Getting quality audio in to a laptop, mixers, affects?

[FlyFishn]

Hi All. I have been lurking the Internet for a while looking for some answers to what I am looking to do but I am still fuzzy as to the options and what the results might be.

Background - I have played guitar for about the past 20 years, never very well but I've dabbled in it. I got a 10 channel mixer a long time ago (Behringer 1002 I think is the model, not sure what the letters are in front). Back in the day I ran an RCA cable to a mic jack on the sound card of my computer. I was able to get OK audio that way. All I have now is a laptop with a configurable 3.5mm port for mic, line in, headphones. I can't get the mixer in that port without a lot of noise.

I've been looking at some options like the basic USB audio adapters (Behringer U-Control's for example) and mixers that have USB functionality built in.

I think what I am more inclined to to is get a mixer that has the USB functionality built in -such as the Allen & Heath ZED60-10FX. I just don't know about the pluses/minuses of these set ups.

With a separate adapter the mixer doesn't matter, I don't think. I could run my current mixer (though it has some issues) then upgrade to any analog/basic mixer later.

Though, I am under the impression that built in USB functionality in some mixers does more than just act as a bridge for the stereo audio in/out, which I think is all I really need. Can I send individual channels/tracks over USB? Or just the main mix in stereo? What about further controls and affects processing through the computer?

Would there be any issue in using a separate analog mixer to hook up, say, a drum set and vocals to one main mix, then bring that main mix through a stereo channel on a USB mixer for expanded channel capacity?

As far as affects go - some reverb and chorus is really all I'd be interested in for acoustic. Though, I am pretty sure the mixers with built in affects only allow 1 affect at a time. Are there any processors that you would recommend? Pedals?

[sdelsolray]

If you could answer the following questions, I suspect folks can help more:

1. Are you recording just your guitar? Guitar and singing? A Group?

2. Are you using a pickup or microphone for the guitar?

3. Once you have recorded several songs what do you want to do with those recordings?

[FlyFishn]

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

If you could answer the following questions, I suspect folks can help more:

1. Are you recording just your guitar? Guitar and singing? A Group?

I am looking to record several things but right now the main goal is to record my aoustic and electric guitars. Electric is stereo.

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

2. Are you using a pickup or microphone for the guitar?

Acoustic is a Taylor 314CE - expression system 2 I think is what it has.

Originally Posted by sdelsolray

3. Once you have recorded several songs what do you want to do with those recordings?

Well I am not looking to "produce" music, at least in the near future. I'd like to share my recordings with friends and family via internet. I may possibly want hard-copy recordings like on a CD or DVD.

Another thing I want to do is extract the audio off of a VCR cassette. We have a VCR of my grandmother playing piano that I want to digitize the audio from and make a tracked CD for my family.

At some point I may want to record in a band setting. We'll see where my music hobby goes. If I can have room for expansion/growth that would be great.

[muscmp]

welcome to the AGF!

i would recommend that you get a focusrite scarlett or presonus audio interface. that way you know how your music is going to enter the computer.

what DAW(garageband/reaper) are you using and what computer? apple or pc?

since your electric guitar is stereo, it must be something like a gibson 355. that is one of the very few that are stereo.

you didn't mention vocals but you still may need a mic. you could record the taylor with a mic and you could record your guitar out of your amp with a mic.

with the audio interface, you'll be able to download your vcr tape into your computer and digitize it. first run the entire tape forward and rewind so that it is settled. that MAY eliminate any pitch changes you may have. you'll need to use an adapter that is rca to 1/4" to be able to do that tho.

you may be able to run the mixer thru the audio interface but it also may be unnecessary due to your DAW most likely having mixing capabilities.

there are no rules so try a lot of different methods.

play music!

[ChuckS]

You could consider the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2, 2i4, or 6i6. While you could use your your old mixer with the audio interface I'd suggest not to. The interface will probably give you lower noise recordings without the mixer and it will be one less thing to connect and get the gains optimized.

How many preamps do you need at the same time?

