Which comes first? New preamp or new Interface?

[AcousticDreams]

I was just notified that my new Pair of Schoeps 621's are on its way. Should have them in hand in just a few days.

I will play with them just using my Zoom recorder for a few weeks.

Then comes building some panels and bass traps. I will put my wood working skills to good use.

But in a month or two's time, I would like purchase either a new interface or a new preamp. Obviously I need both...but the question is which one first?

I have but a first Generation Focusrite 18i20.

If what I am being told is completely true..that the preamp bypasses the electronics in the interface going through line level, Then it would seem that the only real benifet of an interface would be its converters. The Focusrite converters are nothing special.

I have taken a fancy to Cranborne audio's preamps. The recordings they have made are exactly the rock solid representation I am looking for. The recordings used a Larrivee 40 series guitar and a mid-side using AKG 414 and 451. I am very family with the tone of the 40 series. And I believe they captured the tone of the Larrivee very well. Or at least, the way I hear my Larrivee's.

Craneborne claims some unique features. Phase accuracy of a high standard. They have also have two Mojo buttons Cream and Thump( I think that what they call them) That can add a little of what tubes and Transformers are best known for.

On the other hand, The Audient ID44 is an incredible deal. Known for high quality preamps and a unique way of getting good A to D and D to A conversion through a doubling type technique of sorts. Also the ID44 has two channels with sends, so I can add a stereo compressor.

Or, I could even just add a separate converter to the old Focusrite.

I will probably get both, but the question is Which one first. OR do I just get the preamps and add a converter.

What is the true value of an interface for someone like me who does not want very many plug ins= especially if I can add my own preamps and converters?

[DukeX]

I would buy separate converters and preamps, that way to upgrade one you don't have to upgrade the other. And since you already have decent converters, I'd start with a 2-channel preamp.

[rick-slo]

When using an external clock as master for the first Generation Focusrite 18i20 my concern would be how accurately phase locked it would be with that external clock.
I use a Mytek AD converter as the external clock for my RME Fireface 800 but the RME performs a good phase lock loop and things sound better. I would probably go
with a new interface first.

[DCCougar]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

If what I am being told is completely true..that the preamp bypasses the electronics in the interface going through line level

What about not going through the line level and going through the focusrite's preamp instead? Would that be, like, wrong?

[RRuskin]

Originally Posted by DCCougar

What about not going through the line level and going through the focusrite's preamp instead? Would that be, like, wrong?

Not wrong but not ideal, either. An outboard pre doesn't need to got through yet another one. The best route is mic to mic pre to a "direct" in which has unity gain & nothing else.

[ChuckS]

Over time I've built up a recording chain with external gear. Originally I had a Focusrite 6i6 interface. When I got a pair of a bit nicer mics (3-Zigma) I also picked up a pair of external preamps (Speck MicPre 5.0). The Speck is a clean preamp and the output can be switched to either solid state or Jensen transformer. A bit later I got a Motu interface (still using the external Speck preamps) A bit later I got another pair of nicer mics (Gefell M296S omnis). A bit later I got an external ADC (Mytek Stereo192). A bit later I got another 2 channels of preamps (Gordon Model 5). I bought almost all my gear used or demo.

I like the idea of external preamps and converters, and use the interface primarily as only an interface. If I was in your situation I think I'd start by adding 2 channels of external preamps first.

[RRuskin]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

I also picked up a pair of external preamps (Speck MicPre 5.0). The Speck is a clean preamp and the output can be switched to either solid state or Jensen transformer.

I think you mean "direct" or "tranformerless" rather than "solid state." Using the transformer output doesn't change that.

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

....... I also picked up a pair of external preamps (Speck MicPre 5.0). The Speck is a clean preamp and the output can be switched to either solid state or Jensen transformer. .......

Originally Posted by RRuskin

I think you mean "direct" or "tranformerless" rather than "solid state." Using the transformer output doesn't change that.

I guess the way I stated the Speck preamp output selection may have caused confusion. The company phrases it as "With the push of a button, the MP 5.0 can change from a "Transformer-Balanced" output to a "Active-Balanced" output."

