USB pedal interfaces vs "regular" interfaces

[Hollowway]

So, in my years-long analysis paralysis of picking some sort of practice solution when sitting in front of my computer (for both guitar and bass) I'm thinking of one of these pedals that has a USB interface built in (like the ToneX). But I'm also aware I could just use a regular interface (and I need to buy a new one - I don't currently have one usable) and use, say, the ToneX software. So the question is: What is the difference between using, say, a Scarlett vs the USB of the ToneX (or any such device) for guitar and bass? I'm guessing that the true audio interfaces have mic pres of varying quality, whereas the pedals do not, and just convert the tone from the guitar to the interface. Is that correct? And how much difference would that make for guitar/bass tones (as opposed to vocals, mic'd amps, etc)?

 

[AwakenTheSkies]

Leave the modelling for the modeller, and the interfacing for the interface

 

[Hollowway]

Leave the modelling for the modeller, and the interfacing for the interface

Cool, thanks. I kind of figured that was the case (and in the case of the ToneX, there seems to be a lot of problem using the pedal while using it as an interface).

 

[Hollowway]

Aaaactually, one more question: I know that I can use an interface and a plugin as a headphone practice amp (i.e. plugging into the interface), but can I plug use the interface stand alone (assuming plugged in for bus power) as a headphone amplifier if I have a preamp pedal? Not sure if different interfaces are different here, but I'm thinking mostly of a Scarlett.

 

[AwakenTheSkies]

Aaaactually, one more question: I know that I can use an interface and a plugin as a headphone practice amp (i.e. plugging into the interface), but can I plug use the interface stand alone (assuming plugged in for bus power) as a headphone amplifier if I have a preamp pedal? Not sure if different interfaces are different here, but I'm thinking mostly of a Scarlett.

I used to do this when I used headphones, if we're thinking the same thing. Modeller XLRs go into interface inputs 1+2, set it to stereo and turn on direct monitoring on the interface. But if you're not using the computer, why not just use the headphone out of the modeller?

Also it depends on the interface the amount of things you can do with it standalone. For example; when I had the 1st gen Scarlett, it had a physical switch for mono/stereo monitoring and a knob to blend the direct input signal and the system out signal after the DAW. But with my newer Audient iD14, I can't do any of those things without using the driver software on the PC.

 

[Hollowway]

I used to do this when I used headphones, if we're thinking the same thing. Modeller XLRs go into interface inputs 1+2, set it to stereo and turn on direct monitoring on the interface. But if you're not using the computer, why not just use the headphone out of the modeller?

Also it depends on the interface the amount of things you can do with it standalone. For example; when I had the 1st gen Scarlett, it had a physical switch for mono/stereo monitoring and a knob to blend the direct input signal and the system out signal after the DAW. But with my newer Audient iD14, I can't do any of those things without using the driver software on the PC.

Well, not so much the modeler for use without the computer, but more preamp pedals. Now, I don’t have a bunch of those, so it’s not the end of the world, but just curious. I DO like your method of stereo, though. I hadn’t thought about that.

 

[Shask]

I would assume the actual interface would have better drivers, and thus lower latency and stability. It would be designed as the interface as its main function, instead of a secondary use.

 

[budda]

I would assume the actual interface would have better drivers, and thus lower latency and stability. It would be designed as the interface as its main function, instead of a secondary use.

pretty sure all current gen fractal devices have the same or better converters than some interfaces

 

[Shask]

pretty sure all current gen fractal devices have the same or better converters than some interfaces

Yeah, if you compare a $2500 Axe FX to a $200 interface. They would probably be more similar at the same price points.

 

[budda]

Yeah, if you compare a $2500 Axe FX to a $200 interface. They would probably be more similar at the same price points.

Im thinking more fm3 vs whatever above-2i4-below-studio-purchase interface

All the companies list their specs, should be easy to see where tonex stacks up.

 

[ATRguitar91]

I use my HX Stomp as an interface and it does great, very low latency and quality DIs.

 

[soldierkahn]

tossing in what i use on the road, iRig HD X plugged into my ipad. I can have the audio/backing track playing on youtube and itll play through my headphones along with my guitar tone (i use ToneBridge from ultimate-guitar, and Amplitube).

