Suggestions & recommendation for Audio Interface

[ex350]

Hi everyone

 

Saw Craig's great review of the Roland Octa-Studio & wanted to invest in an audio interface.

I'm pretty new to the audio interface thing & hope to hear some advice, suggestions & recommendation

Currently .. I record directly through my Zoom G5 effect into Audacity.

While my band is playing at my place ... I just use a webcam to record the videos & audios

My bandmates are complaining the sound quality is horrendous .. well ... that's the story.

 

So here's my requirements

 

I wanted to record a full band at home with the audio interface .. using Sonar X2

My band consists of 3 guitarists, 1 bassist, 1 electronic drumkits & 5 vocals (sort of live recording thing at home)

So I need to have at least 10 analog inputs

I would want to plug the e-drum in a separate laptop with links to Addictive drums as well (if that is a better option)

I'm currently using Windows 8.1 with USB3 & USB2

My PC is a Dell XPS8700 - i7-4790 with 16Gb RAM

Hopefully the audio interface is also portable as I may want to bring it to a friend's house to record as well ... but that's not a priority.

Was looking at the Roland Studio Capture .... but that product is already 3 years old (released in Jan 2013).

Budget would be around $1200.00

Of course ... I'm also new to these audio interface thing ... so a user friendly system would be helpful as well.

 

Would also liked to have headphones monitoring for all members instead of speaker monitoring

Any headphone amp recommendation would be helpful as well.

 

Hopefully, I have not left out any other specifics.... and not contradicting myself with all the messy requirements.

 

Any advice, suggestions & recommendation (criticism) are welcomed.

 

Thanks in advanced

Cliff

 

 

 

[MikeRivers]

Currently .. I record directly through my Zoom G5 effect into Audacity.

While my band is playing at my place ... I just use a webcam to record the videos & audios

My bandmates are complaining the sound quality is horrendous .. well ... that's the story.

 

Webcams aren't designed for recording, they're designed for someone talking close to the screen, so it's not surprising that you're disappointed with the sound.

 

My band consists of 3 guitarists, 1 bassist, 1 electronic drumkits & 5 vocals (sort of live recording thing at home)

So I need to have at least 10 analog inputs

I would want to plug the e-drum in a separate laptop with links to Addictive drums as well (if that is a better option)

 

As you may have discovered already, computer audio interfaces commonly are made with 2, 4, or 8 mic inputs. These are sometimes augmented with line level analog inputs and digital inputs so a box with 4 mic inputs might be described as "20 inputs." You need to understand what you're really getting, and that takes some study. And do you have enough microphones to use all of those inputs?

 

But do you really need 10 inputs? The vocals are the biggest chunk of this requirement, but you only need five inputs for vocals if all five sing at the same time. If you can overdub vocals, not only will you reduce your input requirements, but, once you get the hang of it, the quality of your recordings will likely improve substantially.

 

Hopefully the audio interface is also portable as I may want to bring it to a friend's house to record as well ... but that's not a priority.

Was looking at the Roland Studio Capture .... but that product is already 3 years old (released in Jan 2013).

Budget would be around $1200.00

 

Even though it's a discontinued product (either now or soon), the Studio Capture would handle your whole band, and it's a heck of a bargain for the current going price of $700-800. I can't think of anything else that comes close to that in price and features. Roland has always have pretty good sound quality, so I wouldn't worry about that. An alternate approach is to use a mixer with a multi-channel USB interface that can connect to your computer. The PreSonus StudioLive 16.4.2AI comes to mind. If your band has a mixer for a PA system, you might consider upgrading to something like this and have it do double duty in your home studio. It will also allow you to record your live shows into a portable computer directly from the mixer. And along this line, there's a new class of product that's a mixer in a box with no knobs that's controlled by a computer or mobile device (tablet or even a phone). These can also be used as a computer audio interface.

 

Of course ... I'm also new to these audio interface thing ... so a user friendly system would be helpful as well.

 

This is a really big jump, and it's not going to be easy. User interfaces are pretty good (a hands-on mixer like the PreSonus is likely to be easiest for you to adapt to), but there's a lot to learn. I have an article in the June 2016 issue of Recording Magazine that helps understand the transition from a straightforward analog recording system to using a computer-based Digital Audio Workstation (DAW). You might want to peruse it at your local magazine store.

 

Would also liked to have headphones monitoring for all members instead of speaker monitoring

Any headphone amp recommendation would be helpful as well.

 

Headphone amplifiers are usually pretty straightforward. Typically they have outputs to four sets of headphones which can either send the same stereo mix to all four outputs or send individual mixes to each output. There isn't much to picking one out.

