# Why buy a high end sound card? (UAD Apollo Twin)



## fustrun

Hey guys!

So currently i am using an Avid Eleven Rack audio interface/guitar effects processor, it's rather cheap and gets the job done .. i have an opportunity to purchase a UAD twin Apollo duo unit rather cheaply in a very good condition.

Now i know that they have a variety of plugins and very good mic preamps and an exceptional "sound" which i don't really know what it means. do different audio interfaces sound different? 

I seldom record in my studio and if i do then i roll off the lows and remove the room since its not acoustically treated and doesn't sound all that good .. so the preamps won't be of much use to me, and in regards to the plugins i get rather good sound using my current plugins so i am not very excited regarding those either.

So my question is basically should i buy it or not and would it make any difference if most of my work is done inside the box using VST's?


----------



## wst3

I'll offer my perspective, which is not terribly popular these days, so take it for what you paid<G>...

First and foremost, different audio interfaces do sound different. It is not always a clear cut case of better or worse, but they do sound different.

The question really becomes do you need better, and if you do, how much better, and how do you figure this all out?

In the old days the limiting factors included the room, microphones, monitor loudspeakers, tape decks, mixers, pretty much the entire studio. So we learned how to minimize the impact of any one of them. 

These days the room, and the transducers remain on the list, but once the audio is digitized it is relatively free from corruption. Which means we have to add the A/D and D/A stages to the list.

In an ideal world we'd buy the microphones, loudspeakers, and converters so that they were evenly matched, that is, no one piece of the puzzle is bringing down the rest of the chain.

Since you don't record you don't have to fret over microphones or A/D converters, but that won't help you much since there are very few stand-alone D/A converters on the market, and the few that exist are orders of magnitude more expensive than the poor little Apollo Twin.

So it really comes down to the D/A converter, at least as you've described it.

It if were me I'd focus on the monitoring environment first, the loudspeakers, and the room itself. Once I'd met whatever my minimum requirements are then I'd pay attention to the converters. Except that since all our content is pretty much in a digital format how do I judge the monitoring environment? Do you see where this leads?

It is an endless cycle, so look at it as a glass half full, you'll never be bored.

I've only used the Eleven Rack as a guitar processor, so I don't know how good, or bad the D/A section is. But I would imagine that an Apollo Twin is probably a step up with respect to the D/A.

So why buy a better D/A converter? Because it will no longer be the weak link, and you can then start noticing differences between monitors, or room treatment, or whatever.

My general rule of thumb for anything audio is that if I can't hear the difference I don't spend the money. This applies to guitars, converters, microphones, home hi-fi gear - everything!

A new Apollo Twin with a Duo DSP runs around $900. I have no idea what your deal for a used one will be. But if you aren't going to be using the preamplifiers, or the A/D converters, or the DSP then I'd think seriously about purchasing a better D/A converter by itself. You can spent upwards of $2K for Benchmark, Cranesong, Lavry, or even RME. You probably don't need to do that. You do need a digital input that is computer friendly, which today means USB or Thunderbolt.

Unfortunately, I needed the DSP, so I use an Apollo Twin, and I'm not real familiar with what else might be out there in that price range. I suggest you take a look.


----------



## chillbot

wst3 said:


> I'll offer my perspective, which is not terribly popular these days, so take it for what you paid<G>...


I offer a different perspective. Which is that you should listen to what Bill says.


----------



## jmauz

I was in a similar situation several years back...I was using a Focusrite Clarett and I had an opportunity to purchase an Apogee Symphony for dirt cheap but in the end I decided to invest the money in room treatment and better monitors. If I had to go back I'd make the same decision. 

As Bill mentioned, you should invest first in shoring up the acoustics of your room. The gains you get from better AD/DA conversion could be lost if your mixes don't translate in the first place.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

The converters will give you a better idea of what's happening in your mixes. Think of it like windows...the clearer the glass, the better you can see (hear). The Apollo has wonderful converters. Is it possible to try it out first?


----------



## JohnG

@wst3 Perfect.

Almost all the support I could uncover in my own, similar quest for better converters was anecdotal. Breathless quotations from Apogee customers and others about how amazing the difference was -- little or no "hard" data.

So my own search revealed:

1. There appears to be no objective quantifiable test that definitively tells you which converter to buy. It's "how does it sound?" just as Bill wrote above;

2. My experience was that every time you spent, say 2X what you had before, the difference was audible and meaningful;

3. It _is_ important even if you're writing with samples to have a good D/A converter, good speakers, speaker cable, and a good amplifier with high damping. Why? Because the stereo image is much clearer and you can hear what you're doing.

I ended up with Lavry Blue, which was so much better than what I had it was easy to hear what a difference it made. At the time, about $2k for a basic stereo unit with D/A, A/D (for recording), and its internal clock.

Good luck!

john


----------



## fustrun

Thank you for all the input guys! i have decided to pick it up since it was practically not used and had quite a bit of plugins that came with it that i neglected to mention. It sounds pretty good but that's from my initial impression and i guess the preamps will come in handy when i do rarely record in my studio.

Thank you again!


----------



## wst3

chillbot said:


> I offer a different perspective. Which is that you should listen to what Bill says.


I wonder what he meant by that????


----------



## gsilbers

meh... 

watch out for the hype. once you enter into the "pro audio" converters there isnt that much of a difference. you coudlnt tell the difference between that eleven rack and rme vs uad. and if you do is not because they are beter, they sound a little different... IF you can really spot the difference in a double blind test. 

to me its more important to have the amount of inputs and outputs you need or plan to use in the future. 
Or maybe there is another item you like on the gear, like a big knob for volume, or mostly digital inputs, or to be able to run plugins on it, form factor and so on. 

more important would be the treated room, and beter mic and speakers and obviously good performance and instrument. but preamps, converters, daws, plugins and other smaller sonic footprint items or much less important and the difference between them is minimal compared to the marketing hype and what "pros" say. 
Is there a difference between them? sure.. is there a difference that will unable you to produce a grammy wining song a million dollar score? nope. 


but thats just me and a few others who go after the anti-gear chasing dragon route. very unpopular nowadays 
check out the gearslutz shootout subforum and there is a long converter shootout thread.


----------



## JohnG

gsilbers said:


> watch out for the hype



I don't see hype in this thread. Do you?

I used to scoff at super-expensive cable for speakers, at anything "audiophile" and anything that seemed hyped -- the apogee testimonials seemed totally goofy, for example. I laughed out loud when people told me how much they paid for speaker cable.

But I undertook an "all at once" upgrade -- going in one leap from close-to-rubbish to "pretty good" on cables, speakers, amp, and converter, and I could hardly believe the difference. I can hear so much better now, and it's not an illusion.

@gsilbers is right to caution against hype, but not all gear is hype. Good cables or a D/A converter likely won't make you into a great composer if you are a weak one. My guess is that the people who will get the most out of this are those who already have been at this for a while. I found it startling what an overall facelift does for your enjoyment of the process and the fineness with which I could zero in on mixing.


----------



## robgb

fustrun said:


> do different audio interfaces sound different?


