Converters make the difference?

[Mondoslug1]

So I got this no name piece of gear soundcard & breakout box thing here to
attempt do acoustic overdubs in Nuendo. The original acoustic tracks were done
on Radar, not sure which converters. I was told Nyquist but not sure about
that. An Amek 9098 Pre/Eq(EQ out) was used. I'm just monitoring for now through
phones comparing my overdubbed tone against what what was recorded and the tone
sucks...thin, bright, gnarly. Same mic, same guitar, diffenet pre(for now)the
room wasn't stellar that it was recorded in & isn't now(although it was
quieter), good engineer vs. me but basically I don't think those things are
mattering here.............the tone I'm getting just sucks & I don't think a
mic pre would make the difference.............it's just about tone, stick a mic
up & go & it sounds thin, brittle, noisy(beyond the room I think) which leads
me to believe this soundcard is a POS and the converters, and some other
isssues. The wildcard is me engineering but still, there's something else going
on here. So far gonna save my cash & go back and record on Radar. Bummed in
Nville.



My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

[Om_Audio]

What hardware was used?

Your comparing the bottom of the barrel to Radar and ignoring a wealth of
other options- for instance- I use RME Multiface with GenX6 word clock as
master- record 24/96 and I can't imagine you would hear the same drastic
differences- or there is the simple Rosetta from Apogee- stereo a/d
conversion- I'm sure these won't be much more than the cost of the hours of
tracking-
I also hear Aardvark is good too- but I'm terribly happy with RME- I'll
never go MOTU again unless maybe when the day came I switched to a Mac-
which is not going to happen in the foreseeable future!

C
"Mondoslug1" <mondoslug1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030814152534.13276.00000535@mb-m16.aol.com...
> So I got this no name piece of gear soundcard & breakout box thing here to
> attempt do acoustic overdubs in Nuendo. The original acoustic tracks were
done
> on Radar, not sure which converters. I was told Nyquist but not sure about
> that. An Amek 9098 Pre/Eq(EQ out) was used. I'm just monitoring for now
through
> phones comparing my overdubbed tone against what what was recorded and the
tone
> sucks...thin, bright, gnarly. Same mic, same guitar, diffenet pre(for
now)the
> room wasn't stellar that it was recorded in & isn't now(although it was
> quieter), good engineer vs. me but basically I don't think those things
are
> mattering here.............the tone I'm getting just sucks & I don't think
a
> mic pre would make the difference.............it's just about tone, stick
a mic
> up & go & it sounds thin, brittle, noisy(beyond the room I think) which
leads
> me to believe this soundcard is a POS and the converters, and some other
> isssues. The wildcard is me engineering but still, there's something else
going
> on here. So far gonna save my cash & go back and record on Radar. Bummed
in
> Nville.
>
>
>
> My tunes at:
> http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm
>
>

[Ty Ford]

In Article <20030814152534.13276.00000535@mb-m16.aol.com>,
mondoslug1@aol.com (Mondoslug1) wrote:
>So I got this no name piece of gear soundcard & breakout box thing here to
>attempt do acoustic overdubs in Nuendo. The original acoustic tracks were done
>on Radar, not sure which converters. I was told Nyquist but not sure about
>that. An Amek 9098 Pre/Eq(EQ out) was used. I'm just monitoring for now through
>phones comparing my overdubbed tone against what what was recorded and the tone
>sucks...thin, bright, gnarly. Same mic, same guitar, diffenet pre(for now)the
>room wasn't stellar that it was recorded in & isn't now(although it was
>quieter), good engineer vs. me but basically I don't think those things are
>mattering here.............the tone I'm getting just sucks & I don't think a
>mic pre would make the difference.............it's just about tone, stick a mic
>up & go & it sounds thin, brittle, noisy(beyond the room I think) which leads
>me to believe this soundcard is a POS and the converters, and some other
>isssues. The wildcard is me engineering but still, there's something else going
>on here. So far gonna save my cash & go back and record on Radar. Bummed in
>Nville.