[FlyFishn]

Originally Posted by muscmp

welcome to the AGF!

i would recommend that you get a focusrite scarlett or presonus audio interface. that way you know how your music is going to enter the computer.

I have heard of/seen in a store the Focusrite products. I suppose I still am missing the boat on what makes one so good. If I have a mixer to do the analog EQ and level adjustments why would I want a separate box that has all of that built in? Is it the sampling rate? Preamp quality? If the quality is thought to be higher in what mixers is that comparison made? Mackie? Behringer? Nady? Are there any higher end mixer options that are up to par with the audio interfaces?

Originally Posted by muscmp

what DAW(garageband/reaper) are you using and what computer? apple or pc?

Right now I have a free download of NCH Mixpad. Computer is a PC, Windows 8.1. Not the greatest but it works...

Originally Posted by muscmp

since your electric guitar is stereo, it must be something like a gibson 355. that is one of the very few that are stereo.

The guitar itself isn't stereo - both my amp and Line 6 POD are. Amp is a Marshall VS265 with stereo chorus. The POD is self explanatory - multiple amp and affects modelling in one box.

Originally Posted by muscmp

you didn't mention vocals but you still may need a mic. you could record the taylor with a mic and you could record your guitar out of your amp with a mic.

I have a couple mic's. The better of the two is a Heil Goldline, GM-4, with a custom 3 pin XLR cable from the stock 4 pin XLR on the mic. The wide range element sounds pretty good for music, though not designed for it (ham radio mic). I've recorded an acoustic guitar off of it in years past.

Originally Posted by muscmp

with the audio interface, you'll be able to download your vcr tape into your computer and digitize it. first run the entire tape forward and rewind so that it is settled. that MAY eliminate any pitch changes you may have. you'll need to use an adapter that is rca to 1/4" to be able to do that tho.

Good tips. I'll keep that in mind.

Originally Posted by muscmp

you may be able to run the mixer thru the audio interface but it also may be unnecessary due to your DAW most likely having mixing capabilities.

I am a knobs, buttons, faders, and switches kind of person. Software is good, but I'd like to keep the adjustments analog. Back in the day, my dream mixer was a 48 channel GL3800 with one bank half mono/half stereo. I don't think you can find current production mixers with analog V/U meters anymore. The high end ones are digital with touch screens.

Originally Posted by muscmp

there are no rules so try a lot of different methods.

play music!

Good stuff. I like your theories.

Originally Posted by ChuckS

How many preamps do you need at the same time?

Preamps in use will generally one one - either mono or stereo (I suppose stereo would be 2 - split left and right). Though, I really don't want to limit myself to that.

[MikeBmusic]

I would also recommend an audio interface, rather than a USB mixer. It may be a learning curve to get used to it, but doing your EQ and FX "in the box" (i.e. in the computer) provides so much more options for recordings.
If you're relying on the mixer for EQ when tracking, then you're stuck with those tracks as recorded. When mixing multiple tracks you often need to adjust the EQ differently on tracks to make every thing "fit" - for example notching some mid frequencies out of the guitar to allow more 'room' for the vocals. You can also do things like use a different reverb (plate, for example) on the vocal than on the instruments (room/hall).

A decent audio interface not only gives you better A/D/A converters, it also gives you better monitoring options (i.e listening to your already-recorded tracks while recording new tracks).

Yes, you can certainly mic up a whole drum kit, run it through a mixer to a stereo output and then record that stereo track (using the line-in inputs on the interface), of course you've got to get the whole kit balanced up first on the mixer, as you wont' be able to adjust individual levels once recorded.

Recording guitar - your acoustic is going to sound much better miked up than plugged in. Your electric is going to sound much better if you mic up the amp, rather than use the amp's DI output.

[Dr. Martin]

The Focusrite audio interfaces are well liked, but I have become interested in the Behringer U-Phoria UMC 204HD which is well specced and a bit cheaper. Decent condenser mics can be purchased these days for not too much cash, and they work well with audio interfaces.

