Interface Recommendations

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by alohachris

IMO, the Duet's mic preamps ARE audibly & much better than the Fast Track.

I'd go as as far as to say there is absolutely no doubt what so ever that the Duet's pre's are cleaner than the M-Audio, that is to say at least "I" have no doubt. That's never been at issue

[alohachris]

Aloha,

The following clip's tracks were all recorded through an Apogee One using only it's onboard mic. The One is half a Duet & a cheaper option for you among entry level interfaces @ $249. It offers the same great mic preamp found on the Duet & Ensemble as well. You can't get THIS sound with a Fast Track:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwR2q5Obzs

alohachris

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by alohachris

Aloha,

The following clip's tracks were all recorded through an Apogee One using only it's onboard mic. The One is half a Duet & a cheaper option for you among entry level interfaces @ $249. It offers the same great mic preamp found on the Duet & Ensemble as well. You can't get THIS sound with a Fast Track:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwR2q5Obzs

alohachris

Chris, Chris, Chris,

This is absolutely the EXACT type of attitude I've been talking about for this entire thread. I've been soap boxing about how the kids/interns come to me full of backwards priorities who can talk about how great a piece of equipment is but simply fail at applying talent to the equation.

You post a video of Pete Thorn who quite possibly is America's most talented and sought after young session and live guitar player, (and engineer) maybe the world, who is revered for impeccable guitar touch, tone and technique and somehow manage to assign the quality of the recording to the Apogee. Again as if all someone has to do to get that kind of sound is call Sweetwater and order an Apogee.

Now for some who don't know better yet they may be funneled down "that old beaten path" that somehow by spending money on (in this case) more expensive equipment they can sound like Pete Thorn. The old adage of Pete could have done the same recording into a 1979 Tascam 4-track cassette player and it would've sounded great certainly applies here. Not because of the equipment but because of Pete.

I've run into Pete down in Santa Monica several times at Tru-Tone and the guy lives, breaths, eats and sleeps guitar, 24/7 and 365 days a year and he has since he's been a child. He's invested more hard work and BS&T's in his craft than most guitar players do in a lifetime. For those that might care the Apogee One does seems like a great little piece as is most of their stuff, but the quality of that recording has NOTHING to do with the Apogee and everything to do with pure talent.

[Steve Berger]

This really is quite a thread. When I posted my response to the OP about the Apogee Duet, it was only because I have a box full of gear and gadgets I've bought thru the years that didn't work either as advertised or as I expected it to.

The Apogee Duet (in conjunction with my iMac actually works better than advertised and Exceeded my expectations), that's the Only reason I recommended it.

Said simply . . . It works and I wanted to share that info with others to help them avoid having a box of gear that doesn't. i certainly wasn't suggesting or implying that the OP or anyone else should expect to become a great player without talent and effort.

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by Steve Berger

The Apogee Duet (in conjunction with my iMac actually works better than advertised and Exceeded my expectations), that's the Only reason I recommended it.

Said simply . . . It works and I wanted to share that info with others to help them avoid having a box of gear that doesn't. i certainly wasn't suggesting or implying that the OP or anyone else should expect to become a great player without talent and effort.

No one's directing anything at you Steve (at least I'm not) The Apogee and a million other pieces of gear have been (for some years now) MUCH better than the pilots whom are usually in control. The quality of Apogee and or the practical reasons you choose to purchase the box are really outside the scope of my points.

No offense to Sweetwater or any of the manufacturers involved but their marketing thrives and preys on the notion that "buying gear" makes for better sound. One only need to sit down and browse through Sweetwaters catalog to see the market has long past the point of sublime gluttony. Now in truth I don't assign any blame to Sweetwater as they're just doin' what they do. We however (as educated recording guys) should know better than to fall into that endless pit. At least that's my hope here.

I see the disconnect on a daily basis and it's really, REALLY frustrating for me. Most of these kids don't wanna mix, they wanna talk about the Sweetwater catalog and where it's clearly a generational thing, I still find it sad.

This is a recording forum and I'd love to swing some of the conversation away from "buying" things and more towards "recording" things. Recording topics like eq'ing tips ect. I'm not suggesting that topics concerning great equipment is wrong but a healthy does of reality (as to what really makes good audio) would balance out the here to fore lopsided equation.

