FX send into Interface

[GuitarIv]

Hey everyone,

so lately I've been toying around with home recording (for covers and song demos) and I've gotten myself a pair of Audio Technica Headphones, a used Tascam Interface and right now I'm using free VSTs together with a virtual Tubescreamer and Cab Impulses in Reaper when not micing my amps. The sounds I get are really cool (Nick Crowe and LePou VSTs) but as soon as I record more than one track my laptop $%&#s up and the latency gets outta hand. Since I can't afford a high end recording PC or Laptop right now I've been thinking about buying the Laney IRT Studio for silent recording, most of you know that cranking a Half Stack in your apartment for recording isn't an option when you have neighbours, especially not when the muse kisses you at 3 am in the morning.

So last night I'm lying in bed, tossing and turning and suddenly a thought crosses my mind: why spend money on a Laney IRT Studio when I could basically use my DSL 100 and Savage 60 preamp into my interface, adding Cab Impulses in Reaper and keep the laptop at a reaonable performance? Plus I have all the pedals with all the effects I'll ever need!

So I'm just trying to get some opinions to be sure I'm not thinking things out the wrong way here:


I take my tube amplifier, hook it up to my cab as I would usually do, plug my guitar in and take the FX send going into my pedalboard. The signal out from my Masterwitcher Loop pedal now goes into the interfaces line level input (as instead of the FX return), I add a Cab Impulse in Reaper and I'm ready to record, having all my pedals working the way they should assigning them to the chain through my Masterwitcher. Not feeding a signal back to the FX return should basically keep the cab quiet whilst there's still a load to ensure my OT doesn't blow up and I have all the preamp goodness together with my pedals in my DAW, the IR's giving me the option to shape my sound the way I wan't it. Right?

Hope you chime in and can confirm this, let me know if I forgot anything that might be crucial here,

Cheers!

[Plenum n Heather]

You are running out of CPU headroom.

No need to either a) upgrade your machine or get a better one (which you said cannot happen), b) Freeze your tracks after you record, or b) bounce down the track once recorded so you are not running multiple instances of IRs and VSTs.

[gwEm]

Reverb plugins in particular seem to use up a lot of CPU. You could look at reducing the number of them that you use. Or use a 'cheaper' algorithm for less important sounds.

If you feel that the cab simulator you run is using a lot of CPU you could try an external speaker sim and do EQ tweaks later.

[gwEm]

I use a netbook which is maybe 7 years old now for recording and it wasn't the best when I first got it. Nevertheless it's enough for the music I make if you are careful with the plugins.

I use Ableton Live v8 with it if that helps.

[GuitarIv]

Regarding all the solutions you guys listed I might try that, but right now I'm really obsessed with the thought of using the Savage and the DSL preamp, taking the virtual Amp VSTs of the equation as those seem to eat up most of my CPU. Plus having all my pedals as an additional option for covers (with my setup I can switch from clean to rhythm to lead with the needed pedals being inserted/taken out of the chain with one press of a button, my Carl Martin Octaswitch does everything simultaneously) would be very cool.

After reading some more into the subject only thing I'd need in my DAW would be a Poweramp Sim and Cab Impulses... or I could get myself the Jet City Attenuator and use the line out to go into my interface? That would save me some massive CPU power I expect?

https://www.thomann.de/at/jet_city_amplification_jettenuator.htm

Found this 3 minute tutorial as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuaZxmf_ddM

Keep em ideas coming, thanks! 

[gwEm]

I have the Jettenuator.

It's great, as an attenuator. The line outs and so on that it has didn't sound that good to me.

Because of that I invested in a Palmer speaker sim which the full output speaker signal goes through into the attenuator. I find that works a lot better than the line outs from the Jettenuator.

I tried the Behringer GI100 which might be a good thing for you. It does have a speaker sim, but you can turn it off and take the line out from it. It's a lot cheaper than a Palmer.

[GuitarIv]

Looked up the Behringer, holy smokes that thing is cheap...
Then again I wouldn't actually mind to save up a bit longer and invest into some proper gear, which particular Palmer Speaker Sim would you recommend, Gwem? I looked up the Koch Loadbox as I've seen it being used by the pros, but that thing is so expensive I might just as well buy a proper laptop for that money...

[gwEm]

I have the PDI03 Joe Bonamassa, but I might pickup the PDI09 Junction at some point too.

The GI100 isn't bad at all. The Palmers have a few advantages in that they don't need power and there are some options to tweak the sound. The GI100 can also function as a normal DI box which is cool. The 4x12 sim on the Behringer has slightly plastic sounding mids, but it's acceptable. As I say one can turn off the 4x12 sim if you want to. I kept mine as I figured it would be a handy thing to have. Actually it has been used in a couple of situations.

[GuitarIv]

Thanks a bunch Gwem! Have my Jackson Dinky for sale right now, will see what I'll get as soon as I get some cash for the axe 

Cheers!