|
Post by svart on Apr 19, 2024 6:58:46 GMT -6
So modern converters don't need external clocking at all unless you need some semblance of sync between devices, which I don't think is necessary in any normal use case because DAWs allow you to nudge tracks to line up in phase anyway.
Huh. No sync necessary?
Recently I was trying to reamp a guitar through a digital Katana amplifer, sending the clean signal through its built-in soundcard, and then recording the miced up amp through my soundcard. The audio started to get out of sync as soon as ~10 seconds in. Luckily, I was able to fix it by lossless stretching, but I was surprised by the amount of clock drift.
Is this not a common occurrence, then, using multiple interfaces that are not clocked together?
I guess that would be a good example of a time you might want to sync, but it seems somewhat extreme. Easily fixed by using channels on the same interface if you need extreme phase alignment. But that's also not a symptom of jitter, that's frequency being off. One or more of the clocks is not precisely on the right frequency. It's a common problem if the division factor is low and the reference crystal is not temperature stable or is old or poor quality.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 18, 2024 12:33:15 GMT -6
Without taking scientific view, just going on using my ears (crazy as that seems these days) I clock my system from my HEDD 192 because … Again more craziness …. it’s sounds better. Just my 2 cents. I don't think anybody is saying it's not different.. But I think a lot of people actually like MORE jitter than less jitter. More jitter would cause more harmonic excitement and would sound "wider" and more "full" and probably have more "detail" in the form of small amounts of distortion.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 18, 2024 11:33:17 GMT -6
It won't. External clocks were used to sync a bunch of different devices. At some point people seemed to like what they did to the audio so they started using them to "fix" the sound.
But actual measurements show that external clocking, with the cable/connector/termination impairments and parasitics make EVERY external clock technically worse than internal clocking.
What I've found over the years is that deterministic phase noise is not necessarily a problem in any modern system in the sense that the primary tone of interest is quite stable with sideband power being very low and easily filtered out. Almost all sigma-delta converter ICs need 128-512fs clocking, and any residual phase noise would also be divided by those amounts before the sampling hardware sees the clock signal. Again, very, very low chance that jitter is the "cause" of a difference in sound.
However, in external WC cabling, there is a possibility of random external noise being introduced.
There's also the question of *what exactly is happening to the WC signal* once it's brought into the device.
1. Used directly.. Which would be more rare today since sigma-delta converters simply can't use the low frequencies directly. 2. Upconverted by PLL/DPLL to 128-512fs for use by the sigma-delta converters.. Which is more likely but also a worst-case scenario. 3. #2 but following the PLL is a "jitter cleaner" which is another PLL with a specific design to decouple the dirty reference clock from the output.
#2 is a bad situation alone. Taking a noisy WC signal and using it as a direct reference for a PLL would MULTIPLY the jitter by the amount that you'd need to multiply the signal to get 128-512fs for the converter clocking. Imagine multiplying your jitter 512x..
So #3 would be the only viable situation, by multiplying the WC signal up to say 100MHz with an aggressive loop filter(low pass feedback) then using that as a reference for a jitter cleaner IC that divides back down to something like 22.579Mhz for the converter ICs to use.
You can see that the converter IC clocks are now extremely decoupled from the WC input and other than being in sync, have very little to nothing in common with other devices also being clocked in a system. It also has very little to nothing to do with the quality of the WC signal.