Yes, but I'm not sure the difference in quality—assuming there is one—is worth the extra cost. I went from a $2,000 boutique pre-amp interface to a $59 no frills interface (the expensive unit is no longer compatible with my operating system and won't be updated) and the difference is negligible. Seriously. Granted, my ears are old—to a twenty year old there might be a significant difference that my old ears just can't hear, but it works for me. And I haven't heard any complaints about the output. I think there is a tendency for musicians to believe that expensive gear will somehow make everything magically better and that just isn't always the case...


----------



## wst3

JohnG said:


> @wst3 Perfect.


 Thank you!



JohnG said:


> 1. There appears to be no objective quantifiable test that definitively tells you which converter to buy. It's "how does it sound?" just as Bill wrote above;


There are quantifiable metrics, but even an idiot can design a converter from a reference design that exceeds the thresholds of sensitivity for the obvious stuff like frequency response, linearity, distortion, and noise.

A really talented designer can exceed those thresholds even further, and at least a couple of those will make a difference - specifically linearity and noise.

But the dirty little secret that few want to talk about is that modern audio circuits all sound pretty darned good, and we don't have the means to measure, or even describe the remaining differences.

Which is to say that "better" or "worse" have given way to "different" and "I like this one".



JohnG said:


> 2. My experience was that every time you spent, say 2X what you had before, the difference was audible and meaningful;


That made me chuckle! There remain a couple of groups of very serious audio professionals who continue to strive to make things sound better. In both groups we always ask if it is 3 dB better. 2X the cost would be 3 dB more expensive, so that's something.



JohnG said:


> I ended up with Lavry Blue, which was so much better than what I had it was easy to hear what a difference it made. At the time, about $2k for a basic stereo unit with D/A, A/D (for recording), and its internal clock.


I am officially jealous! Mr. Lavry's designs strike me as some of the most accurate and neutral on the market. My other favorite, in the same price ballpark, is Benchmark. Both companies have really smart designers! And both companies will tell you what they do, why they do it, and why it might matter to you.


----------



## wst3

JohnG said:


> I used to scoff at super-expensive cable for speakers, at anything "audiophile" and anything that seemed hyped -- the apogee testimonials seemed totally goofy, for example. I laughed out loud when people told me how much they paid for speaker cable.


I still scoff, or at least remain skeptical. I try to understand if there is a realistic explanation for why something might matter. But then once upon a time I didn't understand why someone would spend $400 on a KM-84 when you could buy an SM-57 for $100.

There are real differences, and they are audible to some folks. If you can't hear the difference it may not be wise to spend the extra money.



JohnG said:


> But I undertook an "all at once" upgrade -- going in one leap from close-to-rubbish to "pretty good" on cables, speakers, amp, and converter, and I could hardly believe the difference. I can hear so much better now, and it's not an illusion.


That can be an eye opener! Or a nightmare! Sounds like you had a pretty good experience.

Many years ago I was a broadcast engineer and I did a fairly extensive overhaul of the control room at the station where I worked. All I really accomplished was to uncover all the problems in the transmitter, audio processing, and production room.

Once the GM got over what it was going to cost to fix everything else we did the work and the difference was very real, and our listeners made comments, so we knew it wasn't in our imaginations.




JohnG said:


> gsilbers is right to caution against hype, but not all gear is hype.


There is lots of hype. Ironically some of the worst is used for the lower end gear.



JohnG said:


> Good cables or a D/A converter likely won't make you into a great composer if you are a weak one.


If only!!!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

gsilbers said:


> but preamps, converters, daws, plugins and other smaller sonic footprint items or much less important and the difference between them is minimal compared to the marketing hype and what "pros" say.
> Is there a difference between them? sure.. is there a difference that will unable you to produce a grammy wining song a million dollar score? nope.



This used to be my way of thinking....until I upgraded from my Steinberg UR22 to an Apogee Element. The details it was revealing was a real eye-opener. I could hear subtleties and artefacts that weren't audible in my previous setup. And the preamps, crystal clear and sharp.


----------



## wst3

robgb said:


> Yes, but I'm not sure the difference in quality—assuming there is one—is worth the extra cost. <snippity>And I haven't heard any complaints about the output. I think there is a tendency for musicians to believe that expensive gear will somehow make everything magically better and that just isn't always the case...



I know that you and I will probably never agree completely on this, and I really should just hit delete instead of send, but more for the OP<G>.

There is a difference in quality between a $59 interface and a $2000 interface, but that's kind of silly, so I'll say there is also a difference between a $59 interface and a $800 interface, and that the difference is audible, assuming the rest of the system is up to the task.

I think the difference is worth the price difference, but I know not everyone will agree. And that's ok. When I discuss this with folks I try really hard to emphasize "for me" or "to me", and I appreciate that you do the same. @robgb.

If I were going to put this in a nutshell - for monitoring - and discussing ONLY audio quality as it pertains to mixing:

the weak link in your system will always be the limiting factor - could be your ears, the room, your monitors, or your D/A converter.
Sometimes it makes sense to get a converter that far outstrips your monitors because you plan to upgrade your monitors later.
Sometimes it makes no sense to spend extra, e.g. you can only upgrade your ears (through ear training) so far.) 

Work through the entire playback system methodically, and don't spend money if you simply can not hear the difference.
It might make sense to hear a specific monitor loudspeaker or D/A converter in another setting. You can then recognize that there is a difference, and determine if the difference is worthy of the cost.
A couple summers ago I had a chance to listen to a set of Barefoot monitors - no, not the $50k version, I think these were around $6k for the pair. In any case, they were well beyond my budget, but it was fun to listen to them. Similarly I had an opportunity to audition a pair of Presonus Sceptre S6s. I like coaxial designs a lot, I dislike ported cabinets almost as much, and yet these behaved quite well, even on lower octave transients. These were around $1200 for the pair (I should have waited, I think they are around $1k for the pair now). I decided that they were a sufficiently good step up for me, and I found a way to make the budget fit<G>.
Flip side - I was using a Presonus Audiobox VSL1818. It's a pretty darned good interface, audio quality is better than I'd expected, and the features fit my needs. I auditioned an Apollo Twin USB when they were released. I can pick out a few things the Apollo converters (especially on the input side) do better, but overall I'd say that the two interfaces are both really good, and I just like the sound of the A/D converter on the Apollo a little better. It could in fact be the preamplifiers for that matter, I just like recordings made through the input side of the Apollo better, regardless of which one I use for the output side. But I bought the Apollo for the Unison feature. That was something that provided value to me, and they keep adding Unison enabled plugins, so it turned out well for me.

Be wary of hype, but also know that some hardware designers are just better than others. Some gear genuinely sounds better (in the right setting), and sometimes even different is enough.
You need to spend wisely, but be aware that sometimes you won't. The marketplace (outside a few major cities) has changed so that auditioning gear has become quite difficult. If you become paralyzed from the fear of a bad purchase you will get stuck.
Be wary of folks that suggest that there is no difference. Be a little wary of folks who say the audible difference does not justify the cost difference. We are ALL approaching these choices from our own unique perspective.
Even if you have no plans to purchase a $5k monitor system go listen to one. You'll learn something.


----------



## chillbot

robgb said:


> I went from a $2,000 boutique pre-amp interface to a $59 no frills interface ... and the difference is negligible.


Damn you're like a broken record. Where is the 'disklike' button.


