SoundKitchen Recording Studio

[starfugger]

ok yesterday was the first real recording session i had.  i used up all 10 simultaneous analog tracks for each song, 8 mics on drums, then bass, and scratch vocals.

everything went by smoothly. without any hiccup whatsoever during recording and playback. moving forward and back using the jogwheel is a cinch.  no hiccups there either.

guys, i can't seem to figure out what the buffer sizes are for though.  i understand it's for latency, but i cannot perceive any difference in delay between 48 samples and higher samples.  everything is happening in real time whatever buffer size i use (playback and monitoring).  the cursor position and the signal are tightly in sync (i set the buffer at 128 samples).

thanks guys so far so good with the rme.

[KitC]

guys, i can't seem to figure out what the buffer sizes are for though.  i understand it's for latency, but i cannot perceive any difference in delay between 48 samples and higher samples.

It will come into play the moment you use a lot of native plugins and softsynths/samplers. Of course, lower buffer sizes means lower latency but a higher load on the cpu. If you decide to add softsynths and samples to a project, this will place additional demands on the processor to a point where audio will start breaking up. The solution to this is to add more buffers thereby lessening the load on the processor to process everything at once. Since you have the UAD, the use of other native plugin fx are secondary for you.

EDIT: I forgot to add that 48 samples at 44.1 kHz samplerate corresponds to 1 ms latency. At 128 samples, that's around 2.9 milliseconds. You usually start hearing latency at 10 ms and above so that's usually at 512 samples and over. You can hear latency when mixing the delayed signal with the direct monitor signal. It usually starts out as a phasey kind of sound, progressing to a chorusy sound when you increase buffer sizes until it becomes something like a slap back echo.

[abyssinianson]

Hazel, I forgot to ask if you were using multiple UAD-1s..I am interested in using 2 UADs but have never tested it in an actual machine, though I know that UAD supports multiple cards especially with the version 4 release of the software upgrade, I don't know just how well this will integrate in XP Pro. The reason for the multiple UAD platform in my system is geared towards working with film scoring. I will be scoring an indie film for a friend and if having another UAD in my system will help hiccups from happening while I apply plugs, I would like to go that route. As with everything, I am researching this thoroughly before doing any purchases.

You may have also been informed by UAD that they are currently working on some Neve designed stuff for use with the UAD-1 cards - I am very interested in seeing how those come out.

[KitC]

@abyss: Are you using an Intel system? I've been following the threads in the Sonar forums, it seems the UAD works better with Intel than with AMD. I'm still researching on how well the UAD works with dual core systems - I think the jury is still out although there are some working Intel/UAD systems out there. As for AMD, existing chipsets have proven to be problematic with the UAD except for the Uli chipsets; too early to tell as the Uli is relatively untried for DAW use. My experience with Nforce chipsets have been favorable in general, but I've read reports of Nforce4 users having problems. Word on the grapevine is that UAD is coming out with a pcie version of the card. I know the Mac is PCI-X so I can't say for sure how this will impact newer Macintel machines.

I'm trying to decide myself whether to get the UAD or go firewire with the TC Powercore.

[abyssinianson]

I am on an Intel Prescott platform Kit. Thanks for the info. I will listen a bit more and see how these things integrate so I don't have problems down the line.

[starfugger]

EDIT: I forgot to add that 48 samples at 44.1 kHz samplerate corresponds to 1 ms latency. At 128 samples, that's around 2.9 milliseconds. You usually start hearing latency at 10 ms and above so that's usually at 512 samples and over. You can hear latency when mixing the delayed signal with the direct monitor signal. It usually starts out as a phasey kind of sound, progressing to a chorusy sound when you increase buffer sizes until it becomes something like a slap back echo.

SCARY.  i have yet to find out.  thanks Kit.

Abyss, no, i have but one card as of now.  the ultra pak is quite heavy on the pocket    i figgered i'd use one with all the available effects then pick out the most useful effects and purchase a studio pack or flexipak in the next couple of months.  i'm also on xp pro and so far so good, but i havent really done any industrial strength mixing yet. i didn't have any problems with installing and registering my uad. it was a cinch.  JUST BE WARE OF CHEAP COMPUTER CASINGS.  the first time i installed this, it was my in home computer with internet access and A grade casing.  easy.  then when i brought it to the studio, all hell broke loose.  the casing was kinda defective to a point where i cannot seem to completely push  my precious down into the pci slot.  it took forever as i was being extra careful.  

anyway, abyss, i will wait for those neve plugs.  the people in UA are quite special really.  

thanks guys!

