Do I need an audio interface if my workflow is only digital (no analog)?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajfrank
  • Start date Start date
A

ajfrank

New member
I have a question about latency and the benefits of using a USB audio interface, such as the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2, or the PreSonus AudioBox.
I understand that an audio interface is necessary for converting analog audio into digital audio so that you can record and edit on your computer.
But what if I plan to make music using only software on my computer, with no analog equipment? Would there be any benefits for using an audio interface in that scenario? Does my computer make use of hardware that is found in a USB interface for improving audio quality, or reducing latency, etc? Or are things like audio quality and latency, when working in a digital-only environment, dependent only on my computer specs (RAM, processor, etc)?

Thanks
 
Can you describe your workflow? Is it all midi from a controller? USB?

If you never have any real audio going into you system, only Midi or computer synthesized music, then an audio interface really isn't needed. Its purpose is to bring microphone, or direct feeds like from a guitar into the digital realm.

If you have a computer keyboard connected via USB or midi, then you have everything you really need to make recordings.
 
I guess a lot depends on how good the analog output is of your computer sound card and how well it interfaces with your monitors. Laptop outputs are not always great and can be prone to noise but not all. I imagine you are mixing these virtual sources intending them to at some point be heard in the analog world.

REW (Room EQ Wizard) software, when you set it up, has a soundcard calibration utility. You make up a loopback cable (out to in) for your computer and run the calibration. It will tell you how good the soundcard
Soundcard-Cal.webp
response is. This is the response of a cheap Behringer interface. Very flat response even down to 7Hz and up to 20k.
 
The only benefit you would get by using an interface is possibly a better set of converters and volume control for your monitors.

Since all your sounds are made in the computer, there will be no audio quality improvement.

Latency is caused by the delay between the input and the output, since there really is no input, there is no latency to improve on.
 
This might be a situation where a good USB DAC makes sense.
 
Hi all,
Thanks for the replies!
When I wrote that everything is digital-only and no analog, I didn't take into account the output audio ?

Full disclosure: I'm actually asking for a friend ?
She's just recently started dabbling in making music on her laptop. She's been playing around with the free cloud-based DAW bandlab and really enjoying it. She feels that she wants to try taking the next step but doesn't want to spend over $100 just yet. Maybe soon though.

So I saw that bandlab apparently bought Cakewalk, and are offering it for free. I'm not familiar with it but I was thinking maybe it's similar to the cloud-based DAW... and it's free!

I have a small 25-key USB midi controller to lend her.

So I guess the only questions are whether she needs an audio interface, and monitors?
She's not concerned about the audio being "studio quality" she just doesn't want to have to deal with annoying buggy things like latency, cracks and pops -- things of that sort.

She's fine with using her USB laptop speakers, and a cheap USB microphone, if that setup would work somehow.
 
What is she going to do with the USB mic? Does the mic have a built in headphone socket? Is she going to do anything serious with the mic? If she does plan to do something where she needs to hear in real time what the mic is picking up (and the mic doesn't have built in monitoring), she'll need an interface.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
What is she going to do with the USB mic? Does the mic have a built in headphone socket? Is she going to do anything serious with the mic? If she does plan to do something where she needs to hear in real time what the mic is picking up (and the mic doesn't have built in monitoring), she'll need an interface.
Click to expand...
She actually doesn't even have the USB mic yet. Just so you get an idea -- right now, working in bandlab, she's just wearing some $20 headphones plugged into her laptop headphone jack and recording voice directly into the laptop built-in mic. So right now she just wants to upgrade the mic and while she likes bandlab (cloud-based) it's just too buggy. So she's looking for an alternative to that as well.
 
ajfrank said:
She actually doesn't even have the USB mic yet. Just so you get an idea -- right now, working in bandlab, she's just wearing some $20 headphones plugged into her laptop headphone jack and recording voice directly into the laptop built-in mic. So right now she just wants to upgrade the mic and while she likes bandlab (cloud-based) it's just too buggy. So she's looking for an alternative to that as well.
Click to expand...
Okay, that helps us understand her needs. I would recommend an audio interface and a mic that connects via XLR. But short of that, something like the Yeti Pro will at least avoid the latency problems you get when the input and output are different devices, because it has its own headphone socket and built in input monitoring. The limitation of the Yeti Pro is that it's tethered to its built in audio interface. You can't use other mics or connect other sources such as a keyboard, or have two inputs at once.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
Okay, that helps us understand her needs. I would recommend an audio interface and a mic that connects via XLR. But short of that, something like the Yeti Pro will at least avoid the latency problems you get when the input and output are different devices, because it has its own headphone socket and built in input monitoring. The limitation of the Yeti Pro is that it's tethered to its built in audio interface. You can't use other mics or connect other sources such as a keyboard, or have two inputs at once.
Click to expand...
Got it. Thanks!
Yeah I'll pass along the info (y)
 
The audio that she hears from the headphone socket can be quite good, but the test of course is when she starts to let other people listen on their systems. Will they with better sound setups notice occasional rougher sounds from poor performing VSTis, or notice the bass is too strong, too weak, too boomy. Good quality audio reveals problems as well as sounding better. I could never release or use anything I record in my video studio as the speakers don’t go low enough and mixes always sound odd when listened in the studio. I always need to make Eq choices there, and set reverb levels, because the poorer speaker make doing it so hard.
 
I always hate making suggestions to buy "cheap" gear if the person has any desire to take things to the next level. Buying good starting gear will cost a bit more, but in the long run you don't end up replacing it and throwing away money.
Having said that, you can pick up a Behringer UMC22 for $50 at sweetwater, and a C1 (or C1U) for under $40. This would give you a starting point, and would sound remarkably better than a built in mic for well under your $100 mark... I would honestly recommend at least stepping up to an MXL 770 or 990 microphone, and I've heard nice things about Tascam's TM80 as a starting level microphone. You don't have to start with an Rhode MT-1A or a Shure SM7B. (Although I've seen the MT-1As under $230 and that's a nice mark to aim for.)
The Behringer interface does what you need it to, and I've not heard too many nasty things about it. It gives you a stereo input, or microphone and mono instrument. Also has headphone jack for future expansion to studio grade headphones, and availability of balanced outputs should you desire to go further and incorporate actual external monitor speakers. . . and for $50 you can hardly go wrong. I've seen these for sale on Reverb, e-bay and others for over $100.
Anyway, happy recording! I hope everything works out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top