Analog was so simple...

M

MikeA

New member
But I've finally moved on kicking and screaming to the digital age. I worked in analog for several years, and I've run sound for my church for over 20 years but have not done any multitrack recording since getting out of recording and pro audio. Digital recording was just coming on the scene as I got out. I've got several questions but I'll start off with the one that concerns me the most.

I have an HP HDX16 laptop with 4 GB of RAM and a 2.26 GHz Intel Core Duo CPU. I'm running Vista Home Premium 64 bit as the OS. I've got a Presonus Firestudio Project which is connected to the laptop via an ADS Tech Pyro 1394a Express card. I'm storing the audio on an external HDD, a GRAID 1TB e-SATA unit. I'm using Sony Vegas 8 as my software.

The first session I tried was with a friend who was playing guitar and singing. After several attempts we got a take we were reasonably happy with but there was one area that he messed up the guitar part. I plugged a set of headphones into the Presonus and gave them to him. When he started playing though, there was a noticeable delay in the phones between his playing and what he heard in the headphones. I didn't know how to punch in/out in Vegas on the same track so I had armed another one to record this section onto.

Can anyone tell me why I would have gotten this delay? Was it latency in the system? Or was it some other setting that I'm not aware of? I know it didn't have this delay when we laid down the first tracks because I had been using the headphones to monitor the performance. If I was recording to an analog machine I would have immediately known that I hadn't switched that track to input to listen off the record head and not the playback head, but I'm not so that couldn't be it.

Thanks!

Mike
 
Latency. Generally when you record, you will use the interface's direct, zero-latency monitoring rather than patching through your DAW and monitoring from its output. The DAW compensate for its latency so both the original track and overdub track will line up perfectly.

The exception is when you have to run through the DAW for some aspect of the sound, such as softsynths or effects. In that case you want to set latency as low as possible. Your interface should have some menu where latency can be set; generally you set it low for tracking and high for mixing. That said, I leave latency at 1024 samples all the time, which works for me. However, some VST/VSTis will impose additional latency . . .
 
Wow mshilarous, you use 1024 all the time? I can mix at 1024, but if I tracked at that, I could strum, put down my guitar, get a coffee, come back, strap it back on then hear the strum!:eek:

Typically I track at 128, but if I have a lot of other tracks and stuff I'll go to 256.
 
I guess that reply wasn't very helpful to the op.

If you go into the ASIO driver panel for your Firestudio, you can change the buffer. That's what we have been talking about. The lower the setting, the less delay you will have. But, if it is too low, your audio will start stuttering and popping. If this happens, you need a higher setting. It's a balancing act to find what is right for your system. I would start at 256 and if you get popping, try 512 etc.
 
Thanks guys.

OK, that's helpful. I'll check on that. I did not know that latency settings would be different for mixing as opposed to tracking.

I finally got the chance to take over our upstairs expansion area and moved everything up there and did that first session that afternoon. So, I really didn't have time to set everything up and test it other than to make sure that I got sound from the mics, through the DAW, to the laptop. The weird thing about it is that I could get no sound from the headphone output on the laptop, I had to use the headphone out on the Firestudio in order hear anything. Hopefully, I'll soon be able getting some real monitors and I'm borrowing a headphone distribution box from church right now so hopefully I'll be able to get this straightened out with the help of you guys here.

No dodgeaspen, sorry, I don't have any analog equipment to sell. I always worked at other peoples studios and didn't really get into collecting any stuff. Always wanted to but always seemed to be a day late and a dollar short.

I appreciate the help!!

Mike
 
Ooops,

I think I used DAW in the wrong context above. I meant from the mics, through the INTERFACE, then to the laptop.

That's another thing. The signal flow of an analog recording system (mixer included) was heavily drilled into me from day one. I can relate to that very easily. With computer recording that seems to have gone away and it's very disconcerting to me. I mean, I've got a mixing console for the Presonus and my software program has a mixer too. Why?!?! It just adds another layer of confusion on the process that shouldn't be that confusing. We just want to capture the music that's being made. With analog that was easy, but expensive. With digital its cheap, but not easy...
 
If having two mixers confuses you...

...you don't have to use both all the time.

Just set the levels to what you want them to be on the interface, and then use the mixer in the daw for some final adjustments or automation. (That's what I usually do anyway.)
 
The headphone from the laptop should not work when using the Firestudio. Your interface (Firestudio) actually is your soundcard, so any thing you want input to your DAW gets plugged into the Firestudio and any outputs such as speakers, headphones etc get plugged into the Firestudio. In fact, you should completely disable the soundcard in your laptop. It can cause conflicts.

The 2 mixer things can be a little confusing, but think of it this way. The Presonus software is just like your hardware mixer. It always for all your routing, levels, active inputs etc. You use this to set your tracking stuff.

Now if you were going to record the sound of your analog mixer, where would the outputs of your mixer go?

In the digital world, you take the routings from your tracking mixer and send that to your DAW which you will now use to record with. Don't worry about mixing in the DAW at this point. The idea is to get the tracks with decent level recorded. Once that is done, it is the DAW that becomes your mixer for, well mixing.

