External soundcard really needed for recording?

[Icarusfire]

Using Apple Logic X and iMac, I want to record my guitar tracks and put some keyboards, strings and drums on it. I already have a guitar Effects&Amp simulator which also can be used as audio interface so I can connect my guitar to my Mac through it. And at the moment actually I recently started recording guitar and make some music tracks.


My question is that I heard I need an external soundcard for good recording, what would be the advantage of spending en extra 200$ on this? I may understand that it will be less overhead on my computers cpu and maybe less latency(which I didn't experience yet)..but does that really change the quality of drums keyboards and strings that I create by LogicX? When I say quality I mean does it make the synthesized sounds more realistic and less digital? Or it only improves the quality of guitar recordings?

P.S I'm certainly not an audiophile and not using expensive headphones either, but I do certainly care how realistic my sounds are and they are not digital/plastic..

tnx

 

[Funkfingers]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

The arguments in favour of a standalone in/out device are;
1) better quality A/D and D/A converter chips
2) the provision of MIDI
3) plenty of sockets and discreet channels for the simultaneous recording of more than one musician
4) monitoring via the standalone device should give higher quality audio than the built-in loudspeakers of any computer.

You mention that you have recorded guitar but not keyboards or drums. Trying to record guitar parts over pre-existing drum and percussion tracks is when latency issues will be most noticable. On playback, you may find that your lovingly synchronised rhythm guitar work now replays an annoying fraction of a second late all the way through the take.

CPU load should not be a big problem. My 2009 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo is maxed out to 16GB of boring, old 1067MHz RAM. Even with several AU soft synths and rhythmic sources running, Logic X never uses half of my machine's capability.

The "realism" of the programmed synthesizer and auto-drummer tracks is largely down to the skills of the programmer.

You really should start thinking about audiophile monitoring. How else can you make accurate EQ decisions?

 

[Icarusfire]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

Thanks. But since I am new to recording your good answer led other questions..

- Could you elaborate a bit what meets the criteria for Audiophile monitoring? A 50-100$ flat EQ Haadphone is not good enough I can guess. But considering am not making the soundtrack for the next Spielberg movie. So how good is good enough you think? spec/price wise.

- You said realism of the programmed synthesized sounds depends on skills. For starters, for instance creating a realistic orchestral/strings sound where should I spend my most time in LogicX; tweak EQ's, adding compression you mean?

- Still does external card improves the computer created sound?

- A 200$ audio interface will solve the latency problems? (Focusrite Scarlet 2i4 I consider to buy)

Thank

 

[Funkfingers]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

A 50-100$ flat EQ Headphone is not good enough, I can guess. But considering am not making the soundtrack for the next Spielberg movie. So how good is good enough you think? spec/price wise.

I am yet to discover a pair of budget headphones with truly flat EQ response over a worthwhile frequency range. AKG, Beyer and Sennheiser all make good stuff - at a price.

Most computer and budget loudspeakers are tuned to flatter the sounds that they reproduce. Bass instruments may sound kickass through such systems but, heard through anything else, the low frequencies seem absent. Flat (or near-flat) response monitoring helps to avoid errors of this sort.

You said realism of the programmed synthesized sounds depends on skills. For starters, for instance creating a realistic orchestral/strings sound where should I spend my most time in LogicX; tweak EQ's, adding compression you mean?

The built-in Orchestral sounds of Logic X are going to sound like what they are, a sample sound library - and not the most comprehensive one. It is common practice to fool the listener by blending in some real time human performance artefacts over the sequenced ROMpler sounds.

does external card improve the computer created sound?

The computer recording exists only as zeros and ones until a digital-to-analogue conversion process is applied. Ideally, the specialised electronics in the standalone device should be superior to the general purpose system on a computer's motherboard.

A 200$ audio interface will solve the latency problems? (Focusrite Scarlet 2i4 I consider to buy)

No. The computer recording software governs the latency.

In Logic, from the toolbar, select Logic Pro X/Preferences/Devices. You can make and save adjustments in the window.

 

[uOpt]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

What kind of iMac, specifically? Big differences in Apple's audio quality.

Myself I find that many modern soundcards have acceptable quality on the line in. For microphones I use an actual mic preamp to get it up to live level. Crank it up all the way to use minimum gain on the computer's input. You can also use the mic preamp for line-to-line boost to feed the computer well.

