Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Derrick McDonald]

Are there any advantages to some of the higher priced multi channel for use with Smaart as opposed to say a Presonus Firestudio 2 or 8 channel? 

[Mac Kerr]

Are there any advantages to some of the higher priced multi channel for use with Smaart as opposed to say a Presonus Firestudio 2 or 8 channel?

Since they are being discounted due to being discontinued the Firestudio looks like a great deal. I use the Roland OctaCapture and am very happy with it. Other than the larger form factor I don't see any significant disadvantage.

Mac

[Grant Conklin]

Are there any advantages to some of the higher priced multi channel for use with Smaart as opposed to say a Presonus Firestudio 2 or 8 channel?

In my mind, it comes down to what do you need for i/o, and what do you need it to do other than Smaart?  I wanted my interface to have ADAT i/o for interfacing with O1V96, and the other features of the VSL 1818 were appealing as well.   I'm selling my Focusrite Saphire  Pro 40   because firewire is no longer a protocol I plan to use.  If you can afford it, go at least 3 channels with Smaart.  I wanted the Octa Capture because it's so small, but wasn't willing to spend the extra and not have ADAT. 

[Derrick McDonald]

Excellent, I just got my first smaart program and measurement mic, trying to not break the bank on the I/o if I don't have to

[Mark McFarlane]

Since they are being discounted due to being discontinued the Firestudio looks like a great deal. I use the Roland OctaCapture and am very happy with it. Other than the larger form factor I don't see any significant disadvantage.

Mac

One thing to consider, if the Firestudio is being discontinued then you may not be able to find drivers for the next version of OSX or Windows.  It might not be a problem for a year, or for five years, but ongoing driver support is part of my purchase decision.  If the price makes it a throw away item in 2 years, or its the only way to get enough channels, that may override driver support in the future....

[Jay Barracato]

Are there any advantages to some of the higher priced multi channel for use with Smaart as opposed to say a Presonus Firestudio 2 or 8 channel?

I bought a more fully featured Motu unit because while it was primarily part of my measurement rig I thought I would use the other features for other recording.

It turns out that all of those other features are things I have to make sure are turned off to get good measurements.

My next measurement interface is going to be the most featureless block I can find.

[Rasmus Rosenberg]

I bought a more fully featured Motu unit because while it was primarily part of my measurement rig I thought I would use the other features for other recording.

It turns out that all of those other features are things I have to make sure are turned off to get good measurements.

My next measurement interface is going to be the most featureless block I can find.

Im quite puzzled, what do you features do you have to turn off? And can't you just recall a different preset on the interface when you switch from one to the other?

Here is the short version on my take on the hole Smaart interface discussion. In contrast to Jay, I would any time find an interface that I could use for more than just measurement, especially if you are an sound man (not only a system tech). I can not find an argument not too, why not get more out of your investment?  Off couse there are a trade off in features/quality vs price, but I would turn it around and justify the add in cost to "i will use it much more". As minimum i would go for an interface that could do: 48/96 (192)kzh samplerate, 24bit. Have minimum 4 preamps (recallable if possible), 4 (xtra) line in/out and AES in/out (the more AES the better) with Adat/spdif/dante I/O etc as optional.

What that allows me to do is to interface with almost anything, thus there buy creating a toolbox with my computer that I can customize from gig to gig, with out taking extra gear with me(well ok i might need some jack to xlr adaptors, but thats about it). So now I can not only measure the PA, I can record the gig (LR(plus ambience) or multitrack 8 channels (or more depending on interface and how it interconnects to the desk), I can also use Plug ins and Reverb (ex, i can have the same Lead vocal chain on a tour indifferent of what the venue provide) I don't have to spend time searching for a good drum rev etc. And I can mix it all up to fill the major gaps du jour. So for a little more money, i up my mixing consistency from gig to gig using the same hardware(interface), that allows me to up my "PA tuning" consistency. IMO a win win.
/R

[Jay Barracato]

Im quite puzzled, what do you features do you have to turn off? And can't you just recall a different preset on the interface when you switch from one to the other?

