|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 7, 2016 17:29:01 GMT -6
What gives? Why do people pay double/triple the price for these units? Aren't there basically measurables that units like the Symphony, Burl, etc. reach that are equal to those units? What do they claim the secret sauce is? I think Blackbird uses Prism...but I mean, at some point, isn't sounding fantastic just sounding fantastic? I could see where maybe DA's can be argued more aggressively to be less subjective...at least with the reasoning I'm using. But why would I spend $8000 on a JFC Latte?
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 7, 2016 17:31:35 GMT -6
svart, jimwilliams - and others - if money were no cost, what would you employ? Svart, what would you change?
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Feb 8, 2016 7:38:12 GMT -6
In cases like this, you aren't buying "gear" so much as you're buying a "guarantee" that your audio acquisition is as pure as possible. A number of these designs are discrete, overbuilt, have oven-controlled or radioisotope based clocking circuits, and generally employ the "best" of every component (maybe even sorted by hand).
That stuff alone gets you into the thousands of $$ just for the hardware.
Then you have to pay for the employees, the designers, the electric bill and building, and all the rest of the overhead of running a business just to keep the hardware supported, but in turn, they only sell a handful of these units.
Again, it's about the guarantee that you'll never have to question the gear ever again.. Something that the big boys don't do. They go to work on the music, not arguing about which opamps are the best. The big boys don't care, just do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 8, 2016 8:54:15 GMT -6
You need to consider what they're tools for....and the intended audience. I will take two of your examples because they could BE more different:
Prism is tool about bringing as similar a sound as possible to every single same rate. For a project studio that has little to no value, because you choose the rate that sounds/performs best on your rig. For a for hire room that needs to do 96khz in the morning, some 44.1 overdubs in the afternoon and a 192 mastering session at night there's big value in delivering nearly the same sound (and yes also overbuilt and clean) at all rates.
The Latte, however, is a recreation of an old tape machine's line stages, only replacing the headstock with PCM ADC&DAC. Ampex? I don't remember which....but, for mastering guys who want to keep the tape vibe through conversion, this is the choice. Pretty sure the Eagles remasters were done with it. Fwiw. Luckily all done while the "audiophile" of the group was still with us.
Also you're mentioning some that use a great deal of latency to convert....which are the tools of mastering engineers where latency is irrelevant. Generally, the Larvy Gold level stuff would be annoying to record with unless you have an analog cue feed, because even a digital mixer (like Maestro controls) can't speed up q conversion delay on the mastering ADC--which is how you get a whole other line at the chip level--ADCs that take longer to convert to achieve that last 1% of quality.
|
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Feb 8, 2016 9:23:31 GMT -6
This is arguably the best sounding AD ever made. It was designed on accident. It was needed for testing other gear the Pacific Microsonics guys sold, not as a stand alone AD. In all of my testing this thing sounds unreal. It is to bad no one designs gear like this any more. The one that was in my test was over 20 years old and still smoked all modern day AD's I tested. This is back when designers designed from the ground up and overbuilt. Not off of other peoples chips. www.goodwinshighend.com/manufacturers/pacific_microsonics/pacific_microsonics_model_two.htmI am not complaining about modern day chips. Some of the these AD's built around chips can also sound really great. But honestly, none of them sounded as great as the Model One that was in my testing. I was honestly bummed when I heard how the Model One just stomped on the current converters. |
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Feb 8, 2016 9:41:54 GMT -6
Whenever I think about this- as I still simply use two Aurora 16's- the question is "How will the best converters sound better compared to what I have?" I understand why the best studios have the most expensive converters, as perception of having everything that is "the best" is always a part of their competitiveness. However, I do not think premium converter companies have done a great job marketing to people like me and thousands of other smaller studios who want to know how much better the music will sound and then do a cost/quality analysis to see if it makes sense. Of course, I don't live in Nashville, LA or New York, where I presume you can pick up a demo unit and hear for yourself. I've always wondered why the music industry doesn't have more demo units available for all kinds of gear.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Feb 8, 2016 9:48:27 GMT -6
The models one and two along with Lavry gold do not use chip-based filtering. The analog stages, the power supply and the filtering are the whole story.
|
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Feb 8, 2016 9:57:13 GMT -6
The models one and two along with Lavry gold do not use chip-based filtering. The analog stages, the power supply and the filtering are the whole story. Today, most companies cut corners on all of these aspects. That is why there is room to mod some many pieces of gear. There is not much modding to be done to a Model One / Two, or the Lavry Gold. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Feb 8, 2016 10:12:00 GMT -6
The models one and two along with Lavry gold do not use chip-based filtering. The analog stages, the power supply and the filtering are the whole story. Today, most companies cut corners on all of these aspects. That is why there is room to mod some many pieces of gear. There is not much modding to be done to a Model One / Two, or the Lavry Gold. Layout matters greatly in the audio realm as well, something that folks just don't realize for the most part. Moving from traces to planes makes a huge difference in system impedance and can greatly reduce the need for specialized power rail filtering, etc. Strategically placing certain traces on certain layers, proper via usage, current return planning all matter too, and can simplify a design where someone else might resort to overbuilding. When doing mixed signal design, everything matters. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Feb 8, 2016 10:18:11 GMT -6
A lot of modding is simply substituting better quality parts and beefing up the power supply.
