|
Post by nomorel2020 on Sept 11, 2021 9:12:19 GMT -6
THe mixer in question is a pretty decent studer 169 clone with lots of transformers on every channel. If I monitor off the mixer as opposed to in the DAW the mix is wide, very spacious and has lots of dimension and punch. As soon as it gets in the box it sounds flat, alot narrower and loses it's magic. I have a very expensive clock which I bought and it improved transients and clarity by alot but the width is still far from what I hear from the mixer- would the missing link be a very expensive AD or am I missing something?
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Sept 11, 2021 9:40:30 GMT -6
Trying to understand your setup, are you mixing through the studer and recording the output of the stereo bus back into the DAW?
If that’s the case then yeah maybe you need a really nice AD. But you might want to consider a standalone, high end, digits recorder.
What’s your current conversion?
|
|
|
Post by Chad on Sept 11, 2021 9:49:25 GMT -6
To piggyback on Tbone81's wisdom, if you're needing a high end digital recorder, my recommendation is a DA-3000 by Tascam.
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Sept 11, 2021 10:16:01 GMT -6
This is why I monitor the armed track in PT that I'll be printing to. I wanna hear what that AD is doing, and adjust accordingly.
That said, when you monitor the printed mix and it sounds inferior, are you coming in through alternate 2-tr inputs on the desk? Or are you routing it through the same bus feeding your master section that your analog mix used? I ask because some times the ext src inputs are just kinda lame sounding, and THAT might be what you're hearing (as opposed to a AD issue)
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Sept 11, 2021 10:29:52 GMT -6
And the resolution you’re using to capture the analog?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2021 10:36:38 GMT -6
Feed the AD with the best sounding outs from the mixer. It could be the AD or DA on your interface. Unless you have something at least Lynx or Apogee good (not a duet 1 or 2), at least one of them is usually heavily gimped, eg ime Focusrite and RME firefaces it’s usually the DA and for MOTU, the AD since the ESS Sabre ones came out.
|
|
|
Post by nomorel2020 on Sept 11, 2021 11:41:41 GMT -6
Trying to understand your setup, are you mixing through the studer and recording the output of the stereo bus back into the DAW? If that’s the case then yeah maybe you need a really nice AD. But you might want to consider a standalone, high end, digits recorder. What’s your current conversion? I send stuff out to the mixer, print it back in the DAW and sum through it also. I have a presonus quantum with a bla micro clock xb. The latter hugely improved both ad and da but it's still not quite what I hear on the analog monitor out...
|
|
|
Post by nomorel2020 on Sept 11, 2021 11:42:13 GMT -6
And the resolution you’re using to capture the analog? What do you mean with resolution? Bit depth or dynamic range?
|
|
|
Post by nomorel2020 on Sept 11, 2021 11:43:34 GMT -6
This is why I monitor the armed track in PT that I'll be printing to. I wanna hear what that AD is doing, and adjust accordingly. That said, when you monitor the printed mix and it sounds inferior, are you coming in through alternate 2-tr inputs on the desk? Or are you routing it through the same bus feeding your master section that your analog mix used? I ask because some times the ext src inputs are just kinda lame sounding, and THAT might be what you're hearing (as opposed to a AD issue) I'm monitoring off the headphone out of my mixer. It's the same path as the monitor out. The master outs have additonal big trannies on them and are way hotter so I doubt the sound would deteriorate as opposed to getting even bigger.
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Sept 11, 2021 12:01:35 GMT -6
And the resolution you’re using to capture the analog? What do you mean with resolution? Bit depth or dynamic range? Those are the same thing. Guessing he meant bit depth and sr
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Sept 11, 2021 12:05:29 GMT -6
This is why I monitor the armed track in PT that I'll be printing to. I wanna hear what that AD is doing, and adjust accordingly. That said, when you monitor the printed mix and it sounds inferior, are you coming in through alternate 2-tr inputs on the desk? Or are you routing it through the same bus feeding your master section that your analog mix used? I ask because some times the ext src inputs are just kinda lame sounding, and THAT might be what you're hearing (as opposed to a AD issue) I'm monitoring off the headphone out of my mixer. It's the same path as the monitor out. The master outs have additonal big trannies on them and are way hotter so I doubt the sound would deteriorate as opposed to getting even bigger. How are you feeding the hp out? Does your master section have ext src inputs fed by your daw? In any case, Same path + a headphone amp could still be a cause. That’s another spot console makers tend to cheap out and would account for a change in sound. Unless youre doing the mixing in cans too? I think a detailed walkthrough of your signal paths would be really helpful in troubleshooting
|
|
|
Post by nomorel2020 on Sept 11, 2021 12:39:52 GMT -6
I'm monitoring off the headphone out of my mixer. It's the same path as the monitor out. The master outs have additonal big trannies on them and are way hotter so I doubt the sound would deteriorate as opposed to getting even bigger. How are you feeding the hp out? Does your master section have ext src inputs fed by your daw? In any case, Same path + a headphone amp could still be a cause. That’s another spot console makers tend to cheap out and would account for a change in sound. Unless youre doing the mixing in cans too? I think a detailed walkthrough of your signal paths would be really helpful in troubleshooting The headphone out on my mixer sounds great - thats the problem. What arrives in my daw does not. The headphone out is the same as the monitor out and master output except the master out has more voltage and a tranny on the output.
