Stereo vs. mono tracks?

geekgurl

New member
I have a Gina Echo card with 2 inputs. Trouble is, I can't get anyting from input 2 to record. I know it works, because I can use both/either of the inputs to record in Pro Tools Free.

Does anyone know why this might be happening in Cool Edit? Could it have to do with tracks being set up as either mono or stereo tracks (I've heard CEP's tracks are stereo)? How can I find out if I'm in stereo or mono track mode?
 
In CEP 1.2 there are 2 numbers on every track. The bottom one corresponds to the rec channel and the top one, the playback. Additionally, there is a right/left option on each channel. Specify left or right for 1 or 2.
In CEP 2 its the same story. There is a button on each track that says out 1 and one directly below it that says rec 1. Press rec1 and mark left or right to use channels 1 or 2.
 
Thank you, JuSum. I will try this.

In addition to posting inane questions, I lurk often i the Computers forum here ... you seem to really know your stuff and I value your input when you post. I just wanted to tell you that.

Also, I'd like to know, based on your experience with computer-based recording, do you find that there's a difference in sound in stuff recorded with different software -- like Cubase, CEP, Ntracks, Sonar, whatever? I could swear stuff sounded a little better when recorded into PT Free as opposed to CEP on my system -- but perhaps that has to do with more sensitive default level settings in PT Free being louder or something, so perceive that as sounding better. Do you mainly use CEP for tracking? What do you prefer to use?
 
JuSumPilgrim said:
In CEP 1.2 there are 2 numbers on every track. The bottom one corresponds to the rec channel and the top one, the playback. Additionally, there is a right/left option on each channel. Specify left or right for 1 or 2.
In CEP 2 its the same story. There is a button on each track that says out 1 and one directly below it that says rec 1. Press rec1 and mark left or right to use channels 1 or 2.

That's the tracking screen... you can also choose in the edit screen by choosing File/new.... and then specifiying whether the new file will be mono or stereo...
 
Thanks for noticing, Geekgurl. :)

Im not sure what you mean when you say "things sounded better", it could be the particular mix you did in PT was better than the one you did in CEP. Each program has its own native effects which are not equal. Cubase is a great program and Im a big fan of most steinberg creations. I use their plugs quite a bit (the mastering edition plugs, magneto (only on individual tracks) VSTs like the pro52 and B4). I used the effects native to CEP for a long time before getting into waves and steinberg plugs and CEPs effects will take you far when used right. Every effect has things it will do that work and things it wont do. Its very important to pay attention to that. For instance, too much spread or too many voices on the chorus can kill a vocal track. It will suck out all the detail and cause digital artifacts. I think CEPs reverbs are great but there too they may sound digital or sweet and open dependning on what you do. The compression is not really usable in a conventional way and unless you are just doing very soft knee stuff I would get a plugin like waves RCL or the C1 or ultrafunk's comp. The other thing to watch is the paraEQ which tends to require more gain than waves' renEQ which is smoother and requires less gain. The more gain you use when EQing, the more potential for distortions and soundloss in other frequencies. Its not a bad EQ but renEQ is better. RenEQ is also a CPU hog while CEPs effects are not. The flanger, delay, phase, dynamic delay, etc ...all good stuff. Every effect in CEP has enough parameters to get alot of dif sounds out of. Are there better effects out there? Yes. Nobody touches waves in most areas. But overall CEPs effects are above average and when used right -- will sound as good as some of the best stuff out there but if youre talking about basic tracking, what goes in, goes in. CEP doesnt playback lower or record lower. Projects Ive recorded using CEP, waves and steinberg have been as loud as anything out there. Loudness and definition has everything to do with EQ and compression. Doing that right is a matter of experience and good monitoring.
I havent spent enough time with sonar to make a call. Seems like a decent program. Ntracks effects blow IMO. Cubase is probably the best all in one program out there but its not stable on every system. You get VSTs, great effects, MIDI, nice layout, etc. Ive been using CEP for years, I like what they did in CEP2 and am happy with my setup. If I would change I would probably go to cubase or nuendo.
 
I think she's referring more to the raw tracks sounding better in one program over another. I wish I could answer that but I've usually switched hardware everytime I've switched software so it's hard to say.

I would be surprised to find that there is any real noticeable difference when playing back one track at unity but I bet there are noticeable differences once you start combining tracks because of the summing algorythms. If you buss everything out and mix with an analog board that will not be a factor.

Skippy was saying that he notices a difference if you combine more than 6 tracks on a digital buss. That seems to be where PC's start to max out their limited fixed point processing power. The advantage to ProTools TDM systems is that they use dedicated hardware for all the DSP.

