advice on a simple (cheap) audio interface giving true lin..

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

paul m <matthpau@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Those of you following my other post on pre-amp usage will know why I'm
>posting this one....
>
>If I was to bite the bullet and get an audio interface that gave me
>decent quality true line level input for the lowest price possible (I
>already have one audio interface, but unfortuantely it doesn't give a
>true line level input without going through some sort of internal amp),
>what are my options, and what are your recommendations?

Actually, I'd tell you to buy the cheap Lavry box, and then pad down the
input. The (somewhat high gain) input on the Lavry is cleaner than the
line input on most similarly-priced boxes.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

paul m wrote:
> Those of you following my other post on pre-amp usage will know why
I'm
> posting this one....
>
> If I was to bite the bullet and get an audio interface that gave me
> decent quality true line level input for the lowest price possible (I
> already have one audio interface, but unfortuantely it doesn't give a
> true line level input without going through some sort of internal
amp),
> what are my options, and what are your recommendations?

Historically, the Echo Mia would be my answer to this question. Good
quality, and true line-level inputs and outputs for under $200. The
downside is that its 1/4" inputs and outputs are in fact unbalanced.

This week, M-Audio's Audiophile 24/192 might be the superior product.
It looks pretty good on paper! It's major advantage in my book is true
balanced I/O for a competitive price.

http://www.pcmus.com/Stuff/Juli@%20with%20RCA%20IO.zip

In terms of cards that I've tested myself, if balanced I/O is not an
absolute requirement, for a few dollars more you can get a M-Audio
Delta 1010LT with 8 line-level inputs and outputs, two of the inputs
being balanced.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"paul m" <matthpau@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1104328029.362529.35560@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Those of you following my other post on pre-amp usage will know why I'm
> posting this one....
>
> If I was to bite the bullet and get an audio interface that gave me
> decent quality true line level input for the lowest price possible (I
> already have one audio interface, but unfortuantely it doesn't give a
> true line level input without going through some sort of internal amp),
> what are my options, and what are your recommendations?

M-Audio Delta 44 or Delta 66. Each has four line in/out connections; the 66
also has S/PDIF digital in/out. Not a high-end card, but its imperfections
are pretty benign, rather than noxious.

Peace,
Paul

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

paul m <matthpau@hotmail.com> wrote:

>If I was to bite the bullet and get an audio interface that gave me
>decent quality true line level input for the lowest price possible (I
>already have one audio interface, but unfortuantely it doesn't give a
>true line level input without going through some sort of internal amp),
>what are my options, and what are your recommendations?

Really cheap: M-Audio Transit

Middling cheap: M-Audio Audiophile 2496 (PCI)

A bit more expensive: Audiophile USB or Firewire Audiophile

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

OK, I'm a bit ignorant on the differences between balanced and
unbalanced. From a little research I understand that balanced is
better, but can you tell me why?

Thanks

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

> Those of you following my other post on pre-amp usage will know why I'm
> posting this one....
>
> If I was to bite the bullet and get an audio interface that gave me
> decent quality true line level input for the lowest price possible (I
> already have one audio interface, but unfortuantely it doesn't give a
> true line level input without going through some sort of internal amp),
> what are my options, and what are your recommendations?

An "internal amp" is required to act as a buffer. You can't expect an
interface's inputs to go straight to the a/d converter without accommodating
a wide variety of inputs, otherwise it would be proprietary, specialized to
a very narrow range of external devices, making it less useful in practice,
and definitely not cheap.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

From: "paul m" <matth...@hotmail.com> - Find messages by this author
Date: 30 Dec 2004 02:00:53 -0800
Local: Thurs, Dec 30 2004 2:00 am
Subject: Re: advice on a simple (cheap) audio interface giving true
line input

>OK, I'm a bit ignorant on the differences between balanced and
>unbalanced. From a little research I understand that balanced is
>better, but can you tell me why?

Balanced I/O is the de facto standard for audio production, but it is
not an absolute must. The major advantage of balanced I/O is rejection
of interfering signals such as powerline-related hum and other outside
noise sources. Balanced I/O makes it easier to throw a lot of equipment
together without worrying so much about ground loops and the like. If
you have a lot of equipment tied together, not having balanced I/O can
be pretty daunting.

I must add that balanced I/O is not a total cure for ad-hoc equipment
connection-related problems. It still helps to use your brain when you
hook stuff up. Proper grounding is a bit of an art, some science and a
good dollop of experience.

If your system is small, simple, and well-behaved; balanced I/O may
have few if any audible benefits in line-level applications.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1104400853.819419.47660@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
paul m <matthpau@hotmail.com> wrote:
>OK, I'm a bit ignorant on the differences between balanced and
>unbalanced. From a little research I understand that balanced is
>better, but can you tell me why?