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Sept 11, 2021 13:14:39 GMT -6
had a same-y problem with my Teac A-3300SX tapemachine. the headphone out always sounded spectacularly good but the line outs into the DAW was a different story ...
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Sept 11, 2021 14:17:30 GMT -6
How are you feeding the hp out? Does your master section have ext src inputs fed by your daw? In any case, Same path + a headphone amp could still be a cause. That’s another spot console makers tend to cheap out and would account for a change in sound. Unless youre doing the mixing in cans too? I think a detailed walkthrough of your signal paths would be really helpful in troubleshooting The headphone out on my mixer sounds great - thats the problem. What arrives in my daw does not. The headphone out is the same as the monitor out and master output except the master out has more voltage and a tranny on the output. Maybe the output section is saturating the transformer or otherwise folding up in a way you don’t like and can’t hear except on playback from the DA. Maybe your console has some other issue. Or maybe everything works great, you have amazing ears, and are dissatisfied with the Presonus. Maybe you’d prefer a DSD capture. Or tape. It’s pretty hard to say from here.
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Sept 11, 2021 14:41:36 GMT -6
agree you should look into dsd capture.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Sept 11, 2021 15:56:54 GMT -6
I used to have this issue in a studio I worked in with an SSL duality. Monitoring through the desk was great. Printed mix back in PT was lame via Lynx aorua 16 converters. I ended up instead printing mixes to the RADAR at 24/96k and it was great. Most files were coming off PT at 44.1k.
So could be your A/D. Could be sample rate/bit depth. Could b a combo of things. Work through it systematically and you'll figure it out. Change one thing at a time until you get what your looking for.
Do the free things first. CHange the sample rate and bit depth. I've also found sometimes that recording in a stereo track vs dual mono can make a difference on some daws, but honestly not so much on PT.
|
|
|
Post by nomorel2020 on Sept 11, 2021 16:22:18 GMT -6
The headphone out on my mixer sounds great - thats the problem. What arrives in my daw does not. The headphone out is the same as the monitor out and master output except the master out has more voltage and a tranny on the output. Maybe the output section is saturating the transformer or otherwise folding up in a way you don’t like and can’t hear except on playback from the DA. Maybe your console has some other issue. Or maybe everything works great, you have amazing ears, and are dissatisfied with the Presonus. Maybe you’d prefer a DSD capture. Or tape. It’s pretty hard to say from here. I checked the schematics- the monitor out is literally the same as the headphone out. And i compared the master out to the monitor out- the master out sounded even bigger and better in the daw, but still worse than analogue. The clock made a huge difference in phase coherency but still doesn't sound as dimensional as what I'm hearing...
|
|
|
Post by nomorel2020 on Sept 11, 2021 16:23:29 GMT -6
I used to have this issue in a studio I worked in with an SSL duality. Monitoring through the desk was great. Printed mix back in PT was lame via Lynx aorua 16 converters. I ended up instead printing mixes to the RADAR at 24/96k and it was great. Most files were coming off PT at 44.1k. So could be your A/D. Could be sample rate/bit depth. Could b a combo of things. Work through it systematically and you'll figure it out. Change one thing at a time until you get what your looking for. Do the free things first. CHange the sample rate and bit depth. I've also found sometimes that recording in a stereo track vs dual mono can make a difference on some daws, but honestly not so much on PT. I do everything in ableton pretty much. I don't think dual mono recording is even possible unfortunately. As for 48khz- from what I've unscientifically tested 44.1 sounded best to me on this sound card- how did you test yours?
|
|
|
Post by nomorel2020 on Sept 11, 2021 16:25:09 GMT -6
agree you should look into dsd capture. Why would DSD capture change anything if it still needs to be converted into bits and bytes? I don't follow this answer because I thought digital files are either losless or lossy. From what I gathered AD capture is crucial for hybrid mixing.