----------



## MarcelM

robgb said:


> Yes, but I'm not sure the difference in quality—assuming there is one—is worth the extra cost. I went from a $2,000 boutique pre-amp interface to a $59 no frills interface (the expensive unit is no longer compatible with my operating system and won't be updated) and the difference is negligible. Seriously. Granted, my ears are old—to a twenty year old there might be a significant difference that my old ears just can't hear, but it works for me. And I haven't heard any complaints about the output. I think there is a tendency for musicians to believe that expensive gear will somehow make everything magically better and that just isn't always the case...



honestly and without beeing rude, but go to doctor and check your ears.

i have had very cheap and mid/high end interfaces and ofcourse there is a difference in quality. actually a pretty big one to be honest. people really might go wrong and buy some crap because of statements like the one from you.

ofcourse the monitor speakers or headphones have to be of decent quality aswell.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Heroix said:


> honestly and without beeing rude, but go to doctor and check your ears.
> 
> i have had very cheap and mid/high end interfaces and ofcourse there is a difference in quality. actually a pretty big one to be honest. people really might go wrong and buy some crap because of statements like the one from you.



^ that. There's a reason serious and pro-level composers aren't using a $59 interface. If one can't hear the differences, maybe they shouldn't be doing any of their own mixes.


----------



## resound

So far no talk about latency, but wouldn't that be another factor? I've been considering upgrading from my cheap Scarlett 2i2 to an RME Babyface Pro for better latency. Can anyone speak to this? Will it make a noticeable difference when working with virtual instruments?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

resound said:


> So far no talk about latency, but wouldn't that be another factor? I've been considering upgrading from my cheap Scarlett 2i2 to an RME Babyface Pro for better latency. Can anyone speak to this? Will it make a noticeable difference when working with virtual instruments?



I can attest for the Thunderbolt interface I bought (Apogee Element). There is virtually no latency, even playing back and recording with huge track counts, etc. I can set it down below 128 and it's solid. I've heard good things about the RME stuff, the drivers are excellent.


----------



## sostenuto

resound said:


> So far no talk about latency, but wouldn't that be another factor? I've been considering upgrading from my cheap Scarlett 2i2 to an RME Babyface Pro for better latency. Can anyone speak to this? Will it make a noticeable difference when working with virtual instruments?



Matches concerns here perfectly! All VI sources, so pricey pre-amps not needed. Will pay what is required though, for low-latency and quality DAC.


----------



## resound

Wolfie2112 said:


> I can attest for the Thunderbolt interface I bought (Apogee Element). There is virtually no latency, even playing back and recording with huge track counts, etc. I can set it down below 128 and it's solid. I've heard good things about the RME stuff, the drivers are excellent.


That's good to hear! I usually need to stay at 256 at least, usually 512 when track count starts to creep up.


----------



## robgb

Heroix said:


> honestly and without beeing rude, but go to doctor and check your ears.
> 
> i have had very cheap and mid/high end interfaces and ofcourse there is a difference in quality. actually a pretty big one to be honest. people really might go wrong and buy some crap because of statements like the one from you.
> 
> ofcourse the monitor speakers or headphones have to be of decent quality aswell.


My ears have been checked many times over the years. I've certainly suffered some hearing loss with age, but have no trouble hearing differences in eq, coloring, microphones, etc. I have several different headphones and monitors and can clearly hear the differences between them. But the difference between the two interfaces I spoke of is slight to nonexistent. Certainly not enough to justify the VAST difference in price. Honestly, and without being rude.


----------



## robgb

chillbot said:


> Damn you're like a broken record. Where is the 'disklike' button.


I'm sorry my experience pains you. I guess it's pretty boring for me to advocate using low cost gear when possible.


----------



## robgb

Wolfie2112 said:


> There's a reason serious and pro-level composers aren't using a $59 interface.


I think you'd be very surprised by what some pro-level composers use or don't use. The truth is, a lot of low budget gear is so good these days that it's not quite as critical as many of you seem to think. Very few people listen to albums and say, "Hey, I wonder what audio interface he used on that track." Am I saying there's NO difference at all? Of course not. But you can certainly make a solid album without expensive gear. And even if you're lucky enough to be able to afford expensive gear, it won't make your songs any better. Only you can do that.


----------



## MarcelM

robgb said:


> My ears have been checked many times over the years. I've certainly suffered some hearing loss with age, but have no trouble hearing differences in eq, coloring, microphones, etc. I have several different headphones and monitors and can clearly hear the differences between them. But the difference between the two interfaces I spoke of is slight to nonexistent. Certainly not enough to justify the VAST difference in price. Honestly, and without being rude.



hmmm... not sure maybe its your room/setup then. you should actually hear quite a big difference in sound stage, instrument seperation, depth etc. many stuff like this is getting better with an high end interface and your mixes will sound better in the end.

whatever, if you are happy with that 59 bucks thing its ok. but i think its not so good to recommend this to someone looking for "good" gear.


----------



## germancomponist

The first and most important thing is that you have to have good ears!
If not, it is very uninteresting what equipment u use!
Sorry to say this so hard, but it is the truth!


----------



## robgb

Heroix said:


> whatever, if you are happy with that 59 bucks thing its ok. but i think its not so good to recommend this to someone looking for "good" gear.


My point, of course, is that it IS good gear. Is it the BEST gear? No. But does it have to be the best gear? No. I would not have advocated using low budget gear ten years ago, but times have changed drastically since then and the quality of low cost gear has risen considerably. I like to look past the prejudice of price and encourage people not to mortgage their houses for gear they can't really afford. Obviously, an audio interface won't break you, but once you get down the line buying expensive gear after expensive gear, you're going to wonder why you're freaking broke yet your songs don't really sound any better. Buy expensive gear when the money you're making from your music allows you to afford it. Until then, low budget is fine.


----------



## JohnG

I have had the opposite experience.

Better signal chain and playback makes everything easier and more pleasurable for me, from listening to Josquin or Bowie, to composing. The stereo image is dramatically better and the detail is so much clearer.

To get everything to that level indeed is expensive. Speakers, amp, D/A -- all told almost $10k. But every time I work I benefit from it. I have a friend who has a $30k set of speakers. I don't.

Lower priced gear may, as Rob said, sound better than once it did. And certainly it is a bad idea to take on any debt that puts you in a bind.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen

JohnG said:


> I used to scoff at super-expensive cable for speakers, at anything "audiophile" and anything that seemed hyped -- the apogee testimonials seemed totally goofy, for example. I laughed out loud when people told me how much they paid for speaker cable.
> 
> But I undertook an "all at once" upgrade -- going in one leap from close-to-rubbish to "pretty good" on cables, speakers, amp, and converter, and I could hardly believe the difference. I can hear so much better now, and it's not an illusion.



Glad to see you're a convert  

I couldn't believe the difference when I went from Mogami mic cables to "special" ones.


----------



## N.Caffrey

I recently went from a cheap Focusrite to an Apollo Twin mkII. huge difference for me.


----------



## R. Soul

Is it worth for me to upgrade my Steinberg UR-12 to something like a Babyface pro, if I only work ITB?
I get that it's lower latency, but apart from that, what difference would it make?

If the headphone amp is much better that would be a bonus, as I often use headphones (HD650).


