Trumpet Tracks

Hi all,
 
I am looking for an audio interface that will allow me to record Trumpet and Guitar tracks.  Right now all I have is the onboard Sound Line In and an SM57 Mic (and a cheap Radio Shack Mixer that is OLD) :)
 
I was looking at the FocusRite Scarlett 2i4 or the M-Audio Avid FAST TRACK USB II Audio Interface.  I have Win7 PC.  Does anyone have any experience with either of these?
 
Thanks,
Greg

Thanks for the recommendation. The Roland comes with Sonar X1 LE and is about $265.  I can get Sonar Studio X2 for $150 if I buy X1 and upgrade before the end of the year.  So I am looking at a few other options this way I can get a better version of Studio.  Can you give me your opinion on these?
 
Focusrite 2I4 - $200
Tascam US-200 - $116
Tascam US144 Mkii - $120
M-Audio 9900-65145-12 Fast Track Pro - $202
 
Or any others I should consider?
 
Thanks for the help.
 
 

Even though I own one and for me there are no issues, many here will warn you about Tascam's drivers. The issues have never effected anything I do as it is only a Round trip Latency issue which would only bother me if I used real time effects like Guitar rig. I think there are a few interfaces out there that the drivers could use a little work on. 

I have no personal experience with anything other than the Tascam so cannot personally say much other than what I have read here on the forums. Motu seems a popular choice.  I once owned a M audio fast track pro and it had the worst pre amps. I had to use the SPDIF only. So that brand is in my bad books too. 
The Tascam I have the us1641 has been replaced by the us1800. I think all their products would be about the same and I will say that other than the drivers not being stellar, the rest of the unit is well built and the pre amps are very good. 
Focus on the brand that has at least 1 good pre amp as that's all you will need for your work. 

Focusrite has a grainy signature Focusrite sort of sound that some people speak very highly of.

It's even more obvious with their expensive all discrete transformer based stuff because then when you compare within the higher price points it is very easy to hear how stressed and grainy the mid range sounds compared to deluxe sounding gear.

That might be ok for a trumpet... if you want it to sound aggressive perhaps even irritating.

It's my impression that low priced Focusrite grainy sounding stuff sounds ok when you compare to all the other generic stuff that sounds grainy.



Shopping for a device with good drivers is the way to go if you are sticking with a lower price point.

Sending a trumpet to a generic iChip is going to be an exercise in compromise.

It will be a lot more fun if the drivers are best in class and you can focus on getting the best sound with what you end up with.

RME and Motu have the best Win drivers. 

The Roland stuff has great drivers but poor grounding on the appliances so they seem to have noise issues.

Who else makes great drivers?



best regards,
mike

"Can you post some real world examples for everyone to listen to"

No... two reasons:

1) After auditioning preamps head to head for a specific task and selecting another preamp we rarely make an additional copy on the preamp we chose not to use.

2) I would not post files for comparison unless I went to great lengths to make the examples suitable for comparison. If you don't do the comparison fairly it's waste of every one's time.


I'll bet you can find some comparisons over at Gearslutz. :-)

best regards,
mike

Hi all,

I guess the focusrite 2i4 will be my best bet.  It is about $200, which is about $90 more than the Tascam US-200, but I am hoping it is worth the extra coin.  I can't find a lot of reviews on it though, which is a concern. I read somewhere that it doesn't really matter when looking at pre-amps and A/I's under $500 as they are all low-end, but with that thinking in mind, would it be better to just get a mixer and plug it into the line in of my onboard soundcard?  I don't know what the specs are on the onboard sound, but I'd rather not spend $200 on something that isn't going to make a noticeable difference in sound quality.  I have had surprisingly good results from my old setup, which was ridiculously low end, even though the trumpet sounds a bit "squeezed" at times...(hard to explain - you can't hear all the overtones all the time, etc..but playing with reverb, eq, etc... helped it a lot)  My hope is that for $200, there wiill be a considerable difference.

For $449 you can get it all over with. The fastest drivers in that price range... possibly down to 32 samples if your computer can handle it. 


An exceptional monitoring mix system that will allow you to listen to what you are recording in such a way as to effect your performance in a good and encouraging way.


4 decent generic preamps that are about as average as any you'll find on an iChip based, low power, analog system.

MOTU has a great track record of adapting their drivers to the ever changing world of operating systems.

This thing could keep you happy for a couple decades.

Money well spent? Each has to decide for their self.



That's all I have to say about that. :-)
 

all the best,
mike

Well, I decided to go with the ROland Quad... The reviews seemed decent enough.  Thanks to all who responded.  It was difficult deciding between that and the Focusrite, but since it came with SOnar X1 LE, I would at least have some form of a DAW.  I will upgrade that later. 

Thanks :)

Thanks Brando!  I appreciate it.  I will have to use headphones as I don't have "monitors".  Any recommendations on a decent pair that isn't going to kill me?  Also - after reading a lot about them, I am a bit confused.  I used headphones to monitor on my old setup and then mixed using my computer speakers...My mixes got better with time.  I won't be able to use those speakers with the ROland, so I will just use headphones until I can afford monitors.  When I get monitors, can I use them to listen to everything - like normal PC speakers - as well as to mix things I record or are they just for mixing?