This is discussed in the FAQ.

Balanced lines aren't always better. Balanced connections reduce noise
induced in long cables, and allow you to lift signal grounds, but they
require more electronics in the signal path.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1104400853.819419.47660@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> matthpau@hotmail.com writes:

> OK, I'm a bit ignorant on the differences between balanced and
> unbalanced. From a little research I understand that balanced is
> better, but can you tell me why?

It isn't always better, but when it's not better, it isn't worse than
unbalanced either. It's better if you're feeding it with a balanced
input, but if not, it doesn't matter.

The reason why it's better to buy balanced is so you'll have it if you
need it. But if, because of budget or functional needs, you end up
compromising something more important just to get the balanced device,
don't do it.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

The question arose because I purchased an outboard mic pre-amp. Several
people commented that since I was using it with a Tascam US 428 that I
would effectively then be putting my mic through 2 preamps - the new
outboard one, and the one internal to the Tascam. They then suggested
that the Tascam, like most cheap interfaces didn't provide a true line
level input that would allow me to get around this.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 30 Dec 2004 02:00:53 -0800, "paul m" <matthpau@hotmail.com> wrote:

>OK, I'm a bit ignorant on the differences between balanced and
>unbalanced. From a little research I understand that balanced is
>better, but can you tell me why?

When there are noise problems, balanced can solve them. For line
level signals, this often isn't an issue, or is only a very marginal
one. If your SOURCE isn't balanced, a balanced input is pointless.

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 29 Dec 2004 05:47:09 -0800, "paul m" <matthpau@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>If I was to bite the bullet and get an audio interface that gave me
>decent quality true line level input for the lowest price possible (I
>already have one audio interface, but unfortuantely it doesn't give a
>true line level input without going through some sort of internal amp),
>what are my options, and what are your recommendations?

The cheapest Soundblaster Live, available cheaply on ebay, has a line
input capable of quite respectable quality.

I don't think you'll find a card at any price that connects Line In
directly to the pins of the A/D chip. Nor would you want one to :-)
What's the issue with input circuitry?

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1104499271.921194.30070@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> matthpau@hotmail.com writes:

> The question arose because I purchased an outboard mic pre-amp. Several
> people commented that since I was using it with a Tascam US 428 that I
> would effectively then be putting my mic through 2 preamps - the new
> outboard one, and the one internal to the Tascam.

Did "several people" look at the manual, or look at a block diagram
(unfortunately not in the manual), or even ask TASCAM? Did you?

> They then suggested
> that the Tascam, like most cheap interfaces didn't provide a true line
> level input that would allow me to get around this.

Perhaps they weren't aware that Inputs C and D don't have mic preamps.
Connect your outboard mic preamp to those inputs if you're paranoid
about such things.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:
> In article <1104499271.921194.30070@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
matthpau@hotmail.com writes:
>
> > The question arose because I purchased an outboard mic pre-amp.
Several
> > people commented that since I was using it with a Tascam US 428
that I
> > would effectively then be putting my mic through 2 preamps - the
new
> > outboard one, and the one internal to the Tascam.
>
> Did "several people" look at the manual, or look at a block diagram
> (unfortunately not in the manual), or even ask TASCAM? Did you?
>
> > They then suggested
> > that the Tascam, like most cheap interfaces didn't provide a true
line
> > level input that would allow me to get around this.
>
> Perhaps they weren't aware that Inputs C and D don't have mic
preamps.
> Connect your outboard mic preamp to those inputs if you're paranoid
> about such things.
>

Aren't there analog inserts on the Tascam US-428 like on the smaller
Tascam USB interfaces? you could just use the insert return (if it has
them) bypassing the entire preamp stage.

Anyone out there using the Tascam interfaces have any user comments on
them? I'm thinking of getting one to run with my laptop.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

the M-audio Audiophile 24-26 is a good sub-$100 beat around card. I
wouldn't call it "audiophile", but it has a convenient way of working
without problems in a variety of circumstances.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1104685662.232943.74290@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> voxman@arvotek.net writes:

> Aren't there analog inserts on the Tascam US-428 like on the smaller
> Tascam USB interfaces?

Nope. They didn't figure that was important on the first product of
the series.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 2 Jan 2005 19:34:03 -0800, genericaudioperson@hotmail.com wrote:

>the M-audio Audiophile 24-26 is a good sub-$100 beat around card. I
>wouldn't call it "audiophile", but it has a convenient way of working
>without problems in a variety of circumstances.

And as "audiophile" is generally a term of derision... :=-)

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect