DI box for low guitar volume

spantini

COO of me, inc.
After only doing this digital recording stuff for about three years now, the one thing that still really bugs me is low headphone volume through my US-2x2 interface while overdubbing (dry passive bass).

The first track's not a problem as the monitor knob can be turned to full input, which is plenty loud.

Playback is plenty loud, as are all other audio sources (videos, mp3s, etc), so I know it's not the phones.

It's that monitor blend knob on the interface. After setting input levels correctly at the interface and DAW, then adjusting the monitor knob for good balance, there is not enough headphone volume even when turned all the way up - while overdubbing.
Lowering the Track #1 playback fader to hear more Track #2 overdub doesn't work for me.

At this low overdubbing volume level, my bass doesn't even sound like a bass. I'm using a pick and the attack is so muffled it's like I'm using a marshmallow, and it sounds more like someone humming than a guitar. When the interface gain is cranked until the peak LED stays solid, the true sounds of the bass emerge - along with great headphone volume. I don't use that setting, I back it down to correct levels.

I've also used my Tascam DP-03SD as a sort of preamp for the bass. Straight through the DP-03SD as dry as it wll allow.

Bass > DP-03SD > Interface > DAW

That helps a great deal with headphone volume while overdubbing.

Now I'm considering a DI box to help with my low (passive bass) guitar volume. Will a straight DI box help that, or would something like a SansAmp Bass DI be needed?
 
A passive DI will make it even lower level. Some active DIs have gain.

But why not monitor through your DAW? Then you can control the mix a lot better and add gain, EQ, compression, amp sim, or whatever you need to make it sound and feel good.
 
+1 Mixing through the daw rather than direct might be helpful.

Some people want to monitor direct for latency, though, and that's fair enough : It sounds like you're mixing and recording at sensible levels, which is good. although it can also make things tricky some times.
Make sure you aren't overdoing it. Your master bus output should be nowhere near the red, sure, but it should still be a good strong healthy signal.

Quite often I find myself working, pre-mix, with gain on the master to bring things closer to real-world.
It can be a pain when reference material or sound effects or any other sounds coming from the system are so much louder than what you're working on so doing that can take the edge of it if needed.
Might be useful when direct monitoring, as your master output is being attenuated for that.

Failing that, a dedicated headphone amp or different headphones (lower impedance) might give you more room to push things up when you need to.
 
Some people want to monitor direct for latency, though, and that's fair enough
But most people just follow poor advice from other people who are afraid of latency for no good reason. If the computer was built in the last decade or so and with that Tascam unit, you should be able to monitor through the DAW just fine. For most of us, those direct monitor features haven’t been actually necessary for years.
 
But most people just follow poor advice from other people who are afraid of latency for no good reason. If the computer was built in the last decade or so and with that Tascam unit, you should be able to monitor through the DAW just fine. For most of us, those direct monitor features haven’t been actually necessary for years.

What buffer size do you use?
 
What buffer size do you use?
My interface buffer setting is 128 with no perceptible latency.

__________________________________________

I switched everything over to headphone monitoring through Reaper. Now that made a big difference. There was a bit more fiddling with the knobs on the interface but it's 90% where I like it now. I can probably tweak a bit more out of it if I work at it.

This has reversed the operation of the monitor blend knob on the interface - now increasing Computer gets to the volume I need.

Thanks for the feedback on the DI boxes. I'll leave those alone for now.

I think I'm going to go ahead and get a small headphone amp (4-Out) anyway, just to have the extra phones. Got my eye on a couple.

Thanks to all of you for helping out here.

Peace
 
My interface buffer setting is 128 with no perceptible latency.

When I set mine to 128 samples I can hear the latency as a phase effect, with no plugins inserted. It's not so bad I couldn't use it, but the difference between DAW and direct monitoring is quite stark. Using direct it sounds absolutely rock solid. Through the DAW I get phase interaction between the acoustic and the electronic paths. But I just use this interface on my home computer for Zoom meetings (so I can use a nice mic) and to have a physical volume knob for my headphones.
 
Just for sake of conversation, I record tracks for full bands at 96 samples (Steinberg UR driver shows me 5.397msec in, and 6.395 out) with one resource hungry reverb (Waves H-Reverb), and likely 60+ inserted eq, plate verb, microshift and compressor VST's. I use a basic template when starting a new project that is quite close to my final mix setup. With the exception of the more power hungry verbs and limiters that are not needed while tracking. But I am always pretty much mixing as I am tracking guitars and vocals after drum tracking.

I also track with a basic limiter on the master bus. "Don't shoot me!" LOL! I like to have the feel of the final product as I record. My system allows me to do that.

So that being said about my setup, I agree that most computers these days should be able to handle recording/monitoring through your DAW. Just need to take off the big resource hungry ones so your latency is tolerable while recording. 10ms is about the limit when things get sloppy and performance is not natural. I still can record added 'punch-in's' after mix is complete/without detrimental latency by just disarming the 'look ahead' 4x oversampling stuff.

I should say that I am not using a laptop, but my system is not hugely special. Just a home built I7 W7 PC under $1200 5 years ago or so for everything.


Maybe I should have just said "Direct Monitoring Sucks"! lol

Cheers!
 
Through the DAW I get phase interaction between the acoustic and the electronic paths.
Then you’re not monitoring loud enough. ;)

I play live through Reaper all the time. The whole band including vocals, guitars, bass, keys, even drum triggers through Superior Drummer. Amp sims and EQs and compression and all kinds of things. Nobody ever complains about latency.
 
Behringer HA400 – Thomann UK

Really very good ^. I have one and it is dead silent AFAICT and produces plenty of level into a pair of fairly low sensitivity HD448s.

This problem you see is very common on AIs and has nothing to do with the 'front end' gain. Nothing either with the level of POWER delivered to cans. No, it is all down to a lack of gain in the headphone circuitry (and a bit daft since another 10dB or so of gain costs nothing!)

Once you have signals blipping close to -4dBu say, all is fine but with tracking signals at -18/-20 you cannot get enough drive, especially if there are other competing sounds.

I tend to see the dead hand of the Nanny State in this situation.

Dave.
 
Back
Top