Re: WHAT SORTS OF FIREWIRE INTEFACES ARE PEOPLE USING THESE DAYS?

[tEd ® KiLLiAn <tedkillian@charter.net>]

Dustbunnies, Bill, Rainer, Todd, et al,

Yes, the VG99 was the sole sound source on that particular "testing"  
occasion.

But my ultimate plan is to combine several signal sources: VG, GR, and  
the processed output of my guitar's own magnetic pickups (and some  
other hardware FX) and get them all into the computer together.

I was just using the VG that day because it's output is line-level and  
felt it would offer a fairly consistent audio source for comparison.

Yes I know about the SPDIF digital connection I could have used.

But given that my plan/hope is eventually to mix at least 3 stereo  
sound sources into the MOTU (or other interface) it would really tell  
me nothing particularly useful to have used only the SPDIF digital  
input alone in my test since I cannot use SPDIF on all of them.

I have concerns for the audio quality of all of the other line-level  
signals I will be inputting.

As I said, I was "doing sort of a "scientific" A/B test" . . . not  
perfect, but an honest comparison.

Yes I know about impedance matching, I have had a fairly complicated  
rig for more years than I care to rattle on about here and have sailed  
those waters going and coming enough to know as much about it as  
anybody here does (I'd like to think).

What I was describing was this: After adjusting everything (all gain  
levels, etc.) to get the very best result that could be had (to the  
best of my ability or knowledge) with the VG and MOTU it sounded  
pretty okay . . . and if I had just stopped right then and had been  
satisfied . . . then we might not even be having this conversation.

But I didn't, after that I thought I'd just test it and give the  
straight VG signal a listen through the same speakers to compare.

As I stated, the difference was quite significant.

I may be able to live with this if only my looping and related FX are  
being done by the computer.

Even various hardware loopers (my old EDP included) didn't reproduce  
"perfect" audio quality.

But I was really hoping NOT to have to patch the laptop into the FX  
send and return of a line mixer like I did my old EDPs.

I was hoping I could do enough of my signal processing (for all  
signals) in the MacBook to have most of the processing and all of the  
mixing occur there as well.

I want to lessen my stage "footprint" and gear schleppage."

What I am finding is that I am enough of a guitar audio "tone snob"  
that I may not be able to do it with the MOTU (unless I plop down  
$1200-$1500 USD for a super, duper, ultra, bigger better interface  
than I have already in the loaner Ultralite).

That extra scratch paid in hope of a unknown/possible tonal  
improvement is a big budgetary stretch for me right now.

I want this to happen.

I sold my EDPs in September, more or less burning my bridges and  
forcing my own hand to move in this direction.

There is very little chance of turning back now.

But, unless I can find some satisfying and affordable way of solving  
this little hiccup I am sort of stuck on it.

I know (or believe) that lots of you out there are getting satisfying  
guitar tones out of a computer, not just crazy creative FX and  
looping, but good tone as well.

It may not happen all of the time, but it does happen.

The looping and crazy FX are sort of the easy part in my book.

I have made a number of unhappy gear purchases of late.

I am trying to avoid another - and the subsequent loss of money and  
time for no particular good reason.

I had hoped to buy a new Ultralite of my own and return the borrowed  
one to it's owner.

Then I considered an Apogee duet for a while, with supposedly better  
preamps and better A/D converters (but only a pair of them).

That would mean I would still need my rackmount line-mixer outboard of  
all that to combine all those extra signals before it entered the  
computer.

That doesn't seem to make any sense . . . but I know it would work and  
yield the tone I am after.

It just doesn't lessen my gear load any.

Just replacing the EDPs and a couple of other rack FX with a laptop  
merely complicates things all the more when it comes to "playing  
out" (live gigging) - especially if I wind up keeping a mixer and half  
a dozen other FX pieces and controllers just to make it all work.

I am getting more and more to the point that I wish I'd stayed with  
what I had in September.

I knew how it worked, knew how to program it and knew how to use it.

Every step I take now on this road I find 5 new hidden ones ahead that  
I am going to have to get through before further progress can be made.

This is very, very unsatisfying.

I just want to get back to playing ASAP.

Sincere best regards,

Ted

On Dec 13, 2010, at 8:36 AM, Dustbunnies wrote:

> On 12/14/10 12:45 AM, "tEd ® KiLLiAn" <tedkillian@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>> I played my Gibson and VG99 combination into the MOTU.... [*snip*]
>>
>> ...I was only using a pair of the regular line-level inputs on
>> the back.
>
> Ted,
>
> Is the 99 your sole sound source here?  If so, don't neglect the  
> Digital
> I/O!
>
> The VG-99 is, of course, a digital sound source.  What you're now  
> doing is
> taking that digital signal, then running it through the VG's onboard  
> DAC's
> to turn it into an analog signal then digitizing it all over again  
> when you
> run it into the MOTU's ADC.  All this is just to get a digital  
> signal into
> your computer.
>
> Why?
>
> Instead, see what happens if you keep everything digital going into  
> the
> computer.  Try running the S/PDIF Output from the VG directly into  
> your
> laptop, or even the USB Out.  I've gotten good results using S/PDIF  
> (not as
> much so with the USB -- it "felt" a little laggier -- although that  
> could
> merely be a rote psychological effect, since I almost expected  
> something
> like that).  In fact, the Digital I/O is why I grabbed my AudioFire2  
> in the
> first place.
>
> (aside: this was before I realized that the input on the Macbook can  
> also
> accept Optical S/PDIF directly; so I could've cheaped out on a $30
> Coax-to-Optical converter rather than a $200 interface.  Still, I  
> needed a
> small 2-channel DAC for the output, and it does a great job there.)
>
> As it stands, you're putting your signal through an extra digital ]-- 
> >analog
> ]-->digital conversion that doesn't necessarily need to be there.   
> It's
> obvious you don't like the sound that the MOTU interface is  
> imparting on the
> signal, so try removing that conversion and going direct digital  
> into the
> computer.
>
> Even if you don't like the idea of remaining in the digital domain, it
> should, at the very least, tell you if your problem is with the  
> MOTU's Input
> conversion or if the difficulty is with the interface's outputs.   
> Should
> help troubleshoot the exact source of your frustration.
>
>    --m.
>