Could this be my problem, the interface

  • Thread starter Thread starter mark1971a
  • Start date Start date
Oh okay, that actually does make sense. I was figuring both input line and phone out were the same basic headphone/line out level.

If I plug either into a headphone amp, they sound similar amplitude, but not signal quality.

Another mystery is what is happening in the render mp3 section of reaper? Because everything could be fine before rendering.
 
Last edited:
mark1971a said:
Another mystery is what is happening in the render mp3 section of reaper? Because everything could be fine before rendering.
Click to expand...

True enough. I'd render as WAV which is lossless.
That's the only way to make a fair assessment.
 
Yes, success!

Wav , sounds awesome! Looks good on the scope. Much better that rendering the tracks each as mp3. Now it isn't perfect, but definitely good enough.

How did you find out about wav vs mp3? What makes it lossless?
 
Last edited:
mark1971a said:
Yes, success!

Wav , sounds awesome! Looks good on the scope.

How did you find out about wav vs mp3? What makes it lossless?
Click to expand...

It is a brave new world out there. With you being so, hum, serious about your sound. You may want to do some research. This is pretty standard knowledge. Do searches on all of the common file types, AIFF, MP3, FLAC, Wave (That's all I can think of off the top of my head). I think it will help your stress level a lot.
 
I've had a building suspicion that there's some problem at the output of your system, like a software gain control set too high causing clipping of anything coming from the Toneport. So for you everything coming out sounds and measures bad while it sounds and measures fine for the rest of us. If it's not some hardware or software setting in your system maybe your interface is malfunctioning.

Can you listen to and scope the line outputs? Can you take one of your recordings to another playback system and listen to/scope that?
 
I don't have another system here. Sure, it can do rca, or 1/4" input.

Everything was rendered as a mp3. As a wav I am getting the waveform usually recognized. The sound is more of a full flat signal im used to starting with.

I do not think I m that serious, or hung up on any one thing. I ran out of words to describe what was going on, and moved to pictures to show the deficit. It may not be popular here, but it does get results.
 
mark1971a said:
Yes, success!

Wav , sounds awesome! Looks good on the scope. Much better that rendering the tracks each as mp3. Now it isn't perfect, but definitely good enough.

How did you find out about wav vs mp3? What makes it lossless?
Click to expand...

mark1971a said:
Thank you x 1000000000
Click to expand...

No problem, Mark. I sincerely hope this is the root cause of all your problems.

DM60 is right; It's pretty common knowledge, but how could a newcomer really be expected to know?
It's common knowledge if you were born with a phone in your hand. :p
There's so much that I/we take for granted.

Mark, If you can find a digital recording 101 or a user guide for a DAW, give it a read.
Anything like that should cover the basics.
It's not like you need a formal education to use a computer, but become familiar with common terminology is always helpful.

There are things that aren't likely to be heard of in an 'old style' analog environment.
Sample rate, bit rate, data compression, file format types, latency, buffer sizes, asio, drivers......

Just for future reference, WAV is uncompressed and mp3 is compressed.
That's not dynamic range compression; It's data compression.
Most people couldn't tell a 320 mp3 from a wav. It's pretty damn close.
The lower the mp3 quality settings are, the more likely you are to hear negative effects of that compression.

If you bounce a 16bit 44,100k WAV from a 16bit 44,100k session, it should sound the same as the session, as far as I know.
 
mark1971a said:
I ran out of words to describe what was going on, and moved to pictures to show the deficit. It may not be popular here, but it does get results.
Click to expand...

Fair play..There was an underlying problem.
I guess the mp3 settings are pretty low quality by default or something.
 
I was using the mp3 setting to the smaller size thinking this was latency. Figuring the file size would be smoother/faster.

Wav files are huge in comparision.
 
Steenamaroo said:
No problem, Mark. I sincerely hope this is the root cause of all your problems.