----------



## gsilbers

maybe this will help illustrate my point of not a big deal between interfaces.




can you tell the difference between the last two or three examples in the video?
if so, is it worth the price difference if you needed to buy it for a project?

and if so, would you be able to to tell the difference between these pianos on your low end interface vs high end interface that would impede you to mix it correctly?
and is so, would there be a big difference if you recorded the cheap piano with a high end interface vs recording the high end piano with the cheap interface?

so there will be a difference between interfaces. but there arguments of saying that suddenly with a good interface suddenly everything was clearer and better sounding are minor compared to real differences.
you can still make great stuff with low end interfaces.

and btw, there are plenty of artist just using their computer I/O. from cliff martinez to skrillex and afrojack/tiesto.
a low end interface will not impede anyone from making good music.

and sometimes we just jump into the conclusion that i am talking about a mbox1 interface vs a prism. but its all about the info on hand and being able to compare.
any of these will get you about the same level or grey areas of the same level.
https://www.sweetwater.com/c695--USB_Audio_Interfaces
if you have a good treated room.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

gsilbers said:


> maybe this will help illustrate my point of not a big deal between interfaces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you tell the difference between the last two or three examples in the video?
> if so, is it worth the price difference if you needed to buy it for a project?




I see what your point is, but one cannot judge from a Youtube video. That is a bogus example is many ways.

Of course good music can be created using just about any type of interface...I use to pump out stuff just using the onboard sound from my PC years ago. Was the quality awful? Absolutely! I cringe when I go back and listen to those mixes. The thing is, I didn't know any different (ignorance is bliss ). Everyone is going have their own idea of what sounds good, but my ignorance was realized when I discovered the real-world, audible differences. And it wasn't minor nuances in my case, it was in-your-face clarity. My VI's even sound more defined.

My question to you is....would you trade in your RME 800 for a $59 interface? You have to admit, the converters will sound better on the RME, no?


----------



## MarcelM

gsilbers said:


> maybe this will help illustrate my point of not a big deal between interfaces.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> can you tell the difference between the last two or three examples in the video?
> if so, is it worth the price difference if you needed to buy it for a project?
> 
> and if so, would you be able to to tell the difference between these pianos on your low end interface vs high end interface that would impede you to mix it correctly?
> and is so, would there be a big difference if you recorded the cheap piano with a high end interface vs recording the high end piano with the cheap interface?
> 
> so there will be a difference between interfaces. but there arguments of saying that suddenly with a good interface suddenly everything was clearer and better sounding are minor compared to real differences.
> you can still make great stuff with low end interfaces.
> 
> and btw, there are plenty of artist just using their computer I/O. from cliff martinez to skrillex and afrojack/tiesto.
> a low end interface will not impede anyone from making good music.
> 
> and sometimes we just jump into the conclusion that i am talking about a mbox1 interface vs a prism. but its all about the info on hand and being able to compare.
> any of these will get you about the same level or grey areas of the same level.
> https://www.sweetwater.com/c695--USB_Audio_Interfaces
> if you have a good treated room.




any of those will get me about the same level? sorry, you are totally wrong. i dont know how many you had from those interfaces, but there is a big difference in ad/da quality. i wonder why you dont use onboard sound then yourself instead of an rme 800. j/k 

a good audio interface might make you think that you got new monitor speakers or headphones. also cables do ofcourse make a difference. in the audio world its like this: you get what you pay for!

comparing the two pianos btw isnt the same as comparing a budget interface to an high end one.


----------



## gsilbers

Wolfie2112 said:


> I see what your point is, but one cannot judge from a Youtube video. That is a bogus example is many ways.
> 
> Of course good music can be created using just about any type of interface...I use to pump out stuff just using the onboard sound from my PC years ago. Was the quality awful? Absolutely! I cringe when I go back and listen to those mixes. The thing is, I didn't know any different (ignorance is bliss ). Everyone is going have their own idea of what sounds good, but my ignorance was realized when I discovered the real-world, audible differences. And it wasn't minor nuances in my case, it was in-your-face clarity. My VI's even sound more defined.
> 
> My question to you is....would you trade in your RME 800 for a $59 interface? You have to admit, the converters will sound better on the RME, no?



1st) why woudnt you judge on a youtube video? isnt it nowdays the primary way audiences listen to stuff? 

i dont know about better. it will sound different than a $300 dollar interface for sure. as for 59 dollar one, i think you are missing my point.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Because the audio quality for a Youtube video is low quality, compressed to the nuts. How can you judge based off that??


----------



## gsilbers

Heroix said:


> any of those will get me about the same level? sorry, you are totally wrong. i dont know how many you had from those interfaces, but there is a big difference in ad/da quality. i wonder why you dont use onboard sound then yourself instead of an rme 800. j/k
> 
> a good audio interface might make you think that you got new monitor speakers or headphones. also cables do ofcourse make a difference. in the audio world its like this: you get what you pay for!
> 
> comparing the two pianos btw isnt the same as comparing a budget interface to an high end one.



i do you my macbook pro somtimes. i also have a maudio fireface and had a bunch of other interfaces. 192s, mbox1, virusti, and so on. 


in the audio world the price difference you pay is for marketing and shelf price. there is no "better". better is a juedgement and personal call. everyone thinks UAD is better. everyone things spitfire is better. everyone things the last piano is better. coldnt you make better music with more practice and using the less better equipment like motu ultralightv1, eastwest, the second to last piano on the video, and so on? 

as for piano vs interface.... correct, its different.. and thats exactly the point.


----------



## gsilbers

Wolfie2112 said:


> Because the audio quality for a Youtube video is low quality, compressed to the nuts. How can you judge based off that??



ok but would you make a buying decision based on it? havent you done so for 100% of every sample library out there? 

how about comparing mics

could you be able to afford or rent a neuman and the other 2 mics?


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

I agree, the marketing can mislead you, but only in a certain category. For example, a Scarlet 2i2 and a Steinberg UR22 are comparable (one is red and the other black/gray)...but in the same price category. An Apogee Element and UAD Apollo are a big step up, but offer different features; but at a whole other level.


----------



## MarcelM

gsilbers said:


> i do you my macbook pro somtimes. i also have a maudio fireface and had a bunch of other interfaces. 192s, mbox1, virusti, and so on.
> 
> 
> in the audio world the price difference you pay is for marketing and shelf price. there is no "better". better is a juedgement and personal call. everyone thinks UAD is better. everyone things spitfire is better. everyone things the last piano is better. coldnt you make better music with more practice and using the less better equipment like motu ultralightv1, eastwest, the second to last piano on the video, and so on?
> 
> as for piano vs interface.... correct, its different.. and thats exactly the point.



first of all, i dont think uad is better. its just good if you want to use uad plugins. sound quality wise there are better interfaces for even less money.

and in the audio world its for sure not only about marketing. take a listen to an antelope, or the new audient id 44 and then to one of those low budget interfaces. and also record something with them. its a different world actually.

simple look at the specs of those interfaces will do the rest.

i really cant even believe that this discussion exists here and have to laugh sometimes. you guys should start a post like this over at gearslutz and get smoked


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

gsilbers said:


> ok but would you make a buying decision based on it? havent you done so for 100% of every sample library out there?
> 
> how about comparing mics
> 
> could you be able to afford or rent a neuman and the other 2 mics?