I hate complex external interfaces like the plague. The problem with them is that they require very complex drivers for the OS and the companies making them aren't very good at it (they are audio companies after all). In addition to that OS updates are getting more problematic since you need to wait for those clowns to get cracking on their drivers - which they might never do.

 

[Icarusfire]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

My iMac has Intel High Definition Audio with built-in input/output SampleRate: 44100,

Also

iMac12,1
Processor Name: Intel Core i5
Processor Speed: 2,5 GHz
Number of Processors: 1
Total Number of Cores: 4
Memory: 12 GB

 

[uOpt]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

My iMac has Intel High Definition Audio with built-in input/output SampleRate: 44100,

Also

iMac12,1
Processor Name: Intel Core i5
Processor Speed: 2,5 GHz
Number of Processors: 1
Total Number of Cores: 4
Memory: 12 GB

Yeah but that doesn't say anything about the analog part in front, the quality of the ADC and how well it is shielded form the rest of the computer.

 

[rashayritto]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

The problem with them is that they require very complex drivers for the OS and the companies making them aren't very good at it (they are audio companies after all). In addition to that OS updates are getting more problematic since you need to wait for those clowns to get cracking on their drivers - which they might never do.

Isn't that why everyone just uses the ASIO4All driver?

 

[NecroPolo]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

Really.

Not necessary, you can make demos using the provided audio too. You can mix through built-in speakers, there is no rule against that. But making something that you are happy with? Not really probable.

Think of an audio interface as a bunch of little clever features that adds together for a good result and your smile at the end while skipping a lot of possible traps in-between. We can talk about latency that is not lethal on bare systems but it's there;A/D and D/A conversion that is not obvious for the first feel but makes quite a vast difference when you mix your track; decent preamps that amplify your signals without too much unwanted attributes and so on. GIGO principle is double true when you make an audio recording.

Besides it resembles much of building a guitar rig. Tweaking, thinking, creating and solving problems, developing skills. Getting basic gear that work for you, getting more gear that you don't need but first-timer crush make them beautiful then realising that you were right from the start with barebone approach. Soldering, comparing all kinds of gadgets, public defending your stuff like a crusader and realising that even if you have been doing it for long (even making a living of it) you're still at the start on every single push of the "REC" button.

Fun. My first quality sound card was my best musical investment ever. Don't think of stellar, it was a $100 ($90 actually) PCI card called ECHO audio MIA MIDI, 2 inputs + 2 outputs + MIDI/SPDIF breakout. It's been with me since it came out I guess and I still have it and I still use it along with bigger boys that solve more complex tasks. But the old bitter-batter is still fun, is still nice and is still a milestone where I started to hear music from the techie's side.

A footnote here about controls: As soon you started to think about recording by yourself, you have automatically stepped on the path of developing your hearing. You can mix with a tin can too but it will sound good only through a tin can. To expand the area of your mixing try to check some low-cost monitor speakers by M-Audio (also, decent interfaces as well as Focusrite entry ones) like the AV series. They are not linear studio monitors but they will drastically improve your analythical hearing.

BTW what happened to your profile man? You have been around for a while but now I can see all your forum activity counters down.

 

[Icarusfire]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

Thanks for replies but I'm really confused on something; here the external sound card is always compared with the iMac's internal soundcard but since I am using Zoom g5 as an audio interface, signal is already converted to digital and enters the iMac via USB, so there is no DAC or ADC takes place in the computer since signal is already digital, thus how can putting an extra audio interface between Zoom g5 and the computer will improve guitar recording quality?

You may say an external audio interface has a better ADC/DAC converter than Zoom G5, OK but this should improve the sound quality only if I directly enter my guitar to the external soundcard. but in my case I even think it should reduce the signal quality because Zoom G5 will ADC the signal, process it, then it will DAC the signal and output it analog way, then it will be one more time converted to digital by the external soundcard..so a lot of data is already lost in Zoom G5 converters before coming to my very high quality external soundcard, so what is the use? am I missing something?

 

[Funkfingers]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

There is no need for two soundcard type devices.

If you are working solo and are content with the Zoom G5 guitar sounds, carry on with that set up.

If you intend to work with microphones and/or additional personnel, you will require more input channels than the G5 has to offer.

