|
Post by wiz on Feb 15, 2022 20:12:22 GMT -6
The burl reminds me of my old pair of 111C western electrics that I used to run through.
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 15, 2022 21:00:42 GMT -6
First of all thanks for doing this, appreciate the time and effort. There is a problem with the second set of files, the no fx files... they are both the convert clk , no burl file there. I listened to them all and like all of the burl ones.... I am listening to the transformers on the burl and its AD... would need the burl no fx file to here just the difference clocks make... I wonder why the null file is sort of pulsing at the same rate....? Great sounding track, right up my alley, geeze I wish I lived in Nashville sometimes....8) cheers Wiz Should be fixed
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 15, 2022 21:10:54 GMT -6
First of all thanks for doing this, appreciate the time and effort. There is a problem with the second set of files, the no fx files... they are both the convert clk , no burl file there. I listened to them all and like all of the burl ones.... I am listening to the transformers on the burl and its AD... would need the burl no fx file to here just the difference clocks make... I wonder why the null file is sort of pulsing at the same rate....? Great sounding track, right up my alley, geeze I wish I lived in Nashville sometimes....8) cheers Wiz So just to clarify - they're all going through the Dangerous Convert 2...the only difference in all of these is the clock. Well, and they're all going back through the Burl to print. So, it's not exactly what I'm hearing (because the trip through the Burl is affecting the tone) but the differences should be the same as I'm hearing. Really, I think the only valid ones to listen to are the first set. It's going analog out of the Convert straight into the Burl. I'm not hitting the Burl hard at all, so the transformers should be affecting them less. I actually brought the clip gain up for suitable listening level. Can you hear differences? Or am I just cray cray? And yeah - the pumping was weird on the null. But the fact that you can really only hear the mid and top confirms to me what I thought I was hearing - the Burl is more forward in that area. Also, could the swaying back and forth be the clocking not staying consistent with the Burl clocking the convert? I have no idea.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Feb 15, 2022 21:36:37 GMT -6
The files still aren't right I don't think.. different sections of music...
Its all good though, the burl I definitely prefer..
thanks gain
Wiz
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Feb 15, 2022 21:37:57 GMT -6
What happens when you use the burls clock, but not its AD.
Eg run an internal bounce twice, once clocked to the burl once to the Dangerous...that was my original idea... just to hear the difference in clocks
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 15, 2022 23:13:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Feb 16, 2022 1:11:45 GMT -6
Seems closer... and I went to null them in my daw, and they are actually 180 out of phase to each other as downloaded... Still got that weird pulsing thing.. I don't know what that is... Burl sounds good
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 16, 2022 8:23:15 GMT -6
Hey popmann - I remember you mentioning that once you started hitting the Burl less when you printed, you really loved it. I noticed here when I printed that (somewhat) mixed one that it can really add a lot of top/upper mid info when you push those transformers. Was that your experience? I think it works like tape—clipping the HF off the transient so it sounds brighter, despite the HF removal….so, if the mic is a bit pokey, pushing it harder takes care of that, while not being rolled off sounding. But, its a little dark, pushing harder opens that up too. Its subtle either way, in that i cant tell its there in the result—nothing sounds too bright or wooly if you hear an adjust accordingly. It allows me too pump more HF EQ on the way in…becuase it doesnt get all “mackie circuit sounding” and edgey. Just gets more open.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Feb 16, 2022 9:39:02 GMT -6