Wally Heider always ran two power supplies in parallel on his consoles so the flip of a switch could solve any PS failure. One day they happened to have both turned on and realized everything was sounding better. Wally simply ordered a third for backup and from that time foreword they ran two.
|
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Feb 8, 2016 10:23:53 GMT -6
Today, most companies cut corners on all of these aspects. That is why there is room to mod some many pieces of gear. There is not much modding to be done to a Model One / Two, or the Lavry Gold. Layout matters greatly in the audio realm as well, something that folks just don't realize for the most part. Moving from traces to planes makes a huge difference in system impedance and can greatly reduce the need for specialized power rail filtering, etc. Strategically placing certain traces on certain layers, proper via usage, current return planning all matter too, and can simplify a design where someone else might resort to overbuilding. When doing mixed signal design, everything matters. Very true I have a friend who is very well respected among all the audio designers who has been helping me. He has taught me so much about all of this kind of stuff. Things that you would think make really no difference but they actually do. Everything matters! |
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Feb 8, 2016 10:25:42 GMT -6
A lot of modding is simply substituting better quality parts and beefing up the power supply. Wally Heider always ran two power supplies in parallel on his consoles so the flip of a switch could solve any PS failure. One day they happened to have both turned on and realized everything was sounding better. Wally simply ordered a third for backup and from that time foreword they ran two. It all starts with the PS and trickles down from there. |
|
|
|
Post by delcampo on Feb 8, 2016 10:39:35 GMT -6
A lot of modding is simply substituting better quality parts and beefing up the power supply. Wally Heider always ran two power supplies in parallel on his consoles so the flip of a switch could solve any PS failure. One day they happened to have both turned on and realized everything was sounding better. Wally simply ordered a third for backup and from that time foreword they ran two. It all starts with the PS and trickles down from there. This IME seems to be very true. On the console point, My tech insisted on way over-building the power supply for my Neotek series 1 as step 1 of the refurb. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 8, 2016 10:40:36 GMT -6
Something that the big boys don't do. They go to work on the music, not arguing about which opamps are the best. The big boys don't care, just do it. Aw, man...that's not true at all. They like to pretend they don't, but they do. |
|
|
|
Post by delcampo on Feb 8, 2016 10:51:27 GMT -6
Something that the big boys don't do. They go to work on the music, not arguing about which opamps are the best. The big boys don't care, just do it. Aw, man...that's not true at all. They like to pretend they don't, but they do. I agree with you John. I think the key is people getting things regularly done care, "to a rational point". That point is then quickly trumped by what needs to be captured at that time. Compared to giving the gear detail a irrational level of consideration. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 8, 2016 10:58:00 GMT -6
I'm sure there are a few that don't...Hey - even CLA changed over to the Focusrite stuff. But these guys are just as nerdy as we are.
|
|
|
|
Post by noah shain on Feb 8, 2016 11:08:10 GMT -6
I have a JCF audio Latte.
I love the sound of Ampex amp circuits, which this is based on. It's a tank. Overbuilt and rock solid.
I did a lot of listening to records I love the sound of and Ampex figures in lots of them.
I talked to Josh at JCF a lot and found that we have similar taste in sonics and even philosophy.
He modeled part of his circuit on Ampex circuits.
I use Ampex tape machines cause I like the circuit of the machines. Not the tape so much.
When I found a converter that had some Ampex DNA in it and was built like a tank, power supply, clock, filters and all...that was enough for me. I started saving.
1% closer to the sound I want.
I believe in voodoo though. The scientists here probably laugh at me...and they should.
Incidentally, the Latte can be used as repro amps for the 440b. That's where a lot of the Ampex Magic is and also the biggest PITA about using it.
Music sounds really good coming out of the Latte though. Can't deny that.
I use it a lot just as a "mastering loop" on ITB mixes to get them out in to some outboard 2bus processing. Minimal damage! I actually perceive that music can sound better after taking a round trip through the latte.
This is where the scientists laugh...oh well.
