Version imprimable du sujet

Écrit par : JPSpecial jeu. 15 avril 2004, 14:29

I'm wondering which audio interface would be better for my needs. I'd like to record voice and acoustic guitar using two different mics and afterward doing some harmony vocals and perhaps a second guitar track and some bass. The real problem I want to avoid is major latency. Will I have substantially less with the firewire digi 002r than with the mbox. Some users have said that the latency with mbox is not a problem while others have said it is a true annoyance. Just wondering what some of you users of either audio interface have to say. Also, how many audio inputs can the digi 002r take at a time? I know the mbox can only take two, which of course is pretty limited.

Écrit par : PristineRec jeu. 15 avril 2004, 15:30

I've never used an Mbox, but I have never had latency issues with my Digi002 rack. It has 4 mic preamps and (I think) 4 more 1/4" inputs on the back panel. It can also bring in two chanels of S/PDIF (which is where my outboard tube preamp connects) and has a lightpipe input which could bring in 8 more channels optically, if you had an outboard pre with the correct output.
If you are in fact recording all of the instruments one at a time, you can caorrect for any latency afterwards by nudging the waveform of any trucks back or forward in time to sync them up at mixdown. That's one of the great things about DAWs, it's very easy to slide channels back and forth in time to correct timing, or even to create funky effects.

Écrit par : Barb ven. 16 avril 2004, 13:52

I own both the MBox and the digi002. I use the MBox in the school MIDI Lab with an iMac and the 002 in the recording studio with the Titanium notebook. I don't have latency problem with either one. I would recomend the 002 if you can afford it. The controller is WAY cool and it gives you many more possibilities than the MBox as far as numbers of tracks (8 at a time- 4 XLR & 41/4"). I wish it had 8 XLR instead so I need to go thru a mixing board or preamp for the other mics. A drag but not too bad. You may need to fiddle with the EQ to match mics but do that AFTER the recording. ProTools is non destructive so you might as well start with clean tracks. The XLRs on the 002 and the MBox are Focusrite preamps so if you get a preamp try the Focusrite. It's a good product.

If you have a PC, don't forget to check out Steinberg products. The Ardvark is a smoking interface although it doesn't have the faders and I have only heard great things about Cubase SX. Steinberg might also have a controller for Cubase but the Hui will probably work although I am not too fond of Mackie products for a pro level application.

Good luck!

Écrit par : kolo ven. 16 avril 2004, 14:12

Look, you only get latency if you are using the computer to monitor your input. Most setups, sound cards, etc (I don't know the Mbox specifically) allow you to monitor your live sources directly, mixed with the already recorded tracks(s). In other words you hear your live singing/playing before it goes "in" to the system. Pretty much virtually all recorders (soft or hardware) "line up" the tracks for you so that what you sing is synced with what you are hearing upon playback. I use cubase and turn set it up so I don't hear my performance as I do it returning back with the delay produced by the processing time of the computer. I listen to it from my mixer directly.
Mostly when you read about latency it's for when you are using the computer as a sound source, as in virtual instruments, when you depend on the computer to playback/create the actual sound, so that there is no way to hear it prior to the computer's processing lag.

But of course, as someone just wrote, the great thing is you can nudge the tracks to your hearts content. Good luck.

• latency la ten c y

Écrit par : beltunabob ven. 16 avril 2004, 14:33

Sorry, I'm an ABSOLUTE newbie. Latency means...? The tracks are out of synch? Thanks for your patience.
BobA

Écrit par : kolo ven. 16 avril 2004, 16:13

Latency as in LATE. That is You are playing or singing and the sound or midi signal goes into the computer and gets recorded, "listened to' by the computer and then the computer sends the sound back out for you to hear. It takes a few microseconds to do that and you hear the sound slightly delayed, or out of sync with the rest of the tracks playing back. With midi, you are playing a midi keyboard, say, and your fingers are pushing the keys down which sends a signal to the computer to trigger a soft synth sound (virtual instrument). It takes a fraction of a second for the computer to do that, and the sound may come out a little LATE (latency, get it?). Sequencers can adjust for this on playback, but LIVE as you record you can't help but hear the delay, which may be annoying or screw up your timing. Unless your computer/interface (mbbox etc) is doing this processing really fast. these days it's pretty fast on the newest machines. If you monitor directly you hear your voice BEFORE it gets processed. No latency. Like I said, your software should be able to place the new ttrack in the right spot when you play the recording back.
You need to get a basic book on recording terms and concepts. the stores are full of them.

good luck

Écrit par : JPSpecial sam. 17 avril 2004, 03:57

What is the difference between using the computer to monitor and direct monitoring?
I'm a bit confused by the distinction. If for example I had an mbox, how would direct monitoring be done? It may also be helpful to know I have a 1 ghz G4 Imac with 768 ram. I assume that this amount of ram would be sufficient for what I'm trying to do. Thanks for all the helpful information and advice. This is really a great place for gathering information before jumping into the game.

Écrit par : beltunabob sam. 17 avril 2004, 14:36

OK i understand Latency. What book(s) are recommended?
Thank you.

