|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 27, 2014 1:36:19 GMT -6
www.apogeedigital.com/products/ensembleif you watch and listen to that video... is this what you guys refer to as "digititus"? I really don't care for the audio on that. I like the genre , like the song, all the guys can play and sing... but that sound... personally It grates on me. cheers Wiz
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 27, 2014 6:52:37 GMT -6
Wow, that IS hard to listen to. Something about the top end that's fatiguing. I'm not sure about digititus, but it's probably just the encoding for streaming video.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 27, 2014 9:00:39 GMT -6
Ive heard very good digital recordings that the high end will begin to grate on you(what i consider to be part of digititus), this tune(i agree the performance is good) is grating on every single source, it also seems a function of mixing, everything is jammed between the speakers, nothing below or above them.... maybe a horrible transfer to their site for the vid? I wonder how they let this crispy critter get by them?
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 27, 2014 18:15:11 GMT -6
Sounds like cheap mics into clean preamps hyper compressed. But, then....honestly, I hear people hold up fizzy DR6 recordings all the time as "how do I get this sound"....Apogee knows their market. They are not marketing this to the hifi crowd. Are they? I mix original Ensemble tracks all the time, and it's the opposite--warm/dark to a fault. I was shocked when heard the new Duets compared to the old ones....I'm not even gonna say whether one is "better/worst"-which would take away from the point--they did a 180 in sound--from erring on the side of dark and mellow to being so open and bright...I was shocked. Obviously they took some feedback from some people who chose other interfaces. The market is now amateurs. Driven by. Marketed to. As long as they keep their Symphony system sounding good enough for professional use....they will sell countless overpriced Chinese built boxes to people who bought ProTools because that's what real studios use. They might even paint them black and market them as a package.  |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Oct 27, 2014 18:18:08 GMT -6
I thought this was about some kind of new west african epidemic involving a bowl condition :/
|
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Oct 28, 2014 8:15:00 GMT -6
To me this is simple: You get what you pay for.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 28, 2014 10:29:39 GMT -6
To me this is simple: "You get what you pay for". JMO, I 1/2 agree, i think there's a pretty good bit of "you get what you research the heck out of and demo". A lot of folks pay top dollar for stuff that (imo) doesn't sound very good, and decide it sounds great based on nothing more than a how much they paid for it bias. I say compare, compare, compare, then buy, or buy/sell, buy/sell like jes, jk, and cowboy do. (i would venture to say their way is even better if you can afford it? nothing like living with someone to clarify how you feel about them 8) |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 28, 2014 14:25:19 GMT -6
No....I don't think this is getting what you pay for. At all. Making the assumption that the interface preamps/conversion has anything to do with what everyone's objecting to....and that, my friends would be 100% assumption and not likely a good one, IME.....this is a $2500 interface. If one makes that assumption, one would have to assume you'd get worse with a $500 used VS2480 or Akai DPS24 (worth a little more since it's rarer)? With a $1k Focusrite 8 banger hooked to whatever light pipe interface? I can make perfectly solid recordings with any kind of say TubeMP or DMP3 preamp and any LINE LEVEL input converter you want to hand me. We could certainly get into the weeds of nuance....but, panned back, I think it's a damaging concept to say you need $1k/ch preamps and Symphony/Burl/whatever level of "this month conversion" to make a good recording. I know this is intended to sound this way. It's not some showcase of how lousy the interface is to people who have nice monitoring and a fetish for old recordings....the reason they've gone for a brighter sound in their newer interfaces is the same reason no one duplicates a U67. The new market doesn't want it. Huge majority of people would pull up a U67 and go "that sounds like my Sm7".....right. Not exactly, but in the same ballpark of natural sound. I've literally seen people ask on the purple site about how they get a "bright mic like a U67"....because they've got some record they read was made with a U67 and the vocal is airy. As much as we'd collectively love music production to freeze in some "better" era....go listen to this: www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100That is the goal of a huge majority of musicians. To sound "Current". To sell to the people waiting in line to buy Taylor's new album yesterday like it's going out of style. Thus--this sounds like a current rock mix. At best, it's a wonderful sounding piece....that they've chosen to brighten and crush JUST like the people recording modern rock on $500k Neves do.....at worst, it's a shitty $500 Chinese piece of rebranded Maudio turd they're charging $2500 for....either way--you're not "getting what you pay for". If you think you need uber dollar gear to make a good recording, you are patently, objectively incorrect. I would argue that researching is mostly a waste of time....considering the pool of opinions one finds on the internet...especially if that opinion is "you get what you pay for"....cause a)this is not cheap at all--for an 8 input unit?....b) then there's no reason to research--just buy the priciest option you can afford, right? No reason to even demo things--just buy the most expensive and assume you're now the bottleneck. Which isn't the case. |
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Oct 28, 2014 14:52:17 GMT -6
That example right there boys doesn't have much to do with the sound of that interface. What your hearing is all mix decisions IMO. The bottom end has been filtered out way up and probably because they knew this video would be played more on a handheld devise or some kind of pad. Pretty savvy marketing if you ask me.
