Modern Computer Based Recording Studio With Cubase

_brian_

_brian_

Member
Hello everyone, it's been a while!

I had to sell up my recording equipment to head down south for a new job and I want to start again. I want to start creating a new recording studio - cubase based - it's all I've enjoyed using.

I would like some help from everyone because I don't want to waste money and get something I don't want. Now, I do have some audio equipment that remained unsold or I bought as a stopgap. I'm using a beefy laptop - in the future it will be a powerful desktop I'm using - along with cubase elements (I will get the full version of Cubase in the near future).

Currently I have;

Recording
Phonic Firefly USB interface (not the best audio quality and has latency problems)
Allen & Heath Zed 10 (I really can't deal with the latency)
Focusrite Scarlett 2i4 (Decent latency real dropping out issues, I think I received a faulty one (Yes I did select the correct driver!))

Mackie CR4 Monitors (Not very good audio quality, too much bass etc)
Beyerdynamic DT770

Audio Technica AT2035
Shure SM57 Beta


Instruments
Roland TD-11KV
Fender USA Precision Bass
Various Fender & Gibson guitars
Digitech RP500 etc
Mesa Boogie Amp
Yamaha keyboard

Now, I have to buy this bit by bit so my budget is a difficult one to sort out. I am no beginner, but I am no pro, I would like to use my money wisely to get good results. How difficult is it to get latency free high quality recording? This is the biggest problem I have. Because I write alone, and because I like to hear the end result - eg what is being recorded over some kind of direct monitoring this has been quite infuriating for me.

I like to have all of my instruments set up in a mixer ready to go, all audio levels preset. I also want to start publishing my music online again for sale so this has to be a decent setup which allows me to record hassle free - especially when inspiration hits.

Any advice is welcome, I feel like I've lost a grip on modern standards of audio recording and need some advice to get me right up to speed on what I can and can't do with todays technology.

Cheers, Bri
 
Contemporary interfaces should deliver low-latency recording, and with direct monitoring, zero latency.

However, you need to make sure you are using the interfaces for both input and output audio. The broad signal path should be inputs (mikes, instruments) > interface > computer > interface> outputs (headphones, speakers). I know many people have experienced problems when they have used their computer's on-board sound for their outputs (i.e. listening via computer speakers).

Using the little mixer is fine. Just take its main outputs and go into line inputs of the interface.
 
Yeah, I tried everything with those interfaces. The little phonic unit wasn't too bad for latency - I managed to get it down low without pops etc, but scarlett sounds great when it works, however it suddenly mutes for no reason - with a huge or small buffer size it does the same. It's impossible to use. I was told by the manufacturer to select the correct driver and all the other basic things I had already done, so I gave up on it - waste of money.

The Zed 10 mixer sounds decent and I managed to get down to 11ms but that's not low enough for me. The way I write, I need to hear the computer processed signal, listening direct results in crappy results.

I like to really feel the effects and get the best out of the instrument in real time, to add effects retrospectively is kind of crap to me. I would have gone for a hardware based recorder, however I cannot lose the graphical interface the computer allows you to use. I can end up making quite complicated mixes which are a nightmare to track blind.

I'm really looking to get 4ms or less latency, and probably willing to spend up to £400 on an interface. I don't know if it's worth just getting a desktop computer married up with a firewire interface or if there's now better out there that I don't know about.
 
Hi Brian. I shall now amaze all the regulars here and recommend the Native Instruments Komplete Audio 6! (yeah! Sarcasm is the lowest...)

Sorry but it still remains THE best bang for buck in interfaces AKAIK especially in your situation. You could use the KA6's excellent mic amps plus the ZED 10 (got one) to feed the line 3/4 inputs and enjoy 4 mic recording. Latency is lower than almost anything else on the market at £200 and somewhat above.