Congrats on being able to hear the difference and tells us about it.
Converters make a BIG difference. I've just written a review of some RME
converters as compared to the ones in the Digi 001 for Pro Audio Review.
Very noticeable.

Regards,

Ty Ford

For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[Roger W. Norman]

So? Are you complaining about the fact that the Nyquist converters are too
good, or that you simply, as an engineer, haven't figured out what you're
supposed to do yet?

If you feel you can't accomplish the job, then either you shouldn't have
taken it, or you should have made certain that you could accompish it. That
could/would mean perhaps renting in equipment you needed, or, knowing that
you're environment isn't quiet enough, renting out some studio time. This
whole gig is about knowing beforehand what you need, and if someone isn't
capable of telling you what you need to know, being quick on your feet to
product the needed results in the absolute shortest period of time.

Since you've got a description of the sound "thin, bright, gnarly", then
you've got a starting point. Actually you always have a starting point, and
that's "what did it sound like when I was playing it?". An engineer either
gets the sound the way it is, or the way somebody else wants it. You kinda
sound like you don't know how to get the sound the way it is. Why even care
about the sound their tracks are putting out? If you A) play your ass off,
it will work, and B) if you play your ass off, it will work even better if
you record it right.

And don't negate "thin, bright, gnarly" when that might actually be the
thing you're looking for.

The space is your's man, make the best of it. We have confidence in you!
<g>

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at www.recaudiopro.net. See
how far $20 really goes.




"Mondoslug1" <mondoslug1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030814152534.13276.00000535@mb-m16.aol.com...
> So I got this no name piece of gear soundcard & breakout box thing here to
> attempt do acoustic overdubs in Nuendo. The original acoustic tracks were
done
> on Radar, not sure which converters. I was told Nyquist but not sure about
> that. An Amek 9098 Pre/Eq(EQ out) was used. I'm just monitoring for now
through
> phones comparing my overdubbed tone against what what was recorded and the
tone
> sucks...thin, bright, gnarly. Same mic, same guitar, diffenet pre(for
now)the
> room wasn't stellar that it was recorded in & isn't now(although it was
> quieter), good engineer vs. me but basically I don't think those things
are
> mattering here.............the tone I'm getting just sucks & I don't think
a
> mic pre would make the difference.............it's just about tone, stick
a mic
> up & go & it sounds thin, brittle, noisy(beyond the room I think) which
leads
> me to believe this soundcard is a POS and the converters, and some other
> isssues. The wildcard is me engineering but still, there's something else
going
> on here. So far gonna save my cash & go back and record on Radar. Bummed
in
> Nville.
>
>
>
> My tunes at:
> http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm
>
>

[Mondoslug1]

Roger wrote:

>So? Are you complaining about the fact >that the Nyquist converters are too
>good, or that you simply, as an engineer, >haven't figured out what you're
>supposed to do yet?

Just whining out loud. Radar rawks though.

>If you feel you can't accomplish the job, >then either you shouldn't have
>taken it, or you should have made certain >that you could accompish it. That
>could/would mean perhaps renting in >equipment you needed, or, knowing that
>you're environment isn't quiet enough, >renting out some studio time. This
>whole gig is about knowing beforehand >what you need, and if someone isn't
>capable of telling you what you need to >know, being quick on your feet to
>product the needed results in the >absolute shortest period of time.

I have thought most of it out, the failsafe has always been the studio. From
the beginning I told myself if I don't feel that I can pull it off at the house
I'll just buck up & finish it at the studio(the sound of engineers & studio
owners clapping ) I just would love to be able to do it here.................at
any hour I choose as many times as I want.

>Since you've got a description of the >sound "thin, bright, gnarly", then
>you've got a starting point. Actually you >always have a starting point, and
>that's "what did it sound like when I was >playing it?".

Not like that

> An engineer either
>gets the sound the way it is, or the way >somebody else wants it.

Well there wasn't anything done to my sound first time, guitar, mic, pre,
radar. No Eq no nothing. I'm using a different pre but I just have a feeling
that although the right pre will make a difference, there's another element
escaping me(besides engineer) The freaking soundcard!