Color me obsessed

[rjames1973]

All,

Thanks again for all of the posts on this thread. Just to nip some prospective postings in the bud regarding interface recommendations, I ordered the M-Audio Fast Track interface. Once I actually learn the process of home recording and get better at it, I will move on to an interface that offers more options than the M-Audio Fast Track. One thing I should have mentioned from the beginning is that I am purely a hobbyist guitarist. I am in my late 30s and have a full-time job that has nothing to do with the music business. Again, I appreciate all of the thought and effort that went into the posts on this thread. Please know that I will come back to this thread as I progress with my home recording tutelage and reference the recommendations that were offered here. Cheers!

[moon]

Edited - redundant.

Have fun

[rhancox]

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

You post a video of Pete Thorn who quite possibly is America's most talented and sought after young session and live guitar player, (and engineer) maybe the world, who is revered for impeccable guitar touch, tone and technique and somehow manage to assign the quality of the recording to the Apogee.

I'm a certified newb, but this is exactly what I was thinking. Let's hear the original dry tracks, then we can make an apples to apples comparison.

[moon]

It's not down to one thing or the other. Performance and gear are both important if you want to capture a good quality sound. All parts in the chain have to support each other.

I don't think buying an interface like the Duet, or a competitor like the Babyface, or Sound Devices Usbpre2, is like buying a Ferrari to go shopping at Walmart. They're just the best of the low-end gear and the fact that they have a sound encroaching on the high-end makes them fantastic value.

[Joseph Hanna]

Originally Posted by moon

It's not down to one thing or the other. Performance and gear are both important if you want to capture a good quality sound. All parts in the chain have to support each other.

I don't think buying an interface like the Duet, or competitors like the Babyface, or Sound Devices Usbpre2, is like buying a Ferrari to go shopping at Walmart. They're just the best of the low-end gear and the fact that they have a sound encroaching on the high-end makes them fantastic value.

No of course you're absolutely right I'm not opposed to anyone buying whatever they think they want (and Apogee is in that category) as long as the buyer is aware that the Apogee is NOT gonna make him (or her) a better engineer or recordist.

It's when the threads start to gravitate towards "suggesting" that in order to get really good sound ya gotta step up to expensive equipment that obviously my feathers get ruffled.

In the end a guy that can't make an M-Audio piece sound great also can't make the Apogee sound great...and vice-versa of course.

[KevWind]

[quote=Joseph Hanna;2645584] Sorry I have to respectfully agree and also disagree to some extent. Plus an acknowledgment While I by no stretch of the imagination have your experience level, as I have only been recording myself for 9 years. There are some points of clarification I would like to mention.

I've been soap boxing about how the kids/interns come to me full of backwards priorities who can talk about how great a piece of equipment is but simply fail at applying talent to the equation.

This I am sure is a problem and as you point out a mistake or flaw in thinking.
And and I think most who have enough experience and most here understand that there is absolutely no doubt that "Equipment can not make up for lack of talent" and that one cannot buy their way into experience, skill or talent or top level sound.
However it should be noted that, this being true ... does not make the inverse also categorically true.

Now for some who don't know better yet they may be funneled down "that old beaten path" that somehow by spending money on (in this case) more expensive equipment they can sound like Pete Thorn.

While this is certainly faulty thinking. It does not appear that anything close to that, has actually been suggested by any post here.

The old adage of Pete could have done the same recording into a 1979 Tascam 4-track cassette player and it would've sounded great certainly applies here. Not because of the equipment but because of Pete.

Here is where I agree with a caveat ! First "The old adage" is encompassing the two different aspects of recording that IMO for clarity's sake should be probably considered separately.
I think one needs to make the distinction between the performance and talent, of both the player and the engineer (the subjective)
And the actual sound and quality of the equipment (the objective).
While it's reasonable to state that "1979 Tascam 4-track cassette player and it would've sounded great " It should also be pointed out that the "same recording" and all else being equal, i.e. talent, performance, etc. into better quality gear will sound even better.

In other words as to the inverse I was referring to, and paraphrase your statements in reverse, would be "Now for some who don't know better yet they may be funneled down "that old beaten path" that with enough talent and skill you can make recordings on the cheapest gear that sound just as good as those coming out of high end studios. Because with digital, higher end gear doesn't really sound "that much" better it just costs more. So pro studios could just buy 30 Zoom H 4's and have 120 channels of the same sound as their Hundreds of thousand dollar rigs. Now I know this is of course not what you were saying or alluding to. So too no one is saying that you can just purchase your way to better recordings.