[abyssinianson]

Hazel, thanks for the note. your option to purchase an additional card with not as many plugs to supplement your Ultra makes a lot of sense. right now, I plan to use the second card mainly as addition send effects. i am waiting anxiously for th Neve UAD bundle as well.

[glassjaw_jc]

don't forget to post pics of your rig!!

kaw na rin kit and abyss

[starfugger]

this pic sucks, but here it is for the mean time.

on top: ART TUBE MP, Peavey Unity 300 Monitor Mixer
RME FIreface 800
Joe Meek VC1
Aphex 1100A
dbx 165
ALesis D4

[KitC]

Hazel,

Check this out! The Fireface 400:



Finally! I hope this one's gonna be more affordable!

[abyssinianson]

wow - nice Kit! If you do recordings with those, make sure to let me hear them! The Fireface has great reviews.

On a different note, I also wanted to add in that the Universal Audio people are GREAT - I was adding a second card today and had a bit of a system glitch where I wasn't registering under the MY.UAD system as having an additional card so my plugs were't getting authorized on the second card. Not only did these guys keep on calling me back until my authorization got posted online, they answered all my routing and EQ questions along with some suggestions to try out. Their customer service is GREAT!

[KitC]

I always wanted to know if adding a 2nd UAD will require another free IRQ for the card. If so, that will be a big problem with today's mobos; might have to disable the usb ports just to get a free irq.

[abyssinianson]

apparently you don't have to disable anything because it seems UAD cards get recorgnized under these clusters they call "Groups," under which you could run 2 cards under a group and have a maximum of 2 groups (4 cards) in your system. The UAD cards are able to handle quite a bit of plugins...at least 32 compressors at once and a bit more on top so, having another card will give you some bit of flexibility and additional processing power for your sequencer.

[KitC]

Interesting resource management. My guess is that each group requires an unshared irq; I know the UAD's are picky about these things but I know I can manage another free irq on my mobo.

Btw, anyone peeked under the hood of the UAD? I know they use video processors for their, uhhh... processing. I always wanted to know if they used Nvidia or ATI chips on the card.

[starfugger]

wow, wait a minute. do you mean to say that i just need to purchase the cheapest card and then have the plugs i have on my first card run on the 2nd card as well?  that's amazing!  i seem to be able to run just a couple of plugs on my first, quite frustrating.  getting a 2nd card is really the way to go.

another thing about the uad that i just discovered.  i tried running the precision multiband.  great sounding!  nothing like other native multibands out there.  it sounds very very musical, and warm might i add.  UA rules!

[abyssinianson]

yep, thats the way it seems to work...you can run plugs across a max of 4 cards. however, i've never tried running the max number of plugs on my card but if i remember right, UA indicated that you should be able to run somewhere around 32 compressors, about 15 EQs and 2 Dreamverbs. the company should have some kind of blurb on this but i didn't take note of exactly where it was written. but still, having a second card should be a great help for those heavy mixing projects.

the 2 favorite tools on the card that i love are the LA-2A and the pultec suite - really nice stuff.

[starfugger]

that's great news. what second card did you get?  can you buy just the card without plugs? thanks.

[starfugger]

[starfugger]

Kit, the FF really looks sexy. lol. wonder if it can work as an add on for the ff800.  but then again maybe my pc can't handle so many simltaneous recording tracks.  i finally got around to mixing.  the pc just couldn't handle 10+ tracks of plugs at the same time. i still had to bounce a lot of tracks. im planning to get a more powerful pc that will host native plugs, and hook it up via LAN, and a second UAD card. i heard somewhere that this can be done using an ingenious LAN software especially made for audio. i'll experiment on this in the next couple of weeks.

Btw, i havent gotten around to purchasing my second IDE HD yet. I have just one HD running both DAW software and the main audio files. will getting a 2nd HD improve the performance dramatically?

abyss, how many plugs do u insert at a time? with your non po tools hd rig, do find the need to bounce a lot of tracks?

thanks!

[KitC]

The easiest solution would be to upgrade your processor providing you can find one. The hard part is getting the right upgrades locally.

I've been thinking of building an Intel system to supplement my AMD pc, but the mobos and cpus we have here are insufficient. Specifically, for an Intel, I perfer the 955 or 975 chipset; all we have available are 945's at most. The Intel cpus we have are still from the old 90 nm core process - volcanoes on a chip! The newer Conroe cores or Core Duo (65 nm process) are more preferable to me (and they operate at much cooler temps).

