Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Consumer Hardware & Components > M-Audio MobilePre or Tascam US-122 ?

M-Audio MobilePre or Tascam US-122 ?
Thread Tools
Betox
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Santiago, RD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2004, 05:56 PM
 
I want a USB audio interface to use with GarageBand and record my guitar playing. The two that I'm considering are:

M-Audio MobilePre: http://m-audio.com/index.php?do=prod...df7dee93074494

Tascam US-122: http://www.tascam.com/product_info.php?pid=253

Both work under 10.3.4 and are less than $200. Any recommendations? Actual users?

Thanks
( Last edited by Betox; May 31, 2004 at 07:14 PM. )
--
QuickSilver 800 Mhz / iBook 500 Mhz / Original 5GB iPod / iPod Shuffle 512 / Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger >> And it IS snappy!
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 31, 2004, 08:19 PM
 
I don't have experience with either (though I do own a US-428 which works well under OS X), but one thing right off the bat:

the M-Audio only does 16-bit audio, while the tascam does 24-bit audio.

For me, that's a deal-breaker on the M-Audio, as 16 vs. 24 bits makes a substantial difference.

The other thing of importance to the sound is the quality of the pre-amps, which I don't know about.

Do you have the possibility to borrow them from a music store and try them out at home before you buy?

-s*
     
Betox  (op)
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Santiago, RD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 1, 2004, 08:48 AM
 
What�s the difference between 16-bit and 24-bit recording? I'm not going to do professional recordings just basic guitars and maybe some vocals.

I think the Tascam its steel and the M-Audio it's plastic build, so for now all directions point to the Tascam US-122.

Thanks for the advise.
--
QuickSilver 800 Mhz / iBook 500 Mhz / Original 5GB iPod / iPod Shuffle 512 / Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger >> And it IS snappy!
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 1, 2004, 03:00 PM
 
Originally posted by Betox:
What�s the difference between 16-bit and 24-bit recording? I'm not going to do professional recordings just basic guitars and maybe some vocals.
What happens when you convert analog signals to digital, is that 44,100 times per second (if you're recording at 44.1kHz, which is CD standard), the AD chip measures the signal level and converts it to a number.

Each of these 44,100 individual steps (numbers) per second is called a sample, and 44.1 kHz is the sampling rate in this example. (Other common sampling rates are 22kHz, 48kHz, and increasingly 96kHz - the latter being DVD-audio standard.)

In 16-bit A/D conversion, you have 16 bits (0 or 1) per sample, which means that you have a maximum dynamic resolution of 2^16, or 65,000 levels per sample.

Now, A/D conversion usually is linear, while we hear logarithmically, meaning that the mathematical sampling resolution actually *decreases* the softer the signal gets - while clean dynamics are especially important to our hearing the softer the signal gets. The way around this is to run signals into the A/D converter as hot as possible - which introduces the danger of clipping (overload).

Obviously, the better solution is to use a higher dynamic resolution.

In 24-bit A/D conversion, you have 24 bits per sample, or a resolution of 16.8 million discrete levels.

You don't have to run incoming analog signals as hot and still have far greater resolution than with 16 bits, in addition to signal reproduction being much cleaner and truer for soft signals.

In a nutshell:

You basically have a far greater dynamic range, and a much better-sounding signal - especially for acoustic material. All while running a much lower risk of clipping (since you don't have to turn up the input signal as high).

I tried to keep that fairly layman - if you have further questions, please don't hesitate to ask, and I'll see what I can do.

Again, depending on your listening habits/experiences/equipment, you may not hear a difference at all, or just a very slight one. There is also the question of how good the pre-amps are.

-s*
( Last edited by Spheric Harlot; Jun 1, 2004 at 03:20 PM. )
     
Betox  (op)
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Santiago, RD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 1, 2004, 03:31 PM
 
Thanks for the really good explanation! I appreciated. And I have another question for you:

What if I just buy and iMic USB from Griffin Technology for about $35 and connect my Mackie CFX-16 professional mixer throu the iMic and do my recordings? What�s the difference in doing that or buying a M-Audio or Tascam USB audio interfase?

Thanks for the help!

PS: iMic: http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/imic/
--
QuickSilver 800 Mhz / iBook 500 Mhz / Original 5GB iPod / iPod Shuffle 512 / Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger >> And it IS snappy!
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2004, 09:16 AM
 
Ah.

You didn't mention that you already have a mixer.

The iMic, according to the Ken Stone review linked on the griffin page, supports 24-bit recording, so that's good. (OS X also natively supports the highest possible resolution automatically, so his article is a little outdated.)

I assume that the major difference in price will be due to the mic pre-amps and the knobs/pots/faders on the other two boxes: that kind of hardware is usually the most expensive aspect of any such device (the surface-mounted chip components are fairly cheap if production runs are high enough, but mechanics and analog hardware will always be expensive. Also, keep in mind that one rule of thumb for *real* pro studio use puts a mic pre-amp at about $1000 per channel, retail price. ).

There may also be a difference in the quality of A/D chips, of course.

Given that you have 12 fairly decent mic pre-amps in the Mackie, you don't really need extra pre-amps in the interface.

You get what you pay for, but from all accounts, the iMic is probably quite sufficient for home recording.

If not, $40 is an acceptable risk, IMO. For that kind of small change, you can always chuck it back on eBay.

-s*
     
Betox  (op)
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Santiago, RD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 2, 2004, 10:01 AM
 
Ok, fair enough. I think I'll go with iMic to start, I'm not going to do professional recordings anyways... and it's just 40 bucks like you said, there�s not much to loose.
--
QuickSilver 800 Mhz / iBook 500 Mhz / Original 5GB iPod / iPod Shuffle 512 / Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger >> And it IS snappy!
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:02 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,