Écrit par : kolo sam. 17 avril 2004, 16:12

I don't know much about the Mbox. But direct monitoring is you hearing the audio signal going into the setup before it goes through analog to digital conversion and gets processed "into" the computer, which produces the lag time. So you hear it "live". You should check out if the mbox does this. I bet it does. I've heard good things about it.

Écrit par : arvidtp sam. 17 avril 2004, 16:56

yes, the Mbox does direct monitoring. It's hardware buffer (latency) can be set as low as 256 samples (but this really taxes your processor in Pro Tools). I usually have mine at 512 samples and this is decent for playing softsynths, though not the best.

But the problem with the Mbox is that it is USB. When running pro tools I have found that this limits my processor to about half its power. If I go above that, Pro Tools claims I have run out of CPU power, it cannot send audio to USB and playback/recording stops. This means that you are limited in effects/softsynths. Not a good thing for me, because I never want to bounce tracks to disk. I always want to be able to change stuff later because that is how I make music. I have a 1.25GHz G4 Powerbook for crying out loud - let me use it to capacity!

Also right now Mbox coreaudio drivers are miserable [for me at least] and cause most Core audio software (anything except pro tools) to crash upon opening. There is a workaround - but it is annoying. Hopefully this will be fixed with next Pro Tools release (which has been announced, but no release date mentioned). I'm not really happy with my Mbox. There always seems to be a glitch when I need it most.

I think also I'm gonna get logic express and see if that is a better software platform to compose with than Pro Tools, which I feel is best for multitracking/mastering/post production/video - because thats when I have the most fun using it. I often get frustrated trying to use it to compose (with both MIDI and audio).

1st poster: looks as if the Mbox would suit your needs, but I don't feel it is a reliable package. But there isn't really anything else in the price range from Digidesgin until 002R. Pro Tools is really great as a recording/mixing tool, but if I could buy again, I would skip Pro Tools and go with a portable FIREWIRE interface and some other sequencer/DAW that is more flexible and less monopolistic. That's my two cents.

Best of luck.

-Arvid

Écrit par : bjkiwi lun. 19 avril 2004, 03:03

one thing to be aware of when using an M-Box on a mac...

"When you record into Pro Tools LE Mac there is a latency of 164 samples. All tracks recorded into Pro Tools have 164 samples of latency, but you will not notice this with the first track unless you have a MIDI click, or a recorded click to play along with. Thus, when you record the second track/pass, you will hear latency when the two tracks are played together. After recording your second track/pass into Pro Tools LE Mac, adjust the newly recorded audio track to compensate for the 164 samples of latency.
Select the second pass of audio with the Grabber Tool. Edit Menu > Shift. Click "Earlier" and type in 164 in the "Samples" field. Click "OK". Now, Pro Tools will locate the audio 164 samples earlier.
"Shift" each track or recorded pass back by 164 samples immediately after recording. If you are stacking up tracks, you definitely want them all to be in sync as each new one is recorded."

you can find the full article here http://nav.440network.com/out.php?mmsc=forums&url=http://answerbase.digidesign.com/detail.cfm?DID=7868

there has been a lot of discussion about this on the digidesign user forums and the main bone of contention is that there is no mention of it in the manuals, so untill you chance upon it in a forum your overdubs will end up 164 samples behind your 1st tracks.

if you ask me, the failure to inform users is unacceptable and I have let digidesign know that I am PISSED OFF!!

bjkiwi

Écrit par : arvidtp lun. 19 avril 2004, 03:27

Yeah - what's up with that??? It is weird that that happens in Pro Tools, with it trying to be so "Pro" and all. Is it just LE systems? It seems that even if they can't fix it to be in sync, they could at least have an automatic function that pushed everything back the said 164 samples immediately after recording is turned off. [i like how the sad face on this forum is actually an angry one] That would be a nice Preference Dialog addition, next to the "Correct the rest of Pro Tools' nagging problems" button.

It seems this has been a needless issue for a long time. I heard something about it being fixed in the PC version but not in the mac. That is SO silly if it is true.

Or do most DAWs / sequencers have similar time offset issues? For instance Logic? Or Cubase? How about Digital Performer?

Écrit par : bjkiwi mer. 21 avril 2004, 03:52

this is only an issue with the MBox on the Mac. I emailed digidesign support (asia/pacific as I am in Australia) and got this reply:

"This is a common sence. If you do any hard drive recordings, you can not avoid latency. This is not just ProTools issue. It's the same on all other HDD recording devices. Please research the web about the latency. Visit www.google.com and type in
LATENCY. If you are using Mbox. Here is the work around for latency. -Mute the recoding track and set the Mix knob on Mbox to blend input source and the playback sound."

to which I replied:

Thank you for your reply but you've missed my point. I'm not talking about monitoring latency as I do understand that is a given with computer based recording. What I am refering to is the fact that once a track, or tracks, is recorded it ends up playing back 164 samples late. It appears it is only an issue with Macs.

they replied again with:

"This is the latency anyways but this one was considered as a bug, and had been fixed in PTLE6.4. Please check the update information here.
http://nav.440network.com/out.php?mmsc=forums&url=http://www.digidesign.com/support/cs
Sorry about the inconvenience.

so in the end they've admitted it was a bug that has been fixed in 6.4