Firewire vs USB

[DT Chris]

I'm sorry if this has been discussed.

Just came back from a couple music stores looking at some audio interfaces (Roland Edirol, M-Audio), and the fellows there mentioned that I wouldn't need a PCI interface card, that the Firewire/USB would bypass my soundcard (Creative Audigy LS) anyway.

Their idea is to use the audio capture device to record the channels, and simply use the existing card for playback. The USB or Firewire would apparently bypass my soundcard when recording.

An M-Audio uses a PCI card, why would I want to have that in my computer if I want to maintain portability between computers/location/studio/rehearsal space, etc.

Also, fellow claimed that Firewire is faster than USB2.0 and that I should add a Firewire PCI card to my PC.

What is your recommendation?

[sphinx_uk]

Purely from a data throughput point of view Firewire is better than USB 2.0

also;-

FireWire, uses a "Peer-to-Peer" architecture in which the peripherals are intelligent and can negotiate bus conflicts to determine which device can best control a data transfer.

Hi-Speed USB 2.0 uses a "Master-Slave" architecture in which the computer handles all arbitration functions and dictates data flow to, from and between the attached peripherals (adding additional system overhead and resulting in slower data flow control)

hope this is of some help.

(source usb-ware.com)

[brandondrury]

the fellows there mentioned that I wouldn't need a PCI interface card, that the Firewire/USB would bypass my soundcard (Creative Audigy LS) anyway.

Sort of. That's kind of like saying you can bypass your driver's side door by getting in on the passenger side.


You've heard the "mega technical" version of the USB vs Firewire argument. I'll give you the real world, recording explanation.

USB 2.0 and Firewire are pretty much the same. I've heard rumors this way and that way. I'll let the electrical engineers designing this stuff figure out the details. USB2.0 and Firewire and capable of delivering quite a few channels to your recording computer. So, I think its more important to figure out how many inputs you really need. I lean towards Firewire simply because it is a more popular interface and people seam to be happy with it. If I could get a great deal on a USB 2.0 audio interface, I wouldn't hesitate to jump on it.

Their idea is to use the audio capture device to record the channels, and simply use the existing card for playback.

This is very ....uh.... odd ...advice for a guy who works at a music shop. The audio interface is great at recording music so I can't imagine why you wouldn't use it for playback as well. There are some problems that can occur when using different soundcards for playback and recording.

The biggest one comes with latency. Unless you have some new model Creative Audigy (which means useless in Brandonian), your latency is going to be very high. So, if you intend to monitor within your recording software, you can kss your Creative Audigy goodbye (unless you just get really lucky). The playback on any real audio interface (when combined with an adequate system) is fast enough that you can track your vocals while monitoring through your recording software. I greatly prefer this method of working. There is no way I could use a Creative Audigy for playback for that reason alone.

An M-Audio uses a PCI card, why would I want to have that in my computer if I want to maintain portability between computers/location/studio/rehearsal space, etc.

While M-Audio certainly makes Firewire audio interfaces, they do have quite a few PCI versions. I have 2 M-Audio Delta 1010s. I've been 100% happy with them for nearly 6 years now. Unfortunately, they are PCI. This means that portability is non-existant. I've been wanting a Firewire rig for some time now. If you need to stick your plug into more than one port, you don't want to go the PCI route.

and that I should add a Firewire PCI card to my PC

Maybe. It depends. I wouldn't buy a Firewire PCI card unless you need one. Many motherboards come with integrated Firewire, which means that Firewire is built in already. These will usually be fine.

If you don't have Firewire, you'll need to add with a PCI card. The same can be said for USB 2.0 as well.

Just keep in mind that there are different chipsets with Firewire and some audio interfaces don't like certain chipsets. Before you buy anything, check the manufacturer website to see if they have any specific recommendations for chipsets.

Brandon

[DT Chris]

Thanks for the info.

That being said, is the PCI interface card from the M-Audio/Edirol going to screw up my main soundcard for other applications (gaming, 5.7, 7.1) or does it replace all functionality in that department?

[brandondrury]

That being said, is the PCI interface card from the M-Audio/Edirol going to screw up my main soundcard for other applications (gaming, 5.7, 7.1) or does it replace all functionality in that department?

I wouldn't expect any conflicts at all because it is pretty much one soundcard or the other...more or less. (There are ways to use more than one at the same time) but the worst thing I could happening would be your computer games defaulting to the M-Audio. You'd have to change that back to the Audigy (which SHOULD take 2 seconds).