Sample libraries? Guilty as charged....and many regrettable purchases for this reason. However, I would NEVER buy a microphone based on Youtube sound comparisons.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire

I believe there are differences between more affordable and top of the line/boutique gear. But I don't care about them.

I'm not a professional mixing or mastering engineer, and it will never be my job. What I need to be able to hear working with my samples and writing the music is sufficiently exposed by halfway decent equipment. Anything beyond that is the job of more qualified and aptly equipped people.

It's also a mentality/philosophy thing. I will invest in something considered premium quality, or very expensive, if I feel that something else is not sufficient. But I never cared about anything "cream of the crop", premium, the top of the line and exquisite in life per se. I don't believe in these things. My daily life dealings and practices and what I need to do what I do is all that matters.


----------



## chillbot

OP said he picked up the Apollo. Smart move. Bot-approved. Should have been /thread.

I hate this argument so bad why do we keep bringing it up in every thread. Rob is forevermore on ignore for me. Feels good.

I keep writing stuff and then deleting it. But I do want to know, why do so many assume that everyone is broke and no one wants to spend money? OK if you have $59 to spend you buy the $59 soundcard, that's what you do. If you have $2,499 to spend you can buy a nice Apollo. Stop telling people "you don't need to spend that much". They probably don't need to spend it, depending on where they are at in their profession or hobby. But read what I wrote again: "If you have $2,499 to spend". There's no other qualifiers, there is no "you could spend it on this instead." Stop spending people's money for them. Do you get 42x the value for the $2,499 soundcard? Maybe you do... probably not... I honestly have no idea... it's hard to quantify. But is one better than the other? Someone offers you the $59 Behringer and the $2,499 Apollo for free, no charge. Which one are you taking? Are you honestly taking the Behringer?? IF you want to compete in this industry... if you are at that level where you'd like to make a living or a career at it... IT DOES make a difference. And every tiny little edge you can get in an ultra-competitive industry oozing with uber-talented people not making a dime is a huge edge. Believe me when I say this, 19 out of 20 people you are competing with to get a job with your Behringer are using the Apollo.

(If it's not clear, Apollo being a metaphor for any mid-to-upper-range audio interface, thanks.)


----------



## wst3

gsilbers said:


> 1st) why woudnt you judge on a youtube video? isnt it nowdays the primary way audiences listen to stuff?



I sincerely hope that was said with tongue planted firmly in cheek.

If it wasn't, well, I choose to do the best job I can every time out. I know that data compression for streaming rules the world these days, which doesn't make it right.

Sometimes I listen to music purely for enjoyment, just to hear a performer or a performance or a composition, and I don't care about the audio quality. I'll listen to a recording of a show made on an iPhone from the crowd if the performance is compelling.

But if I am producing the music I want it to be the best it can be - and I still have lots of obstacles to overcome - because that is what a artist/craftsman/engineer does. The hat doesn't matter.


----------



## PaulBrimstone

chillbot said:


> OP said he picked up the Apollo. Smart move. Bot-approved. Should have been /thread.
> 
> I hate this argument so bad why do we keep bringing it up in every thread. Rob is forevermore on ignore for me. Feels good.
> 
> I keep writing stuff and then deleting it. But I do want to know, why do so many assume that everyone is broke and no one wants to spend money? OK if you have $59 to spend you buy the $59 soundcard, that's what you do. If you have $2,499 to spend you can buy a nice Apollo. Stop telling people "you don't need to spend that much". They probably don't need to spend it, depending on where they are at in their profession or hobby. But read what I wrote again: "If you have $2,499 to spend". There's no other qualifiers, there is no "you could spend it on this instead." Stop spending people's money for them. Do you get 42x the value for the $2,499 soundcard? Maybe you do... probably not... I honestly have no idea... it's hard to quantify. But is one better than the other? Someone offers you the $59 Behringer and the $2,499 Apollo for free, no charge. Which one are you taking? Are you honestly taking the Behringer?? IF you want to compete in this industry... if you are at that level where you'd like to make a living or a career at it... IT DOES make a difference. And every tiny little edge you can get in an ultra-competitive industry oozing with uber-talented people not making a dime is a huge edge. Believe me when I say this, 19 out of 20 people you are competing with to get a job with your Behringer are using the Apollo.
> 
> (If it's not clear, Apollo being a metaphor for any mid-to-upper-range audio interface, thanks.)


I suggest a 30-day moratorium on soundcard threads. And pianos. Given some of the prior pouting (in the other thread), I suppose I ought to add this


----------



## robgb

gsilbers said:


> havent you done so for 100% of every sample library out there?


Yep. And I honestly don't give a crap if it IS compressed YouTube sound. It at least gives me an idea of what my own work will sound like when it's compressed YouTube sound...


----------



## gsilbers

PaulBrimstone said:


> I suggest a 30-day moratorium on soundcard threads. And pianos. Given some of the prior pouting (in the other thread), I suppose I ought to add this



...ok.. but ill be back in 30 days.. mark my words


----------



## wst3

I'm quoting the entire post, that was really well said Mr. @chillbot, really well said!



chillbot said:


> OP said he picked up the Apollo. Smart move. Bot-approved. Should have been /thread.
> 
> I hate this argument so bad why do we keep bringing it up in every thread. Rob is forevermore on ignore for me. Feels good.
> 
> I keep writing stuff and then deleting it. But I do want to know, why do so many assume that everyone is broke and no one wants to spend money? OK if you have $59 to spend you buy the $59 soundcard, that's what you do. If you have $2,499 to spend you can buy a nice Apollo. Stop telling people "you don't need to spend that much". They probably don't need to spend it, depending on where they are at in their profession or hobby. But read what I wrote again: "If you have $2,499 to spend". There's no other qualifiers, there is no "you could spend it on this instead." Stop spending people's money for them. Do you get 42x the value for the $2,499 soundcard? Maybe you do... probably not... I honestly have no idea... it's hard to quantify. But is one better than the other? Someone offers you the $59 Behringer and the $2,499 Apollo for free, no charge. Which one are you taking? Are you honestly taking the Behringer?? IF you want to compete in this industry... if you are at that level where you'd like to make a living or a career at it... IT DOES make a difference. And every tiny little edge you can get in an ultra-competitive industry oozing with uber-talented people not making a dime is a huge edge. Believe me when I say this, 19 out of 20 people you are competing with to get a job with your Behringer are using the Apollo.
> 
> (If it's not clear, Apollo being a metaphor for any mid-to-upper-range audio interface, thanks.)


----------



## sostenuto

Wish to raise a very narrow point. Currently use (2) Saffire Pro14(s) and hardware upgrades will choose to go USB3. (2) Focusrite 2i4 likely gets me going at $165. each.
Really do not want to argue the $59. possibility, BUT .... the gap to UAD Apollo Twin is over $700. EACH ___ to RME Babyface Pro is almost $600. EACH.
Focusrite Clarett 2Pre is $500. EACH, but then Thunderbolt connectivity ... and cost is very 'preamp' focused.

How is it, in today's highly competitive world, that such a *gap* exists from respected suppliers and their hardware, to these two 'preferred' alternatives ??

Personal frustration is even higher, given desire for quality additions, yet NO NEED whatsoever for better preamps. Focus is DAC, latency, USB connectivity. Budget is really not the barrier! Getting 'needed' value -for-money' is a serious goal.

Frankly, this Thread has been instructive an helpful.


