools.
Quote by higgins909
I'm thinking about buying the other parts of gear that I will need to get, tonight.
You should know about the 24 hour rule.
It goes like you have to wait for 24 hours to make an important decision.

Don't rush your shopping, you'll likely end up buying something because you like it even tho it might not be what you need really.
Quote by higgins909

1. I'm looking for a audio interface $100 or less.
2. Windows 10
3. Record mic though various programs like games and OBS and teamspeak 3 which is like skype a bit, but way better in the audio way.
4. Being able to record guitar would be nice, but not really remotely needed for now
5. Will it be fine to have on almost all the time?
6. I'm looking to sound really nice, even tho I've only got a Samson R21S (Audio card is near garbage)(May get something like a at2020 later on)
1. read the introduction to recording sticky
2. everything in that price range and twice that will work
3. read the introduction to recording sticky
4. read the introduction to recording sticky
5. most interfaces that cost that kinda money are bus powered, meaning they will use power from the computer, and they don't use much power
6. then you will wanna spend more than $100
Only problem is if you have a ribbon mic, but even a lot of ribbon mics don't have any problem with that.

With your setup you'll be fine.
Quote by Jayerrr
How much do you think is enough to get a good set that will last me a while?
I'd go for a pair of JBL LSR308 at least, then if you're serious about this whole thing you might wanna get a pair of yamy HS8, ADAM a7x or genelec 8040, depending on how you like them.
You might well get a pair of nice monitors and treat your room afterwards, when you've saved up some more money for that.

A pair of good monitor speakers will most likely improve the reproduction quality even if your room is not the best sounding of rooms.
If you don't want to spend any more money than that you might go for a pair of JBL LSR305, tho I'd personally save up more and get a better pair.
Unless of course your current headphones sound plain bad and you can't properly mix anything with them, but in that case I'd get a decent pair of headphones since if you're recording you're probably gonna use a pair anyway.
No you don't need an amp.

Read the introduction to recording sticky.
No, you can't use drivers designed for an OS in another OS, as diabolical mentioned you need to set up ALSA and Jack, then I think the scarlett solo is USB2.0 class compliant, so you should be quite alright after that.

Still, I'd definitely move to windows or mac for recording if I had the choice.
A lot of DAW's can do that without plugins.
Your choice really.

Everything would work, it will probably sound simple but that might be what your'e waiting for.
Listen to some damien rice live show - he sometimes uses an acoustic guitar, sometimes an electric guitar, sometimes an acoustic plugged into an electric guitar amp to get a distorted sound - he gets different sounds but it's all good.

If your concern is that an electric guitar sound from the gretsch might not be "enough" even if it would be more appropriate than the acoustic guitar sound, then I'd get the gretsch.

I myself mostly use an electric guitar when doing songwriter stuff, so have a listen and if that's "enough" for you then you can be sure the gretsch will work just fine - http://kiwi6.com/file/hiwotb34py
Still tho, even if you don't like that particular sound, if you prefer the getsch sound I'd get that one.
Some say if you set the same sampling frequency in the DAW and in ASIO4ALL you can listen to everything at the same time, some say it's false.

To be sure, download the audio from youtube and then load it in reaper.
You should read the introduction to recording sticky in this section.
The speakers in the pic are Genelec 8020.

They're more than you need at the moment.
If you're sure you'll keep doing this audio thing you'll find these, or maybe a pair of bigger brothers, will be worth it, but if I were you I would start with cheaper speakers.
Depends on how much money you want to spend.
A pair of used AKG k240 studio maybe?
Or a pair of used ATH-M50?
Every cable has a capacitance because physics, but unless you were doing something that required extreme accuracy (and you had money to spend in proportion) any cable will do.
Also unless you were working with at least good quality mics and speakers and so on it's unlikely that you will hear the difference between a very good cable and a decent one.

If you really really want to get something high quality get 3 or so meters of mogami gold and a pair of neutrik XLR connectors, else find whatever relatively cheap cable and use it with some unbranded XLR connector.
Quote by FlightofIcarus
Surely the 3.0 stuff is at least an improvement over 2.0?
USB3 is of course an improvement over USB2, but if you're gonna use them for audio they're just about the same and they both have the flaws of USB.

Considering your situation, whatever decent interface with midi i/o is gonna work fine.
If you gotta buy something new, I recommend the roland duo capture ex.
Quote by Robbgnarly
Only the 5212 has the lucky 13 circuit
AFAIK the 2112RC (20w, 1ch, controls on top) also has the lucky13 pre.
Nothing worthwhile is free here.
Download the free trial of everything and see what you like best.

Closest thing to free is reaper which has an unlimited free trial.
They make a lot of headphones in china even among the high end ones, and I think the k271 are made in china as well right now.

Why would you care tho, for the high end ones the earpads are slightly different and that's about all the difference you'll find, so I'm guessing the difference in the lower end ones is the same.
Find the input gain control and turn it up.
It might be in your DAW if you're using a DAW as host, or it might be in the amp sim.

You also might have something in your chain you don't know of, like a compressor, so see if you accidentally loaded one somehow as well.
Quote by the chemist
I understand that.

Most people on this forum won't be going off and buying ADAM/Focal/Barefoot monitors, or buying a nanoSync either.

And I never stated that monitoring wasn't important; it's 1 part of the process.
You tho wrote "Monitoring is one small part. I don;t know who said it, but accurate clocking is just as important", and now you tell me I'm right when I say that's wrong, but again you seem to reiterate what you said was wrong.

Moreover I don't really understand why having higher quality speakers has anything to do with what I wrote
Quote by the chemist
People debate preference all the time; gear recommendation threads a good example. It's validating your preference that moves that discussion.
What I meant is that we are debating that the advantages brought by higher resolution and sampling frequencies aren't a matter of preference, and if we agreed it was a matter of preference we wouldn't be debating anything technical.
Quote by the chemist
In terms of hardware, true. 24-bit is all we see.