Brandon

[DT Chris]

Ok, I'm still not grasping exactly what these PCI interface cards are supposed to do...

Which component is doing the recording and playback? Does the PCI interface completely nullify a need for USB/Firewire?

Is the PCI interface (since it is dedicated to the transfer of audio) more effecient (less latency), then a Firewire? If I use Firewire instead of PCI, what is going to playback the tracks while I record?

[brandondrury]

Ok, I'm still not grasping exactly what these PCI interface cards are supposed to do...

Hang in there. This stuff takes time to soak in sometimes. When tackling new, technical crap I ALWAYS have to remind myself to be calm and relax until the damn mess actually makes sense.

Now that crap is out of the way, lets get to it.

Which component is doing the recording and playback?

While I'm no computer / mechanical engineer, I can give you good-enough-for-recording understanding.

Take your old 4 track tape deck. The signal passes into a jack of some kind, through some wires, maybe a preamp, maybe an EQ, and ends up at a thingy that etches the signal into the tape.

My good-enough-to-record understanding says that process is fairly similar in a computer. The signal goes through some wires, preamps, maybe an EQ, is converted from an analog signal to numbers, fed through some wires (I like to think of them as pipes), and is etched onto that thingy called a hard drive.

So, I don't know if there is any one thingy doing the recording in either a 4 track or a computer system.

Does the PCI interface completely nullify a need for USB/Firewire?

Hmm. This is your problem.

The way I see it, I need to get my digital signal into the computer's brain so I can store it on the hard drive. Much like a courageous female, you've got multiple points of entry (har har).

We can get to the computer's brain via PCI (which has been the conventional way of getting to the computer brain for about a decade for everything from soundcards to modems to networking cards to video cards).

We can get to the computer's brain via Firewire (which is becoming the new standard).

We can get to the computer's brain via USB 1.1 or 2.0 (2.0 is a good option as well. USB 1.1 has its flaws).

It's really as simple as that unless you have big plans for building your own rocket or computer recording device.

Note: This whole damn thing gets more complicated than it needs to be. The most popular way to add Firewire to a computer is by buying a Firewire card that (you guessed it) uses a PCI card. So if you are using a desktop, the odds are pretty damn strong that you are going to go through a PCI card one way or another.

Is the PCI interface (since it is dedicated to the transfer of audio) more effecient (less latency), then a Firewire?

I'm not really sure about the "dedicated to the transfer of audio". Based on my own limited understanding of the unncessary (for me) robotechnical stuff, I don't see a difference. The theoretical guys may be able to confuse you on this one. The major obstical in latency has nothing to do with the format used (at least when we are talking about PCI vs USB 2.0 vs Firewire). The major problem is in the software drivers for these devices.

You can take a look at the M-Audio Delta 1010. They've probably released 10 different drivers for that audio interface over the years. I didn't begin using direct monitoring until last summer, but I'd bet you could see the latency drop as they got better and better at writing the drivers. Maybe not. I have seen this on other cards.

---------
I don't think there is a penalty (in latency) when the Firewire audio data hits the Firewire PCI card. In my own head, I compare this to about how passing from one county to another in your car effects your speed on the Interstate. (It doesn't).

---------
One last thing.

ALL of this crap has already been worked out. There are details you need to know and I have clearly laid laid them out all over this site (although I should probably find them and make them more clear). If Firewire wasn't a realistic way of getting audio into the computer with low latency, the engineer guys at Presonus, MOTU, M-Audio, and everywhere else would have said "Shit!" and invented something else.

My next audio interface will definitely be Firewire. The only reason I don't like PCI comes down to portability. So in the end, it really doesn't matter which methodology you use for connecting to your computer. Just make sure you go with a quaity product (which is the most important of all).

If I use Firewire instead of PCI, what is going to playback the tracks while I record?

Every audio interface I've ever used or read about that was built for recording has ins and outs.

So when you hit play, the audio is spit out of outputs 1/2 (left / right). When you hit record, audio is sucked in on all the inputs you have armed (I've been up to twenty) and at the same the audio that has already been recorded is, again, being spit out the outputs of 1/2.

I'm big on using the same soundcard / audio interface for ins and outs. A lot of the Audigy guys tend to want to use the Audigy for the outputs, but I think a lot of that comes from trying to find a purpose for the Audigy (and wanting to use the same speakers used for gaming and Mp3 playback).