Hey popmann - I remember you mentioning that once you started hitting the Burl less when you printed, you really loved it. I noticed here when I printed that (somewhat) mixed one that it can really add a lot of top/upper mid info when you push those transformers. Was that your experience? I think it works like tape—clipping the HF off the transient so it sounds brighter, despite the HF removal….so, if the mic is a bit pokey, pushing it harder takes care of that, while not being rolled off sounding. But, its a little dark, pushing harder opens that up too. Its subtle either way, in that i cant tell its there in the result—nothing sounds too bright or wooly if you hear an adjust accordingly. It allows me too pump more HF EQ on the way in…becuase it doesnt get all “mackie circuit sounding” and edgey. Just gets more open. Not really. Clipping squares the sines. Square waves can be modeled as an infinite sum of odd order sinewaves. Squares with finite rise/fall times can't be totally odd harmonics, so some profile of even-order harmonics is also present depending on how distorted the sine becomes on both the positive and negative phases. Underdamped circuits can allow ringing on the transitions that add complexity to the higher harmonic content in the form of intermodulation, which is part of why transformers add "sweetness" to our ears. You're adding harmonic distortion at integer intervals of the sine being compressed, so you're ALWAYS adding more (fake) HF when push into a load that clips a signal. However, since that new harmonic content did not exist prior, it's considered distortion. Nonlinearities add more distortion at higher frequencies so things start to sound brighter and more complex than they really are. So it's not more open. In fact, it's more spectrally impure and dense. Our human ears LOVE distortion though. People tend to dislike "cleaner" sounding gear despite generally believing they require cleaner-sounding gear to get higher fidelity. It's also the same reason that people don't really like super-low jitter converters. The jitter can be euphonic in the same way small amounts of distortion are.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Feb 16, 2022 10:33:45 GMT -6
Distortion. Those Coil CA-70 Gates SA-70 are over 1% distortion at +4, mostly in the treble, and we all run much hotter than that. Many talk about how hifi and open they sound….and they do! It’s all tricks.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 16, 2022 11:05:19 GMT -6
I pulled Burl Clk and Dangerous Clk files into a session and used the ADPTR Metric AB thingy. Matched all volumes...and they virtually sound the same. By the measurements, the frequencies are no different, but whatever the reason, I perceive the Burl clock making things a little brighter in the upper range and tighter and punchier on the bottom. I do notice the Burl clock sounds slightly wider to my ear...I could close my eyes, click back and forth, and pick it out every time.
All this was done listening with the Convert clocking with its internal clock. And yes, I realize this is super nerdy and no one cares, but I find it interesting.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 16, 2022 11:12:08 GMT -6
Oh well...I switched the clocking over to the Burl clock and did the same test. Couldn't reliably pick out which was which. lol. So just when I had decided I was going to clock everything with the Burl, I'm now deciding to possibly un-decide.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 16, 2022 11:21:06 GMT -6
OK - I don't care what measurements say...listening to "Liquid Spirit" Gregory Porter. It's a very forward vocal in the 1khz range. It DEFINITELY sounds more harsh with the Burl clocking. So all this to say...I think I'm going to relent that I am not smarter than Chris Muth and can't find something that makes his converter sound better lol.
Although, I'd love to hear that Burl DA
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Feb 16, 2022 11:29:51 GMT -6
Way back when Cranesong had a CD that was a modulating dither, people liked that for a minute, made things ‘wider/softer’. Imagine…..a CD of silence which is a dither you could import and use….
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 16, 2022 11:45:05 GMT -6
OK...just to sum it all up again...listening to a bunch of different references. The Burl clock makes things a little wider, and a little more bright in the midrange. Some records I know that aren't harsh in the midrange sound a little harsh in the midrange.
|
|
|
Post by sopwith on Feb 16, 2022 13:55:22 GMT -6
I perceive the Burl clock making things a little brighter in the upper range and tighter and punchier on the bottom. I do notice the Burl clock sounds slightly wider to my ear...
Yea I heard the same thing in your examples clocked to the Burl, and my monitoring situation is pretty average compared to some of you. More energy in the high mids and they're pushed forward a bit, slightly tighter low end, wider soundstage.
That combination sounds great on really up-front acoustic guitars. Track sounds nice either way.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Feb 16, 2022 14:53:32 GMT -6
Been thinking about how a converter can make something sound wider despite there being a singular monotonic clock source. Wider generally means there must be a phase or time discrepancy between the L and R streams that decouples the common-mode signal slightly.