Not in any current DAW versions, at least.

Pro-Tools 9 was completely 32-float
Pro-Tools 9 HD RTAS structure was 32-float
Logic 9 was 32-float
Reaper was 32-float not too long ago, but I don't really care for Reaper
Ableton 8 used 32-float
Couple things:
I reckon most of these numbers refer to the audio engine of the DAW, which means the audio you recorded is converted to 32bit float and then edited, which is done to avoid clipping when processing stuff.
Also are you sure the PT HD "structure" you're referring to is about audio and not about processing word length (32bit vs 64bit like we see in most modern processors)?

You may as well produce tracks using synth with 32bit float synth engines, but none of these DAW offer the possibility of exporting it as 32bit float audio, so the point is quite moot.

Quote by the chemist
But, with for a lot of applications, you wouldn't gain the benefits of 24 vs 32 bit depth anyways. I think the depth difference is something like 4 dBFS (from -140 to -144). So, a very negligible difference. Unnoticeable really, but some wad somewhere will say they can hear the difference.
Don't really know where you're getting that data from, but from the tech standpoint the headroom offered by 32bit int would be 192.66dB, while that one offered by 24bit int would be 144.49.

You are right saying more than 24bit would be pointless, tho that's because the best AD and DA converter circuits you see around have about 122dB and 130dB of headroom.
Quote by the chemist
Some hardware can mask combing.
Combing tho has nothing to do with sampling rate and resolution, so I don't see what you're on about here.
Quote by the chemist
I could give some people the best gear in the world and still get a turd. Everything is tied together.

From my experiences, having better sample rates/resolution will never help or correct crap technique and inexperience.
Yes, but we're not talking about performance and experience and stuff, we're talking about sound, we're arguing that if you record the same shit at a higher sampling rates and possibly higher resolution will still be shit, but it will sound better.

It won't be better as in it will make the performance better, it will be better as in it will record the same performance with better accuracy.
Lowering the power wouldn't lower the power that much, and there's no guarantee an amp with lower power would sound better than a higher power amp with the volume control turned down.

Also you can only use half the power if the amp has 4 power tubes, so just turn down the master volume control.
Garageband is what you're looking for, yes.
Guitar is a single source, so you should record it in mono.

After you recorded it, it's your choice to either let it rest in the centre or pan it somewhere.
If you absolutely have to get something get a Zoom H1 recorder.

I tho would highly advise saving up to get something worthwhile.
Depends on the data interface (USB, FW, TB...) used by the audio interface, the drivers and the computer's processing power.

Since you don't want to spend much money you're going to be stuck with USB, so find something that uses good drivers (not ASIO4ALL, hopefully not even ASIO).
If you're computers processor and motherboard aren't good enough you'll also not be able to get a very good latency no matter what - something like a core 2 single will likely not give you the results you're looking for.
Quote by 20Tigers
So, are there any flaws with this approach? Any reason not to do it like this or anything that I am overlooking? Or have I just figured out something that is already common practice?
Respectively no, it's a good idea, no, I don't see anything that you're overlooking if I'm getting your description right, and no, what you're doing isn't that common.

A lot of plugins tho have input and output volume controls, so in a lot of cases you can just work with these.
Quote by 20Tigers
It seems to be a very practical book instead of just theory it has a series of listening exercises and "homework".
I haven't read a single book on mixing and I find that theory is something I couldn't live without - it's much better to know why to do something and why it causes an effect instead of knowing that "if my mix sounds too muddy I need to turn down the bass knob on the eq" without knowing what that's actually doing.

If you know theory then you'll also be able to understand stuff like phase distortion, jitter, compression, what's the actual difference between linear phase (so called "mastering") eq's and so on, and that is so much useful.
Quote by the chemist
Monitoring is one small part. I don;t know who said it, but accurate clocking is just as important, as is accurate A/D D/A conversion, properly captured source material, processing, personal technique, etc.
Whoever it was, he was wrong.
The clock you find in a $50 audio interface won't make your high end equipment produce a sound nearly as bad as if you used a pair of low quality monitor speakers.
Quote by the chemist
a RedNet that samples 60 channels of I/O just fine at 192/32.
How fast and how much data you can manage/record/reproduce depends on the computer you're using more than anything - if you used the same rednet system on a $200 laptop with a 5400rpm HDD you wouldn't be able to record many tracks at once.
Quote by the chemist
This debate is more about preference.
If it was a matter of preference alone we wouldn't really be debating.
Quote by the chemist
a large number of engineering sessions at 88.2/24 and 88.2/32-float.
Floating point audio converters are so uncommon that you could say they don't exist, and there's no DAW that even lets you record floating point audio.
So no, people don't record stuff at 32bit float resolution.
Quote by the chemist
If you have an analog console (for example, an AWS924+), you can somewhat get away with lower sample rates because of analog signal path.
Meaning what exactly?
Quote by the chemist
that shows that a good enough engineer can overcome the known and inherent limitations of lower sample and bit rates.
Nobody's arguing that you can't make stuff sound better when recording it at 16/44.1, we're arguing that stuff sounds better when you record it at higher sample rates and higher resolution.
Quote by reverb66
44.1khz - stick with that and save yourself the hassle - the other sample rates don't sound any better - it's a bunch of marketing hype.
You should read the previous posts in this thread.
Quote by smtp4me
Any ideas what this could be, and how to fix it?
It's likely caused by the fact that you're connecting a line output into a hi-z input.

You could fix it by using a device that brings a line level signal to hi-z level or by using an audio interface with a line input.