computer interface v. four track

  • Thread starter Thread starter LI Slim
  • Start date Start date
LI Slim

LI Slim

New member
It's just me and my guitar, mostly. Assuming I'm looking to spend less than $1000 (not including mics), am I better off with a computer-direct thingamagig like the Aardvark Direct Pro (assuming my computer is fully adequate to handle it, as I believe it is) or a stand-alone four track? Resident recording gurus, please help!
 
What are the specs of your current PC????
$1000 should do U quite well as long as your PC isn't horribly out of date......

Sabith
 
Cheapest way to start seem to use whatever soundcard you have and buy N-track.
 
My PC has a Pentium III 633, 128 ram, 20 GB.

What's an N-Track?


My understanding so far is that if I'm going direct to the PC I should get an interface like the Aardvark Direct Pro which has 4 inputs and mic preamps built in. Yes?
 
That's right, but that only takes care of the hardware side of things. Then you'll need some multitracking software to record and mix with. (Windows is sadly lacking in its multitracking capabilities). n-Track is cheap, usable multitracking software. There's an n-Track forum on this board if you want to find out how much, but it's less than $100, which is A Very Good Price.

Your computer's good enough for a small band, let alone one person and a guitar. Good to go.
 
LI Slim said:
My understanding so far is that if I'm going direct to the PC I should get an interface like the Aardvark Direct Pro which has 4 inputs and mic preamps built in. Yes?
Click to expand...

Depends. If you don't have a sound card at all, sure. If you already have one, start with that. That way you can start off recording with only $35 bucks!

If then something fucks up or you simply don't understans the n-track software, or whatever, you haven't thrown out a lot of money. You'll probably soon notice that the soundcard you have sucks bigtime, and you'll want to buy a better one.

At least thats how *I* would do it. Don't chuck out money for expensive stuff unless you are sure you want it.
I did. Once. Anybody want to buy a Behringer Ultramizer? :)
I'm happy I didn't thor out a lot of money on an expensive soundcard and recording software, because I noticed that wasn't the right thing for me. I bought an 8-track instead.
 
Thanks, dobro. The guy I spoke to at Aardvark said the Direct Pro came with all the software I needed. N-Track is much better?
 
Regebro, that's my question. Look, I already know my original soundcard is totally inadequate for home recording. How do I decide whether I'll get a better result with a fancy soundcard/preamp gadget versus buying a comparably priced four-track?
 
Your soundcard is only going to be one link in the chain. If you have the best soundcard in the world and crappy preamps, then you'll faithfully reproduce the crappy preamps' sound.

As far as the recording media, 16bit/44.1kHz audio is better overall quality than cassette or minidisc 4-tracks.

I'd avoid built-in preamps on the sound card for most applications, since it usually means corners get cut. It would be better to get a card that just focuses on converting the input to digital, and leave the work of raising the signal level to a dedicated preamp. If you have good preamps, good converters, and a good recording medium, the rest is mostly up to you.
 
Thanks pg. But let me get this straight. Let's assume that something of quality is coming out of my mouth and soundhole. Let's assume that I'm smart yet technically ignorant. Let's also assume that I'm going to do some "live" recording (i.e., guitar and vocals at the same time). So step by step, you're suggesting that I plug each mic into a preamp (I'm not sure what you mean by "dedicated" in this context; dedicated to the mic?) and each preamp into the soundcard (do I need some sort of special cable?) and the soundcard into the line input of the computer? (And then I'll need good mixing software, yes?) Do you have suggestions as to the soundcard and preamp(s)?
 
Microphones put out a much weaker signal than "line level". Line level is usually the lowest common denomiator for your gear. By a dedicated preamp, I just mean a piece of equipment that is only a preamp. They take a microphone level signal (usually XLR "mic" inputs) and boost it to line level (usually 1/4" "patch cable" outputs). You can buy preamps that have multiple channels, so you can use more than one mic at a time. If you need a lot of mics at once, you might look into a small mixer with built-in preamps. Most pro and "pro-sumer" audio cards have 1/4" line-level inputs, so you'd normally run from your mic to preamp with an XLR cable, then from preamp to the soundcard with a 1/4" cable.

To confuse matters, there are 2 different standards for "line level": +4 for "pro" gear, and -10 for "consumer" gear. There is also the issue of balanced vs. unbalanced connections. You should read the specs on any piece of gear to know what it has in the way of "guzzintas" and "guzzouttas".