[FlyFishn]

Originally Posted by MikeBmusic

I would also recommend an audio interface, rather than a USB mixer. It may be a learning curve to get used to it, but doing your EQ and FX "in the box" (i.e. in the computer) provides so much more options for recordings.

Wouldn't I have the same ability to let the computer "do the work" running a pretty plain signal in to the computer from a mixer then modify the track from there as you suggest?

Originally Posted by MikeBmusic

If you're relying on the mixer for EQ when tracking, then you're stuck with those tracks as recorded. When mixing multiple tracks you often need to adjust the EQ differently on tracks to make every thing "fit" - for example notching some mid frequencies out of the guitar to allow more 'room' for the vocals. You can also do things like use a different reverb (plate, for example) on the vocal than on the instruments (room/hall).

Same question as above here..

Originally Posted by MikeBmusic

A decent audio interface not only gives you better A/D/A converters, it also gives you better monitoring options (i.e listening to your already-recorded tracks while recording new tracks).

I suppose I am not picking up what you're laying down as far as monitoring options. Are you saying the input and output of the audio interface can be split so, say, I could have the playback going to speakers or headphones and I could record my playing on the input along side? How would that be any different from sending playback to headphones on a mixer and main mix out back to the USB?

Originally Posted by MikeBmusic

Recording guitar - your acoustic is going to sound much better miked up than plugged in. Your electric is going to sound much better if you mic up the amp, rather than use the amp's DI output.

Thanks for the note. I'll have to play with that. I did notice in one of my recordings how tilting the guitar towards or away from the mic changed the amplitude and voice a bit. There may be a lot of flexibility there that will be fun to experiment with.

[MikeBmusic]

Originally Posted by FlyFishn

Wouldn't I have the same ability to let the computer "do the work" running a pretty plain signal in to the computer from a mixer then modify the track from there as you suggest?


Same question as above here..


I suppose I am not picking up what you're laying down as far as monitoring options. Are you saying the input and output of the audio interface can be split so, say, I could have the playback going to speakers or headphones and I could record my playing on the input along side? How would that be any different from sending playback to headphones on a mixer and main mix out back to the USB?


Thanks for the note. I'll have to play with that. I did notice in one of my recordings how tilting the guitar towards or away from the mic changed the amplitude and voice a bit. There may be a lot of flexibility there that will be fun to experiment with.

Why EQ with a mixer if you are going to do it in the computer after? If you've already pulled a lot of the bass (or highs) out of the track with the mixer, then they will not be there in the recording to boost back up (or a lot of noise could be added if you do so).

Monitoring: if you're recording with a mic, then you want to listen to already-recorded tracks with headphones. If you're recording DI (direct in, not mics), then you could use speakers/monitors (but you'll probably find headphones is better).
With a USB mixer, the monitoring options can be limited - the mixer may or may not allow monitoring of the previous tracks - some mixers put that "USB in" to the main output, which also feeds the USB out, so you end up re-recording the previous tracks along with your new one.
Audio interfaces have a 'direct monitoring' feature, so you hear the actual input of what you are recording now (not the signal sent to the computer and then sent back, which can cause delay - 'latency') along with the previous tracks from the computer and allows you to balance out the volumes so you can hear both.

So you have already experimented with miking your acoustic guitar, that's good, and you have already found out it is important to not move around when doing it! The position of the mic in relation to the guitar is very important.

[FlyFishn]

I am really glad I got on the forums here and started asking questions. This is the kind of stuff I haven't had anyone able to tell me yet, nor was I catching on to the advertisements and how-to video content that I watched.

As far as the latency goes - I suppose I never even realized that would be an issue. If the computer is playing tracks back there is going to be some latency, very small but some, between the track being played and the track being recorded regardless. Then again, it wouldn't take much to shift a track for alignment purposes - one of the benefits of recording tracks on the computer in the first place.

How much is the difference between 48KHz and 96KHz sample rates? Obviously, 96 is twice 48, but in reality is there a noticeable difference? Or is it something most people wouldn't pick up on?