Here is the short version on my take on the hole Smaart interface discussion. In contrast to Jay, I would any time find an interface that I could use for more than just measurement, especially if you are an sound man (not only a system tech). I can not find an argument not too, why not get more out of your investment?  Off couse there are a trade off in features/quality vs price, but I would turn it around and justify the add in cost to "i will use it much more". As minimum i would go for an interface that could do: 48/96 (192)kzh samplerate, 24bit. Have minimum 4 preamps, 4 (xtra) line in/out and AES in/out (the more AES the better) with Adat/spdif/dante I/O etc as optional.

What that allows me to do is to interface with almost anything, thus there buy creating a toolbox with my computer that I can customize from gig to gig, with out taking extra gear with me(well ok i might need some jack to xlr adaptors, but thats about it). So now I can not only measure the PA, I can record the gig (LR(plus ambience) or multitrack 8 channels (or more depending on interface and how it interconnects to the desk), I can also use Plug ins and Reverb (ex, i can have the same Lead vocal chain on a tour indifferent of what the venue provide) I don't have to spend time searching for a good drum rev etc. And I can mix it all up to fill the major gaps du jour. So for a little more money, i up my mixing consistency from gig to gig using the same hardware(interface), that allows me to up my "PA tuning" consistency. IMO a win win.
/R

My motu has a full complement of channel controls that can make a measurement useless, including polarity, eq, compression and effects. If I end up with a measurement that doesn't make sense the hunt for a control that has inadvertently been left on begins. Often at a time when I am time constrained anyways.

It is like stepping up to a digital board with multiple options for routing. You really can't start effectively mixing until you figure out how that particular board is routed.

Add in the inconvenience of needing another program open on the laptop to see all those parameters, and I will stick with my original stance.

[g'bye, Dick Rees]

My next measurement interface is going to be the most featureless block I can find.

Jay...

I'm available.....

DR

[Rasmus Rosenberg]

My motu has a full complement of channel controls that can make a measurement useless, including polarity, eq, compression and effects. If I end up with a measurement that doesn't make sense the hunt for a control that has inadvertently been left on begins. Often at a time when I am time constrained anyways.

It is like stepping up to a digital board with multiple options for routing. You really can't start effectively mixing until you figure out how that particular board is routed.

Add in the inconvenience of needing another program open on the laptop to see all those parameters, and I will stick with my original stance.

I respectfully disagree.
How do you use Smaart (to its full potential) if your not using the Motu software program to adjust gains? Its way faster than on the interface, especially if you got multi mic's with different gains. Also the only way to be sure that you or some one didn't bump a parameter would IMO be to recall you standard Smaart hardware preset in the software, before you start any measurement. When/ if you find a general mic gain that works for you, you can calibrate Smaart SPL wise, by labling the inputs you can now quicker see if you connected the right mic to the right input. When you got a recallable preamp (payed for it) use it! make presets with preamp gains in 3/6/10/15 db steps. If you have the corresponding values to put into Smaart, you could stay calibrated very easy, depending on how loud you play that night (or can tune for that matter). And much easier than adjusting all the knobs on the front interface. The Visual in the software is also much easier to spot in case you missed anything, and the metering is much better.

I understand your point with its like a digital console, but i do disagree in your conclusion. IMO it would be the same as if that digital console was recalled with your own file, that you know works and have decided and knows how is routed. 

It seriously don't take more than 15 minutes of your off time (or when your bored in the tourbus any way) to make a few presets and be ready to go. And in any case you should make a preset and store it, if you upgrade firmware, have to initialize it or send it for Rep it will most likely be returned wiped and you will have to start all over, mine have at least.
/R
Edit: Also the features you mentioned messes up you measurement (EQ, polarity switch,Compression, reverb), is exactly what keeps saving my a.. day in day out, doing club and support gigs. Im so much more flexible and not stuck with a worse solution if I used what is provided. Even with just 1 channel i can make a huge difference.

