More info on big-kahuna-pros converters use

BTW, I REALLY believe in the placebo effect, confirmation bias, personal favorites or any other "technically WRONG" bias that gets me excited to work and create. I could care less if I'm WRONG, as long as I THINK I'm right. All the testing and BS means nothing if you are so caught up in it to make something meaningful.

How many "wrong" things do we do every day, because we either believe in it or like the way "wrong" sounds???

Anyway that said.....

85 % of the sessions I've done or attended in LA from Capitol on down to smaller basic studio's use ONE converter. The much maligned Digi 192. Over the last couple of years they are slowly switching over to the Avid HD 192's or whatever they call them now. The other 15% are mostly older Apogee's and uber high end Prism's (sorry, can't remember the model.) The Prism's are mostly on UBER high end Scoring Stages like the Sony Stage or Warner Bros. The Orch guys seem to really like those.

Studio's who are serious to make a living at it seem to all fall into one boat - PT and 192. At least in LA. I'm sure it's different to a degree in London or other places. Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule, but IMO, once you get up to the pro level, converters are such a small part of the equation that I'll use whatever is there and get the same results. The closer it is to the performers lips or fingers, the more important it is to me. The closer it is to the computer, the less important it becomes to me.

drbill ( & others, please chime in ) : yes you are right, converters seem to play a small part in the equation, even for big studios/mixers around the globe, seeing the amount of Digi 192 that have been used on countless pro recordings. What I still wonder is this : there are 10s of high end companies that produce very expensive AD/DA Multichannel boxes. Producing them means there is a market for it. Besides for mastering, where you see a lot of these expensive brands products present as stereo units, where do these multichannel boxes go....in secret spaces of studios/producers homes? or are they intended for hobbyists with a lot of dough to spend, kinda like high end "audiophile" stuff?
Or is it a dying market?
PS: I am not fishing about the relevance of said high end converters, because as I stated earlier I think that if they make a difference in the process for anyone, then great!

regards, Nico

Yeah...there are obviously two factions of people on this board that believe two different things. I happen to believe that the converter you use is the basic building block for the rest of your signal chain. I do, however believe that the quality of the microphone has the biggest effect on the quality of your sound. Personally, I have chosen not to put $7000-$10000 into a microphone...the truth of the matter is that it ALL matters. Every piece of the chain. I believe that the difference in cheaper ($1500 and up) microphones is smaller than the difference in cheap converters vs. more expensive converters. YMMV. I would say it really comes down to doing your own tests and being comfortable with your own results.

I think the bell curve definitely works for whatever piece of gear. Once you get above the curve, throwing more money at something does not necessarily mean 1:1 performance increase. I think most things at the bottom of the curve are useless toys, while everything from 1/4 to 3/4s of the curve is totally useful and can be used without worry, and everything at the top is generally just dick measuring.

There are exceptions, but you only have to look at what the pros use to figure out what works and what doesn't. Time and money they have spent has already weeded out the stuff that won't work. Everything left is what it truly takes to enable your skills.

I personally think that the most important part of the sound is using the mics and gear correctly, rather than the brand of the gear. Too many times I've heard someone with a U87 and neve preamp going into an HD converter and it sounds like crap. Moving the mic another inch on the speaker cone would have made it sound 90% better, but choosing a different mic/preamp/converter would not have.  Or, maybe someone used a great preamp with low gain and put a pumping 1176 on it and jacked up the output and recorded a big hissy mess.  Nothing you can do to fix that correctly.  You may be able to put a band-aid on it but now your mixing skills will be questioned by others and it'll become fodder for the "you don't need good/expensive gear, just listen to how bad that neve and 1176 sound, my digi001 and compression plug-in preset#1 sound so much better!" crowd who aim to justify their cheapness.

