Jump to content

Monitoring accuracy


JLo

Recommended Posts

  • Members

First, let me preface this by saying I, like many others on these forums, by no means have a killer, pro setup, but for simple demos and things, it is more than adequate for my songwriting needs...

 

Anyway...

 

I was however doing some recording for a big project recently, and was using my PC setup to do it. Cubase SX running on a 3 MHz Dell with one of the "high end" Creative soundcards (I know...). Input signal was a SM58 into a small 8 Ch Mixer, and then into the sound card. I auditioned the final product on three or four different sets of speakers and enviroments to make sure it translated well, and was pleased with the results. Original Monitoring was done in headphones, and I listened in a few different systems (i.e. home theatre)

 

Next, I just got a MAudio Mobile Pre USB. I used this on my laptop to try it out and got some rather eye opening results. I expected a slightly different sound, especially considering it wasn't going through a mixer and sound card preamps(s) but the difference was huge! I used the same basic setup - SM58 into the MAudio preamp, then USB'd into the computer. I used the same headphones for monitoring purposes.

 

The mic has significantly more high end, and a lot less bass response. I am sure this has a lot to do with the bypassing of a mixer. However, the output on the Mobile Pre also has significantly less bass as well. I tried listening to some music (standard 192K MP3s) through it as though it was "regular" soundcard, and noticed a HUGE lack of bass where there normally was some. I cross referenced MobilePre against the headphone output of my laptop and verified this was true.

 

 

HERES THE QUESTION -

 

What should I consider to be the most accurate - both while recodring and monitoring? Is the input from the mobile pre better than my PC setup (which again, gets quite good results) and I should use that as my primary input setup? Is the output from the mobile pre - and its lack of bass - more accurate for monitoring? I really don't have a way to check against a pair of "transparent" monitors right now, so I can't simply plug the Mobile Pre into a pair of active monitors and check

 

Has anyone experienced anything similar and can share experiences? I do have plane to get some monitors in the near future, but for now, I have to deal with what I've got, so please avoid the "Get some good monitors" statements. Note that I am VERY diligent about checking my mixes on different systems - from PA to headphones to small and large stereos - to ensure they translate well.

 

Thanks, I value your opinions

 

 

(sorry for the cross post. I'm really interested in opinions and the recording forum hasn't replied even once in like 2 weeks...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

First, let me preface this by saying I, like many others on these forums, by no means have a killer, pro setup, but for simple demos and things, it is more than adequate for my songwriting needs...


Anyway...


I was however doing some recording for a big project recently, and was using my PC setup to do it. Cubase SX running on a 3 MHz Dell with one of the "high end" Creative soundcards (I know...). Input signal was a SM58 into a small 8 Ch Mixer, and then into the sound card. I auditioned the final product on three or four different sets of speakers and enviroments to make sure it translated well, and was pleased with the results. Original Monitoring was done in headphones, and I listened in a few different systems (i.e. home theatre)


Next, I just got a MAudio Mobile Pre USB. I used this on my laptop to try it out and got some rather eye opening results. I expected a slightly different sound, especially considering it wasn't going through a mixer and sound card preamps(s) but the difference was huge! I used the same basic setup - SM58 into the MAudio preamp, then USB'd into the computer. I used the same headphones for monitoring purposes.


The mic has significantly more high end, and a lot less bass response. I am sure this has a lot to do with the bypassing of a mixer. However, the output on the Mobile Pre also has significantly less bass as well. I tried listening to some music (standard 192K MP3s) through it as though it was "regular" soundcard, and noticed a HUGE lack of bass where there normally was some. I cross referenced MobilePre against the headphone output of my laptop and verified this was true.



HERES THE QUESTION -


What should I consider to be the most accurate - both while recodring and monitoring? Is the input from the mobile pre better than my PC setup (which again, gets quite good results) and I should use that as my primary input setup? Is the output from the mobile pre - and its lack of bass - more accurate for monitoring? I really don't have a way to check against a pair of "transparent" monitors right now, so I can't simply plug the Mobile Pre into a pair of active monitors and check


Has anyone experienced anything similar and can share experiences? I do have plane to get some monitors in the near future, but for now, I have to deal with what I've got, so please avoid the "Get some good monitors" statements. Note that I am VERY diligent about checking my mixes on different systems - from PA to headphones to small and large stereos - to ensure they translate well.


