Using a hardware reverb for headphone vocal monitoring

Beemer

Member
I have just started home recording. My equipment is:
Condenser mics
Audient iD44 usb interface
Windows laptop
Reaper DAW
Closed back headphones

I am aware that I can use Reaper FX to add reverb for a singer using headphones but as I also own an Alesis MicroVerb reverb unit I would like opinions if using this would be better? It would allow the singer to adjust the reverb themselves.

What might be the best way to connect the MicroVerb. The Audient iD44 has dedicated stereo headphone outputs so I guess I would connect the MicroVerb in-line with these?

Ian
 
The best/easiest way to use hardware effects would be to use a small mixer.

Connect the Mic to a mixer channel
Connect the output of the interface to the mixer

Connect aux 1 to an input on the interface

Connect the reverb unit to an effects send an return.

Plug the headphones into the mixer and monitor through the mixer. Send the Mic signal out aux 1 to get it to the interface.

Bottom line, the reverb unit can't be placed between the headphone output and the headphones. You will probably distort the reverb unit and you will hear the reverb on everything, not just the vocal.
 
Jay,

I have a Behringer XENYX 1002FX mixer but thought that the iD44 mic preamps would be better quality for use with my Neumann KM184 mics and piano recording. However I realise that a vocalist would use my Rode M3 as it has a not so flat response.

thanks for your advice

Ian
 
The iD44 has balanced inserts. RTFM if I might be so impolite?

I an sure those and Reaper can sort it out?

Dave.
 
Dave,
Using the iD44 insert would pass a wet signal to Reaper which is not what I want.

O...k (but I bet there is a way around that but I don't know Reaper at all well) You could still use the insert output to drive the mixer thereby still using the "better" preamp.

I would guess the inserts are "1/2 normalled" i.e. taking an output does NOT kill the thru' signal in the AI but if it does you just need to get a bit cute with some TRS cables and a solder iron.

Dave.
 
The audient preamps may or may not be any better, but that is the best way to put an outboard unit into this setup.

Your problem is trying to create a separate monitor path inside an interface that doesn't have one. Imo the microverb isn't worth the trouble.

Also, singer don't have a clue what sort of reverb they want. Make an educated decision for them, it will be easier and better.
 
Jay and Dave,

Many thanks for the handholding. I've only made one recording so far and realise I have a lot to learn.
 
If you really want to use the onboard pres of the id44 you could just pick up a headphone amp with insert/aux points.

The rolls RA53b would work, the Behringer HA4700 would also work.

It's a headphone amp so it's not really important who makes it as long as it has enough headroom to drive some headphones. I had the HA4700 for a few months and I actually prefered it to the presonus HP4.
 
If you really want to use the onboard pres of the id44 you could just pick up a headphone amp with insert/aux points.

The rolls RA53b would work, the Behringer HA4700 would also work.

It's a headphone amp so it's not really important who makes it as long as it has enough headroom to drive some headphones. I had the HA4700 for a few months and I actually prefered it to the presonus HP4.

I have an HA400, LOT cheaper and it is fine, easily enough level for my headphones and I am deaf! I would bet the 4700 uses the same output ICs? In fact a very prestigious headphone amplifier uses the exact same devices.

Dave.
 
Probably, the HA400 doesn't have any Aux (what Behringer labels thier insert points) though and that was more or less what I was recommending.

I went from the presonus to the HA4700 (which was a nice headphone amp to be honest) to a Rane HC-6.

The Rane blows both out of the water by a large mile, so much clean headroom I don't think I have ever come close to going over 50% of what it could do and to be honest I think if I drove it all the way I would wreck my headphones.

But deaf drummers and guitarists love it. :laughings:
 
Problem with the headphone amp idea is that the reverb would be put on the entire mix, not just the vocal.
 
What might be the best way to connect the MicroVerb. The Audient iD44 has dedicated stereo headphone outputs so I guess I would connect the MicroVerb in-line with these?

Ian

Ian, my response here may seem a bit technical but if you take the time to read it carefully, there's some ideas here that I think could really help you grow in your understanding of how your system works.