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

If what I am being told is completely true..that the preamp bypasses the electronics in the interface going through line level, Then it would seem that the only real benifet of an interface would be its converters. The Focusrite converters are nothing special.

Don't mean to be nit picky but terminology and wording are very important to minimize confusion.

So first off yes and no to the above.
The (no) when using a preamp into an interface, the pre amp does not "bypass the electronics in the interface going through line level",,,,, you are still using some of the "electronics" of the interface i.e. the circuitry that goes from the line level input jack to the converters. The purpose is to bypass he "mic pre's" of the interface with ostensibly higher quality mic pre's of the outboard unit .
The (yes) you would then be using the interface for the converters and the driver software to communicate with the DAW in the computer .

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Don't mean to be nit picky but terminology and wording are very important to minimize confusion.

So first off yes and no to the above.
The (no) when using a preamp into an interface, the pre amp does not "bypass the electronics in the interface going through line level",,,,, you are still using some of the "electronics" of the interface i.e. the circuitry that goes from the line level input jack to the converters. The purpose is to bypass he "mic pre's" of the interface with ostensibly higher quality mic pre's of the outboard unit .
The (yes) you would then be using the interface for the converters and the driver software to communicate with the DAW in the computer .

As always, Good Points KevWind.

Yes I did mean bypassing the Mic pres. But I am glad I accidentally used the wrong terminology, because you bring up an important questions that I was over looking;

* Are there any real quality differences between Line level electronics from one interface to another? I would expect so? Just in the type of connector and wire alone can make a difference. And the quality of what ever other electronics are needed(Capacitors & Resistors?)

This information alone leads me to think about an interface that might have a....supposedly better Line level electronics.

**I know that it could be argued that the drivers only function is to communicate with he Daw...But is it possible that some drivers are better than others In the way they effect the Quality of transmission of the source material to the Daw? In other words, can information be lost through the driver to the Daw because of the way the driver works? Could a driver from one manufacturer Effect the sound in some way? I would think not....but I do not really understand how a Driver plays into the role of Transmission of the signal. Certainly an interesting question.

*** Does adding an external converter in any given interface go through any electronics of the interface? I would think so. This is a similar question to a mic pre going through Line Level inputs. Are there differences in the quality of electronics. And if that is so, then could not the electronics of the interface effect the transmission of signal to the external converter?

All of these new questions lead me to think that a new interface might have more value than I previously realized.

I am one of those people who believe ever single part of a guitar can make a sonic difference. And with Electronics it should be the same. Years ago I worked for a high end Stereo store where we sold extremely expensive speakers. We did extensive tests in difference brands of speaker wire and found there to be some difference.

I very much look forward to all of your replies. I assure you, your answers have made a difference. Sincerely, I thank you very much for your inputs.

[DukeX]

Making simple thinks complicated.

An "interface" is newer terminology. It's just a preamp and converter. You don't need it if you buy a new ADA converter (and preamp) because the ADA converter IS the interface (takes analogue and converts to digital).

If you keep your interface and use an external preamp, you bypass the preamps in the interface--simple--and just use the converters. Stop worrying about line-level degradation (there isn't any), drivers, and software. You will never hear a difference.

I do not even think you need new converters. Seriously, if you can't make great recordings with the converters you already have, you can't make great recordings. Of course, the same could be said for the preamps, but the preamp will make a bigger difference than different converters (yours are plenty good).

[Doug Young]

The best setup I've had as far as what you're talking about was with everything separate. My chain was:

RME AEA32 PCI card - just the digital interface, took digital in, got it into the computer

Cransong HEDD A/D, just the conversion

Great River MP2H - just the preamp, all analog

I liked that setup, but when I moved from the old cheese grate Mac to a trashcan, I could no longer use PCI cards. Went with the all-in-one Apogee Ensemble, which, while it feels less pure and high end than the old setup, sounds great, is more flexible, more channels, and Apogee's quality is still more than I need anyway. I do still use the Great River, doing the bypass the Apogee preamps approach, most of the time, unless I need more channels.

[ChuckS]

If you think at some time you may add external ADC you should make yourself aware of the digital interface from the external ADC to the audio interface. There are multiple 'standards' such as Toslink, ADAT, SPDIF, and AES.

