|
Post by svart on Sept 15, 2021 16:32:33 GMT -6
*Asks loaded question* *Gets many opinions contrary to loaded question* *Defends mixer as infallible constant despite valid questions* *Does no testing or verification of any questions or claims* *Claims everyone else must be wrong then proclaims that their original hypothesis must be the correct one anyway* Weird flex, but ok. Yeah, I deleted my post, remembering one of my mentor’s best aphorisms for success in the business: “Know when to care.” I dunno what you posted but the OP's original post and subsequent replies reads like "what's my problem and why is it my converters?".. Then goes on to proclaim that he knew it was because it was his experience.. then why ask?
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Sept 15, 2021 17:02:20 GMT -6
Perhaps we can set our egos aside and be understanding, seeking a solution for the OP. We have a lot of different levels of end users here with vast differences, differing levels of experience, different ways of doing things, and different ways of communicating. When I read the OP, I saw he was having trouble getting his analog rig to capture well. If he didn’t state it that clearly, that does not negate his desire for feedback and potential help. I think there’s room for grace here. FYI, someone I look up to and respect immensely as a professional disagreed with me strongly on this post. That doesn’t mean I need to take it personally and engage in combat. It just means we see something differently and that we reach results in our careers in a different way. In the end, we both get great results and both have track records to back our opinions. And an opinion, like music, is rather subjective. Perhaps the real lesson here is not about converters, but a learning opportunity in communication. We will all always be students of this craft.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Sept 15, 2021 21:56:44 GMT -6
I only tried to offer free tips vs forking out the cash. That why I pointed out put it back through the board, you’ll get the good sound back. A good converter is going to put whatever the board does into its DAC, which is magical, but like the board, only audible in your room. A good DAC doesn’t do anything for ADC, but could sound way better than typical ones. So spend the cash, enjoy it if you want. Which is ideal if you don’t have a board, …but if you do have a board… wouldn’t you want other stuff?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2021 6:18:16 GMT -6
I've found that bouncing in Logic changes the sound a little compared to the pre- bounce mutli-track output. I've wondered if a summing mixer might help. The least invasive conversion I've heard so far is Dangerous Music's, but I haven't had time with some of the higher end converters. The Burl was sweet, but colored, so you have to love that color. Logic has 64 bit floating point mixer now. Bounce in place is 24-bit fixed point. Freezes are 32-bit float. Simply insert 24-bit tdpf dither plug with no noise shaping as the last insert before bounce in place or rendering a mix or stems. That will eliminate the sound of the Logic bounce. Logic’s own dithers are all noise shaped. Now Logic playback will sound different from other DAWs and players but ime, they all sound a little different and there’s nothing you can do about it. Also many of them truncate and sound better with 24-bit dither on the outputs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2021 6:55:02 GMT -6
*Asks loaded question* *Gets many opinions contrary to loaded question* *Defends mixer as infallible constant despite valid questions* *Does no testing or verification of any questions or claims* *Claims everyone else must be wrong then proclaims that their original hypothesis must be the correct one anyway* Weird flex, but ok. Modded old mixer feeding a prosumer converter, what could go wrong? There’s going to be a bunch of crap in the signal path. Why doesn’t the op just sum in the box? It’s all math and no analog circuit can come close to 64-bit floating point summing where the errors will be about -300 dbfs down. Even if it comes out of the prosumer converter narrow, if it has decent separation, it will sound bigger on better systems. Just don’t print the prosumer da onto the stereo bounce. If a clock makes a huge difference with conversion, sell the crappy converter, sell the clock, and buy a good converter imo.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Sept 16, 2021 8:18:50 GMT -6
Perhaps we can set our egos aside and be understanding, seeking a solution for the OP. We have a lot of different levels of end users here with vast differences, differing levels of experience, different ways of doing things, and different ways of communicating. When I read the OP, I saw he was having trouble getting his analog rig to capture well. If he didn’t state it that clearly, that does not negate his desire for feedback and potential help. I think there’s room for grace here. FYI, someone I look up to and respect immensely as a professional disagreed with me strongly on this post. That doesn’t mean I need to take it personally and engage in combat. It just means we see something differently and that we reach results in our careers in a different way. In the end, we both get great results and both have track records to back our opinions. And an opinion, like music, is rather subjective. Perhaps the real lesson here is not about converters, but a learning opportunity in communication. We will all always be students of this craft. Understood, and agree, however the OP did essentially say that he knew better than the suggestions and never offered any kind of support for his dismissal of other's ideas nor any kind of data to support his own. That's the entirety of my issue here. He can buy a new converter if he wants, but it really read like he was fishing for support of his position from the original post and when he didn't get it he got a bit defensive and snarky.