So modern converters don't need external clocking at all unless you need some semblance of sync between devices, which I don't think is necessary in any normal use case because DAWs allow you to nudge tracks to line up in phase anyway.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 17, 2024 9:26:56 GMT -6
if you didn’t like earlier more expensive Barefoots, why would you like these with their probably cheaper drivers and underbuilt cabinets? Because… Damnit, I don’t know,…you’re killing the dream lol…but the answer to that is maybe three ways are different? I’m not unhappy with my Amphions - just wondering if there’s something idk I’m missing out there… I gotta say, 3 ways are night and day different from 2 ways in how they present the audio. Tonally they may or may not be all that different but having a midrange driver just makes a huge difference in details. that being said, I agree that if you didn't like the higher end barefoots, there's probably no realistic expectation that these would suddenly be better. They're designed to a lesser price point and likely voiced by the same folks with the same ears, so I'd expect them to be similar in overall sound to the rest of the barefoot lineup.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 16, 2024 7:44:49 GMT -6
I find myself travling a bit due to my wifes schedule, which means I have Pro Tools on my laptop (Macbook Air M2) and don't have my Carbon with me. I don't really have a small portable interface like and UA Arrow Solo or something along those lines, but I do have a set of Beyer Dynamic DT1770 Pro's, which personally I think are decent, but not top-shelf perhaps. Assuming good original source that I am mixing on this setup, is an interface really needed or is the headphone out good enough? I think I already know the answer to this question, at least I know what my assumption is, but wanted to get some broader opinions on it. Appreciate whatever you can offer. Thanks, BHM. I know some folks will say it absolutely matters, but I don't think so. You're always going to get a decent picture of the sound. If you don't, then it's probably the headphones. I think the transducers (mics or speakers/headphones) will always be more important than the converters.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 15, 2024 9:41:49 GMT -6
Wow. My atr-80 weighs like 500lbs. I had to rent a truck with a ramp and winch it up and down.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 14, 2024 20:22:41 GMT -6
Of course, the only real way to measure this stuff is to get an in room response readout via REW, ARC etc. However and sorry if this is a silly question but the one thing that always gets me is the specifications vs. tuning with ATC. For example the SCM 25's bass cutoff is supposed to be 47hz -6dB (anechoic), however the port is tuned to 32Hz. I mean are they using a HPF at some point to cut it off or is this just a measurement? What is it exactly?
Anyone here measured their in room response with the 25's?
Port tuning is about creating an air spring that supports the woofer movement as well as a resonance.. The box would always have to have a lower limit than the woofer. Without the box, the woofer wouldn't even extend down to 47hz in free air. The box and woofer form their own Hpf from the natural physics of the system.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 13, 2024 18:16:06 GMT -6
I’m not sure it’s the selling stuff. It’s the buying it again and the rinse and repeat that sometimes makes me chuckle. But it is a good way to test out stuff and see if it works in your space and for your workflow. If you can afford to take a hit on stuff sometimes as you say. Cheers, Geoff I don’t think I do it any more than anyone else. I’m just not scared to say I bought something, got bored and sold it. Two years later I get bored and want that sound again. I don’t know why everybody gets so sanctimonious (not accusing you)…its just a lazy take when people jab me about it. It doesn’t really bother me as much as it makes me roll my eyes. We just teasing you about it.. don't hurt your eyes.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 13, 2024 9:13:21 GMT -6
So far.. It IS John were talking about..
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 13, 2024 9:11:38 GMT -6
I have two iloks. I can't think of a single plugin I have that doesn't have multiple licenses available, so I just put one set on one iloks and another set on the other.
I've never needed to swap the first one out, thankfully.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 12, 2024 9:48:03 GMT -6
Crave. Arouser. Silencer. SSL native bus. Valhalla room.
Should cover just about any situation.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 11, 2024 11:36:44 GMT -6
Nobody will be willing to spend the extra money on new tape reels. Used tape is your friend, but beware the sticky-shed. Be prepared to buy boxes of used tapes to find a few usable ones without flaking or sticky-shed. You have more faith or bravery than me! I feel like used tape is akin to a used sex doll. You can get into baking. Its useful for really critical restoratoins if needed, but for new work, I find the cost of modern production fresh tape to be very reasonable.I dunno, used tape is either going to be pretty stable, or completely falling apart already. I bought a box of a dozen 2" tapes and maybe half of them were turned to powder already but the other half have been used a few times here and there and continue to be stable. The only problem is that you don't really know how many times they've been used and some of them can have some ghosting from previous prints that can't be totally erased. Ampex and BASF 911 has been pretty stable for me. Some Ampex 456 has been fine too. If it's sticky or powdered, you can just strip the tape and keep the reel to do transfers anyway, so as long as you don't pay much for it, it's still worth something. But anyway, 350$ for a reel for 2" might not seem crazy, but when the band wants to do an EP and that's 1000$+ JUST for the tape.. They suddenly don't want to do it considering they want to spend 1000$ total for the WHOLE thing..
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 11, 2024 11:17:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 11, 2024 11:13:58 GMT -6
I'd love to hear the difference in a mix done with it, and one without it. I posit that one of a couple things might be true:
It's nowhere near as different as you hear, mostly because you expect to hear a difference.
It's vastly different, but not necessarily better or worse.
It's vastly better.
It's actually a lot worse.
