Thank you for receiving my post, I have searched but cannot locate definitive discussion regarding measurable difference/advantage in USB ext. interface vs. computer microphone input (mac mini). I am digging into this topic, so if someone more familiar with Sound On Sound forums might help guide me to the proper thread I would be grateful and should be able to take it from there.
Thanks again,
John D.
USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
By computer microphone input I assume you mean a mic equipped with a USB output. I don't think there are definitive differences or advantages as such. As ever with these things it depends on what you want to do with them. What is the intended use?
CC
CC
-
- ConcertinaChap
Jedi Poster -
Posts: 15235 Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 12:00 am
Location: Bradford on Avon
Contact:
Making music: Eagle Alley
Recording music: Mr Punch's Studio
Sir, more than kisses, letters mingle souls. - John Donne
Recording music: Mr Punch's Studio
Sir, more than kisses, letters mingle souls. - John Donne
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
*please note I have edited this slightly for clarity - thanks, jd
CC thank you.
To elaborate, in my instance I connect mics and instruments to a Behringer PMP4000. I then take the Mon1 & Mon2 sends, each carrying one instrument, directly from that into the stereo record in (line in) of my Mac Mini.
Considering my above setup, one wonders 'where's his external USB hardware A to D converter?'
Answer: It's the Mac Mini, I don't have a separate device. Herein, is where I am researching to gain more knowledge. I am considering purchasing a separate device, but I have no reason that I can argue to myself, to buy one. Does anyone know of measurable, quantifiable problems with a setup such as mine? How would they show up in the recorded signal? I have no line noise. My recordings are good, into Garageband 11 & Adobe Audition. It is perfectly stable. I cannot find fault in it, but everybody is using External USB or Firewire ADA converters. As a singer/songwriter I do not require more than 3 simultaneous inputs in my composing workflow.
I am hoping to find someone who has done side-by-side comparison that clearly illustrates where the fault with my setup may lie, and how to recognize it so that I can focus on that analysis myself, and possibly find that fault as well.
I have a good ear and feel that I and my colleagues could identify such issues as line noise and computer-resident transient electrics, vibration etc. either by ear or in the waveforms. There appear to be none, and I hesitate to take on another piece of hardware in my chain, hardware that could have faults and awkward workflow stopgaps of its own. Things are sounding 'real good' to me right now. They are also exceedingly complex frankly. Right now I can lay down 4 ea. separate 3 track originals in about 20 minutes including knobs & switching, opening & closing new files etc. My work flow for raw recording/composing is pretty good (not counting mic placement etc), so there is real sacrifice in time involved in adding another key element to my home setup, it has to really BRING IT in order to be worth it. If I make it more complicated I could snuff out my own creativity then I've got nothing.
I have read many instances (not here) of people stating that a stereo line in is not useable for dual separate tracking which is not correct. I can take in 3 mono inputs simultaneously; guitar via XLR, voice via XLR and MIDI keyboard controller into Garageband as separate mono inputs. I can then split these inputs in the stereo field however I want, via automation etc, they are separate editable tracks, I can hi/low pass them individually, EQ, cut noise, anything. With Adobe Audition I take in only two mono signals As AA doesn't do MIDI.
My PMP4000 is 24bit 48k. I mean, that's all I've got anyhow. My Mac Mini's A-D-A converter already surpasses that. Garageband is basically 24bit 44,100. I have a Tascam DR-05 that can do 24bit 96k, and I am set up to take my board output to that as well though I am not sure there would be much point to taking 24bit 48k output to a 24b 96k recorder. It is more for realtime backup file purposes.
I see no performance or engineering-related reason to buy an external USB unit, but until I have exhausted the question, buying one remains on the table.
As is all of our music creation I am sure, for me my next recording is by far my most important. If I must lock another device into my chain, document it etc. then I should start asap!
Thank you for reviewing my situation and question, I truly appreciate it.
John Dadmun
CC thank you.
To elaborate, in my instance I connect mics and instruments to a Behringer PMP4000. I then take the Mon1 & Mon2 sends, each carrying one instrument, directly from that into the stereo record in (line in) of my Mac Mini.
Considering my above setup, one wonders 'where's his external USB hardware A to D converter?'