The only thing that is a little confusing now is that to hear anything from your DAW, you need to send the signal somewhere, so you send it back to the Presonus mixer software so you can output that to the Firestudio that will have either speakers or headphones plugged in so ultimately you can hear the mix.

Man I made that sound complicated. Just keep at it and it will become second nature. One thing about digital is that in most cases the names and functions are synonomous with the analog world. If you know analog, this will become a piece of cake for you.
Good luck
 
Washburn100 said:
Wow mshilarous, you use 1024 all the time? I can mix at 1024, but if I tracked at that, I could strum, put down my guitar, get a coffee, come back, strap it back on then hear the strum!:eek:

Typically I track at 128, but if I have a lot of other tracks and stuff I'll go to 256.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because I don't monitor thru the DAW, I use zero-latency monitoring at the card. If I needed to monitors effects or softsynths, I would go to 256, but I pretty much never do that.
 
SlowerHand said:
If having two mixers confuses you...

...you don't have to use both all the time.
Click to expand...

I agree that DAW mixers are annoying. They exist because many people have to conceive of mixing as a physical construct. Mostly I use Wavelab which has no mixer at all. When I use Cubase I just try to ignore its mixer, which is fairly easy to do.
 
Washburn100 said:
The only thing that is a little confusing now is that to hear anything from your DAW, you need to send the signal somewhere, so you send it back to the Presonus mixer software so you can output that to the Firestudio that will have either speakers or headphones plugged in so ultimately you can hear the mix.
Click to expand...
and even that's not really confusing. If you were recording analog the tape deck would basically be the equivalent of your DAW and you'd have to send that sound somewhere to hear it so you'd send it to a mixer which would go to your power amp/speakers.
Same basic set-up.
 
OK, so the Presonus mixer acts like the big faders on an analog recording console. Signal comes in from the mics, is routed through the Presonus to the "tape deck"(software tracks) and the level that is fed to the DAW comes from the fader setting at the Presonus mixer.

When I play back the track I use the Sony Vegas mixer. So essentially I set my levels in the Presonus and mix from the Vegas mixer. The Presonus doesn't have EQ on it does it? (I rarely EQ'd going to tape anyway but it can be useful to set HPF and LPF on some sources.)

I'll check all this out at home since I'm at work right now. This is helping guys, I've been confused about it for awhile now.
 
MikeA said:
The Presonus doesn't have EQ on it does it? (I rarely EQ'd going to tape anyway but it can be useful to set HPF and LPF on some sources.)

.
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't want to effect the signal going into the DAW in any way. Once in the DAW, you can do whatever you want to it non-destructively. Some people like compression, eq, even reverb going in, but by doing that you commit it to "tape" and it can't be undone. This my friend is the beauty of the digital domain.

Record completely dry. Now you can morph the sound into whatever you could possibly want. Change your mind, hit the undo. Really don't like it. Delete the effects and start over. Like I said it is all non-destructive so your original is always there unless you bounce the track (whole other story)
 
Washburn100 said:
Personally, I don't want to effect the signal going into the DAW in any way. Once in the DAW, you can do whatever you want to it non-destructively. Some people like compression, eq, even reverb going in, but by doing that you commit it to "tape" and it can't be undone. This my friend is the beauty of the digital domain.

Record completely dry. Now you can morph the sound into whatever you could possibly want. Change your mind, hit the undo. Really don't like it. Delete the effects and start over. Like I said it is all non-destructive so your original is always there unless you bounce the track (whole other story)
Click to expand...
I record most things completely dry but on guitar I find certain fx affect how I play so I'll often cut guitar with the fx on during tracking.
 
Lt. Bob said:
I record most things completely dry but on guitar I find certain fx affect how I play so I'll often cut guitar with the fx on during tracking.
Click to expand...

This is true, but I still record the dry signal while monitoring wet, so I can screw with it later :D

This isn't the way to get things done in a production environment, but we have all the time in the world . . . :o
 
Kicking and screaming? If you have to go kicking and screaming into anything perhaps its better not to go into it. There's a certain trend returning to analog these days. Don't be so quick to drop analog and don't whatever you do part with your analog gear. You're liable to want to use it again!
 
I was only being half serious when I said kicking & screaming. I work at a software company and I'm the guy that is always saying (jokingly) that I hate computers. I do, but it's a love/ hate relationship that everyone has towards them. They can be so damned persnickity at times. Which is why I started this thread.

I would love to continue in analog recording. And, although my "ship" came in a couple of years ago, it wasn't big enough to allow me to do everything I wanted; like fix up the loft in my detached garage, find and buy mics, a mixer, tape machines, monitors, amps, instruments, on and on ad infinitum. Plus, there's also the time factor. Married with 2 kids at home (boys), 2 away (girls), 3 grandkids and 3 acres to tend to doesn't leave a whole lot of time for creative endeavors. The boys require a lot of time with ball practice and games and all the other things that they want to do. When I was working in studios full time I had plenty of time. But then I wasn't married, didn't have a house, kids, etc.

The kicking and screaming part was simply because I knew and understood inside and out the analog realm. The digital/computer age was a whole new ball game with all new rules that seemed so foreign that I just said "Screw it, I've got other responsibilities that I've got to attend to." So I dropped out of the pro recording scene. But like I said, I stayed close to it by running sound at church.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top