----------



## thesteelydane

I don't think my ears are finely tuned enough to really tell the minute differences in converters that the pros hear, I did spent 10 years sitting in front of a brass section after all, but even I can tell the difference between a cheap Focusrite and the step above that. I started with a Saffire Pro 40, then upgraded to a 1st gen Apogee Duet, and that was a notable jump in conversion, but even more so in preamps - and for two interfaces that essentially cost the same, but one gave you a million channels with 8 preamps, the other only 2 channels but of a noticeable higher quality. Now I use a 2nd generation Duet at home and an ancient RME Fireface 800 in the studio. I prefer the conversion on the latter by a very small margin, but the preamps on the Duet for recording - they are whisper clean and quiet compared to the RME. I don't know if this is useful to anyone, but my experience so far has been that what you're really paying for at that midrange midrange level are clean and quiet preamps. 

Disclaimer: I am obsessed with getting the lowest noise floor I can get for my budget at all stages of the recording chain, so take all this with a grain of salt.


----------



## wst3

sostenuto said:


> <snip>How is it, in today's highly competitive world, that such a *gap* exists from respected suppliers and their hardware, to these two 'preferred' alternatives ??



That gap exists for a LOT of reasons.

I'll concede that there is probably an element of "what the market will bear", but there are solid technical reasons:

Most of the lower priced gear is designed by someone that doesn't have a lot of experience. The design could be a copy of different reference designs, which leaves no room for optimizing the board layout, or component selection.
Most of the lower priced gear is designed to a price point. You can't imagine how limiting that can be.
Most of the lower priced gear is designed to meet a release date. That's even more limiting.
Most of the lower priced gear is manufactured in places where manufacturing is really inexpensive. Some of the higher priced gear is also manufactured there, but they are starting with a real advantage.
Several years ago I was asked to design a headphone amplifier. I had some specific performance objectives, a rough idea of budget, but it was generous, and of course they wanted it yesterday. It took me six months (disclaimer, I was working part time on this project, nights and weekends). But as each version of the design was evaluated the rest of the team was satisfied that I was making progress. I'm really quite proud of the final design, although of course now I'd make some changes.

And a headphone amplifier, while not trivial, is nothing compared to a microphone preamplifier or a converter. We also designed our own converter stages for this product. We went down a really blind alley with that, lost probably at least six months with our "brilliant" idea on how to make it quieter and more stable. OUCH!

But these are the investments a company has to make in order to stand above the $59 converter. And you can bet they want to recoup those costs.



sostenuto said:


> Personal frustration is even higher, given desire for quality additions, yet NO NEED whatsoever for better preamps. Focus is DAC, latency, USB connectivity. Budget is really not the barrier! Getting 'needed' value -for-money' is a serious goal.



There are lots of boxes that I think could do well in the marketplace yet they don't exist. Why do we put microphone preamplifiers on every 8 channel A/D converter? Granted, some folks need 8 microphone preamplifiers, but some don't. I recently picked up an Audient ASP-880 to add 8 more inputs to my Apollo Twin (works brilliantly by the way) - the vast majority of the time I bypass the preamplifiers and go directly to the A/D stage - makes gain staging easier, and probably improves the S/N ration by a couple dB. So why not make a version without the microphone preamplifiers?

There are a couple really good DACs that you might want to look at - have you checked out Benchmark Audio or Dan Lavry? They aren't cheap, but they meet your requirements. And they sound great.

[QUOTE="sostenutoFrankly, this Thread has been instructive an helpful. [/QUOTE]
That's good to know.


----------



## Mr Mindcrime

I apologize in advance Chillbot.

If this question needs to be moved to another thread or forum, please let me know. I’m not trying to beat any dead horses here but I need a little (a lot?) direction and this thread seemed like a good place to ask.

First I’ll say that I know I’m limited by not having great ears… which is to say I’m not an engineering professional and I spent way too many years in front of loud guitar amps  So, I can’t fix that.

So my question relates to what I can correct to make my orchestral (_and occasional rock_) mixes sound better to my not-so-great ears. All I’m asking here is…what would be a reasonable *budget* to make improvements to my studio and mix situation. I will do plenty of research on makes and models, etc as there are many threads on this. I just want to know what financial investment makes sense for me to get to the next level.

What is a reasonable budget for next level improvements for the following? Please be specific for each piece.

· Audio Interface

· Monitors

· Speaker Cabling

· Room Treatment

· Anything else ???



Here is what I have:

· Audient iD4 audio interface

· Yorkville Ysm1P monitors

· Low end speaker cables (instrument cables?)

· Mackie 12 channel mixer ( _I run a second Delta 1010 soundcard thru this for non-DAW sound and headphone monitoring_)

· No room treatment at the moment in a converted dining room with hardwood floors

Thank you for your help.

Roger


----------



## JohnG

@Mr Mindcrime I don't know your existing gear. That said, a relatively tiny investment high end speaker cables could be an excellent start. I use Tara Labs but I have other good cables made up by an engineer who used Mogami and Canari as well.

I used to mock this kind of thing ("wire is wire!" I used to say) but hearing is believing. Actually, I couldn't believe the difference. 

http://taralabs.com/speaker-cables


----------



## sostenuto

wst3 said:


> That gap exists for a LOT of reasons.
> 
> I'll concede that there is probably an element of "what the market will bear", but there are solid technical reasons:
> 
> ........ *(Reply edit)*
> 
> But these are the investments a company has to make in order to stand above the $59 converter. And you can bet they want to recoup those costs.
> 
> 
> 
> There are lots of boxes that I think could do well in the marketplace yet they don't exist. Why do we put microphone preamplifiers on every 8 channel A/D converter? Granted, some folks need 8 microphone preamplifiers, but some don't. * YES !!! *
> 
> There are a couple really good DACs that you might want to look at - have you checked out Benchmark Audio or Dan Lavry? They aren't cheap, but they meet your requirements. And they sound great.
> 
> [QUOTE="sostenutoFrankly, this Thread has been instructive an helpful.


That's good to know.[/QUOTE]

Much appreciate the focused Reply ! 
The DAC(s) are not only of interest, but also place higher quality Audio I/F pricing in context ..... 

Finally. I realize the Thread focus has been mainly ... lower cost ~$59. products, but personal focus has been gap from Focusrite to RME, UAD, etc. Now, with Clarett Pre out there, the 'gap' has closed somewhat. 
Still, RME/ UAD are today's popular, professional choices, and this Thread has recalibrated me seriously.

Regards


----------



## pettinhouse

$2000 Audio interface -> mp3 

Ok now, seriously, depends on what you do and what monitors you've got.

Doesn't have any sense to have a $2000/$4000 audio interface and $300 monitors. You would not appreciate the quality of your AI.

Then if you don't use the preamps I would buy an audio interface for $500-$1000 which doesn't mean your music will sound cheap. Absolutely no. 
Expensive gears help you to edit and mix your materials better than "cheap" things but you can record great stuff even with a "cheap" audio interface, anyway once you convert your music to mp3...well...


----------



## wst3

Your request is well framed!

And I too spent too much time in front of loud guitar amplifiers, but apparently I stopped before I did too much damage. Now it's just a matter of age. UGH!

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that there probably isn't a magic number for budgeting. There are just too many variables.