>You kinda sound like you don't know >how to get the sound the way it is.

I think I do know how to get it..........I've gotten it before, it's just not
happening on my rig at present.

>Why even care
>about the sound their tracks are putting >out? If you A) play your ass off,
>it will work, and B) if you play your ass >off, it will work even better if
>you record it right.

trying for letter B.

>And don't negate "thin, bright, gnarly" >when that might actually be the
>thing you're looking for.

Yeah I've learned all things can't be big & fat & warm in a mix but I got
instruments covering that sonic territory..............I'm not looking for
"thin, bright, gnarly" from my acoustic guitar on these particular tunes. heh

>The space is your's man, make the best >of it. We have confidence in you!
<g>

Hey thanks! Stuart Smalley moment, I know I can do this. Doing it's another
thing though.
--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at www.recaudiopro.net. See
how far $20 really goes.




"Mondoslug1" <mondoslug1@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030814152534.13276.00000535@mb-m16.aol.com...
> So I got this no name piece of gear soundcard & breakout box thing here to
> attempt do acoustic overdubs in Nuendo. The original acoustic tracks were
done
> on Radar, not sure which converters. I was told Nyquist but not sure about
> that. An Amek 9098 Pre/Eq(EQ out) was used. I'm just monitoring for now
through
> phones comparing my overdubbed tone against what what was recorded and the
tone
> sucks...thin, bright, gnarly. Same mic, same guitar, diffenet pre(for
now)the
> room wasn't stellar that it was recorded in & isn't now(although it was
> quieter), good engineer vs. me but basically I don't think those things
are
> mattering here.............the tone I'm getting just sucks & I don't think
a
> mic pre would make the difference.............it's just about tone, stick
a mic
> up & go & it sounds thin, brittle, noisy(beyond the room I think) which
leads
> me to believe this soundcard is a POS and the converters, and some other
> isssues. The wildcard is me engineering but still, there's something else
going
> on here. So far gonna save my cash & go back and record on Radar. Bummed
in
> Nville.
>
>
>
> My tunes at:
> http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm
>
>












My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

[Mike Rivers]

In article <20030815111258.21190.00000052@mb-m10.aol.com> mondoslug1@aol.com writes:

> From
> the beginning I told myself if I don't feel that I can pull it off at the house
> I'll just buck up & finish it at the studio(the sound of engineers & studio
> owners clapping ) I just would love to be able to do it here.................at
> any hour I choose as many times as I want.

That's the principle behind personal studios. It's possible, but when
it comes to recording acoustic instruments and vocals, you need to put
more into it than just equipment. I suspect that whatever A/D
converters or mic preamp that you have aren't your major problem, but
once you get your major problem (most likely an architectural one) is
fixed, you might be able to hear what better converters sound like.
That being said, I can hear a significant difference between the
fifteen cent audio hardware built into my laptop computer and the
Digigram VX Pocket card, even when listening to low rate streaming
audio (radio broadcast, dialup) over the Internet on my Radio Shack
Minimus 7 speakers.

If you're just playing with loops, writing songs, rehearsing, or
arranging, a simple home studio in a corner of a room is fine. But
when you want things to sound like they do in a real studio, you need
to at least come close to that real studio environment.




--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)

[Mondoslug1]

Mike Rivers wrote:

>That's the principle behind personal studios. It's possible, but when
>it comes to recording acoustic instruments and vocals, you need to put
>more into it than just equipment. I suspect that whatever A/D
>converters or mic preamp that you have aren't your major problem, but
>once you get your major problem (most likely an architectural one) is
>fixed,

I dunno with my limited experience with different soundcards I'm going out on
the limb and saying this soundcard is a "major" problem for me in achieving the
sound I want. The architecture is for sure, perhaps more so. I am soloing just
the mic in the room with nothing & it's too damn noisy for sure, for me. I
could get away with it I think but not in good conscience.


>The architecture
you might be able to hear what better converters sound like.

