2/4ch interface for live RTA

ExistanceMusic · 22nd August 2005

This is basically a live-guy thing, but I want to pick up really cheap AD interface to use with my iBook for live use with RTA software. Ideally, I need 3 or 4 channels, so I can take a split off the L/R mix of FOH and compare that to a measurement mic.

I've also figured out a way this can be achieved with 2 channels as well, if that's all that's around. I've had a look at the Tascam US-122 online, this is nice and compact and a mate has a M-Audio 410 he might sell to me, which is bit bigger but has the advantage of PT if I want to tape off the 2-Bus. These would be adequate, but I'm still really keen to find out if anyones knows of a 4ch box out there. Bear in mind, sound quality is not an issue, freq responce is all I'm worried about, and price (don't want a stack of features I'll never use...

This is to be used with a 12" 800mhz iBook, 512 RAM, USB or FW, OS 10.3.

ExistanceMusic · 22nd August 2005

Also, what RTA programs are you guys using? Unfortunatly SpectraFoo is PC only right now, and so is SmaartLive and SmaartPro. I'm looking at Mac the Scope, as the program (and the price acordingly) is fully customisable, and you can purchase only the features you want. Any other suggestions? Price not an issue right now, won't be purchasing for a few months as it's pretty quiet over here right now, but definatly want to get something up and running before the summer season.

tINY · 23rd August 2005

do you have a PCMCIA slot? You might pick up an Echo Indigo for cheap (24/96 2-in 2-out) You'll have to use a spare channel for phantom power and pre-amp, though.....

-tINY

ExistanceMusic · 23rd August 2005

Nope, living Mac world. It's actually looking like an m-box might be the cheapest way to go, unless i can get an m-audio 410 on the cheap. It's a real pain the iBook doesn't have line in.....and I'm not taking my powerbook to gigs.

Mozart · 23rd August 2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExistanceMusic

This is basically a live-guy thing, but I want to pick up really cheap AD interface to use with my iBook for live use with RTA software. Ideally, I need 3 or 4 channels, so I can take a split off the L/R mix of FOH and compare that to a measurement mic.

I've also figured out a way this can be achieved with 2 channels as well, if that's all that's around. I've had a look at the Tascam US-122 online, this is nice and compact and a mate has a M-Audio 410 he might sell to me, which is bit bigger but has the advantage of PT if I want to tape off the 2-Bus. These would be adequate, but I'm still really keen to find out if anyones knows of a 4ch box out there. Bear in mind, sound quality is not an issue, freq responce is all I'm worried about, and price (don't want a stack of features I'll never use...

This is to be used with a 12" 800mhz iBook, 512 RAM, USB or FW, OS 10.3.

What software you using for RTA on Mac? A lot of people I know are using SmaartLive on PC...

ExistanceMusic · 23rd August 2005

I know, it's a kickass set of tools, I've used it before, as well as SpectraFoo on PCs. Unfortunatly, I'm not going to go out and buy a laptop just to use as an RTA, and I have no other use for a PC laptop....

I haven't actually picked a program yet, I'm looking at a few. I downloaded a evaluation copy of Mac the Scope last night and had a muck around with the built in mic on the mac (big peak right on 15khz :D ). It's a pretty powerful program, and the price is right, but it's ugly as sin and not very user friendly. It also doesn't have phase correlation, so I'm leaning away from that.

If anyone has any suggestions, I'm open to 'em. MH is working on OSx version of SpectraFoo, so that is also an option I may go for, although as much as I would love the MH converers.....$$$$.....lucky the program will work with other interfaces.

rmx16 · 26th August 2005

I've been using "Foo" with the Metric Halo ULN 2 firewire box for two years with know problems whatsoever.

Tibook 867 osx 10.2.8 1 gig ram
MHLabs ULN 2
Earthworks tc30's

Rob

Walling1 · 29th August 2005

Smaart is gearing up for a major software upgrade, coming in the next couple of months. They are saying that this version will also include a Mac version as well!!

