Ooops!

BTMM

Born To Make Music
So I just got some BANGIN Studio Monitors (Neumann KH 120 A - Takes a bow . . .)

BUT

I forgot something . . .

It came with two power cables (Ofcourse) and then I got XLR cables (One for each monitor).

When I got home I was like now how the F am I suppose to connect this to my MacMini?

What is the next step guys (The cheapest one) - Darn it . . .
 
I guess i need an audio interface eh? Would it be possible to buy like a converter that connects xlr to the audio output of a Mac?
 
Congratulations, the most bs'y thread title I've seen since I'm a FP member.

"Would it be possible to buy like a converter that connects xlr to the audio output of a Mac?"

Yes.
 
Audio interface. Not only will it serve as a way of getting audio in and out of your computer; it'll also take some of the strain off your CPU (simply by being more effective at processing audio than your built in soundcard)
If you don't plan on using any mics then I'd look at the Novation Audio Hub
 
Thx for the info but My Neumann's came with XLR cables and both have female out put (The cables). Which audio interface comes with 'male' xlr outputs so my female xlr cables can connect with them?
 
Audio interface. Not only will it serve as a way of getting audio in and out of your computer; it'll also take some of the strain off your CPU (simply by being more effective at processing audio than your built in soundcard)

A USB interface will use more cpu cycles than will maintaining an internal soundcards’ I/O (such as PCIe). A CPU does not process audio, it sums, then sends those sums to the DAC, which converts it. Or did you mean to say that an external soundcard will process (sum), the audio, thereby relieving the cpu of some load? This is only the case if your soundcard has DSP (think pro tools HD system), and if it doesn’t then there’s no offloading.

The USB I/O will have the highest resource usage in the chain after the sum (CPU / DSP chip).
 
A USB interface will use more cpu cycles than will maintaining an internal soundcards’ I/O (such as PCIe). A CPU does not process audio, it sums, then sends those sums to the DAC, which converts it. Or did you mean to say that an external soundcard will process (sum), the audio, thereby relieving the cpu of some load? This is only the case if your soundcard has DSP (think pro tools HD system), and if it doesn’t then there’s no offloading.

The USB I/O will have the highest resource usage in the chain after the sum (CPU / DSP chip).

The use of a decent AI (and its driver if applicable) is clearly a more efficient way of processing audio than a built-in/onboard soundcard. From my own experience it allows more work to be done on my tracks/songs without pops/clicks and crashes - the load of the CPU is reduced. When I revert back to my onboard card, the CPU load is increased and as such less efficient; pops/clicks & crashes ocur.

Whatever your views are, it's pretty evident that the OP needs an AI pretty sharpish
 
The use of a decent AI (and its driver if applicable) is clearly a more efficient way of processing audio than a built-in/onboard soundcard. From my own experience it allows more work to be done on my tracks/songs without pops/clicks and crashes - the load of the CPU is reduced. When I revert back to my onboard card, the CPU load is increased and as such less efficient; pops/clicks & crashes ocur.

What processing though? On a modern Windows machine there is not a single cpu cycle taken up for the DAC after it’s processed by your software since the HAL is loaded at boot, not when the hardware is called. On OSX it’s negligible, and certainly nothing compared to the resources used on an active usb port. If you have high cpu usage on an internal then there’s something else which is wrong, but it has nothing to do with any 'processing done’ by the external soundcard, i.e. the DAC.

The purpose of an external soundcard is I/O, and, arguably, noise, when talking about the high end.
 
Back
Top