 

 

[ex350]

Hi Mike

 

Thanks a lot for your great advice.

I never thought of a USB mixer .... might just be better for my requirements.

Will check out your article as well.

Thanks again

[Anderton]

As you may have discovered already, computer audio interfaces commonly are made with 2, 4, or 8 mic inputs. These are sometimes augmented with line level analog inputs and digital inputs so a box with 4 mic inputs might be described as "20 inputs." You need to understand what you're really getting, and that takes some study.

 

To add to Mike's excellent advice...many interfaces include "ADAT Digital I/O." This is a port for an optical cable that can carry eight channels of digital audio at 44.1 or 48 kHz. This will add 8 channels to the channel count. So for example, an audio interface with 4 mic inputs, 2 line inputs, and an ADAT optical input would be advertised as having "14 inputs" (4 + 2 + 8).

 

There are several ways to use an ADAT input, but one of the most popular applications is expanding the number of mic inputs. There are several units with eight mic pres and ADAT digital output, like the ART TubeOpto8. If your interface has an ADAT digital input, you can patch the ADAT digital output from a device like the ART TubeOpto8 to the interface ADAT digital input and expand your interface with 8 more mic inputs.

 

For example, the TASCAM US 20x20, which costs $499, has eight mic inputs and ADAT I/O. The TubeOpto8 costs $449, so between the two of them, you're still under $1,000.

 

Do check out Mike's USB mixer suggestion, though, it does seem ideal for what you're doing.

 

[nat whilk II]

First question I'd ask is - what is the purpose of the recording? If you are just trying to capture rehearsals for the purposes of listening to it critically so the band can improve, then you can get by just fine with a pretty simple setup.

 

Rock bottom simple would be basically recording a P.A. stereo output. If you have a P.A. system with a board someone can work (someone who knows a bit about what they're doing), then that a convenient route. Or rehearse occasionally somewhere that has a P.A. all set up with a board (a club during off hours, an amenable church, or even if you can get lucky or know someone, a local studio that will charge you little or nothing for just running through some tunes and recording it rough.) You might be able to get eight to sixteen tracks or so, not just stereo. Then you could mess with it some in a DAW, redo some parts, add stuff, etc.

 

Mike is right about there being a lot to learn, setting up for recording a band via a DAW. The Youtubes that show people "how easy" it is to record a band with the Studio Capture or StudioLive - easy only if you already possess a college degree's amount of know-how about recording. I'm not trying to be discouraging - I'm self-taught here working my own home studio and I love it (except for when I hate it ).

 

You just need to be ready for a big climb up a big learning curve - and dealing with expenses, too. (Always more to learn, and always more gear that seems to promise the "next level" in quality, etc. Gotta keep your head screwed on straight - the world is full of guys who spent a bunch of money on gear that ended up in the closet or going for peanuts on Ebay.)

 

Best o' luck -

 

nat whilk ii

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Anderton]

Regarding your computer, you might want to upgrade to Windows 10 before the free offer runs out. You can install it over your old OS (no need to wipe your hard drive and start from scratch) and if there are problems, you have 30 days where you can roll back to your previous OS.

[MikeRivers]

Thanks a lot for your great advice.

I never thought of a USB mixer .... might just be better for my requirements.

 

OK, the seed is planted.

 

Do you perform on stage and use your own PA system? One of those newfangled digital mixers is really good for that. For one thing, you can save setups and mixes, as well as scenes, so if someone changes instruments for a song, a couple of button presses will bring up the EQ and level settings for the new instrument. Also, most of them have a lot more auxiliary mixes than traditional analog consoles. Get the whole band on in-ear monitors and everyone can have his own mix, the stage will be quieter, you'll have less gear to haul around, and they can even mix themselves via WiFi from their own cell phones. And the whole shebang is transportable between studio and stage.

 

[ex350]

Thanks

Don't know whether it's true .. but I read a few reviews that about Tascam having poor drivers that crash often.

The Tascam US 20x20 seems like a great option for me.

[ex350]

The current purpose is more for rehearsal ... but we will be doing some live stuffs in church & small events soon. So we hoped to capture those session as well. Our church only has a basic mixer & 2 speaker setup ... so it's not really suitable to plug into that.

Ya ... it's going to be tough as a beginner for me and all eyes are looking at me to work this out.

 

Thanks for your advice

Cliff

[ex350]

Thanks Craig

Is Windows 10 a better OS for recording than Win 8.1?

Any issues with Sonar or Cubase ... as I will be using either one of them.

Thanks

[ex350]

Mike

Nice .. will definitely looked into this option as well.

Other than the Presonus you mentioned ... which uses Firewire/Thunderbolt ... any USB models?

