What does this record monitoring switch do?

[Muddy T-Bone]

Another stupid newbie question that I can not find the answer to in the manual. What does this switch in the photo do? It's labeled on/off/auto.

It appears that REAPER is set to defaut to record monitoring OFF.

My guess is the meter on the track is monitoring recording when set in the ON position.

Thanks in advance

 

[Armistice]

If I don't have that switched to ON, I can't hear what I'm playing in monitors/headphones.. Haven't worked out the AUTO setting yet though.

 

[mjbphotos]

If you want to wet monitor the track you are recording, turn it on. Most people use direct (dry) monitoring - monitoring from your audio interface - so that latency is not an issue.

 

[gecko zzed]

What mjb says ^^^

Generally, hardware monitoring through your interface is less risky than software monitoring through your DAW.

However, when it comes to midi and VST, if you are recording midi, you can only hear what you are doing with software monitoring, i.e. that button pressed.

 

[dainbramage]

Generally, hardware monitoring through your interface is less risky than software monitoring through your DAW.

Would appreciate if you could explain this. I'm used to monitoring wet through DAW. Why would it be risky? If it is because of latency one would think it was more work having to move the takes back because of having monitored through interface? Also, if you're using plugins it seems better to listen through them while recording. I am sure you're right but please explain.

 

[bouldersoundguy]

Would appreciate if you could explain this. I'm used to monitoring wet through DAW. Why would it be risky? If it is because of latency one would think it was more work having to move the takes back because of having monitored through interface? Also, if you're using plugins it seems better to listen through them while recording. I am sure you're right but please explain.

To lower monitoring latency you need to use a smaller buffer, but a smaller buffer puts you at risk of recording dropouts and glitches. You have two conflicting needs. With hardware direct monitoring you can set the buffers to whatever works best for recording while having little or no monitoring latency.

You shouldn't have to move anything at all if your DAW is properly configured. If you do you have what's called record latency or record offset. You can test that by connecting an output to an input and recording the playback to another track. It should line up perfectly, or very nearly so. There should be an adjustment somewhere in your software's settings.

Generally it's best to monitor without processing that may cover up performance errors or imperfections, especially with vocals. Sometimes effects are part of the sound, such as with guitars, but I would suggest getting as much of that ahead of the interface using pedals etc.

 

[Armistice]

Would appreciate if you could explain this. I'm used to monitoring wet through DAW. Why would it be risky? If it is because of latency one would think it was more work having to move the takes back because of having monitored through interface? Also, if you're using plugins it seems better to listen through them while recording. I am sure you're right but please explain.

Some people, me included, can relax a bit more with a touch of 'verb on the voice whilst recording... so that's a case of monitoring via the DAW unless your interface has onboard effects, as some do.... however, as boulder points out, doing this might actually mask imperfections in the performance...so there's a line to walk...

These days I go dry via the interface for that very reason... even though my interface can do effects... I'd rather know up front.

 

[gecko zzed]

Some people, me included, can relax a bit more with a touch of 'verb on the voice whilst recording... so that's a case of monitoring via the DAW unless your interface has onboard effects, as some do.... however, as boulder points out, doing this might actually mask imperfections in the performance...so there's a line to walk...

These days I go dry via the interface for that very reason... even though my interface can do effects... I'd rather know up front.

Reverb on the monitor does sometimes make it easier for the singer.

The main problem with it is that it can make the singer sing flat.

If someone insists, I can feed reverb through, but I prefer to go dry.

 

[bouldersoundguy]

Some reverb on the voice while tracking can be helpful. Your brain is used to hearing sounds reflecting of nearby surfaces and the right reverb can make it easier to hear your pitch and tone. Too much can blur your timing. In Pro Tools we found a way to use the ITB reverb though not monitoring through the software. I'm not sure how to do it on another DAW. In the other studio using Sony Vegas we track through a big console which allows reverb in monitors.

Compression on vocals in monitors can make the singer overcompensate by being too dynamic. That counteracts the effect of the compressor and can strain a singer's voice. I would rather have all the dynamics the singer is doing come through so they are more likely to use good mic technique. When I break this rule I use a high threshold so the compression only affects the highest peaks.

While you can track with some effects there's certainly no reason you have to. I would rather have zero latency monitoring and no effects than have latency and effects.

 

[dainbramage]

Generally it's best to monitor without processing that may cover up performance errors or imperfections, especially with vocals

Ah, I see. However I don't really understand what performance errors or imperfections matter if the processing cover it up anyway.

 

[bouldersoundguy]

Ah, I see. However I don't really understand what performance errors or imperfections matter if the processing cover it up anyway.

It might only cover it up enough so you don't realize while tracking. But during mixdown it may become apparent if you change the effects on the track or the balance with the other instruments. If you track with minimal effects you are more likely to hear stuff right away that can be a problem later.

 

[dainbramage]

It might only cover it up enough so you don't realize while tracking. But during mixdown it may become apparent if you change the effects on the track or the balance with the other instruments. If you track with minimal effects you are more likely to hear stuff right away that can be a problem later.

Aha. Thanks for clearing that up, it makes perfect sense now and I will take it into account.

 

[Philx123]

I've always been confused by monitoring. As is, my system, cheap, I know, is set up guitar in through a small behringer mixer via the cd/tape out which goes to the soundcard line in, then audio out via the headphone socket on the soundcard, back to the mixer via cd/tape out. I then use the headphone socket on the mixer to hear the audio. Trouble is, no matter what the settings, I can only hear both track and guitar with ASIO on. I don't seem to have the option of full monitoring any other way, and certainly never hear anything in Reaper without the green record button on or on auto. Am I missing something here?

 

[gecko zzed]

I've always been confused by monitoring. As is, my system, cheap, I know, is set up guitar in through a small behringer mixer via the cd/tape out which goes to the soundcard line in, then audio out via the headphone socket on the soundcard, back to the mixer via cd/tape out. I then use the headphone socket on the mixer to hear the audio. Trouble is, no matter what the settings, I can only hear both track and guitar with ASIO on. I don't seem to have the option of full monitoring any other way, and certainly never hear anything in Reaper without the green record button on or on auto. Am I missing something here?

Yep. You are missing something. Your internal soundcard most likely does not provide for direct monitoring, so the only way you can monitor is via software monitoring, i.e. pressing that that button.

Were you to have an audio interface specifically designed for audio recording and playback, then you could choose to have software monitoring on or off.

So what you are missing is an interface.

 

[Philx123]

Ahh, I see. I'm watching a couple of M Audio delta 44s on ebay, so hopefully that problem will be solved soon.

All the best

Phil