I guarantee any of us could take that interface and record a well balanced song without all that high end hype.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 28, 2014 15:10:46 GMT -6
No....I don't think this is getting what you pay for. At all. Making the assumption that the interface preamps/conversion has anything to do with what everyone's objecting to....and that, my friends would be 100% assumption and not likely a good one, IME.....this is a $2500 interface. If one makes that assumption, one would have to assume you'd get worse with a $500 used VS2480 or Akai DPS24 (worth a little more since it's rarer)? With a $1k Focusrite 8 banger hooked to whatever light pipe interface? I can make perfectly solid recordings with any kind of say TubeMP or DMP3 preamp and any LINE LEVEL input converter you want to hand me. We could certainly get into the weeds of nuance....but, panned back, I think it's a damaging concept to say you need $1k/ch preamps and Symphony/Burl/whatever level of "this month conversion" to make a good recording. I know this is intended to sound this way. It's not some showcase of how lousy the interface is to people who have nice monitoring and a fetish for old recordings....the reason they've gone for a brighter sound in their newer interfaces is the same reason no one duplicates a U67. The new market doesn't want it. Huge majority of people would pull up a U67 and go "that sounds like my Sm7".....right. Not exactly, but in the same ballpark of natural sound. I've literally seen people ask on the purple site about how they get a "bright mic like a U67"....because they've got some record they read was made with a U67 and the vocal is airy. As much as we'd collectively love music production to freeze in some "better" era....go listen to this: www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100That is the goal of a huge majority of musicians. To sound "Current". To sell to the people waiting in line to buy Taylor's new album yesterday like it's going out of style. Thus--this sounds like a current rock mix. At best, it's a wonderful sounding piece....that they've chosen to brighten and crush JUST like the people recording modern rock on $500k Neves do.....at worst, it's a shitty $500 Chinese piece of rebranded Maudio turd they're charging $2500 for....either way--you're not "getting what you pay for". If you think you need uber dollar gear to make a good recording, you are patently, objectively incorrect. I would argue that researching is mostly a waste of time....considering the pool of opinions one finds on the internet...especially if that opinion is "you get what you pay for"....cause a)this is not cheap at all--for an 8 input unit?....b) then there's no reason to research--just buy the priciest option you can afford, right? No reason to even demo things--just buy the most expensive and assume you're now the bottleneck. Which isn't the case.  what language is this^? anyone speak Portuguese around here? I kidd...., except,... really, i haven't a clue what this post is trying to say. |
|
|
|
Digititus
Oct 28, 2014 15:13:37 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 28, 2014 15:13:37 GMT -6
No....I don't think this is getting what you pay for. At all. Making the assumption that the interface preamps/conversion has anything to do with what everyone's objecting to....and that, my friends would be 100% assumption and not likely a good one, IME.....this is a $2500 interface. If one makes that assumption, one would have to assume you'd get worse with a $500 used VS2480 or Akai DPS24 (worth a little more since it's rarer)? With a $1k Focusrite 8 banger hooked to whatever light pipe interface? I can make perfectly solid recordings with any kind of say TubeMP or DMP3 preamp and any LINE LEVEL input converter you want to hand me. We could certainly get into the weeds of nuance....but, panned back, I think it's a damaging concept to say you need $1k/ch preamps and Symphony/Burl/whatever level of "this month conversion" to make a good recording. I know this is intended to sound this way. It's not some showcase of how lousy the interface is to people who have nice monitoring and a fetish for old recordings....the reason they've gone for a brighter sound in their newer interfaces is the same reason no one duplicates a U67. The new market doesn't want it. Huge majority of people would pull up a U67 and go "that sounds like my Sm7".....right. Not exactly, but in the same ballpark of natural sound. I've literally seen people ask on the purple site about how they get a "bright mic like a U67"....because they've got some record they read was made with a U67 and the vocal is airy. As much as we'd collectively love music production to freeze in some "better" era....go listen to this: www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100That is the goal of a huge majority of musicians. To sound "Current". To sell to the people waiting in line to buy Taylor's new album yesterday like it's going out of style. Thus--this sounds like a current rock mix. At best, it's a wonderful sounding piece....that they've chosen to brighten and crush JUST like the people recording modern rock on $500k Neves do.....at worst, it's a shitty $500 Chinese piece of rebranded Maudio turd they're charging $2500 for....either way--you're not "getting what you pay for". If you think you need uber dollar gear to make a good recording, you are patently, objectively incorrect. I would argue that researching is mostly a waste of time....considering the pool of opinions one finds on the internet...especially if that opinion is "you get what you pay for"....cause a)this is not cheap at all--for an 8 input unit?....b) then there's no reason to research--just buy the priciest option you can afford, right? No reason to even demo things--just buy the most expensive and assume you're now the bottleneck. Which isn't the case. what language is this^? anyone speak Portuguese around here? I kidd...., except,... really, i haven't a clue what this post is trying to say. Yep. The interface didn't cause the "digititis", the mixing did... and they wanted a similar sound to pop radio, which is what most people are looking for. P.S. Anyone grab the new Swift record? Any good? |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 28, 2014 15:29:12 GMT -6
