Help me select the right recording interface!!

Discussion in 'Converters / Interfaces' started by SpiderB, Jul 3, 2006.

  1. SpiderB

    SpiderB Guest

    I use ibook G4, 1.2 GHz, OSx 10.4, 100Ghz, 7200rpm, 1GB.

    I play rock/emo/metal.

    I will be recording at home(solo), studio(band), and live performances of my own band. I will also be using the interface for the playback of certain tracks at the venue.

    I was planning to spend about $500 on my interface. But as a musician, I want to go for the best in sound. I'm also trying to get my film done. So I'm interested in surround sound system as well. After reading all kinds of recording forums, it looks like fireface800/400, motu traveler/896HD, Mackie Onyx400/1202 plus interface card could be my choices. But after all, the budget was way too high from when I first started thinking about it.

    Like the fireface800 12" seems bulky, but since it's older now, there is a discount and will be able to purchase it for about $1200. But fireface400, half of its size; just as good with less features is still $1000.

    I have experienced with hard disk recorder but now I'm just starting to record on my laptop so I don't have any softwares. It seems like some companies like onyx have tracktion2 (plug-in bundles) for free. So it would keep me in the budget. But I don't know anything about this software.

    Now I'm willing to pay around $1000 if the whole system is worth the sound and possibly be able to use the product for about 5 years by upgrading it. I'm very much concerned about the upgrade that they follow up with Apple OS x (intel compatibility).

    By the's another question I have. I know micing and environmental setup is very important in recording, but is 192khz better than 96khz? If the music is transfered to CD which I think is 44.1khz, does that mean 96khz is condensed? Or do they skip datas out of 96khz which makes it no difference whether you record 96khz or 192khz if you just transfer it to CD after all?
    I mean... so 192khz works onlyi when I play a playback on lives?

    Well anyway I'm pretty confused :shock: so please help me!
  2. RemyRAD

    RemyRAD Member

    Sep 26, 2005
    Don't bother with any of that crap. Purchase yourself an Alesis HD24 XR. Then purchase yourself 24 channels of some relatively decent microphone preamplifiers.

    You'll have a standalone reliable system with a single-purpose. Then you can dump those tracks into your laptop via the FireWire interface. Choose the software you want to use and the plug-ins that you would like to integrate with your software. Eh voila'!

    I just don't trust computers
    Ms. Remy Ann David
  3. ZZTop

    ZZTop Guest

    Hello, new to RO.
    The setup RemyRAD suggests is basically the same one I have built. It is perfect for doing various types of music and I am very happy so far. Any of the MDM's will work fine. And I find 24 tracks to be just enough.
  4. SpiderB

    SpiderB Guest

    Please dont change the subject...

    those things you guys mentioned is fricken expensive and i have got a hard drive recorder already and i cant edit songs on screen display so i want to move to computor recording... thanks anyways
  5. mattyc

    mattyc Guest

    check out some e-mu stuff maybe. i go from a 1616 into my laptop. has been working well for me so far and the e-mu converters are always getting good reviews. there are a couple of different products for under $500. I'm no expert but it's just an idea. good luck.
  6. AudioGaff

    AudioGaff Well-Known Member

    Feb 23, 2001
    Silicon Valley
    The E-MU stuff is very good. I have the 1616M myself as uses it as portable idea/songwritting tool. It's a great little product with decent budget preamps. I also own and use the RME Digiface and the Alesis HD24 for bigger projects. E-MU stuff only works on a PC at this time but they are supposed to be shipping a PCI card late this summer for using the 1616/1616M MicroDock on either a desktop or laptop. The HD24 is a better and more reliable recording tool, but it does cost more and requires outboard gear and/or an external mixer to get the most out of it.

    Using 192k sampling rate may or may not be better for you depending on many variables. For one thing, you quickly use up more system resources in reduced CPU power, reduced I/O channels. neededing more memory, a veryt fast hard dirve and more HD space ect... and unless the rest of your audio chain is top notch as well as your monitoring environment, you may be wasting it's potential or not even be able to hear any improvement over 44.1 sampling rate.

Share This Page