 

[NecroPolo]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

No if you intend to use the Zoom as your preamp there is not needed any external interface for recording as it is already an audio interface. For making demos it is 10.000% more than we had back in time, in every aspect. Mixing is a whole lotta different thing as the Zoom has only a phones out. It is capable of making a demo with headphones, no doubt.

An external device like a Focusrite Scarlet or something from the Zoom R series (they are bloody awesome BTW) is needed if you want to record vocals, real amps with 2 microphones or something in stereo or more inputs, maybe a real drumkit or the whole band etc. Any source that has no computer connection feature.

 

[Icarusfire]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

@Funkfingers Actually the live guitar sounds better than what's recorded to Logic, I don't know if this is because I don't know how to record properly or I have to tweak some LogicX settings. Or its a soundcard issue, but I said if that is true I don't understand how the external soundcard will help here since some data is already lost before it comes to external card.

@NecroPolo Hey man, I was away for a year now came back..I even don't know what is activity counter BTW Do I really need a monitor? I like to record with headphones since it isolates the raw sound of the guitar, and advice for low cost headphones?

 

[uOpt]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

Isn't that why everyone just uses the ASIO4All driver?

Well - does it work with my Sound Devices USBPre Mk 1?

 

[uOpt]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

No, the Zoom makes the sound digital in the first place, as you say. Of course you don't go back to analog.

How come you didn't mention that little detail in your OP?

 

[Icarusfire]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

I just started recording and it was always in the mix, now when I compare dry guitar sounds I hear a difference.

BTW are you agree that putting an extra sound card between zoom G5 and computer will reduce signal quality since too many A/D D/A's take place in a row? (if I happen to buy one in the future to record multiple instruments for example)

 

[NecroPolo]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

BTW are you agree that putting an extra sound card between zoom G5 and computer will reduce signal quality since too many A/D D/A's take place in a row? (if I happen to buy one in the future to record multiple instruments for example)

Not in any lethal way. A/D into D/A into A/D into D/A daisy chain is not an elegant thing to do but if you record multiple sources (eg a live band) that will be the least of your problems

For nice budget phones that still deliver some goodness try to check Audio-Tecnicas around $40. We have a couple of ATH-M20 phones and they are seemingly indestructibe and have a pretty good sound for the price. AKGs that we also have are in a whole different league but so is the price.

 

[Funkfingers]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

the live guitar sounds better than what's recorded to Logic.

At this point, I must ask you to clarify your signal chain. Is it guitar > amp > mic > Zoom > computer or, just guitar > Zoom > computer?

If you are playing through an amplifier when you record, unsatisfactory sound quality can be explained by several possible factors. e.g. Room acoustics, microphone quality, microphone positioning, interface device conversion quality, cable quality, recording software User settings.

If you are recording directly through the Zoom device, anything other than low signal levels is due to the shortcomings of the Zoom box.

I don't understand how the external soundcard will help here.

Time to check the specification sheets of the Zoom G5 and whichever interface boxes you might be evaluating. Look for bit rate count and sample frequency rate. I would guess at the Zoom offering 20- or 24-bit whereas a Focusrite Sapphire is going to be 32- or, possibly, 64-bit.

 

[Icarusfire]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

I directly use zoom no amp no microphone.

Focusrite says it has has has 96 KHz, 24-bit conversion(conversion of what?). While zoom has 16bit / 44.1kHz "audio interface" and has "24 bit , 128 times oversampling" A/D and D/A conversion. So Focusrite has 24 bit of what? is that audio interface rate or A/D D/A rate? since zoom has different values for audio interface and A/D D/A rates?

 

[Funkfingers]

Re: External soundcard really needed for recording?

Think of the bit rate and sample frequency rate as resolution. In a digital imaging system, this would give sharper pictures. In audio, it provides more detailed, more convincing sound.

In digital audio, the sample frequency rate figure is approximately double the highest audio frequency that a system can reproduce.

44.1kHz is sufficient to reproduce the highest frequencies detectable by the human ear. (Approximately, 22kHz.) However, sympathetic resonant frequencies above 22k are not rendered. Even though human ears cannot hear such high frequencies, we perceive their absence. The Focusrite figure of 96kHz implies a top frequency reproduction of c.48kHz - roughly an octave higher than good ol' 44.1. In plain language, the Focusrite box should provide better sound detail than the Zoom G5.