Thanks

Cliff

[Anderton]

Yamaha, Alesis, ART, Mackie and others offer mixers with a built-in USB audio interface.

 

Also note that several USB interfaces offer "mixer" modes where you can use the interface as a digital mixer. However, the convenience is nowhere near a traditional mixer if you want to do traditional mixing; it's more for set-and-forget mix applications, or use with a computer if you want to make changes.

 

[MikeRivers]

Yamaha, Alesis, ART, Mackie and others offer mixers with a built-in USB audio interface.

 

Also note that several USB interfaces offer "mixer" modes where you can use the interface as a digital mixer. However, the convenience is nowhere near a traditional mixer if you want to do traditional mixing; it's more for set-and-forget mix applications, or use with a computer if you want to make changes.

 

A mixer with a built-in USB interface can indeed be used for mixing in the conventional sense with all the convenience (subject to interpretation) and features (hands-down winner) of a digital mixer. The mixer built into an interface is really only useful for making cue mixes for tracking, and that's usually a set-and-forget mix, at least for the duration of a recording pass.

[WRGKMC]

I've been doing live rehearsal recordings for many decades. You vocal mics aren't going to sound that great when you have guitar amps and drums going live because they will pick up bleed over. You are limited to using Dynamic mics to avoid feedback from the PA (if you use one) and from picking up bleed over from all the other instruments. You need a quiet room when using condensers and would need each singer in a separate iso booth to prevent bleed over which probably isn't going to happen from your description.

 

In the end you'll be spending endless hours trying to make those 5 vocals tracks sounding acceptable, filtering out bleed over and trying to EQ them up to acceptable levels. You'd be better off just doing scratch vocal tracks then re-tracking your vocals on the songs you find to be keepers.

 

Sometimes you can get the vocals good enough to where the bleed over isn't too offensive using dynamic mics like you would doing a live recording but its basically a matter of space where you can mic things with minimal bleed over. I've gotten many over the years, but I can say, nearly all of them could have been better with the vocals done separately using a good studio mic tweaked to perfection.

 

Of course the trade off is you may wind up loosing some of the live groove you may have captured recording everything at once, but the time you save getting a good completed mix by having great vocals to begin with is a no brainer. I'd simply record scratch tracks and go back and dub in new vocals on the best musically recorded songs.

 

You could get by with an 8 Track in that your case. The electric drums can be 1 or 2 tracks, Bass and 3 guitars. That makes 6 for the instruments.

 

For vocals simply take a feed off your PA and run that to one remaining track then take an insert send from whoever is singing lead vocals. This will give you a main vocal track and a chorus track. If your PA has a monitor send just use it to feed the other 4 singers to the one track and use the mic insert for the main vocalist.

 

This should give you some mix-ability between the main vocals and the harmonies.

If you want everything separate you need to go up to 16 channels. Its actually better because the ability to track instruments with stereo effects is there, plus you don't have to swap cables constantly.

 

 

 

If you want to capture everything then just go for a 16 channel recorder. You'll have extra channels left over but you may wind up needing them if you change to an acoustic drummer. The best bang for the money lately is the Tascam US interfaces. They definitely got the competition beat with the best prices for the quality at the moment.

 

 

I normally use a 24 channel PCI setup which I use for live bands but rarely use more then 16 which gives me 8 channels for drums and 8 for everything else.

 

I Recently bought a US-1200, 6 channel interface for testing and solo purposes when it was on sale. It was such a ridiculously low price I couldn't pass up the opportunity.

 

After using it for about 6 months, I've found it very rugged and reliable and 6 channels is fine for doing solo stuff. The mic preamps are very good, They produce no detectable noise and that are strong enough to run ribbon mics without an issue.

 

I've been testing it long enough now that I will likely upgrade my PCI setup to the US-16x08 which is the 16 channel version and get rid of my PCI based setup. The 16 channels are selling for and $299 which is a killer deal for any 16 channel interface.

 

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/pro-a...udio-interface

 

I have used several other 8 channel interfaces like the Presonus and and other then the fact you spend twice as much for them, there is no significant differences in the quality of the recordings you get.

 

I was a bit worried about Tascam years back because they were only making some low end 2 channel interfaces and a bunch of low end stand alone stuff. I can say now that worry was unfounded, their rack interfaces wound up being untouchable in the price range.

[Danhedonia]

This is a thread filled with excellent advice - and I keep returning to the same question asked by a poster above: "what is the purpose of the recording?"

 

Your answer involved where you will be recording, but not why. What are we going to be doing with these recordings? Reviewing to see where we need to sharpen up? Posting them to YouTube to get gigs? You're already at the fork in the road and need to figure this out first, with the band.