[MikeBmusic]

Originally Posted by FlyFishn

I am really glad I got on the forums here and started asking questions. This is the kind of stuff I haven't had anyone able to tell me yet, nor was I catching on to the advertisements and how-to video content that I watched.

As far as the latency goes - I suppose I never even realized that would be an issue. If the computer is playing tracks back there is going to be some latency, very small but some, between the track being played and the track being recorded regardless. Then again, it wouldn't take much to shift a track for alignment purposes - one of the benefits of recording tracks on the computer in the first place.

How much is the difference between 48KHz and 96KHz sample rates? Obviously, 96 is twice 48, but in reality is there a noticeable difference? Or is it something most people wouldn't pick up on?

The DAW takes care of any latency and lines up the tracks (new and old) automatically.

Unless you have some fantastic listening room, acoustically treated by a professional, and very expensive monitors - and TRAINED ears - you won't hear the difference between 96 and 48. The files will just be twice as big.
Record at 48kHz/24 bit and convert to 16 bit WAV and MP3 files when you're done mixing/mastering. If you're synching to video, its recommended to use 44.1kHz sample rate.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by FlyFishn

I am really glad I got on the forums here and started asking questions. This is the kind of stuff I haven't had anyone able to tell me yet, nor was I catching on to the advertisements and how-to video content that I watched.

As far as the latency goes - I suppose I never even realized that would be an issue. If the computer is playing tracks back there is going to be some latency, very small but some, between the track being played and the track being recorded regardless. Then again, it wouldn't take much to shift a track for alignment purposes - one of the benefits of recording tracks on the computer in the first place.

How much is the difference between 48KHz and 96KHz sample rates? Obviously, 96 is twice 48, but in reality is there a noticeable difference? Or is it something most people wouldn't pick up on?

To clarify a bit more :
While the notion of physical faders has a certain appeal, for limited channel home recording it is probably more nostalgia than any real advantage . Also if you are planning on using physical faders for digital recording consider that it represents significantly more money. As does more input channels involve more money, plain and simple , regardless of wives tales and advertising hype. More analog channels always equals either more money or lesser cost and quality components. There really is no way around it.

So as people have suggested If you are not planning on recording more than two channels (even if you might at some time in the future ) then you are going to better served and can get higher quality for the same money by going to a two channel interface

Because it will likely have better mic preamps and better converters than a multi channel mixer and definitely better converters than a computer sound card. And in digital converters do in fact play a part in the quality of sound

As far as the difference between 48k and 96k or even 44k for that matter as far as recording and playback not really all that noticeable. The advantage of 96k is more related to mixing and plugins for some fairly complex mathematical reasons of working in the DAW environment. Also 96k uses much more CPU so it requires a pretty powerful computer
BUT unequivocally, for recording 24 bit is going to give better headroom than 16 bit .

Also as far a latency/ delay most good DAW's have delay compensation and input monitoring as Mike pointed out, so it is unnecessary to shift tracks .

[FlyFishn]

Good stuff. Things are starting to click. Like muscmp said earlier - there are no rules. Though, piecing these details together is what paints the pictures of how this all works.

So if a device has a certain sample rate as a spec, or max spec, is that something that is readily able to be adjusted down? Or does it depend on the driver and how the device is able to be configured as to how much adjustability there is in the sample rate?

Example - if a device has a max 48KHz rate can it be set/configured to 44.1, 24, or 16KHz also? Or will certain driver software limit it to, say, 48, 24, and 16?

[FlyFishn]

In looking at some options it looks like the Focusrite Scarlet 2i4/second gen has a lot more flexibility with outputs than the Solo or 2i2.

The mixer I'm looking at is the Allen & Heath ZED60-10FX.

As far as pricing goes - the 2i4 is already half the price of the mixer. I'd have twice the channel capacity, built in affects processor, analog adjustment for a stand-alone audio set up, and still 48KHz sampling rate to the computer. via USB.

So I guess what I need to figure is if the extra flexibility and options are necessary.

Any thoughts with my line of thinking here?