My lament with AMD is the lack of 939 pin dual core Opterons (165/175), especially since I was informed that none are slated for the Philippine market.    At least I can get a 3800+ or 4200+ X2 so there's some light at the end of the tunnel. The bad: I can't use a UAD with my mobo/cpu combination.    Worse, Sonar and the UAD don't go well together!  ](*,)     At least, I have Cubase...

To quote Emil La Cuesta (aka Rex Navarette), "Next question..."

And btw, if you're going to use that LAN software, use FXTeleport. I'll experiment with Steinberg's VST System Link as soon as I have my other (older) Athlon 2600+ pc up and running again.

[starfugger]

errrrr.  english please? lol sorry i have to educate myself first. so u think if i go dual core i'll be a much happier mix engineer?

yes that's fxteleport! gawd, im itching to test this i swear.  hook up all the pc's i have ever owned  

[KitC]

errrrr.  english please? lol sorry i have to educate myself first. so u think if i go dual core i'll be a much happier mix engineer?

We all will be. Cubase seems to operate well using dual core (but with hyperthreading disabled).

Sorry about the geek speak, but I've been checking the available Intels here and the fastest dual core is the 830 3.0 GHz Smithfields; the single core 640 tops out at 3.2 GHz. Not the fastest, but let down by the available mobos which are all based on the Intel 945 or 915 chipset. DAW builders seem to prefer the 955 over the 915/945 chipset (the older 865 was also preferred but those don't support dual core). A good place to see benchmarks is at http://adkproaudio.com/benchmarks.cfm - notice that AMD machines score higher.

[abyssinianson]

that's great news. what second card did you get?  can you buy just the card without plugs? thanks.

I got the Studio pack on top of my Ultra pack. Originally, I thought that I would need another Ultra for the same plugs to work but I am glad I clarified that with UAD first - that leaves me with more headroom money for the oncoming Neve plugs:)

Hazel, how does the Electrovoice RE-20 mic sound on vocals? I have heard SO much about those mics because they seem to enhance the baritone of th male voice well. I picked it up from an interview with Duncan Sheik that he uses one a lot on his new release, White Limousine." In the context of his songs, I have an idea how the RE-20 sounds but I've never compared it with other dynamics like, say, a Shure Sm58. Your thoughts?

[glassjaw_jc]

this is info heaven for me

[starfugger]

lol, ive maxed out 40 gigabytes in leass than 2 weeks! well, waddayaknow. with my old recorder it used to take me months before i had to clean up the same HD.

abyssinian the RE sounds really "big" on male VO, capturing a lot of "chest", while the all too familiar 57 captures a lot of "throat" (mid range).  i really prefer the RE20 for that god-like hollywood movie trailer VO. even over a LDC like the KSM32.  the RE won't capture the sheen like the KSM 32 would, wich is exactly what we want for VO.  i still eq out some bottom though, as it can get quite exagerated.

on guitars. the RE captures a lot of low-mid tones without abandoning the mids completely (yes it's still there) ... really nice.  the 57 captures mostly the "bite" of distortion guitars.  on clean guitars though i'd be more inclined to use the 57 and the KSM32.  but then again if i wanna back it up a little i'd mostly use the RE signal to give it a less imposing sound, specially if the clean tone grabs too much limelight (which is meant for vocals whenever present).  i've read somewhere that everything is EQ. mic selection, mic placement, amp selection, guitar selection, etc... that's all eq (and it's true when i think about it).  while one can eq out certain frequencies, sometimes i like to use microphones instead of eq plugs (not to mean i dont eq!!!)

i have another LDD, a vintage AKGD12E which was what they used on kick before the 112 came out.  it's quite difficult to find an AKGD12E these days, but i've read somewhere that it is THE king of low end resonance.  it's really good on kick, and IMO a lot more solid than the RE is on kick. i haven't tried it on voice or guitars yet.

i will post sound clips of different sources in the next couple of weeks to demo the difference between the RE, 57, D12E, and KSM32

about the UAD-1, i  have ordered a project pak already and it will be here in a couple of weeks. I NEED IT. lol.  im a little bummed about the precision multiband though. i have 12 days remaining on my demo.  i've tried the c4 before and the PM is more intuitive and WARMER.  i don't know if im being deceived by the graphic interface. lol.

anyways, time to get that HD.  later!