|
|
|
Post by nomorel2020 on Sept 11, 2021 16:29:05 GMT -6
What do you mean with resolution? Bit depth or dynamic range? Those are the same thing. Guessing he meant bit depth and sr Pls correct me if I'm wrong but I always thought bit rate was describing digital headroom while dynamic range is a term in analogue and digital domains. Analogue headroom is purely determined by voltage. High voltage mixers like the RND 5060 or SSLs have high voltage rails= super high output and apparently a more dynamic and "large format console type" sound
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Sept 11, 2021 16:37:03 GMT -6
agree you should look into dsd capture. Why would DSD capture change anything if it still needs to be converted into bits and bytes? I don't follow this answer because I thought digital files are either losless or lossy. From what I gathered AD capture is crucial for hybrid mixing. having had the same issues as yourself the only way i could digitally capture the console mix so it sounded as close as possible to the monitor feed was with dsd. dsd is the most analogue sounding digital format i've heard. only reason i don't use it at all stages is because it's expensive and doesn't play well with plugins. you record your console out with a stand alone dsd box and then convert the dsd capture to pcm itb with conversion software. effectively use the dsd like master tape. other than that i would be capturing my mixes at 96khz min because it sounds better to my ears.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Sept 11, 2021 17:02:48 GMT -6
I used to have this issue in a studio I worked in with an SSL duality. Monitoring through the desk was great. Printed mix back in PT was lame via Lynx aorua 16 converters. I ended up instead printing mixes to the RADAR at 24/96k and it was great. Most files were coming off PT at 44.1k. So could be your A/D. Could be sample rate/bit depth. Could b a combo of things. Work through it systematically and you'll figure it out. Change one thing at a time until you get what your looking for. Do the free things first. CHange the sample rate and bit depth. I've also found sometimes that recording in a stereo track vs dual mono can make a difference on some daws, but honestly not so much on PT. I do everything in ableton pretty much. I don't think dual mono recording is even possible unfortunately. As for 48khz- from what I've unscientifically tested 44.1 sounded best to me on this sound card- how did you test yours? Just record all the different setups and then compare them. If you want to do blind tests use Hofa's free A/B tool. I personally think recording in anything less than 96k is pointless but that's just me. I don't mind rendering files out to 44.1 after that. But to capture stuff I do min 96k. A lot of my chamber music work is 384k agree you should look into dsd capture. Why would DSD capture change anything if it still needs to be converted into bits and bytes? I don't follow this answer because I thought digital files are either losless or lossy. From what I gathered AD capture is crucial for hybrid mixing. DSD is a different way to capture digital information. Its using delta sigma modulation in pulse signal modulation as opposed to Pulse code modulation(PCM). It uses single bit values. You can read about it here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_Stream_DigitalI do not think this is a route you'll need to take personally. Plus good DSD converters are hella pricey. And I think DSD sounds soft compared to PCM which is why i work in DXD. That and doing anything with a DSD file is basically impossible after the fact unless you convert it to PCM anyways.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2021 11:12:02 GMT -6
DSD was a failed format that crashed and burned spectacularly when “multi-bit “ (most just run multiple decimators and modulators but TI uses a hybrid approach with resistors like earlier DA chips) delta sigma converters came out in the late 90s that all output pcm and use switchers faster than 64x 44.1khz. DSD literally can’t take advantage of such technological advances. Blackdawg DXD is just 24-bit, 352.8 kHz pcm.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2021 11:19:29 GMT -6
I think the softness of DSD has something to do with the circa mid 90s processing. I’ve noticed it too on hybrid SACD. The SACD side always sounded softer and more processed if the same master was used for both layers and not a bounce from the dsd layer.
Edit: damn it is indeed just distortion from the processing. Skimmed some papers.
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Sept 12, 2021 11:32:26 GMT -6
Trying to understand your setup, are you mixing through the studer and recording the output of the stereo bus back into the DAW? If that’s the case then yeah maybe you need a really nice AD. But you might want to consider a standalone, high end, digits recorder. What’s your current conversion? I send stuff out to the mixer, print it back in the DAW and sum through it also. I have a presonus quantum with a bla micro clock xb. The latter hugely improved both ad and da but it's still not quite what I hear on the analog monitor out...
You expect it to sound the same. If that's your expectation, why the mixer? Sure, it changes the game ads analog artifacts.
Try to recreate your summing / mixing scenario in the DAW with plug ins, and it will sound different, aka wider more punchy etc.
|
|