I didnt really answer your question but I bet it would be hard to find a real difference between most of the prosumer quality platforms.

Different systems may specify a slightly hotter signal as 0db so that may be why ProTools free seemed a little louder. I dont know because I could never get the free version to run ;)
 
Thanks Tex and JuSum, I think you both answered my question ... I was in fact asking about raw tracks sounding different ... must be getting back to that whole "summing" thing again ... but I also wanted to know who has good effects.

One time Sonusman (Ed) mentioned offhand that he thought Cubase had among the worst summing problems he's heard ... but JuSum, you really like Cubase ... it's interesting.

*sigh* I think it really does come down to experience. Here all the newbies like me (I know my classification is "Junior Member," but that just means I shoot my mouth off, not that I know anything) fret over every little aspect of our recording chains because we need all the crutches we can get (and yes, I speak of myself specifically). I guess the best approach is to just get used to some software's way of doing things, refine your technique on it, and stick with it.

On that note, Tex, how do you like your Roland Studio Pack? I don't think you're missing out on much not getting PT Free to work; I like the interface cuz I've worked on it a bit before, but Free is only 8 tracks ...
 
I've been out of the loop on home gear and I just got the Roland so I could be up and running fast without getting too bogged down in research on the latest pre's and converters.

The preamps are a little too noisy but for the price the features are definately worth it. 8x8 digital buss, 2 fx, 2 comps, Logic (echhh). I plan on adding some external pre's and comps pretty soon. I need to stop buying guitars ;)

I dont konw what the deal was with Free PT. I've heard so many bad things about it's stability I didnt bother to really trouble shoot it. If I start getting serious about doing any commercial stuff I'll just get a full ProTools system for the sake of compatability.
 
I couldnt run PT for too long without it crashing either.

Tex, you can never have too many mics, pres or guitars. ;)

And Im not even a guitar player. You just never know which one will be magic in what situation.

Geekgurl, I would imagine that CEPs background mixing function makes for greater accuracy in summing and mixing. I havent seen that kind of process in other programs Ive used.
 
I've only used CEP for wav editing but my frustrations with logic may drive me to try some Multi tracking in CEP. I like having real time comps though so I may have to spring for CEP2. But if I'm going to spend money I may just get something else all together.

ahh, damn it all to hell.
 
TexRoadkill said:
I've only used CEP for wav editing but my frustrations with logic may drive me to try some Multi tracking in CEP. I like having real time comps though so I may have to spring for CEP2. But if I'm going to spend money I may just get something else all together.

ahh, damn it all to hell.

Didn't you get the Roland Studio pack? A friend of mine bought that and then had me come over and try and give a quick lesson in multi-tracking... holy poop.... not for a novice like him! and even for the experienced it's a bear. Not intuitive at all. He traded it in for an MAudio something or the other. I've been looking at the Roland because I like the mixer and possibly using it as a controller for, but I wouldn't use Emagic (il)logic. How does the mixer work in that capacity? I think you should seriously look into Samplitude or Nuendo.
 
I need to check out all those software packages.

The VM3100Pro is definately not an easy mixer to use. It wouldnt be so bad if they had some sorta software interface to do all the routing.

As a controller it will send transport and slider info great but I prefer to handle the DSP in the Roland for now so I dont use the midi slider control. I just use the DAW as a recorder and keep all the volumes at unity.

I absolutely love having the 8x8 digital busses. I submix in Logic to the 8 busses and use the Roland effects and mixer for the actual mixdown back to a stereo Logic track. I really want to add some more external comps and effects but I think I'll be limited to 4 or 6 sends from the Roland. It does have a SPDIF i/o so that adds some more external possiblities too.

I'm still not sure if I would be better off with an analog mackie and Delta 10/10 or something but it works fine for now. At some point all the differences become so minute that unless you have some really good stuff worth recording it doesnt seem all that important to squeeze out a little better quality for a lot more money.
 
TexRoadkill said:
I need to check out all those software packages.

At some point all the differences become so minute that unless you have some really good stuff worth recording it doesnt seem all that important to squeeze out a little better quality for a lot more money.

Amen.... I just spent some jack the past month moving from a Tascam TSR 8 to a digital multi-track... tracking to the digital, doing everything else on the DAW. I guess I figured life would be so much better if my DAW could chase my digital and I could have 16 virutal tracks and blah blah blah blah.... point is, all that new gear still leaves me with recordings of my weak arrangements with bad timing, bad playing, but hey.... no tape noise or wow and flutter.... :(
 
Back
Top