Would be an interesting poll topic to have a mix with and then done without and have people judge whether or not they find any of these apply.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 11, 2024 11:06:38 GMT -6
After having a 2" 24 track tape machine for a few years a few things have been true:
A great alignment will not sound drastically different than a decent ADC will. You can push is extremely hard and finally get that "tape" sound, but the "tape" sound is generally from poorly aligned machines or from those pushed extremely hard for the effect. The "tape sound" is extremely overstated by most.
Nobody will be willing to spend the extra money on new tape reels. Used tape is your friend, but beware the sticky-shed. Be prepared to buy boxes of used tapes to find a few usable ones without flaking or sticky-shed.
Bands want the tape sound, but not the tape hassle. Instant punches and cut/paste are not a thing and bands who wanted the tape sound will suddenly be OK without it if it means not spending the extra time and money to do take after take to get it right.
The majority of my tape journey has been playing with it on my own stuff or doing tape transfers to digital.
Every time I think of selling it, I'll get a transfer job that pays a few percent of what I paid for the machine.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 9, 2024 9:07:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 5, 2024 10:40:44 GMT -6
Power down.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 4, 2024 13:31:30 GMT -6
Yeah I don't like how it sounds in the demo video. It sort of made a difference, but it started sounding very phasey really quickly. I can do the same thing by slipping a mult in time a few milliseconds.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 4, 2024 11:13:21 GMT -6
I have an A revision 1176 (Hairball clone) permanently patched from a preamp as my vocal chain. 12:1 and usually hitting around 15db GR on loud spots and I've never really touched it much since getting it where it works best. Can't imagine anything else would work better. I’d love to hear a with vs without vocal take of that. After having early 2000s reissues and quickly-trying a good-portion of the “best-original-versions” at various studios over the years, other than the All-Buttons-In trick on drum rooms (even then, I wish I could find that curve with so much less distortion), I’ve always been “ho-hum” about the 1176. It compresses well (I’m sure that was special in their hey-day), but I’m still waiting to hear the wow-factor. In this case, I really am using a compressor to keep the levels mostly in a smaller dynamic range. Most of the time I'm using compressors to add dynamics. I honestly could use any 1176 here, but the extra bite the A revision gives seems to make vocals pop a little more than the D rev. or the F/G revs. In any case, I like the 1176 because it does keep vocals pretty level without pumping too much. I could never get along with the LA2A due to the weird dark fuzziness it gave vocals. I tried an LA4A and it worked ok, but I could never get it to give me the GR I wanted. I didn't have hardware LA3As until recently but now that I've settle on the 1176, I don't think I'm trying them.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 4, 2024 9:10:50 GMT -6
I have an A revision 1176 (Hairball clone) permanently patched from a preamp as my vocal chain. 12:1 and usually hitting around 15db GR on loud spots and I've never really touched it much since getting it where it works best. Can't imagine anything else would work better.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 1, 2024 9:03:14 GMT -6
Sounds exactly like every YT video I've seen in the last few years.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 1, 2024 9:02:33 GMT -6
50/50 on this being an April fool's joke.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 29, 2024 13:29:37 GMT -6
Usually run the room mics into ValhallaRoom or Verbsuite. Might add some of the individual drums too depending on how wet it needs to be.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 29, 2024 11:42:34 GMT -6
AVB is still somewhat of a viable option. You can go MOTU and add more gear as you go. I think that today I believe that any significant interface is plenty good enough. No need to jump to big names unless you plan to buy into their ecosystems. What you do want from an interface is USEFUL features like plenty of I/O of various types that can be adapted to work in your space. You also want more I/O than you think you'll need because there will always be a time when you "just need another input" to keep the session moving.
I think the biggest thing is that a pro studio will have a tracking room that is treated acoustically. I don't mean a few panels on the wall, but a concerted effort to make it sound *good* or at least neutral. A pro studio will also focus on making the sessions move quickly. Patchbays, plenty of cables and an organization system of some sort so that you don't have to spend a ton of time swapping everything around to do things. Nothing says amateur like an artist watching you burn their time and money away while you try to rearrange your cables/mics or figure out a problem somewhere.
Everyone has an interface and access to mics and gear these days. It's cool to have it, but it's also kind of expected to have as well. What will set you apart is having a space that is better than others acoustically that also feels productive.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 29, 2024 7:16:50 GMT -6
I'd say just do what works. There's no reason to worry about what others think about your patchbay unless you're building a public studio.
|
|