• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Do i need an "Interface" if I have a preamp/mixer?

M

MCBTunes

Dec 17, 2004
797
1
Martensville, Sask
#1
I just picked up some new monitors today and the PA/recording guy at the shop suggested a mixer to EQ the monitors to my room as well as allow me to run multiple sources to them. I'd like to do a little bit of recording; guitar, bass, and vocals as well.

I'd use my Eden WT400 for the acoustic and bass, it has an XLR recording out. I am assuming this a signal acceptable to the mixer.(I would use xlr to 1/4 inch into the mixer)

I imagine the 1-2 mics could plug directly into the mixer. Right?

Right now I only have the onboard sound from my Asus M2N-Sli Deluxe. So it has an 1/8 inch line-in. A sound card with more inputs could be coming, but it wont be right away, so I will need to make do.

Tomorrow I go in to buy stuff, and I just want to be sure I have all I need.

So I am looking at:
instrument/mic to preamp to mixer to computer line-in.

Now I have never done this before. So, the question is, where does the interface come into play and will it improve my recording quality?

I know there are several kinds of free recording software available, so that is not a great concern unless I need a special kind for this type of recording.

Am I off base, as far as decent recording quality?
 
#2
The interface is a big deal for recording quality. OTOH for "basically good" recording the sound card you have may be fine. As far as the question in the thread title, an interface and a preamp and a mixer are three different things, and all three are necessary for digi recording. OTOH many interfaces contain preamps, and most mixers contain preamps. There are a few digital mixers which contain interfaces as well, and many interfaces are packaged with software for mixing "in the box" (ITB), on your computer.

So you need to look at the specific features of the gear you have, and see if any feature or component is lacking from that specific gear.
 
#3
Hm, ok. So far all I really have are the active monitors, the wt400, a couple mics and my instruments. So I suppose playing it by ear tomorrow and seeing what they recommend with what they have in stock will be my best bet. I don't usually like taking their word, so I thought I'd try out a little research.

However, it sounds like unless I spring for a pricey digital mixer I will need an interface. I was just going to pick up like a four channel mixer, a mackie 402-VLZ3 or go even cheaper and pick up a behringer. Would I need the interface for each instrument, or does the interface go after the mixer in the recording line?
 
#4
OK, so you're recording the whole band at once, not one at a time? There are two approaches: (1) Get a mixer which mixes the band down to a stereo (or even mono) signal, and run it into a stereo (or mono) soundcard, recording it all on one or two tracks. (BTW soundcard = interface, depending on specific features.) ...or (2) get a multi-channel interface, recording each instrument onto its own track, and and mixing them ITB. Each method has pros and cons. A mixer is a valuable tool to have anyway, especially if you ever run your own PA for small gigs. But recording multiple channels is the more "professional" recording method as it allows you to adjust the mix after the recording has been made.
 
#5
I just switched from a traditional mixer over to an audio interface which has severl inputs on it. I'm using a Presonus Firebox. It uses firewire as the interface. I believe your Asus mobo has a firewire interface. It comes with Cubase LE.

On the front panel of the Firebox there are 2 moc inputs with built in preamps, on the back there are 2 line level inputs. You can send the main outs right to a pair of active monitors. You can do all your EQ'ing right from Cubase.

Adam
 
#6
Ok cool, I think I basically understand.

The choices are:
1. Good soundcard as interface with multiple ins or a mixer to mix it down to however many tracks
2. USB/IEEE 1394 interface again with the mixer if the interface doesnt have enough tracks
3. high end mixer with internal interface
among a couple other generally more expensive options.

I think I need a new soundcard now because my speakers crackle when they are plugged into my motherboard stereo out, not so noticible when music is playing but when the music is off it is pretty bad and that bothers me. This means option 1 is likely best for me. So I have a dedicated external interface on loan right now. Which I will be giving back as soon as I get enough time to research a sound card to use as my interface. I would like to keep it under $200 so if I need to mix down the number of inputs I would be fine with that.

Time to go research soundcards.

Cheers
 
#7
Here's a great place to start educating youself...Invalid Link Removed

Before you buy anything, make sure you know what it does, how it's going to fit your needs, and how to hook it up.

On very rare occasion I disagree with bongo, but this is one of those times. Onboard soundcards - even "good" ones - will have a hard time giving you anything even close to decent recording quality. There are a multitube of interfaces on the market for your budget, and every one of them will give you MUCH better results. Research, learn, buy smart, have fun. :)
 
#8
Cool thanks, tweakheadz seems to have a lot of good info.

edit:

I can't seem to find a sub $300 interface that gets decent reviews.