DM60 is right; It's pretty common knowledge, but how could a newcomer really be expected to know?
It's common knowledge if you were born with a phone in your hand. :p
There's so much that I/we take for granted.

Mark, If you can find a digital recording 101 or a user guide for a DAW, give it a read.
Anything like that should cover the basics.
It's not like you need a formal education to use a computer, but become familiar with common terminology is always helpful.

There are things that aren't likely to be heard of in an 'old style' analog environment.
Sample rate, bit rate, data compression, file format types, latency, buffer sizes, asio, drivers......

Just for future reference, WAV is uncompressed and mp3 is compressed.
That's not dynamic range compression; It's data compression.
Most people couldn't tell a 320 mp3 from a wav. It's pretty damn close.
The lower the mp3 quality settings are, the more likely you are to hear negative effects of that compression.

If you bounce a 16bit 44,100k WAV from a 16bit 44,100k session, it should sound the same as the session, as far as I know.
Click to expand...

Sometimes when we are looking at the horizon, we forget to look down and see the cliff in front of our feet.
 
mark1971a said:
I was using the mp3 setting to the smaller size thinking this was latency. Figuring the file size would be smoother/faster.
Click to expand...

Lovely stuff.
I'm not admin but I'd probably abandon this thread now and start afresh if you have an issues.


For buffer settings, go into Reaper preferences and click audio > Device.
You should see "request block size" probably set at 512?
I assume this is the thing to change. Try it at 64.

In truth it's not quite as obvious as I'd expect.
 
Scincerely , it is the problem.

A true master producer, could have done good and continued to mix together those tracks. Made something listenable, nice.

I reached a difference, and my limitation in skill really frustrated me.

I will start some other threads in the near future, plugins and such. This is cool, Im real happy with the direction I am headed. I feel I can continue again.
 
Lol! Seriously, lol for real. I figured it was the MP3 giving him fits, but thought surely this guy knew the difference - with him being a fucking scientist and everything. :facepalm:

Seriously though, yeah, I guess now you know. MP3s are fine for small storage and regular everyday background listening when the utmost audiophile quality is not a concern. But if you're really trying to compare a pure analog signal/recording to digital, you can't use a fucking MP3 on the digital side. Digital will never win that fight. Jeez. What a clusterfuck. I KNEW it was operator error.
 
By the way - I am glad that you got it figured out finally. That last post sounded kind of dickish, and I didn't entirely mean it that way. I'm just flabbergasted that all this drama was over something so silly. But you got it now, so go record something.
 
Greg_L said:
I'm just flabbergasted that all this drama was over something so silly.
Click to expand...

I have to agree....it did get a bit silly, all because small details in his steps were not clear. :)

Mark,

Try to be more clear/detailed in your posts....you were kinda' replying in half-sentences.
This is way I asked a couple of times that you describe *exactly* how/what you were doing, because it's always one bad step lost in the details that makes all the difference.

Anyway...now go play around with the gear and see what you can get out of it. :D
 
If WAV is windows audio video, and is what my phone records in and laptop records in, then what would a protools Mac setup render to?

Does the mac have the ability to render a sound better or worse in detail? Those might be fighting words but Im curious.

You guys all did really well, and helped me get on track in a short amount of time. Take a bow.
 
Last edited:
AIFF for Mac is the same as WAV for PC.

No real difference in audio quality.
 
miroslav said:
AIFF for Mac is the same as WAV for PC.

No real difference in audio quality.
Click to expand...
+1.
The difference is in how the data is stored on the disc, but both are uncompressed files, and both are of equal quality.
 
Sure would be helpful to hear some clips.
I have had similar experiences that are typically traced to the Interface and/or drivers.
Because you are having the same problem with two interfaces, I suggest you clean up your pc and update your drivers.
Are you using the latest ASIO driver?
Try another pc if you have one.
When you get the pc and drivers working right, the sound should blow you away.
Good luck, and don't give up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top