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Sept 16, 2021 8:42:55 GMT -6
Perhaps we can set our egos aside and be understanding, seeking a solution for the OP. We have a lot of different levels of end users here with vast differences, differing levels of experience, different ways of doing things, and different ways of communicating. When I read the OP, I saw he was having trouble getting his analog rig to capture well. If he didn’t state it that clearly, that does not negate his desire for feedback and potential help. I think there’s room for grace here. FYI, someone I look up to and respect immensely as a professional disagreed with me strongly on this post. That doesn’t mean I need to take it personally and engage in combat. It just means we see something differently and that we reach results in our careers in a different way. In the end, we both get great results and both have track records to back our opinions. And an opinion, like music, is rather subjective. Perhaps the real lesson here is not about converters, but a learning opportunity in communication. We will all always be students of this craft. Understood, and agree, however the OP did essentially say that he knew better than the suggestions and never offered any kind of support for his dismissal of other's ideas nor any kind of data to support his own. That's the entirety of my issue here. He can buy a new converter if he wants, but it really read like he was fishing for support of his position from the original post and when he didn't get it he got a bit defensive and snarky. I understand your position Svart. You offer great suggestions. And on a side note - Still rocking two of your units here and they sound amazing.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Sept 16, 2021 9:33:45 GMT -6
tascam da3000 is 830 euros. I just looked at the guts of the DA3K while discussing the Svartbox design and it's extremely similar.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2021 9:50:39 GMT -6
tascam da3000 is 830 euros. I just looked at the guts of the DA3K while discussing the Svartbox design and it's extremely similar. The Tascam 3000 is dirt cheap for a good stereo AD/DA. Tascam interfaces used similar conversion for a while until Gibson cheaped them out.
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on Sept 16, 2021 10:11:39 GMT -6
Not entirely sure what's going on here... haven't read every post... But...
First rule of mixing & capture with analog is to accept that the sound is going to change. Nothing you can do about it.
Come off the desk/summing box... back into DAW, standalone recorder, or Hail Satan... the biggest "tone box" of 'em all... an actual open reel tape machine and the mix is going to sound different then the direct output/monitor of the desk.
Facts of life. Sky is blue water is wet the mix is going to sound at least a little different.
As for fancy pants converters & clocks and whatever else is being yakked about... sure they can make a difference.
But, an awful lot of records. And some of them, very excellent sounding records were made with devices that are a lot shittier then even the most basic $300 interface we can put our mitts on today at GuiTarget.
How many albums were mixed to something like a Panasonic 3700 DAT machine?
Something to ponder.
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Sept 16, 2021 10:18:45 GMT -6
Not entirely sure what's going on here... haven't read every post... But... First rule of mixing & capture with analog is to accept that the sound is going to change. Nothing you can do about it. Come off the desk/summing box... back into DAW, standalone recorder, or Hail Satan... the biggest "tone box" of 'em all... an actual open reel tape machine and the mix is going to sound different then the direct output/monitor of the desk. Facts of life. Sky is blue water is wet the mix is going to sound at least a little different. As for fancy pants converters & clocks and whatever else is being yakked about... sure they can make a difference. But, an awful lot of records. And some of them, very excellent sounding records were made with devices that are a lot shittier then even the most basic $300 interface we can put our mitts on today at GuiTarget. How many albums were mixed to something like a Panasonic 3700 DAT machine? Something to ponder. And the scores of records tracked through the :shudders: Digi 192 or the :weeps: 96. Records that sound better than anything I will ever do with my highfalutin' Burl Mothership, because talent and know-how 45th-president modern digital conversion by a factor of magnitudes.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Sept 16, 2021 12:42:38 GMT -6
Not entirely sure what's going on here... haven't read every post... But... First rule of mixing & capture with analog is to accept that the sound is going to change. Nothing you can do about it. Come off the desk/summing box... back into DAW, standalone recorder, or Hail Satan... the biggest "tone box" of 'em all... an actual open reel tape machine and the mix is going to sound different then the direct output/monitor of the desk. Facts of life. Sky is blue water is wet the mix is going to sound at least a little different. As for fancy pants converters & clocks and whatever else is being yakked about... sure they can make a difference. But, an awful lot of records. And some of them, very excellent sounding records were made with devices that are a lot shittier then even the most basic $300 interface we can put our mitts on today at GuiTarget. How many albums were mixed to something like a Panasonic 3700 DAT machine? Something to ponder. And the scores of records tracked through the :shudders: Digi 192 or the :weeps: 96. Records that sound better than anything I will ever do with my highfalutin' Burl Mothership, because talent and know-how 45th-president modern digital conversion by a factor of magnitudes. Not to mention the lack of DAW calibrations, just slamming the converters with a hot signal "because it sounds good" with no regard to peaking at some arbitrary value, etc..