 

If you are attempting to create recordings to promote the band, then recording the whole thing live has bleed issues that WRK mentioned. And in simple terms, is vastly different from trying to record rehearsals for your own review.

 

You could use something as simple as a TASCAM DP-008 for simple recording; I can't remember if it functions as a DAW but if not that product, then something similar. There are a ton of them.

 

If you're looking for a way to make promo videos for the band, you'd much rather use a mixer and then use a laptop (or iPad) to record the final mix synced to the video. And at this point you really need to have more dialog with your band. Your comment about "all eyes are on me ..." indicates unrealistic expectations.

 

Again, if you're going to do more than simply improve the quality of collecting ambient sound, you're talking about a layer of engineering, DAW manipulation, etc., and that's not like sending someone out to pick up food.

 

So - what are you using these for?

[MikeRivers]

This is a thread filled with excellent advice - and I keep returning to the same question asked by a poster above: "what is the purpose of the recording?"

 

Your answer involved where you will be recording, but not why. What are we going to be doing with these recordings?

 

Of course that's a valid question, but I'd like to think that the original poster already knows about making simple one-mic recordings and he wants to do something else. That's what he was asking for, and he got some good info. He'll sort it out, or ask more questions.

 

[ex350]

Thanks for all the great advice & comments.

It's true that probably I am wanting too much at this stage as a novice.

Most of my bandmates are not well-versed in recording as well ... they just wanted the recording to sound great during practice & live.

Presonus has just released the new AR16 hybrid mixer and that really looks appealing to me because of the analog features which definitely looks much simpler, the 16 inputs also suits my requirement as well as the ability to record multi-tracks & stereo.

Will study more on this mixer & make a decision soon.

 

Sincere thanks to all your kind advice

 

[Danhedonia]

DAWs aren't difficult to learn -- it's the connectivity issues. In 2016 we still don't have real plug and play.

 

I still don't have a clear sense of what the recordings are intended for, and will simply suggest that you may be trying too hard to build a "one size fits all" solution.

[MikeRivers]

For me, connectivity is the easy part, but it's becoming more complex with all the different brands of digital gozintas and gozoutas. Life was easier when you only needed to know that outputs go to inputs and the connectors have to fit together.

 

My brain stops when I get beyond the Record and Play buttons on a DAW. I can't imagine living long enough to learn which of the sixteen equalizers and twenty-three compressors I have in my virtual rack will be right, and I don't have the patience to try them on every song I mix. If I can't get it right with the console EQ and one of the couple of compressors, the mic's in the wrong place or it's the wrong mic - and hopefully I've discovered that when tracking and fixed it.

 

Hint: Don't send me your projects to mix.

[ex350]

Hi

Thanks for your comments.

You are right ... I am getting too many request and suggestions from my band mates on what they want & I got confused.

The most important requirement right now for me is live situation. When we play live, I would want the recording to be as good as possible. Right now we are using the mic from the video cam ... & doesn't sound good.

[ex350]

My brain stops when I get beyond the Record and Play buttons on a DAW. I can't imagine living long enough to learn which of the sixteen equalizers and twenty-three compressors I have in my virtual rack will be right, and I don't have the patience to try them on every song I mix.

Haha .. thanks Mike.

Glad to know .. I'm not alone

For a novice .... I am getting giddy as well.

[Danhedonia]

For live situations there are some questions that will help you narrow things down.

 

- Are you usually playing with most instruments direct into the board?

- What's your microphone budget?

- (Somewhat answered above) How willing are you to learn new tech?

 

If your answers are 'No,' 'Less than $500,' and 'mm maybe a little,' (in order), then I suggest getting a mixer and small recorder. The Tascam DP-008 is a fine little machine, and about the size of a brick (though far less heavy).

 

You can route mics to the mixer, and the mix to the recorder. You can then mix down to Digital file formats. This configuration will minimize your outlay while giving you some flexibility for other things (like multi-tracking in practice) later.

 

Recording live sound also means you're going to need to learn about bleed and mic placement (good to learn), and you'll start developing rudimentary instincts about engineering, which is good.

 

Much as I adore using my iPad to record, you'd have to buy an IPad. And learn to use it. And , and, and.

 

The TASCAM is small but captures sound fine, and like will seem more familiar to you.

 

You will note I had no helpful words about affordable microphones for you. Lololololol..... Can't help you there.

[ex350]

Thanks for all the advices ....

I have to start to read up & learn more about recording. Too many terms & words .. I still cannot understand.

We have amps in our church and there's lots of echo / reflection.

I want to record direct to the interface or mixer ... so that it sound better without the echo