Answer: It's the Mac Mini, I don't have a separate device. Herein, is where I am researching to gain more knowledge. I am considering purchasing a separate device, but I have no reason that I can argue to myself, to buy one. Does anyone know of measurable, quantifiable problems with a setup such as mine? How would they show up in the recorded signal? I have no line noise. My recordings are good, into Garageband 11 & Adobe Audition. It is perfectly stable. I cannot find fault in it, but everybody is using External USB or Firewire ADA converters. As a singer/songwriter I do not require more than 3 simultaneous inputs in my composing workflow.
I am hoping to find someone who has done side-by-side comparison that clearly illustrates where the fault with my setup may lie, and how to recognize it so that I can focus on that analysis myself, and possibly find that fault as well.
I have a good ear and feel that I and my colleagues could identify such issues as line noise and computer-resident transient electrics, vibration etc. either by ear or in the waveforms. There appear to be none, and I hesitate to take on another piece of hardware in my chain, hardware that could have faults and awkward workflow stopgaps of its own. Things are sounding 'real good' to me right now. They are also exceedingly complex frankly. Right now I can lay down 4 ea. separate 3 track originals in about 20 minutes including knobs & switching, opening & closing new files etc. My work flow for raw recording/composing is pretty good (not counting mic placement etc), so there is real sacrifice in time involved in adding another key element to my home setup, it has to really BRING IT in order to be worth it. If I make it more complicated I could snuff out my own creativity then I've got nothing.
I have read many instances (not here) of people stating that a stereo line in is not useable for dual separate tracking which is not correct. I can take in 3 mono inputs simultaneously; guitar via XLR, voice via XLR and MIDI keyboard controller into Garageband as separate mono inputs. I can then split these inputs in the stereo field however I want, via automation etc, they are separate editable tracks, I can hi/low pass them individually, EQ, cut noise, anything. With Adobe Audition I take in only two mono signals As AA doesn't do MIDI.
My PMP4000 is 24bit 48k. I mean, that's all I've got anyhow. My Mac Mini's A-D-A converter already surpasses that. Garageband is basically 24bit 44,100. I have a Tascam DR-05 that can do 24bit 96k, and I am set up to take my board output to that as well though I am not sure there would be much point to taking 24bit 48k output to a 24b 96k recorder. It is more for realtime backup file purposes.
I see no performance or engineering-related reason to buy an external USB unit, but until I have exhausted the question, buying one remains on the table.
As is all of our music creation I am sure, for me my next recording is by far my most important. If I must lock another device into my chain, document it etc. then I should start asap!
Thank you for reviewing my situation and question, I truly appreciate it.
John Dadmun
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
Hi Dadmun
Nope, you already have all of the functionality in your rig that a dedicated audio interface would give you.
An audio interface would provide:
Mic preamps (available on your Behringer)
Latency free direct monitoring (ditto)
Cue mixes (ditto)
Line and instrument inputs (ditto)
Headphone/monitor outputs and associated controls (ditto)
AD/DA (available on your Mac)
Midi connectivity (am assuming you plug your keys in via USB?)
In addition, 44.1kHz at 24bit is perfectly adequate for most standard recording tasks.
You will begin to consider the benefits of a standalone audio interface when you:
Wish to improve the quality of A/D conversion or to work at higher sampling frequencies
Need more inputs or outputs
Need to create more complex cue mixes
Wish to improve the quality of your preamps
Begin to notice that a Behringer signal chain might be surpassed by other designers - and realise that everything you're doing is going through that signal chain.
Until then, you're absolutely right in my view, if you're happy with your sound and the workflow of your rig then concentrate on the composition.
Oh - one thing your desk won't do without significant intervention - monitor M/S in L/R. Many of the AI software mixers perform this beautifully, but only necessary if you're capturing in M/S.
Kindest
Loopy
Nope, you already have all of the functionality in your rig that a dedicated audio interface would give you.
An audio interface would provide:
Mic preamps (available on your Behringer)
Latency free direct monitoring (ditto)
Cue mixes (ditto)
Line and instrument inputs (ditto)
Headphone/monitor outputs and associated controls (ditto)
AD/DA (available on your Mac)
Midi connectivity (am assuming you plug your keys in via USB?)
