I’m working, keeping it short…if the preamp has a line level input, adding any “character” that the preamp may have is fairly easy, and sometimes beneficial. Route track to a line out on the interface, plug the line out to the line in on the preamp, rout that preamp to a new track, watch for any unwanted feedback looping when monitoring, record away.
Thanks
You're busy and probably didn't pick up the "Re-amp" nuance here.
What nuance? I quoted his post, he wasn’t sure of the terminology to be used in communicating his desired action, and I provided a course of action that would give him the desired/possible result. I didn’t go into the minutiae of the fact that this will only add any available character that the new preamp might impart on the already recorded material(although I mentioned it). In no way will it remove the existing character, just add to it. That may, or may not, be a good thing. It’s a similar concept to doing a mixdown “out of the box”(aka Analogue Summing), similar in the way my Soundcraft mixer interface is set up to do…route your tracks/busses to mixer channels, mix and eq manually on the analog section of the board in real time, route the mixer main channels to a stereo track and record it. This allows for the use of other analog outboard, via aux sends, to add color etc. In my system, I don’t hit the preamps on the mixer with the digital signal from the DAW in this scenario. It is inserted at line level at the converters, post preamp, pre eq.You're busy and probably didn't pick up the "Re-amp" nuance here.
So how is your answer any different from this?…
I know…I took for granted that the only way to route his new external 500 series rack preamp to his computer properly is through one of the line level inputs on his interface.
:dood:
Wow , I like the short answer .What nuance? I quoted his post, he wasn’t sure of the terminology to be used in communicating his desired action, and I provided a course of action that would give him the desired/possible result. I didn’t go into the minutiae of the fact that this will only add any available character that the new preamp might impart on the already recorded material(although I mentioned it). In no way will it remove the existing character, just add to it. That may, or may not, be a good thing. It’s a similar concept to doing a mixdown “out of the box”(aka Analogue Summing), similar in the way my Soundcraft mixer interface is set up to do…route your tracks/busses to mixer channels, mix and eq manually on the analog section of the board in real time, route the mixer main channels to a stereo track and record it. This allows for the use of other analog outboard, via aux sends, to add color etc. In my system, I don’t hit the preamps on the mixer with the digital signal from the DAW in this scenario. It is inserted at line level at the converters, post preamp, pre eq.
So how is your answer any different from this?…
I know…I took for granted that the only way to route his new external 500 series rack preamp to his computer properly is through one of the line level inputs on his interface.
All of this doesn’t really make much difference in the end, probably. As the track line level signal should probably be padded down, like with a 24-30dB in-line pad, or by sending to the line out of the interface from the track in the DAW ”post fader”, and attenuating to taste with the DAW track fader. This would allow the external preamp some headroom to work any available magic. Still, it’s not going to eliminate the original, actual, capture characteristics. It will let him get a bit of a feel of his new toy though.
Anyway, he’s not actually re-amping(where he would need to step down a line level recording output to match the impedance requirement of an amplifier instrument input). He’s adding another 2 trips through the ad/da converters to experiment with adding another gain stage…and any noise that is introduced in the process, for better or worse.
I haven’t played with a DBX comp in years. I hope it’s a ton of fun! It should add some possibilities to your input chain.
Most definitely. I firmly believe that the “capture” of the performance is critical. This is where a well chosen preamp, compressor, and mic can make something really shine above. Mic position is also a key point that I could give more attention to, myself.
I am no expert, but I do agree that Reaper’s plug-in pool is deceptively deep. Since I came back on a different platform(Mac), I decided to give them a fair shake…rather than go plug-in mad…again. Yeah, I bought one suite recently, and use a few from it lately, but…I know that I don’t have to. Not at all.
Sometimes we just have to catch the moment. It’s nice to be prepared, and well practiced in capturing it.
Thanks ,Don I am glad to have any and all help !
I get the metaphor. I do get the concept of the capture being key as well.
What nuance? I quoted his post, he wasn’t sure of the terminology to be used in communicating his desired action, and I provided a course of action that would give him the desired/possible result. I didn’t go into the minutiae of the fact that this will only add any available character that the new preamp might impart on the already recorded material(although I mentioned it). In no way will it remove the existing character, just add to it. That may, or may not, be a good thing. It’s a similar concept to doing a mixdown “out of the box”(aka Analogue Summing), similar in the way my Soundcraft mixer interface is set up to do…route your tracks/busses to mixer channels, mix and eq manually on the analog section of the board in real time, route the mixer main channels to a stereo track and record it. This allows for the use of other analog outboard, via aux sends, to add color etc. In my system, I don’t hit the preamps on the mixer with the digital signal from the DAW in this scenario. It is inserted at line level at the converters, post preamp, pre eq.
So how is your answer any different from this?…
I know…I took for granted that the only way to route his new external 500 series rack preamp to his computer properly is through one of the line level inputs on his interface.
All of this doesn’t really make much difference in the end, probably. As the track line level signal should probably be padded down, like with a 24-30dB in-line pad, or by sending to the line out of the interface from the track in the DAW ”post fader”, and attenuating to taste with the DAW track fader. This would allow the external preamp some headroom to work any available magic. Still, it’s not going to eliminate the original, actual, capture characteristics. It will let him get a bit of a feel of his new toy though.
Anyway, he’s not actually re-amping(where he would need to step down a line level recording output to match the impedance requirement of an amplifier instrument input). He’s adding another 2 trips through the ad/da converters to experiment with adding another gain stage…and any noise that is introduced in the process, for better or worse.
It’s alright @Sapient …I had a bad (end of the)day at work.
Biggest thing i spew over & over its the "TAKE" that matters. Get your sound & playing & tone right before you even put the mic up to the speaker.
Engineers are a much different in concept to guitarist. They are surgeons of sound.
No biggie, pal. I could tell something was pissing you off, and it was something else ..like a bad day or something.It’s alright @Sapient …I had a bad (end of the)day at work.
It was fun, thinking about an analogue summing project again…a live mixdown. The bummer about my system is that I chose the 12 channel board, instead of the 22. That makes me have to set up busses for a mixdown like that, usually. It’s still fun though.
Exactly what i meant, they want the pure signal & its not as glamorous when you play but the signal has no wobble or reverb spread in the track going into the mix,.. they get precise as the nix will dictate how much chorus or reverb mdulation ect or whatever song calls for.
Right , I watched a guy on youtube step by step in production. He would take tracks and use reverb to set them back in the mix. Very interesting video.