I'll use my setup as an example. I have a Gadget Labs 8/24 soundcard. It has a break-out box with 8 1/4" ins and outs (it'll work with either balanced or unbalanced). Each channel on the soundcard is individually selectable for +4 or -10 through software. It also has a pair of balanced XLR ins and outs on channels 1 & 2 (I've never used 'em). For preamps, I have a 16 channel Mackie mixer. It has 16 built-in preamps with XLR ins. I connect the mic to a channel on the mixer with an XLR cable, and then run a standard 1/4" cable from the channel's line out to an input on the soundcard. I leave all the soundcard's channels set to +4, since that's the level my mixer puts out.

There's a lot of good soundcards and preamps to choose from, it's tough for me to make any specific reccomendations. With soundcards, you generally just want good quiet converters and enough ins and out for what you want to do. With preamps, you might be looking for something really clean or something that really colors the sound. There are enough good, affordable soundcards on the market that it's not hard to pick something you'll like. Preamps are a totally different thing, and they are a big part of sound you'll be capturing (along with your mics, of course). Did this help, or make things worse :D?
 
My $.02.

Seems to me you are still wrestling with computer recording vs. 4 track. If by 4-track you mean tape, there are several issues to consider.

First of all editing on tape is destructive editing - meaning you tape over the original material. If you then decide the first take was better, it's gone. You can get around this by "bouncing" (recording the original material onto a new track and editing the new track), but each time you bounce on tape you degrade the signal. Also, you are limited to four tracks. You may think that's plenty, but if you decide to put in any harmony parts, or add a second guitar, you can quickly use up the 4-tracks (or you're back to bouncing).

Computer recording has many advantages. The number of tracks available (depending on the software) is virtually unlimited (64 to 128 typically). Secondly, copying a track (the digital equivalent of bouncing) involves no degradation, since you are just copying digits. Voila, you get an exact copy. You can also add software effects (reverb, delay, chorus, etc) and you can do this non-destructively - i.e., see what it sounds like without effecting or destroying the original material in the process.

Downsides? Steeper learning curve. Probably more $ to start. Also, there is the age old argument that analog is warmer than digital (this is where your pre-amps start to come into play).

Since you already have a computer, you can probably get a quite decent setup with a good sound card ($300 - $600), software ($100 - $300), a mixer - Mackie makes some good ones with decent preamps built in ($500 - $800). You could forego the mixer and just get a two-channel preamp (maybe $300). In addition you will also need mics and cables (which you need for the 4-track anyway).

You also need something to play the music back through. While you can use your computer speakers, you probably won't want to.

I guess I've talked myself full circle here, and it all depends on how serious you want to get. If you just want to record and hear yourself, get a radio shack mic, plug it into you existing sound card, and use Windows sound recorder to record. Investment will be about $10.00 and it will sound like s&%t. :-)
 
LI Slim said:
How do I decide whether I'll get a better result with a fancy soundcard/preamp gadget versus buying a comparably priced four-track?
Click to expand...

The actual recorded sound quality will be similar, IMO. But you will with a PC like yours get more tracks out of the PC, and also you will get effects. So if you don't already have outboard effects, go with the soundcard.

Now, the drawback is that is is more complicated to use, and your PC will crash more often than your tapes will shred. Thats why I was recommending you to buy the SW first, to see that PC recording is something you feel comfortable with. But it seems you already know that you do, and then its' not a problem.

(I don't know anything about different recording softwares and can't tell you if n-track is better or worse, sorry.)
 
Thanks, guys, this is all really helpful. PG, what you say is helpful rather than making things worse, although you have pretty much convinced me to get a soundcard with the preamps built in; from what I've heard in other fora, I can get quality despite the fact that I may be "cutting corners". I guess cutting corners is sort of the idea.

Dachay, why would I need a mixer? I thought the mixer is the PC (with appropriate software).

So I'm likely to suffer through crashes no matter what? Is there anything I can do to minimize this?

Thanks again you guys are great.
 
And just when you thought a direction was becoming clear, I'll throw in another variable to help confuse the issue. You don't have to record with either a computer or 4-track if you don't want to, you know. You can get a studio in a box, like one of the Roland units. The downside: they're not as flexible and versatile as a computer-based studio. The upside: they're way easier to learn, have everything you need built in except cables and mics, and are portable. For someone doing just guitar and voice like you, it's a very real option. If you want to check out the possibilities of this option, you might as well toddle over to VS Planet. There are other stand-alone brands, but Roland's good, and the people at VS are pretty alright, if eccentric. :)

http://www.vsplanet.com/cgi-bin/ubb/Ultimate.cgi?action=intro&BypassCookie=true

The forum called Pre-purchase Questions should do nicely.
 
