Buy one really decent interface once, and you won't spend the rest of your life wanting to upgrade to the next thing and the next thing. If I was you I'd look for a laptop that can support firewire and go with the FP10. The preamps compared to almost all usb interfaces are phenomenally better.

If you've already got the laptop then...

firebox + my buddys shure 55.. I have to crank the preamp which doesn't seem right to me

[QUOTE=Joelbassman;17996470]Buy one really decent interface once, and you won't spend the rest of your life wanting to upgrade to the next thing and the next thing. If I was you I'd look for a laptop that can support firewire and go with the FP10. The preamps compared to almost all usb interfaces are phenomenally better.

If you've already got the laptop then...[/QUOTE]

Yeah thats whats im gonna do. Ill switch to a good laptop with firewire and probably buy a Pod X3 until i have a enough to gets me a FP10.

Which is a better moddeling unit the Pod X3 or Toneport UX8?

[quote=viciouscycle;17996928]firebox + my buddys shure 55.. I have to crank the preamp which doesn't seem right to me[/quote]
The firebox is notorious for being very dodgy.


Like my friend got one, and plugging his Gibson Les Paul straight in distorted with no gain applied. Which is the opposite to your problem, but that's the mic side of the preamp. I'm guessing there's and impedance issue or something. I have to crank on my Firepod (FP10) but I kinda like having the headroom.

At school using the API 512c's is a nightmare cause almost anything you put into it clips with no gain applied. I'd rather crank the gain a bit then have to pad everything down. Idk if noise issues come more prevalent with preamps you have to crank, but those API's are waaaaay too hot.

I think it might just be the mic.. He forgot his sm58 so we were stuck with that, it worked out

[QUOTE=benfan;17997263]Yeah thats whats im gonna do. Ill switch to a good laptop with firewire and probably buy a Pod X3 until i have a enough to gets me a FP10.

Which is a better moddeling unit the Pod X3 or Toneport UX8?[/QUOTE]

you're going to get a lot of different opinions on that last question, but i think the x3 has better modeling personally

Iv read alot of reviews recently on the x3 and some of them are really in favour. But iv read a couple of reviews from people on other boards who say when recording, the guitar amp sounds come through really thin and weak. So it seems like a pretty devisive unit.

I really enjoy the podx3. the stock patches are crap as with anything, but if you can work an EQ and use your ears, you'll be fine.

Is the gearbox software free when you buy the pod? Seems like it will be alot easier to create patches using that.

the gearbox/line6 edit/podfarm editing software is free to download to use, but the VST is what they charge you for

[QUOTE=benfan;17998695]Iv read alot of reviews recently on the x3 and some of them are really in favour. But iv read a couple of reviews from people on other boards who say when recording, the guitar amp sounds come through really thin and weak. So it seems like a pretty devisive unit.[/QUOTE]

well you're just not going to get the most impressive guitar tone from amp modeling, at least not low end modeling. Nothing beats micing it up man, if you have to rent a rehearsal space and mic it up, your frist impression to most people is your demo, make sure it's a lasting one and don't cut corners

[QUOTE=benfan;17998695]Iv read alot of reviews recently on the x3 and some of them are really in favour. But iv read a couple of reviews from people on other boards who say when recording, the guitar amp sounds come through really thin and weak. So it seems like a pretty devisive unit.[/QUOTE]

ive never had that problem before, the recorded tone is always exactly the same as the tone i hear when playing. maybe they're using different speakers or something? i dunno.

I guess if you listen through the headphone jack and record through the line out or something it may sound different, i always record through the USB. recording through line out or headphone out is kind of a waste of bits and sound quality, because you have to convert it from digital to analogue for the output, then back to digital when it goes into the computer.