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,937
|
Post by ericn on Sept 16, 2021 12:45:03 GMT -6
Any console requires listening and learning what each output sounds like and adjusting ones work flow. The comment that the headphone out has the same circuit baffles me, your going to need some kind of headphone amp, that circuit isn’t going to be on the line level outputs. Also matching headphone load to amp section can be a big deal. It very well could be conversion or how he’s hitting it and I agree monitoring the DAW would be a great step, but I think my Uhber Geek friends Savart and EMMR will agree it’s always smart to play around with finished ref. Tracks some tones and a scope to learn what both your AD and DA are doing just like tape there is a fair amount of analog in any converter. For instance I just demoed one of the after market highly regulated PSU’s for the Mytek, yes the bass was improved yes a better soundstage and yes lower distortion .
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on Sept 16, 2021 13:05:06 GMT -6
And the scores of records tracked through the :shudders: Digi 192 or the :weeps: 96. Records that sound better than anything I will ever do with my highfalutin' Burl Mothership, because talent and know-how How about the Digidesign 888? Countless times I'd have to fly something from 2" to toolz & back again through those and you just knew the audio was going to take a hit... be sitting there thinking man, I hope we don't have to do too much of this... Not too long ago saw a thing with, I think it was Joe Barresi who said that he'd occasionally still mix down to an Alesis masterdisc at 16 bit because he liked how aggressive it was. Talk about embracing the change! Could also look at Ken Andrews & Failure "Fantastic Planet" - There's a record he made with a Smackie and ADAT's. Ok surrounded by a mountain of outboard and mixed to a Studer A80... but the core was still Smackie/Adat and that's an album that's still a high water mark for a lot of people. And it is a very fine sounding album! Today anyone can buy a UA Apollo and its light years better sounding then the Smackie Adat combo. If you can't make a record with that you can't make a record with anything.
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Sept 16, 2021 13:46:19 GMT -6
Any console requires listening and learning what each output sounds like and adjusting ones work flow. The comment that the headphone out has the same circuit baffles me, your going to need some kind of headphone amp, that circuit isn’t going to be on the line level outputs. Also matching headphone load to amp section can be a big deal.It very well could be conversion or how he’s hitting it and I agree monitoring the DAW would be a great step, but I think my Uhber Geek friends Savart and EMMR will agree it’s always smart to play around with finished ref. Tracks some tones and a scope to learn what both your AD and DA are doing just like tape there is a fair amount of analog in any converter. For instance I just demoed one of the after market highly regulated PSU’s for the Mytek, yes the bass was improved yes a better soundstage and yes lower distortion . That was the point i was trying to make, but it seems the OP wasn't interested in hearing it so I gave up 🤷🏻♀️ The HP out on my api is pretty lame sounding. Dumpy, low detail, wimpy bass, attenuated HF extension, all the usual stuff. But, it follows the same signal path as the monitor outs. On the other hand, if i send my desk's output to my aviom system and listen thru that, it sounds worlds better. And back when i had a snazzy SPL headphone amp, the cans sounded absolutely fabulous coming off the desk.
