Input monitoring clarifications
Being still very new to music production, I played around with the input monitoring button in GTL to get a better understanding of its purpose.
As I understand it, it lets me hear what I‘m playing on my connected guitar (or mic) in realtime. This makes only sense, when my signal is not sent to the speaker in its original form, but when it‘s processed in some way (e.g. through an AUv3 effect, like adding a distortion to the guitar): having input monitoring turned on, I can still hear how my guitar sounds (in realtime, whereas the distorted signal may have a delay).
What I‘m unsure about: does this make any sense without using an external mixer attached to GTL?
Using my Zoom U-44, I can connect my audio system to Zoom’s main out (where the processed input is sent to, e.g. the distorted guitar, so the audience will hear this), while also having a headphone out where I can listen to my original input (my undistorted guitar, that the audience should not hear).
With no external mixer (e.g. using a simple iRig), I only have one out. As such, when activating input monitoring, both the processed and original sound will be sent to it, which wouldn‘t make much sense in most situations (unless you take it as a „feature“ and want to present both signals to the audience).
As such: should the input monitoring option be available anyway when no external mixer is attached to GTL? In my case it rather confused me... until I got my Zoom and experienced the difference.
As I understand it, it lets me hear what I‘m playing on my connected guitar (or mic) in realtime. This makes only sense, when my signal is not sent to the speaker in its original form, but when it‘s processed in some way (e.g. through an AUv3 effect, like adding a distortion to the guitar): having input monitoring turned on, I can still hear how my guitar sounds (in realtime, whereas the distorted signal may have a delay).
What I‘m unsure about: does this make any sense without using an external mixer attached to GTL?
Using my Zoom U-44, I can connect my audio system to Zoom’s main out (where the processed input is sent to, e.g. the distorted guitar, so the audience will hear this), while also having a headphone out where I can listen to my original input (my undistorted guitar, that the audience should not hear).
With no external mixer (e.g. using a simple iRig), I only have one out. As such, when activating input monitoring, both the processed and original sound will be sent to it, which wouldn‘t make much sense in most situations (unless you take it as a „feature“ and want to present both signals to the audience).
As such: should the input monitoring option be available anyway when no external mixer is attached to GTL? In my case it rather confused me... until I got my Zoom and experienced the difference.
Comments
I'm still a bit confused:
When disabling direct monitoring in GTL, then whether the audience nor myself won't hear anything I'm playing, right?
And the difference to the "Mute" option on a loop is that muting will only apply when playing the loop back, not while recording it, right?
And: Using an external audio device, I can decide to listen to either both my dry guitar signal AND the processed one from GTL (e.g. with a Tonebridge effect on it), or just one of them. But when I'm using the internal audio device of iOS, I can only listen to the processed one from GTL, and not to the dry one (or a mix of the two). Right?
That's correct, they won't hear what you're playing.
Yep that's correct.
Yes that's right, I wouldn't recommend using them both together because the iPad will introduce latency. Two identical signals, one delayed and the other not, are likely to cause phasing and result in a weaker signal.
I tried to record my performance using GTL's built-in recorder.
I noticed that it only records the channel(s) that are selected in GTL's input. Once again, I'm confused.
While recording guitar, I often sing in addition (and vice versa). But certainly, the additional singing must not be recorded to the loop, but it should be presented to the audience (and thus, it should be also present in the recording of the performance).
So far, I didn't notice this behavior, as I was listening to my recordings "live" through my audio system which is connected to the headphones out on my Zoom U-44 interface, and input monitoring was active. So the audience indeed would hear my performance, but still, I feel there's something not right in this behavior, as I'd expect the recording from GTL would result in this, too.
I feel that for each input, there needs to be an "input monitoring" option?
Thinking about it, I feel that GTL, once it implements the sophisticated dedicated inputs-to-loops routing, should offer the following on its GUI (not in the settings, but available all the time when performing live):
This way, while performing live, I have complete freedom of what the audience should hear, and what I record in parallel.
Yep if it's implemented it's going to be complicated. I think we would need a fully routable input mixer to achieve all this. It's a big job but the only way to accommodate for the majority of scenarios.
Includding recording all audio inputs and so.
I think implementing Ableton export, alongside similar but GTL specific song/sample export, could be useful for edit sessions inside garageband or similar... until proper mixer/recorder arrives to monolothic GTL.
These kind of improvements would make more popular GTL aside useful as composition tool. I imagine it isn’t trivial but how about multiple input/outputs like loopyHd and use it in junction with AUM/AB3?
If someone releases a AUv3 looper device AUM will become a true GTL pn steroids... (that’s why I suggest be the first...)
Aside note: I finally managed my time to map some controllers includding an old footpedal to GTL and it’s amazing the job you have done @Jack...
The bindings and the possibilities with the whole workflow are awesome. Even using it with launchpad app in the background it works flawless...
I need to add AUM in the set to control both volumes properly (which is a must if I want to make the routings too) but it will be great to have both options, rock solid monolithic with basic routing and experimental routing AUv3 version for complex setups.
Yeh I'm enthusiastic about an AUv3 version as well. Its the next logical step after the coming Universal update!