In addition, 44.1kHz at 24bit is perfectly adequate for most standard recording tasks.
You will begin to consider the benefits of a standalone audio interface when you:
Wish to improve the quality of A/D conversion or to work at higher sampling frequencies
Need more inputs or outputs
Need to create more complex cue mixes
Wish to improve the quality of your preamps
Begin to notice that a Behringer signal chain might be surpassed by other designers - and realise that everything you're doing is going through that signal chain.
Until then, you're absolutely right in my view, if you're happy with your sound and the workflow of your rig then concentrate on the composition.
Oh - one thing your desk won't do without significant intervention - monitor M/S in L/R. Many of the AI software mixers perform this beautifully, but only necessary if you're capturing in M/S.
Kindest
Loopy
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
Hi John.
If you are happy with the sound quality you achieve and the workflow MO suits you why change?
Your setup is in fact little different from mine. I too use a mixer, A&H zed 10 but instead of an internal system soundcard I use a PCI M-Audio 2496. The system soundcard in most computers is not really that good but there are obviously exceptions.
You threw me a bit with the PMP4000 being "24 bits" as the mixer is not a converter! I assume you are referring to the 24 bit effects? If the performance of your setup still bothers you, do a zero input, noise floor test. I have Adobe 1.5 and it has excellent meters in it. My PCI system returns about -93dBFS but my USB AI, a Native instruments KA6 betters -100dBFS. In practice of course, with real sources and rooms that 7dB diff' matters not a jot!
Dave.
If you are happy with the sound quality you achieve and the workflow MO suits you why change?
Your setup is in fact little different from mine. I too use a mixer, A&H zed 10 but instead of an internal system soundcard I use a PCI M-Audio 2496. The system soundcard in most computers is not really that good but there are obviously exceptions.
You threw me a bit with the PMP4000 being "24 bits" as the mixer is not a converter! I assume you are referring to the 24 bit effects? If the performance of your setup still bothers you, do a zero input, noise floor test. I have Adobe 1.5 and it has excellent meters in it. My PCI system returns about -93dBFS but my USB AI, a Native instruments KA6 betters -100dBFS. In practice of course, with real sources and rooms that 7dB diff' matters not a jot!
Dave.
#They did not listen, they are not listening still...Perhaps they never will?#
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
Thanks Loopy, so the Behringer isn't maybe so good eh? Ouch! 
The switches are not so great either, have to hit a few, several times to get them to release. I can spend some time reading up here at S O S, to become more up to speed as to other options similar to the PMP4000. Yeah I use an Edirol pcr-800 via USB, I have the GB jam packs beat zampler instruments.
Say, you mentioned this, "Oh - one thing your desk won't do without significant intervention - monitor M/S in L/R. Many of the AI software mixers perform this beautifully, but only necessary if you're capturing in M/S." I am not sure that am understanding the acronyms correctly.
In terms of analog in I take in 2 mono in's, they are generally leveled the same, those two, then in GB 11 or Adobe Audition I choose each as a separate mono input (there is also the option for stereo input, one ea. only), mono1 & mono2. Then in GB I can stereo pan and then monitor thatIn terms of monitoring, I generally don't monitor the record side audio much honestly, during a take, come to think about it. I monitor the record send outputs at the behringer through 2 matched set of headphones at control room out. So I'm listening to audio on the behringer side while watching the levels in the DAW on a big flat screen on a arm on my wall. I try to send to GB at -21db or so.
I have a lot to learn, for instance my playing style has been introducing plenty of noise to deal with, fret buzz and just slop so I am reforming my style to tighten up and get rid of that junk that I am accidentally adding.
Thanks again Loopy for helping to validate my understanding. Very helpful forum to a new novice member by the way!!
John Dadmun
The switches are not so great either, have to hit a few, several times to get them to release. I can spend some time reading up here at S O S, to become more up to speed as to other options similar to the PMP4000. Yeah I use an Edirol pcr-800 via USB, I have the GB jam packs beat zampler instruments.Say, you mentioned this, "Oh - one thing your desk won't do without significant intervention - monitor M/S in L/R. Many of the AI software mixers perform this beautifully, but only necessary if you're capturing in M/S." I am not sure that am understanding the acronyms correctly.