Thanks,

Greg

I hope you enjoy the Roland!



best regards,
mike

So here is a test I have performed and it is admittedly flawed, But for me it showed which pre amps in my collection might be the better ones if background S/N is a concern to you. 

in a very quiet room ( turn off CPU ) 

Headphones on. Use headphone jack of equipment @ 2-4 o clock. 
Plug in a SM 57 or ? dynamic mike. 
Later try test with Phantom on and a condenser. 
Turn the pre amp all the way up ( don't let the dog bark at this point) 

M-Audio fast track pro= Very loud  Hiss+ static sound. ( 60Db?) 

Tascam us1641 = A hiss ( 20Db? ) 

Behringer Xenyx mixer Solo the ch. = A louder hiss ( 30 Db?) 

Yamaha 01v digital mixer solo the ch=  a Quieter hiss ( 10Db?) 

So not exactly a pre amp test, more of a noise floor test. But personally I like to not have that kind of thing added to my music.
 
Sure this test also needed a Test tone and output level comparison to be more accurate. But one thing all these devises had in common was that optimum before clipping level would be with gain set at close to 2 o clock. 
At that level the hiss is not as noticeable unless you are looking for it. With the M audio it was very noticeable. 

I thought Focusrite pre's were 'irritatingly stressed & grainy'?

Guess I'll have to sell both of mine, now that I've been shown the errors of my ways

That's if any bugger will buy them

I had a thought that Mike might try and debunk the SOS tests. Basically what Mike is saying is not true at all. Firstly I thought they went to great trouble to maintain consistency with regard to the performances using the Disklavier concept.

Trying to do tests by pushing any of the pres into unknown territory would have been ridiculous so keeping them all well within a very linear part of their operation and sound was the right thing to do.

Yes there are small differences between them for sure but overall there are not major differences and my point that you don't need to spend thousands on a good preamp still stands. The fact is that most pres everywhere these days will do a very good job.

An remember the concept of capturing a beautiful performance that moves you emotionally during the playback is really what it is all about. And when this is happening what type of pre that is being used is of absolutely no importance. The tools mean nothing in this situation.

This is what people should be aiming for, not getting all caught up in how good your pre is. Being moved by a great recording transcends everything that comes before it in terms of the technology being used.

I have never implied that great equipment does not exist. I think we all agree that the ideal situation is a great performance and great equipment. 

But as we all know the better scenario is OK equipment and a great performance will always sound better than an average performance using great equipment. That sucks no matter which way you look at it.

There are plenty of things you can spend your money on that will make a much more significant improvement in your overall sound rather than a very expensive mic pre.

This thread has come a long way since the OP ;-0

I think SOS did a good job.  Using a midi piano took most of the performance issue out of the equation.  But like any musical scientific test, it is an "average" test.  And "proved" that, on average, a basic IC preamp can equal a premium one in average recording.  This is a good thing and something I've noticed before.  And really, by the time you fx a track recording, squeeze it into a mix, convert it to mp3 and have an untrained ear listen to it on earbuds while jogging, alot of the subtle differences get washed out.

This doesn't mean we have to be satisfied w/ interface IC preamps w/ 55 dB of gain.  And SOS (esp. Hugh) is often all the travel of knobs not being equal - the last 10 dB of gain out of the 55 is bunched in the last twist.  We pay more for more gain, closer tolerances for knob travel, and better (read pricey) electronics.  That means we can use the preamps more artistically, makes our life easier and is what we do.  It doesn't mean Joe Average w/ a low price interface can't record a good take.  It does mean the room and mike and technique make more of a difference.  Poor Joe will have to learn to use his equipment, and if or when ready will spend the bucks to upgrade his working enviornment. 

So kudos for SOS proving this fact - most modern recording equipment is pretty good.  Better than what I learned on back when dinosaurs roamed the earth w/ badly aligned tape machines and vintage IC preamps that crapped out if you even looked at turning them up.  I still wince at one good song where the singer belted out one line and I got a perfect example of analog distortion - and not the good kind.

As far as mags.  They aren't really for the experts.  Notice all the copies laying in the lobby of most real studios.  The guys behind the SSL know most of what is written in them.   They are for begginers or the semi-pro.  There are good tips and techniques - stuff a lot of people don't learn because they aren't teaboys sweeping up the studio, getting yelled at for mispointing the mics while the engineer drinks his tea and watches the set up, but at least the tea boy gets to watch the engineer record and mix using great equipment.  Many learn through articles.

And yes, many mags pay for the articles - how do you get experinced people to take the time and write otherwise?  But I can't imagine a magazine covering up for bad equipment or software.  There have been plenty of examples of music tech writers telling their story - here and at gearslutz and other places I'm not aware of.  And many of these writers have more recording skins on their wall then the complainers on forums who make one post and dissapear into the net ether.  The writers and the mags have far more to lose w/ bad reviews than one advertiser - their audience who pays full price for the mag.  Piss off a few of those w/ wrong reviews and you lose readership everytime.  And advertising rates are based on how many issues you place (not sell, which accounts for all those issues laying around studios and label lounges).

So the next time someone complains about payola in mags, think Yugo.  No publisher wants that, whether it is in music tech, or autos or any tech pub.  You live and die by your rep.

@