I can hear it, I don't care if I'm not an engineer. I can hear the
differences.......I couldn't tell you what's what but I can tell you there's no
depth, it's noisy beyond the room. I couldn't hear much difference between
Sound Manager & an AM 2 or 3 card but I can here the difference between this
POS C Port into Nuendo and tracking in Radar

>That being said, I can hear a significant difference between the
>fifteen cent audio hardware built into my laptop computer and the
>Digigram VX Pocket card, even when listening to low rate streaming
>audio (radio broadcast, dialup) over the Internet on my Radio Shack
>Minimus 7 speakers.
>
>If you're just playing with loops, writing songs, rehearsing, or
>arranging, a simple home studio in a corner of a room is fine. But
>when you want things to sound like they do in a real studio, you need
>to at least come close to that real studio environment.


You speak the truth, luckily the basic tracks were done there. this is just
icinng but still.....................
>





My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

[Jay Kahrs]

>So I got this no name piece of gear soundcard & breakout box thing here to
>attempt do acoustic overdubs in Nuendo. The original acoustic tracks were
>done
>on Radar, not sure which converters. I was told Nyquist but not sure about
>that. An Amek 9098 Pre/Eq(EQ out) was used. I'm just monitoring for now
>through
>phones comparing my overdubbed tone against what what was recorded and the
>tone
>sucks...thin, bright, gnarly. Same mic, same guitar, diffenet pre(for now)the
>room wasn't stellar that it was recorded in & isn't now(although it was
>quieter), good engineer vs. me but basically I don't think those things are
>mattering here.............the tone I'm getting just sucks & I don't think a
>mic pre would make the difference.............it's just about tone, stick a
>mic up & go & it sounds thin, brittle, noisy

Just for ****s & giggles, what preamp was used on the orginal tracks and with
what mic? Converters matter but not as much as mics, placement and preamps
IMHO. I'm not a big fan of the pre on the 9098pre/EQ. While it doesn't suck it
isn't far from it, I've heard run of the mill Amek console pres sound much
better in A/B comparions when I was in the hot seat.

---
-Jay Kahrs
Owner - Chief Engineer
Mad Moose Recording Inc.
Morris Plains, NJ
http://www.madmooserecording.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Come visit me here --> http://www.gear****z.com

[Ty Ford]

In Article <20030815221612.06138.00000045@mb-m19.aol.com>,
brownsnd14@aol.com (Jay Kahrs) wrote:
>>So I got this no name piece of gear soundcard & breakout box thing here to
>>attempt do acoustic overdubs in Nuendo. The original acoustic tracks were
>>done
>>on Radar, not sure which converters. I was told Nyquist but not sure about
>>that. An Amek 9098 Pre/Eq(EQ out) was used. I'm just monitoring for now
>>through
>>phones comparing my overdubbed tone against what what was recorded and the
>>tone
>>sucks...thin, bright, gnarly. Same mic, same guitar, diffenet pre(for now)the
>>room wasn't stellar that it was recorded in & isn't now(although it was
>>quieter), good engineer vs. me but basically I don't think those things are
>>mattering here.............the tone I'm getting just sucks & I don't think a
>>mic pre would make the difference.............it's just about tone, stick a
>>mic up & go & it sounds thin, brittle, noisy
>
>Just for ****s & giggles, what preamp was used on the orginal tracks and with
>what mic? Converters matter but not as much as mics, placement and preamps
>IMHO. I'm not a big fan of the pre on the 9098pre/EQ. While it doesn't suck it
>isn't far from it, I've heard run of the mill Amek console pres sound much
>better in A/B comparions when I was in the hot seat.

Conversely, I really like the 9098 pre/EQ. It does some really nice things.
The EQ is a bit different and takes some getting used to.