Thanks, I value your opinions



(sorry for the cross post. I'm really interested in opinions and the recording forum hasn't replied even once in like 2 weeks...)

 

 

First of all, you don't want the sound going in your computer to come out bad, if it's not better then it shouldn't be worse. The less chain the signal goes through the better it will be. Always try to send your signal to your computer going through little outside gears from the one thats producing the signal.

 

This what I'll advise based on my experience. Study your monitors, study your monitors and study,study,study your monitors.

 

Onces you learn your monitors you will know how to get the best sound out of them. I have been using the same monitors for over 5 years, I have learned how they sound and how to get the best out of them.

 

I'll give you an example: When I hear the bass in my monitors, then it's too much. Yes the bass has to be there but just a little bit. This problem is due to my environment. So if you were mixing on my monitors and didn't know them, you'll probably cranked the bass up and that will be too much on playback systems.

 

I would love to get an ADAM monitor or one of those monitor that cost the same as a Boeing 747, I would like to call that guy from Auralex, put him on my private jet and let him fix my room but like you I'm not financial able to do that.

 

So I study my monitors, I know what levels will be too much or too little and it has helped me a lot. I have also treated my room to about 90% pro standared but I don't think I'll be buying new monitors. Any money will be use for extra treatment.

 

Audioicon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Geez, this is tough. You have two separate setups, and want to know which one is better to use as a reference, right?

 

I suggest this:

(This only will test the record path. Testing a reproduction path, especially one with speakers in the loop, is significantly harder, and more than I have time to delve into tonite.)

 

1. Get a test & measurement CD (I recommend Pink Noise at -10 dBFS), rip it to a WAV file on your hard drive.

2. Record the CD's audio through both rigs (Creative and MAudio) onto your PC setup, and save the results as more WAV files. Label them so you know which is which. 30 seconds of each should be enough. Just make sure to start the CD from the beginning on both times you record it.

(You aren't just looking to record a noise sample, you need to record an *exact copy*, sample for sample, of the first 30 seconds of that particular pink noise track.)

3. Normalize all the WAV files to, say, -1 dBFS

4. Invert both audio WAVs from step 2 & resave to disk.

5. One at a time, mix the result of the step 4 WAVs with the WAV of step 1, and bounce each result to a new track (or file). Be careful to align the beginning of each recorded WAV with the beginning of the Ripped CD WAV, down to sample-accurate timing.

 

Now you have 2 WAVs from step 5. These files show what is being LOST by each audio interface, on the way into the PC, because they contain what is left after you subtracted it from the real, unadulterated CD Ripped WAV file. Hopefully you labelled one as Creative and the other as MAudio.

 

Open both WAVs. Do NOT normalize them. (If the level is very low, you can boost each by 10 dB or so, but make sure to do it to BOTH files exactly the same way. It'd be better not to mess with them at all if you can help it.)

 

The WAV with the larger average amplitude is the one with WORSE audio, because it has a larger *difference* between it and the CD Ripped WAV.

 

Listen to both. Look at both in a RTA (spectrum display). This will tell you what frequencies each interface is losing or ignoring. If you hear a lot of highs or sub-bass (or whatever), it means these are sounds that the interfaces are not picking up.

 

If the amplitude gets gradually larger with time, that means you have sample clock drift, which is pretty common. It is not that big of a deal normally; though there are times it becomes important.

 

If the volume randomly jumps around, especially right away, it could indicate frequency or amplitude dependent phase shift problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Philbo - thanks... when I have th opportunity I will try that.

 

In the meantime, the project in question came off great, with lots of compliments. Ironically though the intro (for a broadcast piece) was recorded on the PC and the outro through the MobilePre. To me they sound somewhat different, but noone seems to really notice or care!!! Sweet!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...