[QUOTE=Xomblies;17999118]well you're just not going to get the most impressive guitar tone from amp modeling, at least not low end modeling. Nothing beats micing it up man, if you have to rent a rehearsal space and mic it up, your frist impression to most people is your demo, make sure it's a lasting one and don't cut corners[/QUOTE]

some people get some sweet *** tones from micing, but i just dont have the patience for that, haha. one thing i hate about recording is micing things, goddamn.

mic'd vs modeled is the difference between amateur and pro, i mean there's a ton of variables that i continue to reiterate on these forums;

player
guitar
cables
amp
amp settings
cab
room
mic (and correct phase if you're using multiple mics)
preamp
outboard gear/ plugins

if you narrow it down to simply
player
guitar
cables
modeler
modler settings
Di
outboard gear/ plugins

you're losing a lot of things that account for good tone

[QUOTE=Xomblies;17999291]mic'd vs modeled is the difference between amateur and pro[/QUOTE]

thats kind of a generalization, sure modelers have a ways to go before they are as easy to use as tube amps (who knows if they will ever be at that level) but it doesn't mean they're for the amateur only.

plenty of professional artists use solely digital modelers. conversely, there are lots and lots and lots of recordings of mic'd amps out there that are utter sh[size=2]i[/size]t

srs

steve vai, john petrucci, and devin townsend are now axe fx users, so yeah

meshuggah, periphery, porcupine tree (on but only on deadwing as far as i know)



in b4 everything mentioned doesn't sound pro

Yeah the Axe Fx does sound like a pro piece of kit.

I like mic'd up sounds but i cant afford to keep shelling out for studio time with my band.

So i can create my own patches for free through gearbox but i would have to pay for presets (vst's) from Line6?

you guys realize that those guitarrists are mainly endorsing the gear and not actually using it right? if they [I]are [/I]using it in the studio it's a combo of modeling and mic'd up (as much as i do like axe fx).

and of course my statement is a generalization, i know tons of people who post on these forums even who mic up some really crap tone... "in general, the difference between an amp model and the real thing are the difference between amatuer and pro" i fixed my statement for those of you who lack the ability to infer

[QUOTE=Xomblies;17999982]you guys realize that those guitarrists are mainly endorsing the gear and not actually using it right? if they [I]are [/I]using it in the studio it's a combo of modeling and mic'd up (as much as i do like axe fx).

and of course my statement is a generalization, i know tons of people who post on these forums even who mic up some really crap tone... "in general, the difference between an amp model and the real thing are the difference between amatuer and pro" i fixed my statement for those of you who lack the ability to infer[/QUOTE]

I remember reading somewhere that steven wilson said he went direct with podxt's for all the sounds on deadwing. I think it may have been in the booklet for the album, i forget tbh.

meshuggah has used direct in for some albums and mic'd for some with a vetta II for their newest stuff. (they have yet to record an album with the axe fx). They mic'd cabs on their new album, and tbh I think the tone is a bit lacking compared to tones on some of their other albums (like the re-release of 'nothing' which was all direct in)

periphery, i dunno if they mic'd cabs or not for their album, but i know it was all modeled with an axe fx (maybe some older pod tracks too but i doubt it)



I'm not really trying to just argue for the sake of arguing, I just dont agree that in a professional environment, you'll always get a better tone micing stuff up, or that you'll always be getting a better tone with a tube amp. There's an advantage and a disadvantage to every method around, like in meshuggah's case, you can loose alot of those low frequencies by pumping something through a speaker and picking it up again with a microphone.

Pretty sure Bulb said it was all Axe Fx on the album and the pod for bass.

There is no doubt that mic'ing up gets better results if you are skilled enough and have a good enough space to do it. But i think that some people have got awesome results using modeling effects, and it alot more feasable for someone like me with minimal space and not really a good place to crank mu tube amp.