For those that might care the Apogee One does seems like a great little piece as is most of their stuff, but the quality of that recording has NOTHING to do with the Apogee and everything to do with pure talent.

Here I respectfully disagree, The quality of the performance in that recording has nothing to do with the Apogee and perhaps one could even say the bulk of the overall quality has everything to do with pure talent. BUT
in total, the quality of sound of the Apogee definitely comes in to play.

So to sum up my long winded blurb

So I agree, as I would guess most or all here understand. That learning the craft, is by far going to make the biggest single difference in ones recordings.
What I got out of Chris's post was (which I tend agree with) is that, with the Apogee the Peat Thorn recording is an example of what can be accomplished. Also depending ones goals and of course the B word- budget... What can happen to people who are, or become fairly serious about striving to get better recordings. Is that they can often go through a process of continually trading up in the quality of gear they purchase and might have in the longer run saved some, or at least end up spending no more. Then if they would have just purchased better quality gear in the first place.
And that if this does become case, of trading up continually. Some might say in the end its same, so it make no difference.
But consider that if one does get a better gear at the get go, Then one advantage is they can spend more time actually learning the craft as opposed to searching for better equipment.
But I agree that someone starting out can be well served for a number of years by the M Audio piece. IMO 16 channels of a good portion of Pro tools functionality is quite a good start. It is always a matter of balance, budget against desire.

[Sage97]

Originally Posted by rjames1973

All,

....., I ordered the M-Audio Fast Track interface.....

Congrats! Time to go make music and have fun.

Your thread will live on for a while.

[rjames1973]

Thanks, Sage97!

[rdm321]

I’ve followed this thread with a lot of interest. I’ve read all the posts, some of them several times. I appreciate all of the input, especially from those with studio experience.

As I’ve said previously, I’m a “let’s see what I can do with what I’ve got” person. I’ve used GB with a simple Fast Track interface and a medium-quality dynamic microphone for years. Admittedly, the FT can be noisy, but I learned how to tweak the knobs to pretty much eliminate that problem.

I’ve also learned that GB has many, many effects that can be used in many, many ways to change & improve simple recordings. I remember when I first discovered the settings on GB’s graphic EQ that eliminated the nasty booming “wolf tones” on my acoustic guitar recording. All of a sudden my old Guild guitar (notorious for boominess) sounded clear and crystalline. I could have solved the problem by buying another guitar, but the joy of discovery, of figuring something out on my own, was (quote) priceless (as well as free).

I’m in my 60s. I know that I’ll never make a penny from music. But I DO expect to get a lot of enjoyment from fooling around with my own at-home playing, songwriting and recording. And the fact that I can figure out tricks, shortcuts, tweaks, add-ons, effects etc contributes to my life-long learning journey.

Apologies for waxing philosophical. To the OP – enjoy!

[alohachris]

Aloha rjames,

Best of luck with your new interface, rjames. Now it's on to capturing your music!

Joe, my "attitude" here is completely in the spirit of sharing what's worked for me & helpfulness, right or wrong. Sometimes yours seems to be in the spirit of personal contentiousness. In this case, I would mildly argue, you may have made a few off-mark assumptions about my pretty straight-forward suggestions to rjames. Viva la difference.

The clip I included in my last post was about:

1) hearing what's possible with the One as the front end of a signal chain (as a cheaper alternative to the Duet & not that much more $ than the Fast Track), &

2) hearing the outstanding quality of the One's mic preamp - even through its onboard speaker. And that's beyond the great pro-level musicianship, nice spacing in the mix of Thorn, Lurie, et al. The front-end quality of the One's preamp is clearly audible.

I wasn't trying to foster an attitude of "buying your way to excellent recording quality" that some of your students may embrace. But hey, it's all a moot point now, right? Rjames has his entry level interface.

Hopefully rjames will learn from ALL the opinions expressed here & do his own research in putting together compatible & complementary parts of his signal chains, beyond the AGF forum. The notion of room treatment that you & I mentioned to him may be the most valuable part of the suggestions here.

Afterall, it's only gear. And it's only opinions. I certainly respect & learn from yours, Joe. So let's just agree to disagree, OK? All the best.

A Hui Hou!
alohachris