[Jay Barracato]

I respectfully disagree.
How do you use Smaart (to its full potential) if your not using the Motu interface program to adjust gains? Its way faster than on the interface, especially if you got multi mic's with different gains. Also the only way to be sure that you or some one didn't bump a parameter would IMO be to recall you standard Smaart hardware preset on the interface, before you start any measurement. When/ if you find a general mic gain that works for you, you can calibrate Smaart SPL wise, by labling the inputs you can now quicker see if you connected the right mic to the right input. When you got a recallable preamp (payed for it) use it! make presets with preamp gains in 3/6/10/15 db steps. If you have the corresponding values to put into Smaart, you could stay calibrated very easy, depending on how loud you play that night (or can tune for that matter). And much easier than adjusting all the knobs on the front interface. The Visual in the software is also much easier to spot in case you missed anything, and the metering is much better.

I understand your point with its like a digital console, but i do disagree in your conclusion. IMO it would be the same as recalling that digital console with your own file, that you know works and have decided and knows how is routed. 

It seriously don't take more than 15 minutes of your off time (or when your bored in the tourbus any way) to make a few presets and be ready to go. And in any case you should make a preset and store it, if you upgrade firmware, have to initialize it or send it for Rep it will most likely be returned wiped and you will have to start all over, mine have at least.
/R

Gain is the one thing that is easily accessible on the hardware. Beyond that there is no need to have the software control bogging down my laptop.

I don't want to have a preset that turns off features I don't need. I don't want those features there in the first place.

Any recording I do is not going to be on the computer that handles dsp and measurement anyways. I would rather have a single function tool that does that function well rather than an audio Swiss army knife wherethe most of the tools are less than effective.

[Rasmus Rosenberg]

Gain is the one thing that is easily accessible on the hardware. Beyond that there is no need to have the software control bogging down my laptop.

I don't want to have a preset that turns off features I don't need. I don't want those features there in the first place.

Any recording I do is not going to be on the computer that handles dsp and measurement anyways. I would rather have a single function tool that does that function well rather than an audio Swiss army knife wherethe most of the tools are less than effective.

Im not sure what interface do you have? the Mk3? Anyway if so, the gain for the 4 preamps are very easy to adjust from the front panel (I really like the push to Pad feature), But if I do any "serious measurement" I use at least 3 mic's (sometimes more depending on time) REF signal, Console out, and DSP out that's 6 inputs, so i need the software open anyway. To say the software control bogs the PC down might be true but should be way overstated, It takes very little CPU and is not the deal breaker compared to running that ekstra MTW, that makes the computer sink, the CPU wouldn't be able to run it smooth any way, At least not on the computers i have Beta tested it on.

As for the whole (edit not hole) one function tool thing, I do agree, if you can afford the best tools you should use them. But I can't see any money saved with that. As I said if all of your gigs are as sys tech, yes one can afford to buy a device that only does measurement (with no other functions) but for all others; Im sorry but I can't see why you would not benefit from having the extra features, yes they cost extra (in some cases not), but makes you money down the line (or at least bail you out).
Im not saying that you should run everything together or at once (Smaart, dsp, recording, plug ins). Im talking about in most cases either, just with the same hardware.

I guess we disagree on the subject that the extra features/ tools are inefficient. I not only consider them effective, but also potential gig saviors.
/R

[g'bye, Dick Rees]

As for the hole one function tool thing,
/R

FYI, that's "whole", as in "hele".  "Hole" is "hull" or "åbning".  But you probably know that.

Pardon my Norwegian.  It's a close as I can get to Danish......

[Rasmus Rosenberg]

FYI, that's "whole", as in "hele".  "Hole" is "hull" or "åbning".  But you probably know that.

Pardon my Norwegian.  It's a close as I can get to Danish......

Hey Dick,
How are you? I remember you Norwegian to be pretty good, still is I can see Thanks for the spelling/context correction always appreciated.
Now all i need it to make my post's make sense... 
/R

[ProSoundWeb Community]