There is, however, a reasonably sane way to prioritize things, and you are on the right track.

First, divide the world into recording and critical listening. Sadly, the former requires the later, so that's where I recommend most folks start.

You need a suitable space for critical listening
You need to treat that space for isolation
You need to treat that space for listening
You need to get suitable monitors
You need to get a suitable amplifier (unless said monitors are self-powered)
You need to get a suitable D/A converter

And if you are recording you need to do the following additional steps:
You need a suitable space for recording - might be the same space, helpful it if is.
You (may) need to treat the space for isolation
You (may) need to treat the space for recording
You need to get suitable microphones (this one will HURT!)
You need to get suitable microphone preamplifiers (nearly as painful)
You need to get a suitable A/D converter.

Obviously you can collapse these lists down to one if you know that you need both.

And that's it. That's really all there is to it.

When you start doing your research pay attention to groupings. You'll find a bunch of monitors priced around $500/pair, then maybe $1000/pair, and so on. Start your listening tests in the middle and work your way in both directions. What you will probably discover is that within a price bracket there are a lot more similarities than differences. This applies to monitors, converters, everything really.



Mr Mindcrime said:


> · Audient iD4 audio interface


I don't have that interface, but I do have their ASP-880, and I'm really impressed. I don't know if the ID4 shares anything with its big brothers, but I hope it does. If not I'd look at the UA Apollo and the RME range. I think you'd be hard pressed to do better for even a little more. If you want to go crazy be prepared to spend $2K or more for the D/A and I have no idea how much for the A/D.



Mr Mindcrime said:


> · Yorkville Ysm1P monitors


I have the original (passive) version of those monitors. I still have them, but don't use them as often as I once did. I never owned the powered version, but the passive ones served me well for probably 20 years. You can do better, of course, but I think you'll need to spend upwards of $1K for a pair to get there.



Mr Mindcrime said:


> · Low end speaker cables (instrument cables?)


Ignore this for the time being. Yes, good cables can make a difference, but you aren't there yet, and cost is insignificant compared to the rest.



Mr Mindcrime said:


> · Mackie 12 channel mixer ( _I run a second Delta 1010 soundcard thru this for non-DAW sound and headphone monitoring_)


I will stipulate that I am not a fan of Mackie mixers. Greg is a smart guy, and a talented audio engineer, but he builds things for the way he works, and his approach is not universal. If I were you I'd focus on an audio interface that lets you skip the mixer entirely. No idea what that's gonna do to your budget.



Mr Mindcrime said:


> · No room treatment at the moment in a converted dining room with hardwood floors


Since you are looking at a budget right now I'm going to recommend adding a line item to hire an experienced acoustician or studio designer and let them do the hard work for you. The treatment may turn out to be inexpensive! And for the record, I love hardwood floors in a studio!

It isn't just treatment, by the way, it is the placement of the loudspeakers and your ears too, and everything else in the room too.

What else?
Speaker stands - not expensive in the same sense as the rest of this stuff, but leave yourself some money for them.
Cable management.
Lighting
Furniture

While these may not directly impact your listening experience they can help to improve it.


----------



## AllanH

Thanks to everyone for all information. I'm looking to add a better audio interface and this thread has been enlightening.


----------



## SkippySonics

First time posting here, but just wanted to say that I don't have a great room at home for my studio, but I do have pretty good software and decent gear and my ears are the ears of a composer and not of an engineer (even though I've studied some audio engineering at school. I decided about a month ago that I was finally gonna bite the bullet and upgrade what I thought was the weak link in my setup which was my soundcard/interface. I have a pair of JBL 4328s and I had been using an NI Komplete Audio 6 that I was quite happy with (mainly because I could get very low latency in live musical theater pit keyboard gigs). But it was also a bit inconvenient to use sometimes at home for practical reasons (changing outputs to get "computer" sounds when I wasn't working in my DAW). So (without a lot of research) ordered an Apollo Twin USB from Sweetwater mainly cause of the "Unison" preamp feature. It arrived, I hooked it up, put on some of my favorite tunes (from classical to EDM) and was just completely blown away at how much more detail I could hear. And this was just from a $220 soundcard to a $900. The idea that someone couldn't hear the difference makes me think back to something I realized pretty early in my first digital audio class which was when I listened to music, I "heard" what a musician/composer would hear, not what was actually there. Meaning, since I know what a great piano sounds like, I would hear a not fantastic recording of a piano, but my mind's ear would "fill in the blanks" so to speak (hope that makes sense) and it took me quite a while before I learned how to listen as an engineer where I focused on the "sound" that was there and not on the sound I expected to hear.


----------



## robgb

I think it's pretty hilarious that someone can be so pained by an opinion that he blocks the person with that opinion. Its a conversation, folks, with differing points of view, not an earth-shattering event.

Some people are very delicate...


----------



## GtrString

Why buy the Apollo? So you can forget the tech stuff and concentrate on making music


----------



## sostenuto

Got the message(s), yet startled at lack of support for new Focusrite Clarett Pre range. 
Just too new yet, or something specific?


----------



## JohnG

wst3 said:


> I don't have that interface, but I do have their ASP-880, and I'm really impressed. I don't know if the ID4 shares anything with its big brothers, but I hope it does. If not I'd look at the UA Apollo and the RME range. I think you'd be hard pressed to do better for even a little more. If you want to go crazy be prepared to spend $2K or more for the D/A and I have no idea how much for the A/D.



The Lavry Blue model that gives you 2 channels of A/D and 2 of D/A lists for $2,500. Not sure if you can buy it cheaper somewhere else: http://www.lavryengineering.com/products/pro-audio/4496-12.html


----------



## Mr Mindcrime

A thousand thanks to @JohnG, @wst3, @skippy and others. You've given great advice and this entire thread has actually been eye opening for me. As my compositions have improved I've been focusing on the mixing and production side of things and its been a little frustrating not getting the results I want. I'm trying to learn to engineer, mix, and produce and hearing the differences caused by processing has been difficult. I just chalk it up to not knowing what I'm really listening for and bad ears.... both of which are probably factors. 

But in reading this thread, a light bulb has come on that maybe part of the problem is poor equipment and tools. I've spent a small fortune on software, libraries, instruments, etc and I guess the time is now to improve my listening space (thanks Bill!) as well as upgrades to my audio interface, monitors, cabling, etc. So time to research some upgrades and see if I can then "hear" what I need to hear to make my compositions and recordings sound better.


----------



## Nathanael Iversen

Mr Mindcrime said:


> A thousand thanks to @JohnG, @wst3, @skippy and others. You've given great advice and this entire thread has actually been eye opening for me. .....
> 
> But in reading this thread, a light bulb has come on that maybe part of the problem is poor equipment and tools. I've spent a small fortune on software, libraries, instruments, etc and I guess the time is now to improve my listening space (thanks Bill!) as well as upgrades to my audio interface, monitors, cabling, etc. So time to research some upgrades and see if I can then "hear" what I need to hear to make my compositions and recordings sound better.



I know that in my treated and calibrated room, with excellent speakers and conversion, it is easy to hear what effects processors are or aren't doing. My experience is that once you learn it, you can work on less revealing gear. But a lot of things I never noticed until it was more obvious. I have never regretted a penny spent on acoustic treatment or better monitoring (or better microphones and instruments). Transducers are the most colored items in a signal chain, so improving mics (if you record acoustic instruments) and monitors improves everything else tremendously.