[QUOTE=mnemonic;18000463]I remember reading somewhere that steven wilson said he went direct with podxt's for all the sounds on deadwing. I think it may have been in the booklet for the album, i forget tbh.

meshuggah has used direct in for some albums and mic'd for some with a vetta II for their newest stuff. (they have yet to record an album with the axe fx). They mic'd cabs on their new album, and tbh I think the tone is a bit lacking compared to tones on some of their other albums (like the re-release of 'nothing' which was all direct in)

periphery, i dunno if they mic'd cabs or not for their album, but i know it was all modeled with an axe fx (maybe some older pod tracks too but i doubt it)



I'm not really trying to just argue for the sake of arguing, I just dont agree that in a professional environment, you'll always get a better tone micing stuff up, or that you'll always be getting a better tone with a tube amp. There's an advantage and a disadvantage to every method around, like in meshuggah's case, you can loose alot of those low frequencies by pumping something through a speaker and picking it up again with a microphone.[/QUOTE]

as much as i hate to say it, it was a generalization, there are always going to be people who can get a pro sound out of a modeler, and THAT does say something about an engineer... it's about what what you yourself can use to make sonic masterpieces, not the gear. Anyways i didn't take it as an argument for the sake of arguing, i tend to get a bit temperamental when it comes to getting good tone for some reason. Speaking of amp modeling i'm going to be purchasing digidesign's eleven within the next few weeks mainly for multi fx with midi automations controlled by pro tools, but i'm interested to hear their amp models in rack form :)

S'up foo's.

My new laptop should be arriving tomorrow!
Core 2 Duo cpu (2.5ghz)
4gb Ram
512 Dedicated graphics
and a Firewire port (took me a while to find a laptop with this)
Its gonna have Windows 7 64bit on aswell.

So as soon as that arrives im gona be getting the Pod x3 and start recording some music!

On a side note - My drummer has a Roland V drum setup (cant remember which although I think its the TD10).
At the minute all iv been able to do is record straight from the line out into cubase which comes in as one track of audio data ( very hard to EQ well ). Is the main idea behind recording with these setups to get the midi data from the module and use something like Superior drummer to manipulate the midi data?

I'll find out for definate which module he has, but as of yet i havnt been able to figure out how to get seperate tracks in for each drum/cymbal.

[QUOTE=benfan;18007500]Is the main idea behind recording with these setups to get the midi data from the module and use something like Superior drummer to manipulate the midi data?[/QUOTE]

Yes, yes it is, though Superior doesn't really manipulate MIDI data as such. If you wanted to change velocities, timing etc., you would do that in your DAW, and then Superior (or EZ Drummer, or BFD or whatever) would interpret the received MIDI data.


[QUOTE=benfan;18007500]

I'll find out for definate which module he has, but as of yet i havnt been able to figure out how to get seperate tracks in for each drum/cymbal.[/QUOTE]

If you have an audio interface:
Buy a couple of MIDI cables. Hook 'em up. Open Cubase. Rest should be fairly obvious.

If you do not have an audio interface:
Buy a MIDI to usb cable. Hook it up. Open Cubase. Rest should be fairly obvious.

I dont know whether to go for something cheap like a fast track usb, or get something abit more substantial which uses firewire.

[QUOTE=benfan;18007586]I dont know whether to go for something cheap like a fast track usb, or get something abit more substantial which uses firewire.[/QUOTE]

Depends what you're going to use it with and for.

Well you tried to get firewire didn't you

the firewire/usb debate

i used to use my presonus firebox, but my firewire port broke on my pc - so i had to switch to my backup m-audio mobilepre usb interface

to be quite honest, sound-quality wise, there isn't much difference between the firewire input and the usb 2.0 input. both are pretty much noiseless, both are pretty solid.

usb is, however, i find more prone to lag a few MS more than firewire is, and its not as completely stable.

but because lag can be fixed by re-tracking in the DAW (a process i do often because i copy and paste a lot while mixing) i haven't really felt the urge to get a new firewire port

final conclusion

go firewire if you can, but if you're on a budget or are unable to use it, usb will yeild pretty comparable results quality wise. watch the lag, and it should be ok.

i MIGHT suggest if your budget is tight (like mine is) to improve sound quality in other ways by getting a budget interface like a mobile pre or fast track usb. there are other avenues to improve sound with the money you can save - like an axe fx, a new mic, etc. these, imo, have a bigger impact than the upgrade from usb to firewire port

I haven't run into lag with my firebox yet :D

yeah firewire ports are pretty consistently lag free and thats really the main point which makes it superior

Although it doesn't give me the advertised 2ms.. it's like 3.4/5 which is a little noticable sometimes