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on Sept 16, 2021 13:47:24 GMT -6
And the scores of records tracked through the :shudders: Digi 192 or the :weeps: 96. Records that sound better than anything I will ever do with my highfalutin' Burl Mothership, because talent and know-how How about the Digidesign 888? Countless times I'd have to fly something from 2" to toolz & back again through those and you just knew the audio was going to take a hit... be sitting there thinking man, I hope we don't have to do too much of this... Not too long ago saw a thing with, I think it was Joe Barresi who said that he'd occasionally still mix down to an Alesis masterdisc at 16 bit because he liked how aggressive it was. Talk about embracing the change! Could also look at Ken Andrews & Failure "Fantastic Planet" - There's a record he made with a Smackie and ADAT's. Ok surrounded by a mountain of outboard and mixed to a Studer A80... but the core was still Smackie/Adat and that's an album that's still a high water mark for a lot of people. And it is a very fine sounding album! Today anyone can buy a UA Apollo and its light years better sounding then the Smackie Adat combo. If you can't make a record with that you can't make a record with anything. Ha i am a weirdo and prefer 888s to the 192s. I even prefer the 96s to the 192s, but that could be all in my head. I really hate the fucking 192s 🤣
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,937
|
Post by ericn on Sept 16, 2021 14:16:49 GMT -6
How about the Digidesign 888? Countless times I'd have to fly something from 2" to toolz & back again through those and you just knew the audio was going to take a hit... be sitting there thinking man, I hope we don't have to do too much of this... Not too long ago saw a thing with, I think it was Joe Barresi who said that he'd occasionally still mix down to an Alesis masterdisc at 16 bit because he liked how aggressive it was. Talk about embracing the change! Could also look at Ken Andrews & Failure "Fantastic Planet" - There's a record he made with a Smackie and ADAT's. Ok surrounded by a mountain of outboard and mixed to a Studer A80... but the core was still Smackie/Adat and that's an album that's still a high water mark for a lot of people. And it is a very fine sounding album! Today anyone can buy a UA Apollo and its light years better sounding then the Smackie Adat combo. If you can't make a record with that you can't make a record with anything. Ha i am a weirdo and prefer 888s to the 192s. I even prefer the 96s to the 192s, but that could be all in my head. I really hate the fucking 192s 🤣 Benny I almost did a spit take, but 888’s were a great AES interface I will give you that😜 Again I’ll admit plenty of records that sound great do so inspite of the 888 and it’s all about what works for you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2021 15:02:03 GMT -6
Not entirely sure what's going on here... haven't read every post... But... First rule of mixing & capture with analog is to accept that the sound is going to change. Nothing you can do about it. Come off the desk/summing box... back into DAW, standalone recorder, or Hail Satan... the biggest "tone box" of 'em all... an actual open reel tape machine and the mix is going to sound different then the direct output/monitor of the desk. Facts of life. Sky is blue water is wet the mix is going to sound at least a little different. As for fancy pants converters & clocks and whatever else is being yakked about... sure they can make a difference. But, an awful lot of records. And some of them, very excellent sounding records were made with devices that are a lot shittier then even the most basic $300 interface we can put our mitts on today at GuiTarget. How many albums were mixed to something like a Panasonic 3700 DAT machine? Something to ponder. Tons of old rap and metal records and demos were done to Portastudios and bang harder than anything today in those genres. Alesis and Mackie are hifi in comparison.
|
|
|
Post by nomorel2020 on Nov 21, 2021 12:49:30 GMT -6
Lmao at people claiming high end converters worth 2,5k+ sound the same as crappy prosumer interfaces. No amount of gaslighting and technical jargon makes this true. I ask you again: why would these expensive boxes never go on sale if they were basically the same?
I don't know what you guys are referring to but none of the stuff that holds up sonically was recorded on crappy gear, even back in the day. And a lot of stories about lofi recording are just that, stories which add to this diy myth that's more often than not fabricated to add a mystique. Billy Eilish? Yeah, she definitely didn't mix her stuff on a focusrite 2i2 but instead got it mixed professionally in a very expensive studio, regardless of what they say. Was T-Pain's I'm sprung recorded on a crappy mbox? Yes! Was it re-recorded in a high end studio with thousands of dollars worth of gear before it was released? Also yes. Source? I talked to the engineer lol. If anyone wants to give me their high end gear because everything apparently sounds so good nowadays, hit me up! I'll take those high end converters and those pesky analogue consoles off you. This type of gate keeping is really insidious and frankly outdated.
Of course one can make a hit song on a focusrite, no doubt about it. But will it sonically hold up to big productions mixed on expensive gear? No, period. One should differentiate those two. And my original question was not how good a song was but how to capture the depth achieved by running tracks through a good mixer with transformers. If one has nothing to add, please don't comment.
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Nov 21, 2021 13:18:57 GMT -6
Save up, sell stuff you’re not using, purchase a Lavry Gold and be done with it.
|
|