Music is an auditory event. I have never understood why anyone who loves music and cares about it professionally would not want that to be as good as possible. Outside of students, hobbyists, and folk just getting started, I don't understand why it is important how good something is for $500. I am interested in how good things can sound,not how cheaply I can work. I can't afford everything that means. Sadly, once you decouple cost from "how good can things sound", the cost usually rises. Admittedly, it is a game of diminishing returns. But how good can it be? I continue to want to know. Every room I build sounds better, gets better speakers, etc. 

Why keep chasing it? Someone reportedly asked Pablo Casals why he still practiced cello for hours a day at 80+ years of age. He responded, "I think I am finally starting to see some improvement". I feel that way about my rig, my workspace, my craft. I want it all to improve. If you push for years and years, you eventually end up somewhere really nice. Somewhere that was inconceivable when you began... It is worth it.


----------



## JohnG

Mr Mindcrime said:


> I'm trying to learn to engineer, mix, and produce and hearing the differences caused by processing has been difficult.



You might consider paying an engineer to give you a few hours' lessons. I use an engineer most of the time, but I watch what they do and sometimes learn a little kernel here and there. Good engineers know so much more than I do, but certainly for demos and some very quick turnarounds I am on my own, so every increment helps.

The downside of working with engineers (if there is one) has been a pro tools investment, which seemed like a lot of money for not much, given that all the DAWs now can do a heck of a lot of what PT does.

However, the engineers all know how to work speedily with PT, so owning it smooths recording sessions and speeds mixing. Plus, to be fair, it is an excellent audio tool. (don't use it for sequencing but of course many people do).


----------



## wst3

JohnG said:


> You might consider paying an engineer to give you a few hours' lessons. I use an engineer most of the time, but I watch what they do and sometimes learn a little kernel here and there. Good engineers know so much more than I do, but certainly for demos and some very quick turnarounds I am on my own, so every increment helps.
> 
> The downside of working with engineers (if there is one) has been a pro tools investment, which seemed like a lot of money for not much, given that all the DAWs now can do a heck of a lot of what PT does.
> 
> However, the engineers all know how to work speedily with PT, so owning it smooths recording sessions and speeds mixing. Plus, to be fair, it is an excellent audio tool. (don't use it for sequencing but of course many people do).


Excellent advice! The only thing I'd change is a suggestion to find an engineer that works with the same tools you already own. Two reasons really:
1) since you want to develop your engineering chops you'll learn more, and more quickly if you are already familiar with the tools. Even just a little familiar.
2) there is no compelling reason to use PT these days unless you need to exchange projects with other PT studios. Most of the major platforms are every bit as capabile. The difference is more about workflow. PT does let you make certain edits really easily. But once you figure out how to do those tricks in your environment you'll be fine.

If you want to work with a particular engineer, and that's a valid approach, then you might need to add tools, or even a new platform. Nothing wrong with that if it fits in the budget.

But the reason John's advice is so very good is simply that most of us old guys learned at the feet of even older guys. It is a bit of a cliche, but I learned an awful lot by soldering patch bays, moving microphones, and running for coffee or take-out food. I learned by watching guys who knew what they were doing, or even better, by making mistakes in those same studios. What happens if I put the microphone here? OK, mistake is not quite accurate if the clock is not running I guess.

Anyway, the point is that working with a more experienced engineer, in your studio, is going to be the fastest way to learn. Ask questions, and listen to the answers. And listen to the results!!

I'm sure they exist, but I've yet to meet a computer musician/composer that could not engineer their own work, with a little coaching. There are many who choose not to, mostly because they wish to focus on composition or playing, or maybe even family and friends. Again a perfectly valid choice. But I'll bet you can learn this stuff.

These days there are a lot of good on-line sources as well - they won't replace an engineer sitting in your chair, but they might help accelerate the process a little. I recently recommended a Groove3 bundle to a friend, with great trepidation I might add. I watched the first few chapters with him, and while it was a little difficult to focus (it was very basic) I was impressed with the level of detail provided. If that interests you I will find out the name of the bundle.


----------



## dohm

I went from a Presonus interface to a UAD Apollo. Kept the same JBL LSR 4326P monitors. I could hear the difference while mixing. Treated my studio with GIK acoustic panels and bass traps. I could really hear the improvement. Picked up a Dangerous Music D-Box and started using the supposedly better A2D converters in that unit instead of the UAD converters. Same monitors. Wow! I could easily hear the difference. More clarity, better stereo field while mixing. I have visited several mixing and control rooms in pro studios with even better A2D converter boxes and better cabling, monitors, etc. Yes, you can hear the improvement in regards to mixing/mastering. Now, I am still happy with the UAD Apollo A2D when passively listening to music. In fact, I prefer a little less clarity when passively listening while I do something else. However, when I need to hear the details for mixing or mastering...the more expensive A2D converters are better. Now...time for more expensive monitors


----------



## Mr Mindcrime

JohnG said:


> You might consider paying an engineer to give you a few hours' lessons.





wst3 said:


> Excellent advice! The only thing I'd change is a suggestion to find an engineer that works with the same tools you already own.


These actually sound like great ideas. I live a couple hours outside of Nashville so maybe there are some possibilities there. I would love to spend time in a professional studio to learn a few basics. And if some engineer were willing, having someone sitting in my studio for a few hours sounds very interesting.

Bill, I'm old enough to know that I don't know everything so learning from the wiser, more experienced guys is right up my alley. 

I use Cubase so maybe finding some one on one engineering training shouldn't be too difficult? 

Thanks again John and Bill!


----------



## JohnG

Mr Mindcrime said:


> I live a couple hours outside of Nashville so maybe there are some possibilities there



There are fantastic engineers there. Probably hundreds, actually.


----------



## wst3

Mr Mindcrime said:


> I live a couple hours outside of Nashville so maybe there are some possibilities there.


I believe it is in fact quite difficult to swing a dead cat without smacking a talented engineer in the head around there (just be careful not to hit them in the ear!)


----------



## AllanH

wst3 said:


> ... I recently recommended a Groove3 bundle to a friend, with great trepidation I might add. I watched the first few chapters with him, and while it was a little difficult to focus (it was very basic) I was impressed with the level of detail provided. If that interests you I will find out the name of the bundle.



I would much appreciate if you could find the name of the bundle. I've gone through quite a few Groove3 tutorials, but many were rather rudimentary and repetitive that I lost interest. 
@wst3 - thanks for taking the time to share your knowledge.


----------



## chimuelo

JohnG said:


> There are fantastic engineers there. Probably hundreds, actually.



Take a trip to Soundcheck in Nashville. If you bring a baby they get free T Shirts.
Everything you need is in one Massive converted Trucking Terminal.
Pre & Post, on site Audiologists, IEM Fittings, Engineering classes, etc.

John McBrides Black Hawk Studio is pretty famous, as is his wife Martina.


----------



## chimuelo

Back on topic.
I buy high end DSP Accelerators and soundcards for driver quality and mission critical reliability.
I can get similar sound quality from a 1-2000 dollar card.
If you’re making money from Audio spending the extra for peace of mind with driver quality and reliability is well worth the extra.


----------