If you get an audio interface you'll want to know if the line inputs bypass the interface preamps (subject you have been discussing) as well as what digital interface standard you want to use for a possible external ADC (and maybe external DAC as well) in the future.

Also, there are a few audio interfaces that don't have analog inputs (they don't have preamps, line inputs, or ADC). They are made just for digital connections to external gear. The Motu 8D is an example of that type.

[Gordon Currie]

For modern recording I think it is the best use of $ to get the interface (preamp + a/d converter) sorted out before anything else.

I don't know when that Focusrite was made, but digital audio technology and converter design in particular are constantly improving.
Unlike analog, where that 40 year old high end equipment is possibly still worth using, converters/interfaces from more than a decade ago are often not equal to moderate equipment of today.

I love a good preamp as much as the next person, but you'll only hear it when the track goes down. You will be listening to the converters (and amp/speakers/etc) far more while editing and mixing.

Many high quality interfaces have very good preamps these days. My RME Fireface is super clean and accurate, and I wouldn't use an outboard preamp unless it brought something truly amazing to the party.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

As always, Good Points KevWind.

Yes I did mean bypassing the Mic pres. But I am glad I accidentally used the wrong terminology, because you bring up an important questions that I was over looking;

* Are there any real quality differences between Line level electronics from one interface to another? I would expect so? Just in the type of connector and wire alone can make a difference. And the quality of what ever other electronics are needed(Capacitors & Resistors?)

This information alone leads me to think about an interface that might have a....supposedly better Line level electronics.

**I know that it could be argued that the drivers only function is to communicate with he Daw...But is it possible that some drivers are better than others In the way they effect the Quality of transmission of the source material to the Daw? In other words, can information be lost through the driver to the Daw because of the way the driver works? Could a driver from one manufacturer Effect the sound in some way? I would think not....but I do not really understand how a Driver plays into the role of Transmission of the signal. Certainly an interesting question.

*** Does adding an external converter in any given interface go through any electronics of the interface? I would think so. This is a similar question to a mic pre going through Line Level inputs. Are there differences in the quality of electronics. And if that is so, then could not the electronics of the interface effect the transmission of signal to the external converter?

All of these new questions lead me to think that a new interface might have more value than I previously realized.

I am one of those people who believe ever single part of a guitar can make a sonic difference. And with Electronics it should be the same. Years ago I worked for a high end Stereo store where we sold extremely expensive speakers. We did extensive tests in difference brands of speaker wire and found there to be some difference.

I very much look forward to all of your replies. I assure you, your answers have made a difference. Sincerely, I thank you very much for your inputs.

You are asking some great questions.

However ( and only in a general sense) while it is true that everything in the signal path does matter (or as some might say only as good as the weakest link)

It is also true that with todays electronics and digital software, that for a modern "Home Recording" there is also a "general relative consecutive numerical list" (for lake of a better phrase) of probable importance for consideration.

While there could be some specific situational exceptions, but in general The relative importance list goes "roughly" like this, and more or less follows the actual signal path (and of course after considering the guitar and guitarist.)



#1 The room acoustics and its relation to the recording position, and the mic placement. (BTW the room is often by far the "weakest link" in most home recording situations )

#2 The quality of mic > and pre/s

# 3 If you're using out board analog processing on the in for recording i.e. the quality of the comp, eq , and or reverb. (Which I tend to not do, I basically record raw = unprocessed) .

#4 the quality of outboard processing units for mixing (Which do use a comp and a reverb)

Then we get to things which are ultimately can be a factor BUT (because of advances in modern digital electronics and software) are arguably much less important, and the least likely to have a dramatic or easily noticeable effect.

The quality of interface components and converters ,,,,, while it is true the better the components and converters, the better quality of sound..... BUT it is a fairly subtle difference at most. Today even the entry level "Pro-sumer" interfaces have quite usable conversion. As far as the actual circuity ? again given modern assembly consistency techniques, I would rate it fairly low in being a noticeable factor in sound.

And IMO the least important, to almost not important (as far as sound) is the software like the particular "Drivers" and the DAW algorithms. In fact in null test ,after test, after test, of DAW audio engines (no plugins) they all basically cancel
The difference in DAWs is about workflow not "sound of audio engine"