I've been a long time user of Smaart, and carry an extra PC laptop when I'm going to be spending a few hours aligning a new system, but I also run it under Virtual PC on my Powerbook for the smaller mix gigs. Also, the new version supposedly supports multiple inputs. At the moment, I have a little routing box where I have a direct sum from the console, my Earthworks, and a feed from the solo bus, and I can use any 2 at a time. I've never felt that a stereo feed from the console would be of much use, but that's just me. I've been waiting far an OSX version of Smaart for quite some time now, and the folks at SIA Soft totally kick ass for making this happen. thumbsup Of course, it hasn't been released yet...

I've used SpectraFoo a bit, but it just isn't geared towards live sound. I know there are plenty of people who would (will?) flame me for saying that. But that's just the way it's setup - a majority of the meters in Foo are mastering meters, and the delay section, which is of paramount importance for live sound use, just sucks. I could go on and on, but I won't. I think it's great for the studio, however. But again, that's just me. It was designed by the Metric Halo folks to use in their studio (and that's not 'just me'). Your mileage may vary. There are people who use it for live sound and like it.

Mac the Scope is just fine. I also use a program called Signal Scope as a quick and dirty RTA. It's cheap.

Hope this helps!

-Dave

ExistanceMusic · 31st August 2005

Certainly does, cheers. As far as I can tell from the 'net, Smaart seems like the live standard, so I'll keep an ear out for an OSX release...

rmx16 · 1st September 2005

This was posted on Smaart's support forum awhile back.

Do you anticipate any significant differences in feature set between the Mac and Windows versions of Smaart 6 ?
>>>

The Mac and Windows versions of Smaart6 are being developed from a single unified source base and should be at complete or near-complete parity in terms of feature sets when all is said and done. They should even share most bug... er, undocumented features in common.

>>>
Will the Mac version be able to implement external DSP device control via PCMCIA card RS232 port adaptors or other such hardware interfaces?
>>>

Yes and no. The both the Mac and Windows versions will have the same external device manager (EDM) and the API to it should be virtually identical in both versions. That should make it possible to write new driver plug-ins for version 6 and beyond that compile pretty painlessly for either platorm. Unfortunately all existing Smaart 4/5 device control DLLs are so heavily invested in Windows-specific technologies such as MFC, that it will not be feasible to port them intact.

We should be able to create a wrapper that allows the use of existing Windows version DLLs with the new EDM in the Windows version (that's part of what we're working on right now) but I'm afraid that will not be an option for Mac OSX. We do intend to rewrite new cross-platform drivers for some of the most current and widely used devices ourselves over time and publish the interface specification so that anyone else who is so-inclined can create new drivers.

>>>
Has Apples' recent announcement about migrating to Intel chips impacted the release of a Mac version of Smaart 6 ?
>>>

This is one of two recent announcements from Apple* I regard as really good news. The other was that the new Mac OSX 10.4, a.k.a. Tiger (

...) distribution is shipping with WxWidgets, the cross-platform GUI development framework we've been using. That fact should help propel us out of left field and into the mainstream a little more and hopefully speed resolution of some of the bugs in WxMac that have been slowing us down here and there along the way. I am given to understand that adding support for Intel CPU's running OSX will require only minor changes to both WxWidgets and our own code. And one of the latter represents a pretty significant change for the better.

It's a dirty little secret that PowerPC-based Macs can't really do real-time, double-precision signal processing efficiently. Apple's signal processing libraries for PowerPC CPUs can only run floating point DSP operations such as FFTs at 32-bit precision in the SIMD (DSP) section of the chip (the Vector Engine in Apple parlance). If you want 64-bit, double precision FFTs (and we do) all your DSP would have to be done serially, on the standard FPU and performance would suffer dramatically.

Now 32-bit floats are fine for audio recording and like that. It's borderline precision for measurement instrument use but since SmaartLive is also a real-time application we are pretty much stuck with it for the current crop of Mac's. I will say that with some noodling and jumping through hoops we've been able to minimize the impact of rounding errors and turn in decent enough accuracy at 32-bit precision on the Mac. But it's definitely upset the apple cart a few times (no pun intended), double precision would still be better, and at the point when we can use Intel's signal processing libraries across the board, that whole problem just goes away. The Pentium 3 runs SmaartLive 5's double-precision DSP op's in SIMD just fine and word has it the Pentium 4 runs 64-bit DSP faster than 32, which I would have no trouble believing.