He's just saying that considering how the other thread turned out - the one and only locked thread on RGO - that he was surprised someone would bring it up a day later. That's fine - this thread seems to be more informative and less "I know what's scientific and right and all you other assholes are dumb..."...You are free to talk about whatever you want on here...

thanks admin, it didn't rub the wrong way, by talking and reading about it, I realize it is just not a very hot topic.
Kinda how on a non-mechanical-oriented supercar forum, discussing a under-the-hood element might not generate much typing on the keyboards

I will ask one more little question then, to oblige, and then move on to greener, transistor & tube filled pastures =

Regarding multichannel high end converters: are there some specifically preferred for tracking - mixing - summing ( digi or analog ) among everybody here, and why ?

Ok with you admin to open up the thread to us, mere mortals, and leave the big kahunas out, for a while ?

regards, Nico

If you don't like the way I'm running my forum, you are free to leave anytime you like. If you keep up this shit, I'll make the decision for you.

I think it's ok coming form a guy who has been here for a while with 400+ posts. Guy that just signed up with 5 posts, not so much. JMO.

I can't argue that.

Jazz, SMH dude, although your premiss is wildly off, pot meet kettle... Your attitude is combative, and condescending as hell? What have you done in your life that makes you king shit? I whole heartedly disagree with you on some things, and my research and findings were scientific in my own controlled space, are you calling me a liar/ besides a cunt? The shoot out you did, was NOT in my control, and comes off as less than useful to me, i've suggested to everyone, multiple times, "get the shit and find out on your own"! I also pointed out to you on the "what i'm working on" sub forum that the mp3 320 sounded smeared on the hi hats, compared to the wave file, but you ignored that?so now what? Save the high horsing BS for gearslutz, you're not talking to a bunch of kids here dude, and you're managing to "piss" too many of us who aren't shoving our point of view down other peoples throats,....off!

If you want to focus on the name calling, great. But you're not dealing with my point so I'm going back to that.

Ethan presented a case in the last thread and was met with total derision. Like the 'bias' in the URL of the test? I stepped in to defend the argument partially - referencing Svarts point that bad board designs often contribute more than the chips themselves - and said that while a few cheap bits of kit like Mboxes and Laptop soundcards suffer with noise and groundloops, most DAC's are perfectly good and have no audible difference (the one case I remember sounding noticeably bad was a Digi 192 that died a few weeks later).

John twisted the argument, as he has done again by insinuating I'm running off people who contribute when that's the case I was making against his behavior, to make it out that I was saying all soundcards sounded the same and that I was wrong. I pointed out that you did that, pointed out you'd no evidence amounted to make your case either way, insulted you back (which was a mistake, to descend to the same level) and you got buttmad and shut the thread. Then you made a bitchy little passive aggressive sticky (in which for some reason you wouldn't name me), for the second time, complaining about forum behavior. Then you decided to reference me in the thread passively again, and the cattyness got to me.

As for the incessant complaining you're now complaining about..where? Outside of your head, where?

I'm nothing special in the audio community and I don't think anyone here makes themselves out to be either, but if you're not willing to let your opinions clash you will learn nothing. I'm pretty sure 'everyone' I'm making mad is about 2-3 people, but it's not my boat. I'll gladly get off and everyone can nod sagely about how the same 3 interfaces are all very good. Everyone can all agree on the things they do and get along, and then throw toys out of the pram when they don't.

tony You've never presented a test or any sort of repeatable method, which is the nature of a fair test. Untested factors need to blameless to assert a test is fair or you're fooling yourself. This is not Alex Jones tier conspiracy, this is the basis of our understanding of most things. If you made a valid point and I skipped over it, sorry, but mostly it's been all awash in a muggy sea of subjectivity-to-avoid-scrutiny. Again - it's fine to have that opinion and your advice is also perfectly sound in terms of 'try it and see' - but the attitude that this inner truth is somehow as real as objective measurements and testing is fallacious.

nico I was aiming nothing at you except the apology for the thread derailment. Sorry about that, again.