In terms of analog in I take in 2 mono in's, they are generally leveled the same, those two, then in GB 11 or Adobe Audition I choose each as a separate mono input (there is also the option for stereo input, one ea. only), mono1 & mono2. Then in GB I can stereo pan and then monitor thatIn terms of monitoring, I generally don't monitor the record side audio much honestly, during a take, come to think about it. I monitor the record send outputs at the behringer through 2 matched set of headphones at control room out. So I'm listening to audio on the behringer side while watching the levels in the DAW on a big flat screen on a arm on my wall. I try to send to GB at -21db or so.
I have a lot to learn, for instance my playing style has been introducing plenty of noise to deal with, fret buzz and just slop so I am reforming my style to tighten up and get rid of that junk that I am accidentally adding.
Thanks again Loopy for helping to validate my understanding. Very helpful forum to a new novice member by the way!!
John Dadmun
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
Dave thanks - I have to agree, I am doing okay right now and I will press on. Yes the effects are 24 bit, though I did not realize that is what I was reading in my specs earlier. Looking again I see that the sample rate is 46.875... But it is "DSP" which must as you say refer to the 24 bit effects. There is certainly no direct digital out...
Thanks as well for the advise on running a zero input noise floor test, a good idea that I will have to try.
Learning a lot! Must admit to many blind spots, some that I know, many of which I am meeting for the first time!
Wow that Korg is amazing! If I had that, I could maybe get 3 keyboards out of my Edirol as well as lower noise! Very interesting! Someday perhaps...
John
Thanks as well for the advise on running a zero input noise floor test, a good idea that I will have to try.
Learning a lot! Must admit to many blind spots, some that I know, many of which I am meeting for the first time!
Wow that Korg is amazing! If I had that, I could maybe get 3 keyboards out of my Edirol as well as lower noise! Very interesting!
Someday perhaps...John
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
M/S = mid/side. L/R = left/right. It's a slightly more advanced technique which you should have a look at when you get some toilet-time....
Your desk would only become a limitation (in comparison to certain audio interfaces) if you decided to capture in m/s - that is, use an m/s array on for instance your guitar. The output of the array can quite happily be recorded straight from the mics - two channels, but in order to hear the standard L/R image they produce 'live' (that is, as they are being recorded) then the mic outputs would have to be monitored via an m/s matrix - a method which you could implement on your desk but it would take at least 3 channels (and possibly other stuff). Some interface software mixers decode m/s to l/r for live monitoring at the flick of a (virtual) switch - very elegant! I only mentioned it for completeness......
I feel you have the right approach fella. First priority is the material and performance. Make your workflow as supportive toward that end as possible. All the kit in the world will not make up for poor composition, poor arrangement or poor execution.
Behringer equipment is feature-rich which is a great place to start. But I fear that as you move forward you will simply begin to hear things in other designers kit which is simply not there with the Behringer. Maybe at that point you might dump the Berry and opt either for a better desk, an audio interface, or both...... enjoy the journey!
Kindest
Loopy
Your desk would only become a limitation (in comparison to certain audio interfaces) if you decided to capture in m/s - that is, use an m/s array on for instance your guitar. The output of the array can quite happily be recorded straight from the mics - two channels, but in order to hear the standard L/R image they produce 'live' (that is, as they are being recorded) then the mic outputs would have to be monitored via an m/s matrix - a method which you could implement on your desk but it would take at least 3 channels (and possibly other stuff). Some interface software mixers decode m/s to l/r for live monitoring at the flick of a (virtual) switch - very elegant! I only mentioned it for completeness......
I feel you have the right approach fella. First priority is the material and performance. Make your workflow as supportive toward that end as possible. All the kit in the world will not make up for poor composition, poor arrangement or poor execution.
Behringer equipment is feature-rich which is a great place to start. But I fear that as you move forward you will simply begin to hear things in other designers kit which is simply not there with the Behringer. Maybe at that point you might dump the Berry and opt either for a better desk, an audio interface, or both...... enjoy the journey!