Regards,

Ty Ford

For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[Mondoslug1]

Jay wrote:

>Just for ****s & giggles, what preamp was used on the orginal tracks and with
>what mic? Converters matter but not as much as mics, placement and preamps
>IMHO. I'm not a big fan of the pre on the 9098pre/EQ. While it doesn't suck
>it
>isn't far from it, I've heard run of the mill Amek console pres sound much
>better in A/B comparions when I was in the hot seat.
>

Hey Jay, on the tracking session the mic was a 4033 & the pre an Amek 9098. I'm
resigned to the fact that there are a lot of other issues involved here other
than the converters but that Soundcard Interface is still a POS I think - for
what I'm trying to achieve.
>---
>-Jay Kahrs
>Owner - Chief Engineer
>Mad Moose Recording Inc.
>Morris Plains, NJ
>http://www.madmooserecording.com
>- - - - - - - - - - - - -
>Come visit me here --> http://www.gear****z.com
>
>
>
>
>
>





My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Mondoslug1 <mondoslug1@aol.com> wrote:

> Hey Jay, on the tracking session the mic was a 4033 & the pre an Amek
> 9098. I'm resigned to the fact that there are a lot of other issues
> involved here other than the converters but that Soundcard Interface is
> still a POS I think - for what I'm trying to achieve.

How many tracks at a time do you need? A Symetrixc 620AD can be had for
next to ****s and giggles and is a usable device.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[Rob Adelman]

Ty Ford wrote:

>>Just for ****s & giggles, what preamp was used on the orginal tracks and with
>>what mic? Converters matter but not as much as mics, placement and preamps
>>IMHO. I'm not a big fan of the pre on the 9098pre/EQ. While it doesn't suck it
>>isn't far from it, I've heard run of the mill Amek console pres sound much
>>better in A/B comparions when I was in the hot seat.
>
>
> Conversely, I really like the 9098 pre/EQ. It does some really nice things.
> The EQ is a bit different and takes some getting used to.


For lack of a better word, I found a little sponginess to it. Very cool
for some things, not so good on others.
-Rob

[Chris Rossi]

brownsnd14@aol.com (Jay Kahrs) wrote in message news:<20030815221612.06138.00000045@mb-m19.aol.com>...
> >So I got this no name piece of gear soundcard & breakout box thing here to
> >attempt do acoustic overdubs in Nuendo. The original acoustic tracks were
> >done
> >on Radar, not sure which converters. I was told Nyquist but not sure about
> >that. An Amek 9098 Pre/Eq(EQ out) was used. I'm just monitoring for now
> >through
> >phones comparing my overdubbed tone against what what was recorded and the
> >tone
> >sucks...thin, bright, gnarly. Same mic, same guitar, diffenet pre(for now)the
> >room wasn't stellar that it was recorded in & isn't now(although it was
> >quieter), good engineer vs. me but basically I don't think those things are
> >mattering here.............the tone I'm getting just sucks & I don't think a
> >mic pre would make the difference.............it's just about tone, stick a
> >mic up & go & it sounds thin, brittle, noisy
>
> Just for ****s & giggles, what preamp was used on the orginal tracks and with
> what mic? Converters matter but not as much as mics, placement and preamps
> IMHO. I'm not a big fan of the pre on the 9098pre/EQ. While it doesn't suck it
> isn't far from it, I've heard run of the mill Amek console pres sound much
> better in A/B comparions when I was in the hot seat.
>
So have you guys actually played around much with the soundcards that
come with computers? The original poster's problem sounds a lot like
a cheap soundcard. My personal experience with consumer grade
converters is that they can range from halfway decent to completely
unusable. If you want to do some overdubbing at home getting two
decent nothing fancy channels of A/D would be a minimum I'd think.

rossi

[Jay Kahrs]

>Conversely, I really like the 9098 pre/EQ. It does some really nice things.
>The EQ is a bit different and takes some getting used to.

Go figure. I like the EQ a lot but the preamps almost always leave me wanting
more. I remember one session where I ha the bass DI'd from a Demeter box and
into a 9098pre/EQ with the EQ out. The bass player wanted to know why it
sounded weird. I agreed that it did and ran it into one of the console (Amek
Mozart, transformerless) pres and we agreed that it sounded much better. I had
the same thing repeat it's self many many times. I don't know why, it should be
nice but it just sits there in a boring and uninteresting way. It's bland. But,
I don't think this is the posters problem if he used it on the basic tracks and
he's still using it. So, I digress...