You have a Yammy keyboard, MIDI? The KA will serve as a MIDI interface and give ultra low latency "softsynth" playback. The AI comes with a light Cubase version so you would have a spare copy for location work on the laptop say?
Kontakt Player and about 3G of downloadable samples. And just about THE best, most stable drivers you will get this side of RME (who, BTW have been rumoured to have had a hand in the design!)

There ARE later AIs. F'rite, Tascam and Steinberg have all had a facelift and the new products ARE excellent by all accounts but none seem to beat the KA6 for connectivity and driver/latency quality so far.

Dave.
 
I'd tend to agree - latency really hasn't been a problem on my last two computers - as long as you don't use very budget end processors in the PC.

I'm actually not convinced latency is a real issue now with decent internal cards, or proper external devices. I have a Lexicon, a Tascam (my studio multi-channel one, and a Behringer X32. None of these are in use, showing any signs of any delay that myself or the people on the recording end moan about? I hear lots of comments about people with in-ears finding even short delays intolerable, and even nauseous but my experiments seem to show that this only applies with a totally dead signal, and adding just a tiny bit of reverb to make it sound more real, and like singing live on stage? I'm pretty sold ion the idea that the isolation of headphones and in-ears makes the delay confuse your brain. After all - a sidehill on stage can be 10-12m away, and nobody moans about that 10-12ms latency - yet I hear people complaining 5ms is too much to perform???

Clearly, once you start to get up into the 20ms area - it's a proper detectable echo, and you have to be careful of lots of small delays adding up - but mine seem to run between 5 and 11ms. You do need to make sure Windows 10 doesn't automatically install older drivers - mine did this recently and really confused me till I downloaded the current one from the manufacturer.
 
rob aylestone said:
I'd tend to agree - latency really hasn't been a problem on my last two computers - as long as you don't use very budget end processors in the PC.

I'm actually not convinced latency is a real issue now with decent internal cards, or proper external devices. I have a Lexicon, a Tascam (my studio multi-channel one, and a Behringer X32. None of these are in use, showing any signs of any delay that myself or the people on the recording end moan about? I hear lots of comments about people with in-ears finding even short delays intolerable, and even nauseous but my experiments seem to show that this only applies with a totally dead signal, and adding just a tiny bit of reverb to make it sound more real, and like singing live on stage? I'm pretty sold ion the idea that the isolation of headphones and in-ears makes the delay confuse your brain. After all - a sidehill on stage can be 10-12m away, and nobody moans about that 10-12ms latency - yet I hear people complaining 5ms is too much to perform???

Clearly, once you start to get up into the 20ms area - it's a proper detectable echo, and you have to be careful of lots of small delays adding up - but mine seem to run between 5 and 11ms. You do need to make sure Windows 10 doesn't automatically install older drivers - mine did this recently and really confused me till I downloaded the current one from the manufacturer.
Click to expand...

Strange, I've found with the 11ms of the Zed 10 is really messing up me recording drums.
 
I hadn't realised the Zed10 was a USB interface itself.

So you can go inputs > Zed10 > PC via USB.

But I am not clear on how you are monitoring what you are recording.

If you are using the Zed10 you should be monitoring through it, i.e. speakers and headphones connected to it, and not to the computer. The latency you experience may be the 11ms of the Zed plus whatever is being generated by your computer's internal sound, if that's what you are listening to.
 
_brian_ said:
Strange, I've found with the 11ms of the Zed 10 is really messing up me recording drums.
Click to expand...

That is not really fair on the ZED 10. It is not a full blown audio interface, it is a very good mixer with excellent pre amps EQ etc and Fx. The USB facility is just a stereo, 16 bit feed that is of the 1st generation "generic" USB audio type, there are no ASIO drivers for it.

Latency matters depending on what you are trying to do. My son could easily play a controller keyboard through a 2496 (into Tannoy 5As) at 256 samples but, he could not PLAY ALONG with a previously recorded track until the card was set for 128 samples and even then he struggled. The card goes down to 64 samples but the PC was then quite cheap and feeble and could not manage 64 samples. N.B. the KA6 will run at 32 samples on this i3 laptop, so long as I aske very little more of it!

