software vs. hardware effects

  • Thread starter Thread starter travelin travis
  • Start date Start date
T

travelin travis

New member
I know this has been asked before so forgive me. For the average home recordist, is there really much difference in a budget hardware compressor and a software plugin compressor?

i have very little experience using compression. i just tried the sonitus plugin compressor included with sonar 4 pe to tame some peaks on a acoustic guitar solo. i can't hear any difference in the track other than the peaks being lower in volume. i'm reducing the peaks by -6 db. for transparent compression, what would be the benefit in having a hardware compressor when I can just use software plugins?

also, I would like to have a basic hardware reverb just for monitoring during tracking. would something like one of those nano verbs work ok considering the reverb won't actually be recorded, just used for monitoring purposes? do cheap reverb units sound so bad that they are uninspiring during tracking?
 
Hey Travis

Firstly, if your not experienced with a compressor I would recommend sticking to a software one for the time being (the sonalksis is pretty good) because you can keep adjusting the compression until it's right. A luxury not supplied with the hardware ones.
If you're looking for transparent compression you shouldn't be able to hear THAT much difference... but that's the idea! Keep adjusting and find what works for each track.

I've been recording for about 7 years and have been very content with software compressors until I took the plunge last month. :cool:

Secondly, reverb. There's no reason why you can't monitor your tracking recordings with software reverb. It doesn't need to appear on the final recording. Just set it up as a 'send' on the track your recording to - not the recording channel... (I can't work out how to word that better - someone?.. anyone?! :confused: :confused: ).

The jist of it is that you should be able to do everything you mentioned within the computer as it is... more money to spend on mics n gadgets!! ;)
 
thanks for the info fishybob. so after taking the plunge, what do you like better about your hardware compressor? also, I don't like using the software reverb during tracking because of the latencey. it sounds like reverb but with a short delay added.
 
A hardware reverb should be the first piece of outboard you buy. There are some low budget reverb to consider: Lexicon MX200 (I haven't heard this one yet), TC M300 or M-One XL. If you can spend up to around $500 the absolute best budget box in my opinion is the Kurzweil Rumour.that one you would keep for a while.
 
I have nowhere near $500 to spend. maybe I should just keep monitoring dry for now. i was thinking of grabbing a *cheap* used budget box for monitoring purposes.
 
Hi,
While I'm not a fan of Alesis verbs or compressors, you generally don't want to wash the vocal in a ton of reverb during tracking, so for the little bit of verb you do fold back, it probably doesn't matter much the quality. On the cheap though, see if you can find a used Lexicon Alex, which would sound much more inspiring.
-RD
 
You shouldn't have any noticable delay in the reverb while tracking... What's your setup, what gear?

Is there any latency while tracking dry?? :confused:

The hardware compressor I got was the Focusrite Penta. I mainly got it for tracking. To help control levels. As I use a stereo guitar FX, I really love the stereo compressor... Doesn't do much... but I like it! :D


Travis, I'm still using a software reverb and find the sound to be rich enough for what I do. I don't like tracks swamped, just a hint. £500 is also WELL out of my budget! I think I'll stick with software for the time being. :o
 
I tend to use very little reverb. i plan to record a few local singers and thought a little reverb during tracking might help a bit.
 
I agree completely. Most singers tend to perform better with a little reverb (they can shut there eyes and imagine they're singing wherever they like!).

Very doable with software!
 
fishybob, I get noticeable latencey during tracking if I monitor what's being recorded. I'm running into a yamaha mg mixer, delta 1010LT sound card, sonar 4 pe. right now, i just monitor from the mg mixer. i can get my latencey down to 5 ms when only doing a few tracks. otherwise, i have to go with about 10 ms.
 
The best ultra-cheap used reverb I know of is the Alesis Wedge. I'm sure you can find one for under $100, probably well under $100. It's dead simple to use and sounds good.
 
thanks for the info sonicalbert. i'm gonna keep my eye out for one, although I really hate buying electronics from sleaze bay.
 
I checked on Wedge's today on eBay, and a couple went recently that looked practically brand new. If you are patient I'll bet you could get a good one. But you are right, it's definitely "buyer beware" on eBay.
 
I use a guitar effects pedal (Boss GT-3) for quick dirty tracking reverb if somebody requests it and it does quite nicely.
I think anything cheap will work fine for you to track. If you step up to something like a Midiverb, or especially a Rumour, you might find actual uses for it in mixing as well.

And I think the general rule of thumb on compressors is: decent software > budget hardware*





*Except maybe for the RNC
 
i was reading a bit at tweakheadz site today. i learned something that i did'nt know about latencey. if you increase the sampling rate in your host from 48k to 96k, the latencey is cut in half. i had my settings in sonar at 48k, 24 bit, 256 samples, getting 5.3 ms latencey. there was some kind of phasy sound, a bit of distortion, and a slight delay when monitoring the input with these settings......just a bunch of nasty artifacts.

i changed the sample rate to 96k and the nasty artifacts are gone. also, i get 2.7 ms latencey. i can't hear the delay now and monitoring the input with reverb sounds very nice. the trade off is that my cpu usage went up considerably and recording at 96k will make for some hefty size tracks. i can deal with the increased storage requirements but the cpu usage is a biggie for me.

since i'm running an amd 1.4 ghz thunderbird cpu, i could definately stand to upgrade my cpu. i'm wondering now if i would be better off upgrading my cpu and maybe my mobo too, or buying a budget reverb box.

i wish i knew more about latencey and how to effectively bring it down without bogging down my cpu so much. does anyone know about this stuff?
 
fishybob, what kind of latencey are you getting? what are you running? thanks.
 
I haven't measured my latency before... It isn't noticable at all. (Quick test on my soundcard says 8 milliseconds!!! :eek:

I'm running Cubase SX2 with Audiophile 24/96.

The reverb I use most often is Waves Trueverb... It's perfectly adiquate for my level. ;)

System is Athlon 2800+, 1G RAM, 2x120Gb Seagate Hdrives.
 
I can bring my latency down to 2 milliseconds but even my cpu goes up quite quickly. I just dropped it back a notch and the difference is huge. Try a few setting and see if you can get a compromise. ;)

With regards to buying a hardware verb or upgrading the pc... even if you buy a hardware verb your still going to need to upgrade that machine one day. Once it starts holding you back, move on (if money allows!).
 
fishybob, you mean you can't hear a delay in the signal with 8 ms latencey? on my machine, it's very noticeable, distracting even, at 5.3 ms. this machine was originally thrown together as a budget do all pc. it's now up to 768 mb ram, 2 80 gb wd hard drives. i'd like to go with a faster cpu, better mobo, and more ram but I'm not sure it would make any difference in latencey.
 
One millisecond is the time it takes soundwaves to travel 1 foot. 8 Millisecond sis the equivilant of standing 8 feet from your sound source. Unless you get you head next to the speaker a few milliseconds shouldn't be noticable. I think if your finding 5 milliseconds too much and feel the need to reduce it further perhaps you should sit closer to the speakers! :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top