Edit:
It's worth adding that, because I am busy and don't have a lot of time to A/B test gear, when I buy a piece I just put it in the rack and get about my business. If it sounds bad I might not really know what's causing the problem and waste a bunch of time beating up my mix trying to fix it. I learned the expensive way that quality is worth paying for with audio gear...id rather spend more $ and know that I'm operating at a dependably high quality level so I can focus on work.
That's NOT why I bought a Latte but it's part of why I bought a silly expensive 2ch converter. I still fall prey to the idea that my competition is beating me because they have better gear. I'm not letting those dogs have an advantage on me!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Feb 8, 2016 11:31:01 GMT -6
I have a JCF audio Latte. I love the sound of Ampex amp circuits, which this is based on. It's a tank. Overbuilt and rock solid. I did a lot of listening to records I love the sound of and Ampex figures in lots of them. I talked to Josh at JCF a lot and found that we have similar taste in sonics and even philosophy. He modeled part of his circuit on Ampex circuits. I use Ampex tape machines cause I like the circuit of the machines. Not the tape so much. When I found a converter that had some Ampex DNA in it and was built like a tank, power supply, clock, filters and all...that was enough for me. I started saving. 1% closer to the sound I want. I believe in voodoo though. The scientists here probably laugh at me...and they should. Incidentally, the Latte can be used as repro amps for the 440b. That's where a lot of the Ampex Magic is and also the biggest PITA about using it. Music sounds really good coming out of the Latte though. Can't deny that. I use it a lot just as a "mastering loop" on ITB mixes to get them out in to some outboard 2bus processing. Minimal damage! I actually perceive that music can sound better after taking a round trip through the latte. This is where the scientists laugh...oh well. Edit: It's worth adding that, because I am busy and don't have a lot of time to A/B test gear, when I buy a piece I just put it in the rack and get about my business. If it sounds bad I might not really know what's causing the problem and waste a bunch of time beating up my mix trying to fix it. I learned the expensive way that quality is worth paying for with audio gear...id rather spend more $ and know that I'm operating at a dependably high quality level so I can focus on work. That's NOT why I bought a Latte but it's part of why I bought a silly expensive 2ch converter. I still fall prey to the idea that my competition is beating me because they have better gear. I'm not letting those dogs have an advantage on me!!! I believe you. Things sound better to me simply printed through the Burl without anything else. BTW, your music sounds amazing so I'm sure the Latte is the real deal. |
|
|
|
Post by jayfitz on Feb 8, 2016 12:02:56 GMT -6
Ingenious/cutting edge design, quality components, tank-like build quality and small-batch availability....which describes the Latte (and others), always demands a higher price, no matter what the product is.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 8, 2016 12:13:21 GMT -6
Great thread, IMV after a certain level of gear quality is attained, it becomes a game of inches, at which point it's all about what ever increases your confidence and speed toward a better end, it all matters...
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Feb 8, 2016 13:45:51 GMT -6
Back in the '70s every studio had a shop and upgrades were SOP.
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Feb 8, 2016 16:45:51 GMT -6
Great thread, IMV after a certain level of gear quality is attained, it becomes a game of inches, at which point it's all about what ever increases your confidence and speed toward a better end, it all matters... I agree with this. The game of inches is often just personal preference. The more I examine this ocean of gear we have to choose from, the more I'm convinced that none of it these days is bad. I prefer certain converters to others but it may not be because they are better. It's more likely it merely has the sound that I like. I have no doubt that the very expensive converters are great, but I doubt it would make much of a difference in my productions from what I already have, you know? |
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Feb 8, 2016 17:04:20 GMT -6
In cases like this, you aren't buying "gear" so much as you're buying a "guarantee" that your audio acquisition is as pure as possible. A number of these designs are discrete, overbuilt, have oven-controlled or radioisotope based clocking circuits, and generally employ the "best" of every component (maybe even sorted by hand). That stuff alone gets you into the thousands of $$ just for the hardware. Then you have to pay for the employees, the designers, the electric bill and building, and all the rest of the overhead of running a business just to keep the hardware supported, but in turn, they only sell a handful of these units. Again, it's about the guarantee that you'll never have to question the gear ever again.. Something that the big boys don't do. They go to work on the music, not arguing about which opamps are the best. The big boys don't care, just do it. This answer makes sense to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Feb 8, 2016 17:14:58 GMT -6
One of the more ear-opening experiences I can remember was the first time I used digital eq. on the signal from a first class converter.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Feb 8, 2016 17:33:47 GMT -6
One of the more ear-opening experiences I can remember was the first time I used digital eq. on the signal from a first class converter. In which way it is diffrent from lets say middle class conversion? |
|