That example right there boys doesn't have much to do with the sound of that interface. What your hearing is all mix decisions IMO. The bottom end has been filtered out way up and probably because they knew this video would be played more on a handheld devise or some kind of pad. Pretty savvy marketing if you ask me. I guarantee any of us could take that interface and record a well balanced song without all that high end hype. really? sorry, it's the video attached to the product in an advertisement bragging the quality of the item on their own website? I would even venture to say that most guys who are checking out Apogee products are probably listening to samples through a 1/2 decent pair of self powered studio monitors, which IMO, shows it may just be the single worst device, or decision i've ever witnessed being made by a company that bases it's reputation on....ummm, sound quality?! lol, just horrible. Maybe not come to think of it, the guy who designed the flag ship symphony also said "i don't like the sound of analog drum recordings" lol, thats gotta be the worst decision ever uttered by such an important representative of a pro audio company... and honestly, after the conversation i had with one of apogee's "experts" at AES, it doesn't surprise me, i was stunned at how very little he knew. Just sayin... |
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 28, 2014 15:37:10 GMT -6
I have to agree that in my mind.. that is a shocking advertisement for what the product is (or should be).
These aren't beats headphones..
this is an apogee product...
It completely turned me off.. I had been starting to think about maybe .. .upgrading ?
really if this kind of sonic result is part of the marketing ploy, there should be a couple of videos, one for this type of crowd.. and those of us who like .. well ... recording and mixing 8)
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 28, 2014 15:59:37 GMT -6
what language is this^? anyone speak Portuguese around here? I kidd...., except,... really, i haven't a clue what this post is trying to say. Yep. The interface didn't cause the "digititis", the mixing did... and they wanted a similar sound to pop radio, which is what most people are looking for. P.S. Anyone grab the new Swift record? Any good? How you got this out of that post is amazing lol, I think people are listening for a good song, 99% of people know nothing about a "radio sound", and if you think a bad sound is desired by anyone who's conscience of "radio sound" or not,... well ? Good sound is not subject to trend, it's scientifically proven that the physiological hearing mechanism in humans cause their brains to respond certain ways, to certain sounds, the idea that an audio engineer would buy into "bad sound is the new good" is pretty numbing, it is utterly ridiculous to believe painful sounds such as provably annoying, square waved distortion elements that factually inspire people to shut them off, is what people desire, is hard to believe. |
|
|
|
Digititus
Oct 28, 2014 16:28:36 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 28, 2014 16:28:36 GMT -6
Yep. The interface didn't cause the "digititis", the mixing did... and they wanted a similar sound to pop radio, which is what most people are looking for. P.S. Anyone grab the new Swift record? Any good? How you got this out of that post is amazing lol, I think people are listening for a good song, 99% of people know nothing about a "radio sound", and if you think a bad sound is desired by anyone who's conscience of "radio sound" or not,... well ? Good sound is not subject to trend, it's scientifically proven that the physiological hearing mechanism in humans cause their brains to respond certain ways, to certain sounds, the idea that an audio engineer would buy into "bad sound is the new good" is pretty numbing, it is utterly ridiculous to believe painful sounds such as provably annoying, square waved distortion elements that factually inspire people to shut them off, is what people desire, is absurd. I haven't heard the track yet, just trying to translate popmann. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Oct 28, 2014 16:32:43 GMT -6
How you got this out of that post is amazing lol, I think people are listening for a good song, 99% of people know nothing about a "radio sound", and if you think a bad sound is desired by anyone who's conscience of "radio sound" or not,... well ? Good sound is not subject to trend, it's scientifically proven that the physiological hearing mechanism in humans cause their brains to respond certain ways, to certain sounds, the idea that an audio engineer would buy into "bad sound is the new good" is pretty numbing, it is utterly ridiculous to believe painful sounds such as provably annoying, square waved distortion elements that factually inspire people to shut them off, is what people desire, is absurd. I haven't heard the track yet, just trying to translate popmann. hey jes, i just re read my post, kinda came off bad re reading, no offense meant bromee! |
|
|
|
Digititus
Oct 28, 2014 16:33:56 GMT -6
via mobile
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 28, 2014 16:33:56 GMT -6
I haven't heard the track yet, just trying to translate popmann. hey jes, i just re read my post, kinda came off bad re reading, no offense meant bromee! None taken. |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Oct 28, 2014 16:38:28 GMT -6
Oh yeah, clients never want to sound modern....like what's hip right now? Never.
|
|
what language is this^? anyone speak Portuguese around here? I kidd...., except,... really, i haven't a clue what this post is trying to say.