Mackie Onyx Satellite
Presonus FireBox
Presonus Inspire
M-Audio Firewire 410
M-Audio Firewire Solo

are there any other good quality boxes I should read up on?
 
#9
A local bud seems to be getting good results with a Firepod. That was around $400 new IIRC. Personally I would go with something having a 1394 interface as it will pass a lot more data then USB. HTe M-audio stuff has ProTools M-Powered as an option if you decide you want to head that way. PT is an awsome recording environment.
 
#12
DocBop said:
How do you figure that. FW is a bus. Using a card is a bridge from PCI bus to FW bus no more or less hit than FW chips on the mobo.
Click to expand...

Most of the onboard firewire connectors rely on more resources from the CPU (just like onboard LAN adapters, etc) The onboard cards usualy handle more of the processing themselves. When I've benchmarked my systems using Sandra or something else, I've always seen way more CPU activity using onboard vs addon cards. This is usually the case for USB as well.

Adam
 
#13
Well I bought a Presonus Inspire... it gave me a lot of high pitch whine so I upgraded to the firebox, it gave me less whine but it was still there and I can't have that. Then I traded down to an M-Audio Fast Track Pro to see if it was firewire causing the issues.... the M-Audio works, most of the time... but it is USB 1.0 which just isnt good enough.

Now I've narrowed it down to a couple of choices.... until someone enlightens me of an even better way to do it.

E-Mu 1212M + Mackie 802 VLZ3 for $350
E-Mu 1616 $440

both PCI interfaces, which is faster than USB and Firewire, so that is good... I hear Emu doesnt really have any driver issues which is good. I hear they both have "decent" preamps.

What do you think?
 
#14
Are you sure you the Fast Track PRO is USB 1? In any case firewire or PCI would be faster. Actually since this email I returned my Firebox and replaced it with a Firestudio Project along with a Mackie 1202 VLZ. I have many things hooked up and the Mackie has a second stereo bus (ALT 3/4). This combined with the extra channels gives me the flexibility I wanted.

Adam
 
#15
Yeah it is USB 1 which I thought was unbelievable at first.

I actually have a PS3 I'd like to run through my monitor... would going with the Mackie 802 allow me to run the PS3, my computer and my recording through the mixer to the monitors?

I am actually looking closer at the 1616 PCI + breakout box as I just discovered computer hardware ships without customs/duty charges. I'll need to be sure that it can take multiple ins to run different sources also.
 
#16
Hate to hijack but i have a question myself:

Is there any way to go instrument/mic to mixer to interface to cpu? So as to have the benefits of a mixer but have all channels on a separate track in the software? Sort of a noob at this recording thing, but that setup seems to make the most sense to me

Thanks in Advance, Mike
 
#18
adammazza said:
Most of the onboard firewire connectors rely on more resources from the CPU (just like onboard LAN adapters, etc) The onboard cards usualy handle more of the processing themselves. When I've benchmarked my systems using Sandra or something else, I've always seen way more CPU activity using onboard vs addon cards. This is usually the case for USB as well.

Adam
Click to expand...

They're usually done the same way, electronically. The onboard device is still wired to the PCI bus.

In some cases you may have an inefficient controller on the board, and a good one on the card, but the opposite can be true as well.


In response to the original question, I have an M-audio delta 1010LT It was around $200, gives 10 inputs 10 outputs, including a pair of XLRs w/ a fixed preamp for mics, and a couple digital ports.

I haven't really done much recording with it yet, but my original goofing around gave some nice results.

-Nick
 
#19
mikeypbass said:
Hate to hijack but i have a question myself:

Is there any way to go instrument/mic to mixer to interface to cpu? So as to have the benefits of a mixer but have all channels on a separate track in the software? Sort of a noob at this recording thing, but that setup seems to make the most sense to me

Thanks in Advance, Mike
Click to expand...

Yes, there are Hybrid mixer/audio interfaces that do this. For example The Alesis Multimix USB 2.0. I recommend reading the guides on Invalid Link Removed
 
#20
A lot of this depends on what you need these recording for.

I have had great success using a mixer and plugging in all the drum mics, vocal mics, guitars, bass etc and mixing it in stereo and sending that to my M-box interface. Works well for quick "live" recordings and if you spend enough time on the mixer it can sound fairly descent. The downside of course is the lack of editing ability once the track is on the computer. I have since got myself an interface with more inputs and record every instrument to a seperate track and do all the mixing in the computer.

If you lack instrument inputs you can always record each instrument independantly and onto it's own track however my "band" can't grasp the concept of playing a song without the rest of the band playing as well.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back