Brandon

[DT Chris]

Originally Posted by brandondrury

My next audio interface will definitely be Firewire. The only reason I don't like PCI comes down to portability. So in the end, it really doesn't matter which methodology you use for connecting to your computer. Just make sure you go with a quaity product (which is the most important of all).

This is my biggest concern. Currently I don't need a lot of portability, but joining a band and needing to record rehearsals/live performance may suddenly require it. If I choose to have a permanent home studio (I still rent) then I could perhaps accept a more stationary solution.

Originally Posted by brandondrury

I'm big on using the same soundcard / audio interface for ins and outs. A lot of the Audigy guys tend to want to use the Audigy for the outputs, but I think a lot of that comes from trying to find a purpose for the Audigy (and wanting to use the same speakers used for gaming and Mp3 playback).

I guess this is the answer I'm really going after;

An audio capture device sends the audio information to the software, to each track the channel is assigned to... So what is doing the playback? The audio device via monitor speakers? USB/FireWire/PCI interface is only a means to transfer the information?

If so, then obviously the audio capture device will not conflict with existing soundcards on my computer. When I open my software and configure it, the list of sound devices will be available, and I simply select the [Audio Capture Device] in the menu instead of the Audigy[Sound Card], correct?

Originally Posted by brandondrury

I'm big on using the same soundcard / audio interface for ins and outs. A lot of the Audigy guys tend to want to use the Audigy for the outputs, but I think a lot of that comes from trying to find a purpose for the Audigy (and wanting to use the same speakers used for gaming and Mp3 playback).

Will that tend to 'color' the original track from the original audio device by playing it back in a different soundcard? It would seem to me that one would want to use the same audio device to record and playback so no information or quality is lost somewhere...

[brandondrury]

This is my biggest concern. Currently I don't need a lot of portability, but joining a band and needing to record rehearsals/live performance may suddenly require it. If I choose to have a permanent home studio (I still rent) then I could perhaps accept a more stationary solution.

Well, 5.5 years ago I didn't think I really needed a portable solution either. I've had to say no to several clients simply because I wasn't portable. Go with Firewire if you have any doubts at all.

An audio capture device sends the audio information to the software, to each track the channel is assigned to... So what is doing the playback?

It works in the exact same way, only backwards. The software mixes the signals together (if applicable) and sends that signal to the audio interface. The audio interface converts the signal back to analog and then you can run that wherever you want (studio monitors, headphones, etc).

USB/FireWire/PCI interface is only a means to transfer the information?

Yes. This is exactly right. Audio interfaces also, typically, handle the conversion from analog to digital (AD) or digital to analog (DA).

In my system, I upgraded my converters to Mytek AD96 and DA96. I run that signal into the input of the Delta 1010 (which is on the PCI card, not on the breakout box). So, the only thing the Delta 1010 is doing it catching the digital signal and sending it to the brain / software. That's it.

Latency is the only settings I ever change on my Delta 1010. So really, the audio inteface in my rig just kind of sits there. I very very seldom think about it. (If you decide to go with an audio interface with preamps, fancy monitor mix controls, etc you will definitely think about your audio interface more).

f so, then obviously the audio capture device will not conflict with existing soundcards on my computer. When I open my software and configure it, the list of sound devices will be available, and I simply select the [Audio Capture Device] in the menu instead of the Audigy[Sound Card], correct?

Exactly. This is the concept and how things SHOULD work. I can't tell you there won't be conflicts. However, what you are describing is exactly right, theoretically.

Will that tend to 'color' the original track from the original audio device by playing it back in a different soundcard?

Good question.

Using different audio interfaces, in and of itself, won't color the sound. Two equal quality audio interfaces will work fine together. The real "color" comes from shitty converters (both AD and DA). So if there is a super weak link in the chain, you will lose quality somewhat.

Of course, assuming you have a real deal recording audio interface, the difference that converters make is quite subtle. I dropped some serious cash on my converters. You can hear a difference, but most bands I've worked wit haven't noticed.

The biggest reason to use the same audio interface for ins and outs is latency. Your home recording audio interface will always be faster than an Audigy or any other device not specifically made for mega low latency.

(So in other words, the Audigy is almost totally useless for recording).

Brandon

[DT Chris]

Thank-you , kind sire. I now understand.