---
-Jay Kahrs
Owner - Chief Engineer
Mad Moose Recording Inc.
Morris Plains, NJ
http://www.madmooserecording.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Come visit me here --> http://www.gear****z.com

[Mike Rivers]

In article <d8e0e163.0308160946.1fa7013d@posting.google.com> rossi+google@webslingerZ.com writes:

> So have you guys actually played around much with the soundcards that
> come with computers?

Only to the extent that I use the sound cards that came in my
computers for listening to Internet streaming broadcast. Even with low
quality streaming and not particularly high fidelity playback, there's
a considerable difference between the built-in audio hardware on my
laptop (the worst), the sound card in my Dell desktop (better than the
laptop) and the VX Pocket PCMCIA card that usually lives in the laptop
(the best).

I wouldn't do any serious work on any of the built-in audio hardware,
but it's OK for messing around and seeing how things work.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mrivers@d-and-d.com)

[Mondoslug1]

>
>Go figure. I like the EQ a lot but the preamps almost always leave me wanting
>more. I remember one session where I ha the bass DI'd from a Demeter box and
>into a 9098pre/EQ with the EQ out. The bass player wanted to know why it
>sounded weird. I agreed that it did and ran it into one of the console (Amek
>Mozart, transformerless) pres and we agreed that it sounded much better. I
>had
>the same thing repeat it's self many many times. I don't know why, it should
>be
>nice but it just sits there in a boring and uninteresting way. It's bland.
>But,
>I don't think this is the posters problem if he used it on the basic tracks
>and
>he's still using it.

Well I'm not still using it but I don't have a problem with the sound I got
tracking with it & Radar.....at all but when I go back I'll be able to choose
and try different pres(Great River & Vintech 1272s) since they won't be wasted
on freakin drums this time! Just kiddin....sorta.

So, I digress...
>
>---
>-Jay Kahrs
>Owner - Chief Engineer
>Mad Moose Recording Inc.
>Morris Plains, NJ
>http://www.madmooserecording.com
>- - - - - - - - - - - - -
>Come visit me here --> http://www.gear****z.com
>
>
>
>
>
>





My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Mondoslug1 <mondoslug1@aol.com> wrote:

> Well I'm not still using it but I don't have a problem with the sound I got
> tracking with it & Radar...

If you're happy with what you got using a Radar 24, and you are now
unhappy with what you're getting using your soundcard, then, yeah,
convertors might well make the difference.

But understand that if the problems are upstream from conversion, better
convertors will not help, except to allow better interpretation of the
problems. That can be good in the long run. But if one thinks a certain
tool is going to fix a problem, and the tool just makes the problem more
obivous, one's first reaction is often disapointment.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[Mondoslug1]

Hank wrote:

>Mondoslug1 <mondoslug1@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Well I'm not still using it but I don't have a problem with the sound I got
>> tracking with it & Radar...
>
>If you're happy with what you got using a Radar 24, and you are now
>unhappy with what you're getting using your soundcard, then, yeah,
>convertors might well make the difference.
>
>But understand that if the problems are upstream from conversion, better
>convertors will not help, except to allow better interpretation of the
>problems. That can be good in the long run. But if one thinks a certain
>tool is going to fix a problem, and the tool just makes the problem more
>obivous, one's first reaction is often disapointment.
>

Yeah that's where I'm afraid this would eventually head
with the current rig. I'm repeating myself but I do think this tool(POS
Soundcard) is a big part of the problem and a better hardware interface would
no doubt be an improvement. This projec - biased as I am - deserves much
better.


>--
> hank alrich * secret mountain
> audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
>"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"
>
>
>
>
>
>





My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Mondoslug1 <mondoslug1@aol.com> wrote:

> I do think this tool(POS
> Soundcard) is a big part of the problem and a better hardware interface would
> no doubt be an improvement. This projec - biased as I am - deserves much
> better.

I don't know anything about computer sound cards, but aren't there some
pretty good ones around for not all that much money?

Arny, what's nice and not too costly?