I am also fervently hoping Apple adopts the Intel C Compiler for use with their development environment. The GNU C Compiler, which Apple uses for OSX, is sooooo slooooow compared to Microsoft's compiler. It's also not in the same class with regard to optimization functions that help make compiled applications run faster. Intel's C compiler is supposedly faster than Microsoft's, with as good or better optimization capabilities. So that would be a good thing even if it does cost money.

ExistanceMusic · 1st September 2005

Wow, what an awesome post, thanks for that! Just in itself that discussion tells us alot of things about the apple/microsoft/intel world that are really worth knowing.

SoundBroker · 30th November 2007

SoundBroker.com is having a member's only Christmas sale if you are looking to purchase a legal copy.

22nd August 2005	#1
ExistanceMusic Gear addict Joined: Mar 2003 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 478 Thread Starter	Cheap 2/4ch interface for RTA This is basically a live-guy thing, but I want to pick up really cheap AD interface to use with my iBook for live use with RTA software. Ideally, I need 3 or 4 channels, so I can take a split off the L/R mix of FOH and compare that to a measurement mic. I've also figured out a way this can be achieved with 2 channels as well, if that's all that's around. I've had a look at the Tascam US-122 online, this is nice and compact and a mate has a M-Audio 410 he might sell to me, which is bit bigger but has the advantage of PT if I want to tape off the 2-Bus. These would be adequate, but I'm still really keen to find out if anyones knows of a 4ch box out there. Bear in mind, sound quality is not an issue, freq responce is all I'm worried about, and price (don't want a stack of features I'll never use... This is to be used with a 12" 800mhz iBook, 512 RAM, USB or FW, OS 10.3. __________________ Jesse Mahoney ExistanceMusic :at: hotmail dot com

22nd August 2005	#2
ExistanceMusic Gear addict Joined: Mar 2003 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 478 Thread Starter	2/4ch interface for live RTA Also, what RTA programs are you guys using? Unfortunatly SpectraFoo is PC only right now, and so is SmaartLive and SmaartPro. I'm looking at Mac the Scope, as the program (and the price acordingly) is fully customisable, and you can purchase only the features you want. Any other suggestions? Price not an issue right now, won't be purchasing for a few months as it's pretty quiet over here right now, but definatly want to get something up and running before the summer season.

1st September 2005	#10
rmx16 Lives for gear Joined: Jul 2002 Location: Philly Posts: 1,408	This was posted on Smaart's support forum awhile back. Do you anticipate any significant differences in feature set between the Mac and Windows versions of Smaart 6 ? >>> The Mac and Windows versions of Smaart6 are being developed from a single unified source base and should be at complete or near-complete parity in terms of feature sets when all is said and done. They should even share most bug... er, undocumented features in common. >>> Will the Mac version be able to implement external DSP device control via PCMCIA card RS232 port adaptors or other such hardware interfaces? >>> Yes and no. The both the Mac and Windows versions will have the same external device manager (EDM) and the API to it should be virtually identical in both versions. That should make it possible to write new driver plug-ins for version 6 and beyond that compile pretty painlessly for either platorm. Unfortunately all existing Smaart 4/5 device control DLLs are so heavily invested in Windows-specific technologies such as MFC, that it will not be feasible to port them intact. We should be able to create a wrapper that allows the use of existing Windows version DLLs with the new EDM in the Windows version (that's part of what we're working on right now) but I'm afraid that will not be an option for Mac OSX. We do intend to rewrite new cross-platform drivers for some of the most current and widely used devices ourselves over time and publish the interface specification so that anyone else who is so-inclined can create new drivers. >>> Has Apples' recent announcement about migrating to Intel chips impacted the release of a Mac version of Smaart 6 ? >>> This is one of two recent announcements from Apple* I regard as really good news. The other was that the new Mac OSX 10.4, a.k.a. Tiger (...) distribution is shipping with WxWidgets, the cross-platform GUI development framework we've been using. That fact should help propel us out of left field and into the mainstream a little more and hopefully speed resolution of some of the bugs in WxMac that have been slowing us down here and there along the way. I am given to understand that adding support for Intel CPU's running OSX will require only minor changes to both WxWidgets and our own code. And one of the latter represents a pretty significant change for the better. It's a dirty little secret that PowerPC-based Macs can't really do real-time, double-precision signal processing efficiently. Apple's signal processing libraries for PowerPC CPUs can only run floating point DSP operations such as FFTs at 32-bit precision in the SIMD (DSP) section of the chip (the Vector Engine in Apple parlance). If you want 64-bit, double precision FFTs (and we do) all your DSP would have to be done serially, on the standard FPU and performance would suffer dramatically. Now 32-bit floats are fine for audio recording and like that. It's borderline precision for measurement instrument use but since SmaartLive is also a real-time application we are pretty much stuck with it for the current crop of Mac's. I will say that with some noodling and jumping through hoops we've been able to minimize the impact of rounding errors and turn in decent enough accuracy at 32-bit precision on the Mac. But it's definitely upset the apple cart a few times (no pun intended), double precision would still be better, and at the point when we can use Intel's signal processing libraries across the board, that whole problem just goes away. The Pentium 3 runs SmaartLive 5's double-precision DSP op's in SIMD just fine and word has it the Pentium 4 runs 64-bit DSP faster than 32, which I would have no trouble believing. I am also fervently hoping Apple adopts the Intel C Compiler for use with their development environment. The GNU C Compiler, which Apple uses for OSX, is sooooo slooooow compared to Microsoft's compiler. It's also not in the same class with regard to optimization functions that help make compiled applications run faster. Intel's C compiler is supposedly faster than Microsoft's, with as good or better optimization capabilities. So that would be a good thing even if it does cost money.

