Audio interface as a DI??

[The-Zeronaut]

Maybe its a n00b question...
can i use any audio interface as a DI to "reamp" later with revalver , ampeg svx, wagner , etc...?

i know i can with the toneport ux2 but is there any other interface that can do that?


Thanks for the help

P.s: sorry if there is anything wrong with the english

 

[Metaltastic]

Well almost all interfaces these days have a HiZ instrument input, which allows you to plug your guitar/bass straight in and monitor your recording with an ampsim such as Revalver or Wagner, while only recording the dry track. So yes!

 

[The-Zeronaut]

thank you very much for the info , Metaltastic!!

Now i have a Toneport GX but i want to upgrade my audio interface .
Could anybody recommend me which of these is better (and if i can use it to DI)?

http://www.thomann.de/es/alesis_io2.htm

http://www.thomann.de/es/cme_matrix_kusb.htm

http://www.thomann.de/es/presonus_audiobox_usb.htm

http://www.thomann.de/es/maudio_fast_track_pro.htm


or should i just go directly to the toneport UX2?

http://www.thomann.de/es/line6_toneport_ux2.htm


Obviously, the less money I have to spent, the better , cuz im a student and im in a budget.



Thank you very much for your help!!!


p.s: sorry if there is something wrong with the english

 

[Metaltastic]

No problem dude! They'll all work, but I'd go for the Presonus above the others, cuz it seems the highest quality (the Alesis being a close second, forget about the M-Audio, and I've never heard of CME, seems sketchy). Definitely don't get the Toneport UX2 though, it's a hassle if you don't wanna use Gearbox (and you shouldn't, Revalver and even Wagner are way better).

And your English is flawless so far, so don't sweat it!

 

[The-Zeronaut]

Believe me when i say
Thank you very much , Metaltastic!!

and yes ,i will use Revalver III ...gearbox has nothing to do against the sound quality of revalver

 

[Joematthews]

Yeah, as metaltastic said, the presonus looks like the best interface for the cash. The M-Audio is also meant to be good for the cash.

Oh yeah, CME make controller keyboards and the like. Not a company renowned for good design, build quality or reliability. Also that is one ugly interface

Joe

 

[Kazrog]

While some audio interfaces have decent onboard DIs, you'll always get the best quality with a dedicated active DI, such as the Radial JDV MK III or the more affordable but just as good sounding Radial J48 (just has fewer features.) Trust me, it makes a big difference in your guitar and bass tone regardless of what you reamp or process your tone with.

On a smaller budget, I've even found the Behringer Active DI to sound about 80% as good as the Radial units for much less money, and far better than any onboard DI on any interface I've tried.

 

[JJO]

Yeah, as metaltastic said, the presonus looks like the best interface for the cash. The M-Audio is also meant to be good for the cash.

Oh yeah, CME make controller keyboards and the like. Not a company renowned for good design, build quality or reliability. Also that is one ugly interface

Joe

Well i got a cme uf8(88 hammered master keyboard) since 1,5 year now. Cant really say anything bad about it Works like a charm(including usb drivers), though i only use it 3 times a week or something, so it's not getting the heavy use or anything.

 

[Soundlurker]

I'm quite happy with the quality I get with my Emu 1616m's hi-z inputs. It's a lot cleaner than when I used a cheap passive Behringer DI + cheap mic pre + emu 1212m (same converters as 1616m). Don't know if it's the fact that the 1616 has a higher input impedance (1Mohm) or the quality of the preamp or the crappy transformer the behringer DI has. Most probably all of the above.

 

[Joematthews]

Well i got a cme uf8(88 hammered master keyboard) since 1,5 year now. Cant really say anything bad about it Works like a charm(including usb drivers), though i only use it 3 times a week or something, so it's not getting the heavy use or anything.

Each to his own I guess, but in the context of this thread I think CME isn't the best choice.

 

[SamaHell]

i have toneport ux1, the sound using others amp-sims beside gearbox is a little weak. Can i get a better signal/tone putting a preamp like a tube preamp mic200 from behringer in front of a toneport?? like this way:

guitar > mic200 > toneport ux1 instrument input > revalver or amplitube metal

or i still need a DI active box?
my pickup it's a SD SH-6

thanks!

 

[Kazrog]

I highly recommend active DI boxes, as I said previously. The Behringer active DIs are cheap and good.

 

[Ermz]

I'm considering grabbing a Millenia STT-1 Origin for direct tracking work. Still think that one needs a dedicated DI box, kazrog? I can't say I've heard its DI for myself, but I can do a shootout with it and the best DI radial have on offer (friend of mine bought it for whatever reason; it's a goddamn beast).

PS using Presonus and Digidesign hardware absolutely slaughtered me when I tried to get any quality from DI tracks. Never again.

 

[Kadmium]

Can i get a better signal/tone putting a preamp like a tube preamp mic200 from behringer in front of a toneport?? like this way:

guitar > mic200 > toneport ux1 instrument input > revalver or amplitube metal

No. You need a DI Box to go into the Mic200, and from there, it should go into the Toneport's Line in, not the instrument in.

 

[Metaltastic]

But that would be pointless, skip the Mic200

 

[viggen666]

my problem with the UX1 is that you don't have any control over the input gain on the instrument input and that the signal clips too soon, even when using pickups that have only average output like my les paul with duncan full shred.

are all passive d.i. just bad for dry guitartracks ? cause I have a little labs redeye.

other options lying around are : Behringer active DI, instrument input on studio projects vtb-1 preamp, or instrument input on the m-audio...

still worth it to buy a better DI Box ?

 

[SamaHell]

well, i tested the mic200 in front of the toneport ux1 instrument input. The signal was better than without the mic200, but i still haven't active DI box to make a shootout. The doubt is this, in the manual, it says that this preamp could be used like a DI box, using the in and out jack ports, and.. since the mic200 it's always with power, i guess this will be doing things like an active DI? i'm gonna try to put some demo clip for you.

 

[viggen666]

just tried some things here with my ux1...

first the behringer DI-100, it sounded good without the -20db on, unfortunately the output got too hot with it off, even with the mic gain from the UX1 turned counter clockwise, it seems that gain knob doesn't have enough range.

with the -20db switch on i thought the sound got duller and more noisy as I had to turn up the gain to get to a decent level.

next tried my little labs redeye on it, signal of that one was weaker and did loose some highs vs the behringer, but overall sound was certainly good.

neither of those sounded any better then the instrument input on the UX1, i don't think using a d.i. box with the line6 makes the sound any better, probably the mic preamp on it is just cheap shit.

 

[SamaHell]

did you some testing using the line-in inputs instead of instrument input?
i didn't, i'm gonna try some tonight

i think the same, the preamp in the UX1 sounds bad to me, at least for guitar.

 

[SamaHell]

wel.. here i put a short clip

http://www.soundclick.com/Serpens

the only one i have there, ehehe...
try to listen on hi-fi .... there is no bass guitar, it's just to know how you guys think about overall tone and stuff i can do with the toneport and de mic200 preamp.