Kindest
Loopy
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
Loopy I do not doubt your impression of the behringer's being low end electronics and agree that flexibility is a big plus with the pmp4000 - I utilize it fully. If it makes my sound a bit cartoonish I will have to just work through that for now. I will get some demos of my stuff on here at some point. I just got a box.com account set up and test-shared a few things but have not heard back as yet but the journey does continue! I will look into m/s array. With my setup I can bring in xlr from my guitar as well as 1/4" concurrently at least, but the 1/4" signal is so much worse that I don't bother with it. It seems somehow noisy or unpredictable whereas the XLR out from the guitar is very stable. I haven't been mic'ing the guitar lately but when I swap out strings I will lay down more refined solo guitar tracks with well placed mics. Generally I play and sing everything realtime right now, sort of in a live performance sketch format so that I can practice my presentation and also quickly show my rough ideas to others. I also hunt around for ideas in the moment that way. I hope to master up a cd of originals and send it out to get 100 cranked out splash painted, in those splash painted fold out paper eco-jackets with my original art as well, it's super-cheap to do as I understand it, & maybe I could sell a few cd's at open mics to cover cost of showing up to play, etc. No big deal for sure but that's what I'm working toward. I know that folks here on S O S are far more high budget accomplished pro musicians and engineers but I have a long ways to go... M/S might help enhance my approach toward this end product I'm targeting so I'll definitely check it out, thank you for all the advise.
John Dadmun
John Dadmun
Urthlupe wrote:M/S = mid/side. L/R = left/right. It's a slightly more advanced technique which you should have a look at when you get some toilet-time....
Your desk would only become a limitation (in comparison to certain audio interfaces) if you decided to capture in m/s - that is, use an m/s array on for instance your guitar. The output of the array can quite happily be recorded straight from the mics - two channels, but in order to hear the standard L/R image they produce 'live' (that is, as they are being recorded) then the mic outputs would have to be monitored via an m/s matrix - a method which you could implement on your desk but it would take at least 3 channels (and possibly other stuff). Some interface software mixers decode m/s to l/r for live monitoring at the flick of a (virtual) switch - very elegant! I only mentioned it for completeness......
I feel you have the right approach fella. First priority is the material and performance. Make your workflow as supportive toward that end as possible. All the kit in the world will not make up for poor composition, poor arrangement or poor execution.
Behringer equipment is feature-rich which is a great place to start. But I fear that as you move forward you will simply begin to hear things in other designers kit which is simply not there with the Behringer. Maybe at that point you might dump the Berry and opt either for a better desk, an audio interface, or both...... enjoy the journey!
Kindest
Loopy
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
Everybody begins somewhere John, and you are beginning in a good place. Don't be intimidated by others who appear to have more kit/experience - ironically many are searching for simplicity and directness in their recordings. Focus, keep an open mind and.... enjoy yourself.
Kindest
Loopy
Kindest
Loopy
Re: USB External Audio Interface vs. Computer Mic Input
Well Loopy scratch my using the pmp4000 to its fullest, now I've shifted to a Tascam DR-05 for sampling and video, it records at 24b 96K so I'm recording with that now via a Behringer UB-802. Liking what I'm getting thus far & I can edit in 32b floating 96K in adobe audition cs6.
Working with it over the past few days I've pulled off 8 or 9 recordings, taking them into AA, splitting the stereo track to mono's & then working with them. Making progress, but more learning curve/research as now I have to take Adobe Audition more seriously.
I tend to believe that the audio capture quality is improved over the 24b 44,100K garageband captures done on computer. Seems like a different color of sound but I can't place what the difference is. Since I can record to both simultaneously I've been mulling over doing that then using both recordings each copied to l/r and mixed differently, panned differently, for each track. & so it goes! -John
Working with it over the past few days I've pulled off 8 or 9 recordings, taking them into AA, splitting the stereo track to mono's & then working with them. Making progress, but more learning curve/research as now I have to take Adobe Audition more seriously.
I tend to believe that the audio capture quality is improved over the 24b 44,100K garageband captures done on computer. Seems like a different color of sound but I can't place what the difference is. Since I can record to both simultaneously I've been mulling over doing that then using both recordings each copied to l/r and mixed differently, panned differently, for each track. & so it goes! -John