Havent dipped into trying out other plugins or IRs yet, my Line 6 Spider V MKII gives me my tastiest recordings. I hook my ipad up to it via lightning cable, can control the amp with Spider Remote, playback audio tracks and record straight into GB. Not bad for an amp that cost me nothing lol

 

[DECEMBER]

If you use Windows then the biggest inconvenience is that you can only use one audio device at a time. So if you want to hear the rest of the mix while recording thru the Tonex, you'll have to monitor everything thru the Tonex USB output device, with headphones plugged into the Tonex, and assigning that as the audio device in the DAW. Then when you need to use the mic inputs or your monitors with the main interface, you'll have to assign the audio device again and move your headphones back to that one.
With a Mac you can create an aggregate device to use multiple USB devices simultaneously.

 

[CleansingCarnage]

I have both an interface and a Tonex, and I play through the Tonex plugin using my interface 100% of the time when I'm playing through my computer. The interface is just a lot more convenient to use and has a lot more features including a mic preamp etc. The full size Tonex can be used as a guitar interface though and you can hook up your monitors to its outputs, so if you're really only using it for guitar it would work.

One of the biggest reasons I don't play through the Tonex at all on my computer is that when acting as an interface that's exactly what it is and it doesn't function as a standalone profiler anymore, you would just be running plugins with it anyway.

 

[Hollowway]

If you use Windows then the biggest inconvenience is that you can only use one audio device at a time. So if you want to hear the rest of the mix while recording thru the Tonex, you'll have to monitor everything thru the Tonex USB output device, with headphones plugged into the Tonex, and assigning that as the audio device in the DAW. Then when you need to use the mic inputs or your monitors with the main interface, you'll have to assign the audio device again and move your headphones back to that one.
With a Mac you can create an aggregate device to use multiple USB devices simultaneously.

That’s interesting - I never considered using multiple interfaces, but good to know a Mac can do it.

 

[Hollowway]

I have both an interface and a Tonex, and I play through the Tonex plugin using my interface 100% of the time when I'm playing through my computer. The interface is just a lot more convenient to use and has a lot more features including a mic preamp etc. The full size Tonex can be used as a guitar interface though and you can hook up your monitors to its outputs, so if you're really only using it for guitar it would work.

One of the biggest reasons I don't play through the Tonex at all on my computer is that when acting as an interface that's exactly what it is and it doesn't function as a standalone profiler anymore, you would just be running plugins with it anyway.

Yeah, the crazy thing is that the tonex software comes free with the pedal, so I almost feel like that makes more sense. I mean, I can always buy another interface, but this way I could have a piece of hardware for not much more than the software alone.

 

[velvetkevorkian]

If you use Windows then the biggest inconvenience is that you can only use one audio device at a time. So if you want to hear the rest of the mix while recording thru the Tonex, you'll have to monitor everything thru the Tonex USB output device, with headphones plugged into the Tonex, and assigning that as the audio device in the DAW. Then when you need to use the mic inputs or your monitors with the main interface, you'll have to assign the audio device again and move your headphones back to that one.
With a Mac you can create an aggregate device to use multiple USB devices simultaneously.

Yeah this is my biggest annoyance with my Stomp, I have to pipe it through my interface to hear it in my monitors.

 

[cindarkness]

3-in 1-out XLR switcher is the solution.

 

[CleansingCarnage]

3-in 1-out XLR switcher is the solution.

I got a Mackie Big Knob so I could switch my monitors between my interface and Tonex, but since I never use the pedal I just use the other features on it instead. Still awesome to have a mute and volume control for the monitors.

Yeah, the crazy thing is that the tonex software comes free with the pedal, so I almost feel like that makes more sense. I mean, I can always buy another interface, but this way I could have a piece of hardware for not much more than the software alone.

Yeah considering that I use the Tonex plugin all the time I definitely think it was worthwhile, plus you can obviously load your profiles into the pedal and take them anywhere so even though I don't use it much yet I definitely will at some point.

 

[TedEH]

same or better converters

It seems to me like if your source sound is digital, and the destination is digital, and the connection is digital, then there's no conversation taking place except for resampling to match bitrates/depth etc. It seems like a no-brainer that using the USB interface of a digital modeller is going to give you the most "pure" version of that sound because it's not going through extra steps of digital-to-analogue, impedance matching, possible losses and noise over cables, back to analogue-to-digital, likely some more resampling along the way depending on settings and driver and etc etc etc.

If the end result of your digital model is a buffer with the sound in it, and you just blast that buffer over a usb cable to your daw, then there isn't a better "conversion" than no conversion at all.

Add to that, your Axe or ToneX or whatever has an input designed specifically for a guitar input, including a bunch of stuff to simulate a pedal's load on the guitar, etc., so your input is better too.