Since I don't know how the guts of any of these boxes work I can't assume that they have separate A/D ICs for L and R. Knowing that the sampling clock will be common between the channels, that only leaves the L/R frame (sync) clock. This is the clock that tells the IC whether it's handling Left or Right audio frames. Higher jitter might mean that these frames are timed slightly differently than another converter leading to higher Haas effect and/or small phase discrepancies.
|
|
|
Post by sopwith on Feb 16, 2022 15:02:14 GMT -6
Been thinking about how a converter can make something sound wider despite there being a singular monotonic clock source. Wider generally means there must be a phase or time discrepancy between the L and R streams that decouples the common-mode signal slightly. Since I don't know how the guts of any of these boxes work I can't assume that they have separate A/D ICs for L and R. Knowing that the sampling clock will be common between the channels, that only leaves the L/R frame (sync) clock. This is the clock that tells the IC whether it's handling Left or Right audio frames. Higher jitter might mean that these frames are timed slightly differently than another converter leading to higher Haas effect and/or small phase discrepancies.
Hm that's a weird one, when you dig into it technically it doesn't make a whole lot of sense as an intentional choice. Maybe the increased compression/limiting brings the stereo reverbs & ambience a bit more to the foreground? I am not an authority on any of these topics.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Feb 16, 2022 15:14:57 GMT -6
Been thinking about how a converter can make something sound wider despite there being a singular monotonic clock source. Wider generally means there must be a phase or time discrepancy between the L and R streams that decouples the common-mode signal slightly. Since I don't know how the guts of any of these boxes work I can't assume that they have separate A/D ICs for L and R. Knowing that the sampling clock will be common between the channels, that only leaves the L/R frame (sync) clock. This is the clock that tells the IC whether it's handling Left or Right audio frames. Higher jitter might mean that these frames are timed slightly differently than another converter leading to higher Haas effect and/or small phase discrepancies.
Hm that's a weird one, when you dig into it technically it doesn't make a whole lot of sense as an intentional choice. Maybe the increased compression/limiting brings the stereo reverbs & ambience a bit more to the foreground? I am not an authority on any of these topics.
It's totally possible that it's just a psychoacoustic effect like that, but I think what I understand is that John is only switching the clock sources, not the actual A/D units, so any difference would have to be on the clock signal itself. But then again he also said that he pulled the files into a comparison program and they were nearly identical.. A computer can surely measure the difference in bits down to infinitesimally small amounts that we couldn't possibly discern. I know he hears something, but a measurement at the bit level would surely show the difference.
|
|
|
Post by sopwith on Feb 16, 2022 15:37:40 GMT -6
Oh jeez good point, the only difference in these examples is the clock source. Anyway I heard the same things John's describing, without looking at any of the filenames.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 16, 2022 16:04:33 GMT -6
Yeah - it's just the clock. I said earlier in the thread that I had read somewhere that maybe one of the reasons like consoles is the phasing across channels makes it sound "wider." No idea there. I wonder if the same thing applies here - the clock source isn't quite as stable when slaving to another clock...IDK. I really don't know what the hell I'm talking about. But blindly, I could hear what I perceived to be a "separation" of the instruments. So maybe not wider, per se, but more 3 dimensionality. lol. When I listened back with the Convert using its own clock, I think I blindly switched back in forth a bunch of times and then A/B'd...and I could make out the Burl clk file every time. Doing that same thing with the Convert clocked to the Burl, I couldn't. So who the hell knows. Maybe it's all complete bunk. But I do think I'm just gonna run with the Dangerous.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 16, 2022 16:04:56 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Feb 16, 2022 16:14:42 GMT -6
Oh Lordy, that's a good episode.
|
|
kcatthedog
Temp
Super Helpful Dude
Posts: 15,341
Member is Online
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 17, 2022 1:38:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Feb 17, 2022 3:08:17 GMT -6
My studio is based on a Crane Song HEDD 192 for recording and mixing/mastering conversion and an Avocet for monitoring.
I think quality conversation makes the whole production process easier and more pleasurable.
Do I think it's essential here today with the standard of modern conversion on offer from RME etc .... probably not.
|
|