Leaderboard

So as an orchestral musician and and a brass player myself I really just wait around this forum for people to send orchestral stuff. So this hits both of the areas of things I do. The first thing I notice is that the mixing is actually pretty good, everything is really clear, and it's for the most part orchestrated well. That said, I do have some objections to the use of samples here. It seems like you're using cinebrass (or another similar sounding brass library), which is just fine. Cinebrass is awesome. I think you could do a little bit different job of using the articulations patch. In this case, using 2 layers, an articulation patch, and the legato patch under it. That gives you the sustain and power of the brass, but without the "pretty" articulation that that patch normally has. Let's take a timestamped journey: Beginning - Your use of the Captain Falcon samples throughout are hilarious, in a very good way. Beginning - This brass figure where you're repeating the note over and over, I can tell by listening that the velocities are either very similar or the same and you're just relying on the round robin articulations of the patch. I would suggest using the repeated notes in the strings, and letting the brass just hit accents. This is my orchestral brass player side talking. I have had to play many parts written just like this. They're tiring and really tedious to rehearse, for not much musical reward. I also think that doubling the horns and trumpets in octaves like this would be more effective with just the hits rather than every note. You can hear that this adds some mud to an otherwise clean mix. :21 - I'm listening with headphones now. I think you actually are using the sustain+articulation thing I mentioned, but the sustain is so much quieter than the attack that it just sounds like attack to me, and it ends up doing that car horn, honky kind of sound. Balance out articulation+sustain and it'll work really well. Actually that covers most of the things I'm hearing here.

It would totally work! If you're finding your DT 880s too quiet or perhaps maybe lacking then a proper dedicated headphone amp will be the ticket. Likewise with your MDR-7506s and moving to the Roland. With that said, if you're happy with the headphone output on the UR22 and you need to drive monitors as well then you can. However, it requires that you have the ability to "split" the line output signal. This can be done with something like this, and if you're handy with a soldering iron you can make them yourself The reason this works is because in transferring audio the thing of concern is the AC Voltage. So, as I mentioned in my first post audio systems operates on Impedance Bridging. The fundamental principle in action here is that your audio interface will have a very low output impedance, on the order of a few ohms or less, and the input to any given device will typically be on the order of at least 10 kilohms. This means that very little current actually flows into the receiving device and you're effectively measuring the voltage. Then since the devices receiving the AC Voltage are connected in parallel they will have the same voltage potential across them. It is actually quite an elegant solution honestly. Your upgrade plan has nothing "technically" wrong with it all. It is very much equipped for the intended purpose of giving you two headphone outputs with one of those outputs having tons more power than you do you now. Whether it sounds "better" is something only you can decide. If I may make one suggestion. Think about what you're going to need in the future in terms of your audio interface. If you want more ins and outs then buy it now. You may have plans in the future for an outboard synth or an outboard buss compressor and those will eat up valuable analog ins and outs. I'm not saying that the Rubix 24 is bad or the like, but it is a small interface without much actual I/O digital or analog. You may be working 100% ITB with maybe a need for a mic occasionally. For that it is perfectly equipped. I know personally I'd be too limited by it immediately. So, just think about what you actually want to do in the future and buy based off that I've got a fairly complicated setup so I've had to learn to deal with the sorts of issues that pop up. I've had to deal with ground loops, bad cables, not enough I/O, varying power voltages, etc . . .. This can be a complicated mess to sort out. So, if you ask me a question about the "technical details" I can probably explain it. However, when you start getting into subjective things like will it sound better or the like, well only really you can decide that. I mean there are some obvious things like if you want more detail in the bass region then you've got to do the whole room treatment things and get bigger/better speakers. There really is not an easy way around that sort of thing. However, if you want to know why your square waves don't look like square waves on an oscilloscope in the real world or connecting things up. I've got you covered.