A mixer is not REQUIRED, but it is one alternative way to get preamps which ARE required.

By going the mixer route you get the preamps along with a lot of other features (for not a lot more money than stand alone preamps). For example, you can run your mics into the mixer and then into the sound card, and then run cables back out from the sound card outputs to the mixer. By plugging headphones into the mixer and setting the proper configuration of channel assignments, you can directly monitor exactly what is being recorded to hard disk (rather than before it goes to disk).

You are right that the software will typically have a mixer built into it. However, this is more for mixing multiple pre-recorded tracks on playback and for putting software effects on recorded material. The hardware mixer will be used when you do your actual recording (or possibly for mixing down to cassette or ADAT later on).

I have no direct experience with sound cards with built in preamps, but everything I've read says to stay away from them. You will find out the hard way (like probably everyone else using this forum) that buying cheap typically means buying twice. First the cheap version, which you end up throwing out once you understand what you're doing, and then the one you should have bought in the first place.

So the device that you buy for $100 (because you didn't want to pony up for the $200 unit) ends up costing you $300 when you finally figure out you really needed to buy the $200 unit. Take it from someone who's been there (which reminds me, are you interested in a used dual-tape Karoake casette recorder?)
 
Dobro, a friend mentioned that he had one of those. It's a 4-track that records to a mini-disc and has some sort of editing device built in, yes? Does this mean that it records in analog and then converts to digital? (I'm not sure I have any idea what I'm talking about.) Is the editing sort of a simplified version of what I would do on the PC? Can I download the mini-disc onto an MP3 file in my PC? Is the sound quality comparable to what I would get if I get, say an Ardvark Direct Pro or Echo Mona? Why is there air?
 
There are both 4, 8 and 16 tracks digital portas availiable, costing anything from $500 to $5000. The sound quality is similar to a PC with a good sound card. Yes, on a PC you can (at least with some extra software) have more editing capabilities that on a standalone unit, but it would probably not be anything you use very much.

Since you already have a PC, a digital porta would probably be more expensive, although it might be easier to use, and you'd probably suffer less crashes. So basically you have the same pros and cons as with a 4-channel tapedeck.

Comparing a tape porta with a digital porta, the digital will be more expensive, have a better sound and usually built-in effects.

PC or not PC, aye theres the rub, I would say. If you decide to go the non-PC route, just buy the most expensive porta you can afford. :)
If you decide to go the PC-route (which seems reasonable since you have a good PC already) check out the "computer recording" forum to see what you should get.
 
LI Slim - what Regebro calls a porta records digitally. It has A/D converters which change the analog signals from your mics and instruments and converts them to digital. Then, yes, you can mix the prerecorded tracks, adjusting level and EQ and panning and some effects. It's pretty much like mixing on a computer, I would expect, except you don't get the big computer screen with all the pretty waveforms of your recorded tracks. You can burn the mix to a CD (I don't think many units have CD burners, but you can buy and attach one). You can convert your recorded files to mp3, yeah, and send them out to the world online. The sound is comparable to computer-recorded sound, yeah. In short, you can produce recorded music which sounds as good as computer-recorded music in most cases. Air is a useful medium for transmitting sound waves.
 
I have an MD8. That's Yamaha's minidisc multitracker. They also make a 4track version (the md4) which is a few hudred cheaper. (I'd say spring for the 8). I got mine for $950 new from zzounds.com (they were having a sale).

The sound quality is something you'll have to decide. It's 18bit/44.1khz. I have no quarrels with the compression, as it only compresses the data which is inaudible to the human ear. Very few can hear a difference.
The MD8 and MD4 also have good editing fucntions.

What I did is bought the MD8 as well as a standalone cd burner. That way, I can mix down my song to the cd burner, pop the cd into my computer and still get all those pretty waveforms. This way, you also don't have to worry about sound card. If I wanted to get fancy, I could even burn each track seperatly and mix it on my computer. If your interested in this do a search for "the monkey method" on this site.

I did a fair amount of research and got hung up like you on computer vs. standalone units. I ultimatly decided to go standalone, and that the MD8 was the best bang for the buck.
Visit the minidisc forum if you like.

-nilbog
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top