Dave.
 
_brian_ said:
The way I write, I need to hear the computer processed signal, listening direct results in crappy results.
Click to expand...

And yet thousands of others do just fine with direct monitoring. I bet you could find a way to use direct monitoring more effectively.

If you must process the sound in real time you will get some latency. There are people doing that and getting what they call inaudibly low latency. I would suspect they're keeping it below 8ms or so, though I can see that still being a problem for some people. Once you get below about 3ms it's more or less equivalent to the acoustic delay from a snare or tom to the player's ear.
 
Are you playing real or electronic drums?

If electronic drums, monitor the sound from the drum brain instead of the computer and capture the performance.

For everything else, if you need the effects to play, you may need to get outboard effects and just record them.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
And yet thousands of others do just fine with direct monitoring. I bet you could find a way to use direct monitoring more effectively.

If you must process the sound in real time you will get some latency. There are people doing that and getting what they call inaudibly low latency. I would suspect they're keeping it below 8ms or so, though I can see that still being a problem for some people. Once you get below about 3ms it's more or less equivalent to the acoustic delay from a snare or tom to the player's ear.
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in what thousands of others do, I've asked for advice in order to get what I want.

EG - low latency and decent sound quality, I have never liked direct monitoring. I used to use hardware recorders, but cannot do without a computer interface, I don't think it's too difficult a problem to solve.

I used to use an EMU 0404 with XP and didn't have the latency bother I have now.
 
Farview said:
Are you playing real or electronic drums?

If electronic drums, monitor the sound from the drum brain instead of the computer and capture the performance.

For everything else, if you need the effects to play, you may need to get outboard effects and just record them.
Click to expand...

I don't want to monitor direct, I use a few effect plugins to really get me into the feel of the music.
 
_brian_ said:
I don't want to monitor direct, I use a few effect plugins to really get me into the feel of the music.
Click to expand...

Then learn two basic things: how to get your tone more or less right before it hits the interface, and how to add parallel effects (like reverb) in the DAW without monitoring through the DAW.

Or step up to a better interface. Many newer interfaces have DSP direct monitoring software that allows you to hear effects while tracking and still keep the latency low. The UAD Apollo interfaces do this.
 
Hi Brian. I can understand you growing a bit irritated! You are not a noob and you HAD a PCI based system that was of very low latency. Today it is USB most of the way, even Firewire was not (note the passed tense!) always super quick and of course had many and varied issues including a tendency to self destruct!

As has been said, most of the run of the mill AIs at around 50/70 quid per track will give low enough latency FOR MOST RECORDING PURPOSES. The snag is they are not, despite claims to the contrary, "ultra low" latency interfaces. Check out the wise words of TAFKAT over at Sound on Sound forum.

I have mentioned the Native Instruments KA6 and I feel sure it would work well for you but perhaps it is time to really get shoulder to that yacht and go RME? Their latest AI is nothing short of magic. Same (eff all!) latency for TB and USB3.0 (no, they have NOT borked TB, they have made USB 3 its equal) . RME are also one of the few AI companies that keep ahead of all the machinations of Apple and Msoft and their kit keeps working for just about ever. Their latest mic pres are also said to be beyond reproach, 75dB of super low noise gain all under software control.

Big, BIG cash splash I know but if I had need of a top line interface again I would go for it and eat beans for a six month.

Dave.
 
_brian_ said:
I don't want to monitor direct, I use a few effect plugins to really get me into the feel of the music.
Click to expand...

The equipment you have is not compatible with the way you want to work. So you have two choices:

1. Do what BSG suggested and get an interface with DSP built in.

2. Find a way to get into the music using parallel processing or outboard processing.
 
ecc83 said:
Hi Brian. I can understand you growing a bit irritated! You are not a noob and you HAD a PCI based system that was of very low latency. Today it is USB most of the way, even Firewire was not (note the passed tense!) always super quick and of course had many and varied issues including a tendency to self destruct!