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[Arny Krueger]

"LeBaron & Alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
news:1fzsri6.1u0igr7p7uctyN%walkinay@thegrid.net
> Mondoslug1 <mondoslug1@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> I do think this tool(POS
>> Soundcard) is a big part of the problem and a better hardware
>> interface would no doubt be an improvement. This projec - biased as
>> I am - deserves much better.
>
> I don't know anything about computer sound cards, but aren't there
> some pretty good ones around for not all that much money?
>
> Arny, what's nice and not too costly?

Please check out http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/compare/index.htm .

Depends on what you want...

I think the lowest cost record/play consumer cards that are good enough to
recommend would be the Turtle Beach Santa Cruz or a CL Audigy OEM. The
lowest cost production-style card is probably the Echo Mia. The M-Audio
Delta 1010 is probably the lowest cost multichannel (8 or more)
production-style audio interface I can recommend.

[Mondoslug1]

Arny K wrote:

>"LeBaron & Alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
>news:1fzsri6.1u0igr7p7uctyN%walkinay@thegrid.net
>> Mondoslug1 <mondoslug1@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I do think this tool(POS
>>> Soundcard) is a big part of the problem and a better hardware
>>> interface would no doubt be an improvement. This projec - biased as
>>> I am - deserves much better.
>>
>> I don't know anything about computer sound cards, but aren't there
>> some pretty good ones around for not all that much money?
>>
>> Arny, what's nice and not too costly?
>
>Please check out http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/compare/index.htm .
>

Wow.....thanks for the link.

>Depends on what you want...
>
>I think the lowest cost record/play consumer cards that are good enough to
>recommend would be the Turtle Beach Santa Cruz or a CL Audigy OEM. The
>lowest cost production-style card is probably the Echo Mia. The M-Audio
>Delta 1010 is probably the lowest cost multichannel (8 or more)
>production-style audio interface I can recommend.

I need something like the Lynx 22 or RME Multiface although I've never
personally heard either one. I only need like 2 analog in and 4 out so I can
monitor a stereo mix & 2 mics through an external mixer. You ever run across an
ST C Port DAC 2000? I thought I read that it had the same converters as the
Delta stuff...........I hope not for Delta's sake.


Although I play a bjorkin' beginner on usenet....................



My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm

[Jeff Chestek]

>
>>Just for ****s & giggles, what preamp was used on the orginal tracks and with
>>what mic? Converters matter but not as much as mics, placement and preamps
>>IMHO. I'm not a big fan of the pre on the 9098pre/EQ. While it doesn't suck
>>it
>>isn't far from it, I've heard run of the mill Amek console pres sound much
>>better in A/B comparions when I was in the hot seat.
>>
>
>
> Hey Jay, on the tracking session the mic was a 4033 & the pre an Amek 9098. I'm
> resigned to the fact that there are a lot of other issues involved here other
> than the converters but that Soundcard Interface is still a POS I think - for
> what I'm trying to achieve.

And what mic and pre are you using with your POS soundcard???

Jeff Chestek

[Mondoslug1]

jeffrey Chestek wrote:
>>
>>>Just for ****s & giggles, what preamp was used on the orginal tracks and
>with
>>>what mic? Converters matter but not as much as mics, placement and preamps
>>>IMHO. I'm not a big fan of the pre on the 9098pre/EQ. While it doesn't suck
>>>it
>>>isn't far from it, I've heard run of the mill Amek console pres sound much
>>>better in A/B comparions when I was in the hot seat.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Hey Jay, on the tracking session the mic was a 4033 & the pre an Amek 9098.
>I'm
>> resigned to the fact that there are a lot of other issues involved here
>other
>> than the converters but that Soundcard Interface is still a POS I think -
>for
>> what I'm trying to achieve.
>
>And what mic and pre are you using with your POS soundcard???
>
>Jeff Chestek
>
>

A 4033 and a DBX 586 here on loan to try which I know is not thought of fondly
around these parts & I might tend to agree but that's where this started.
Changing the pre would make a difference no doubt but I thiik there is another
issue or two beyond the pre.





My tunes at:
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/andymostmusic.htm