30th November 2007	#12
SoundBroker Gear interested Joined: Feb 2005 Location: Las Vegas & Rio De Janerio Posts: 7	Smaart6 SoundBroker.com is having a member's only Christmas sale if you are looking to purchase a legal copy.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

23rd August 2005	#3
tINY Gear Guru Joined: Jul 2004 Location: Orygun Posts: 10,234	do you have a PCMCIA slot? You might pick up an Echo Indigo for cheap (24/96 2-in 2-out) You'll have to use a spare channel for phantom power and pre-amp, though..... -tINY

26th August 2005	#7
rmx16 Lives for gear Joined: Jul 2002 Location: Philly Posts: 1,408	I've been using "Foo" with the Metric Halo ULN 2 firewire box for two years with know problems whatsoever. Tibook 867 osx 10.2.8 1 gig ram MHLabs ULN 2 Earthworks tc30's Rob

29th August 2005	#8
Walling1 Gear nut Joined: Feb 2003 Location: Columbus, OH Posts: 107	Smaart is gearing up for a major software upgrade, coming in the next couple of months. They are saying that this version will also include a Mac version as well!! I've been a long time user of Smaart, and carry an extra PC laptop when I'm going to be spending a few hours aligning a new system, but I also run it under Virtual PC on my Powerbook for the smaller mix gigs. Also, the new version supposedly supports multiple inputs. At the moment, I have a little routing box where I have a direct sum from the console, my Earthworks, and a feed from the solo bus, and I can use any 2 at a time. I've never felt that a stereo feed from the console would be of much use, but that's just me. I've been waiting far an OSX version of Smaart for quite some time now, and the folks at SIA Soft totally kick ass for making this happen. thumbsup Of course, it hasn't been released yet... I've used SpectraFoo a bit, but it just isn't geared towards live sound. I know there are plenty of people who would (will?) flame me for saying that. But that's just the way it's setup - a majority of the meters in Foo are mastering meters, and the delay section, which is of paramount importance for live sound use, just sucks. I could go on and on, but I won't. I think it's great for the studio, however. But again, that's just me. It was designed by the Metric Halo folks to use in their studio (and that's not 'just me'). Your mileage may vary. There are people who use it for live sound and like it. Mac the Scope is just fine. I also use a program called Signal Scope as a quick and dirty RTA. It's cheap. Hope this helps! -Dave

31st August 2005	#9
ExistanceMusic Gear addict Joined: Mar 2003 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 478 Thread Starter	Certainly does, cheers. As far as I can tell from the 'net, Smaart seems like the live standard, so I'll keep an ear out for an OSX release...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How to interface live with another studio?	KingUgly	High end	3	9th December 2005 06:01 PM