I respectfully disagree with Fairviews idea of using a small mixer. I think its best to keep the Audient as what we'd call your 'center section'. This means that you want the master volume on the audience responsible for controlling the final signal to your monitors.

The cable connecting your Audient to your monitors should be in line output 1L and line output 2R. DO NOT use your headphone output to send audio to your monitors. It may work but it is not good practice to do so.

If line output 1L and 2R are connected to your monitors, you should then use Audent line output 3L and 4R to connect to your Alesis. Your signal chain should be as follows:

Audient output 3-4 -> Input L/R on the micro verb
Output L/R on the micro verb -> input of channels 3-4 on the Audient.

So the idea is that you are sending the audio out of Reaper into the MicroVerb then back into reaper. Its going in a circle. Its leaving then coming back. That way you control the amount of reverb from inside Reaper. We call this an effects loop.

In Reaper you will have to tell the audio how you want it to go in and out of the system. So you have to tell reaper to send whatever you want reverb on out of outputs 3-4 on the Audient. You do this by creating a separate signal path in Reaper for your very audio to travel out. This path needs to be different from the one going to your reference monitors. This allows you to just apply reverb to the microphone for example.

The way you do this is by creating a 'send' in reaper. You then point/direct the outputs of that send to outputs 3-4 on the Audient. As you turn the send up, it will change the volume going to the Alesis. BUT you won't hear the audio that Reaper is sending out until you create a way for it to come back in. You do this by creating an audio channel and feeding the reverb (created by the Alesis) back into Reaper. How? What you do is create a new audio channel and assign the INPUT of the newly created audio channel to inputs 3-4. Thus you're enabling the Audient to receive the audio coming back from the Alesis and you will hear the reverb.

I realize Fairview was trying to make this simple. I feel its not only better to use the Audient as a your main monitor controller because the Audient sounds better, but also because learning how to move audio out of Reaper then bring it back in is a very important thing to know how to do.

This is a clean and proper way to use a reverb. I would HIGHLY recommend taking the time to learn and understand this process instead of sidestepping it by adding another device.
 
Dave,
Using the iD44 insert would pass a wet signal to Reaper which is not what I want.

If you follow the method I recommend above, it will address this issue as well. When your effects loop (as I articulated above) is complete, you will have a completely wet signal that is returned to Reaper from the Alesis. But you now have achieved total control over the BLEND of that wet signal. Thus you can balance the wet signal to the dry one as needed from INSIDE Reaper.

Patching that setup as I recommended will also enable you to send a different amount of vocal reverb to your singer vs yourself in the other room. It will let you change the reverbs without 'committing' them to track. This means that if you track the song with a plate reverb, and want to change it to a 'hall' reverb later, you can do so. It takes time to set it up, but this is the BEST way to implement that Alesis into your signal chain. It is the way all professional studios integrate hardware.
 
Last edited:
you could just pick up a headphone amp with insert/aux points.

Once again, I don't mean ANY disrespect to others that are taking the time to offer advice. I'm quite certain that many of these suggestions are based on the assumption that Beemer is not willing to take the time learn the Audient patching system. I don't feel there is a good reason to add an additional headphone amp when there is already two high quality headphone amps ON the Audient.

I respect that some may feel these ideas would make things simpler, but I would still suggest learning to patch that reverb unit properly.
 
Problem with the headphone amp idea is that the reverb would be put on the entire mix, not just the vocal.

Indeed he would have to setup a hardware send and monitor via that in addition to the whole mix.

I know how to do that in cubase... uh not so much in reaper.

I also want to note the headphone amp idea would not be the method I would use personally. I would set up a hardware effect in cubase, set my buffer rate at 64 and do that (even though it's not as low latency as a headphone mixer amp could be). TBH I wouldn't even bother with a hardware reverb unless it was something more into the $300 area as software is quickly clobbering anything on the market in the hardware arena.

I did recently "reamp" (using the term loosly) some lead guitars through a boss RV-6 this way, worked great (used an orginal jcr reamp).
 
Hmm. I run a signal from my mixer to the reverb unit and then to reverb return, choosing which inputs I want reverb on, such as the vocal. The main output from the mixer then only has reverb on the vocal. Then again, I use a real multi input mixer as my interface.
 
Back
Top