As has been said, most of the run of the mill AIs at around 50/70 quid per track will give low enough latency FOR MOST RECORDING PURPOSES. The snag is they are not, despite claims to the contrary, "ultra low" latency interfaces. Check out the wise words of TAFKAT over at Sound on Sound forum.

I have mentioned the Native Instruments KA6 and I feel sure it would work well for you but perhaps it is time to really get shoulder to that yacht and go RME? Their latest AI is nothing short of magic. Same (eff all!) latency for TB and USB3.0 (no, they have NOT borked TB, they have made USB 3 its equal) . RME are also one of the few AI companies that keep ahead of all the machinations of Apple and Msoft and their kit keeps working for just about ever. Their latest mic pres are also said to be beyond reproach, 75dB of super low noise gain all under software control.

Big, BIG cash splash I know but if I had need of a top line interface again I would go for it and eat beans for a six month.

Dave.
Click to expand...

Great help thanks Dave, the problem here is I'm more of a musician/songwriter than a audio tech. The funny thing is in real life I am an engineer, but when I'm writing music I am relaxing, I am more of an artist and want to create something different. A simple change in EQ or Reverb or whatever can send me to a different place and I want to get it down as soon as possible. However, I don't want to get it down so that it isn't editable because it might not sit well in the mix once all of the other instrumentation has been added etc.

I do not believe in doing tried and tested methods just because that is the way they have been done in the past, it doesn't mean I don't respect it, it simply means that this is where I get my inspiration from and by using those methods that inspiration might well be extinguished. If I get bogged down into tweaking things till they're perfect, listening direct, adding effects, not liking the original performance, re-performing, adding effects - I will not write! It becomes a horrid chore for me, I hate everything I do and I give up.

I would be willing to spend on a RME interface if it meant all of my problems were eliminated, so the question is - which interface would you suggest? I would also be willing to build a desktop computer for this if it helped things, but if it's not going to be much difference between USB or thunderbolt etc, then I can just use my laptop.

Some man, thanks for understanding my situation.

Edited to say that this card looks promising: RME HDSPe AIO Audio Interface Card
 
gecko zzed said:
Brian,

How are you monitoring your recordings?

What speakers are you using?

What are they connected to?
Click to expand...

Hi Gecko mate, I'm using crappy Mackie active speakers at the moment, and tracking with DT770 - I really like them, they're both connected to the Zed10. Although it's not the best I can mix with the DT770's and get a decent result, those Mackie monitors are just to make noise so I can jump about like an eejit after writing something!
 
You are welcome B. Yes, RME HDSPe AIO | That would, I am sure be the answer to your latency problems, in fact I am pretty sure THAT is the card that TAFKAT (SoS forum) uses as his baseline latency control and I fairly sure nothing has beaten it so far!

Since you already have the ZED10 I am sure it will marry up with that card beautifully (and you should be able to calibrate the ZED's LED meters with the OP level of the card? Something I cannot do with my mixer into a 2496). You would be future proof needing only an ADAT pre amp to gain another 8 inputs. The Mkll Behringer unit is said to be pretty good.

Dave.
 
_brian_ said:
Hi Gecko mate, I'm using crappy Mackie active speakers at the moment, and tracking with DT770 - I really like them, they're both connected to the Zed10. Although it's not the best I can mix with the DT770's and get a decent result, those Mackie monitors are just to make noise so I can jump about like an eejit after writing something!
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I'm trying to understand why latency is giving you so much grief, and that's eliminated one area.

Are you using VST instruments for your sounds, or something else?

Actually, what would be good is a description of your typical process. I'm not yet convinced that the 10ms latency of the Zed is the culprit.

I say this because I got my firepod some years ago now, set it up and started recording with no problems. I didn't even think to question its default settings. Sometime later I noticed that the default was 9.6ms, and I've never bothered changing it. When recording I sometimes go for direct monitoring. At other times I use software monitoring, because I like to hear it with the assortment of effects I'm adding via plug in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top