|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on May 27, 2015 13:12:33 GMT -6
edit: I plan on not doing a youtube video about this.
I would need some other equipment (Monitor controller) to test this properly in a video. Right now, i have to come out of the DAW with the faders set to about -30dbFS for anything I listen to, since the speakers are plugged directly into it. Also, because I run the symphony in USB mode, I can't clock the Symphony to the ADC of this thing, so I can't really test the ADC side without getting clicks and pops. I can test the D/A side tho.
My current method involves setting the Symphony's SPDIF output to mirror analog outs 5-6. Analog outs 5-6 are connected from my patch bay to a pair of patchbay channels (top 23-24) set to HALF-NORMAL. The SvartBox analog outputs are connected to the same pair of channels that the symphony is patched to, but on the bottom (bottom 23-24). My speakers are plugged into the bottom 23-24 in the rear.
The SvartBox is about 5db quieter than the Symphony, so i have to compensate via faders in logic. The process I use is to load in an aif or wav and duplicate it. One channel is set 5db quieter than the other and labeled as "Symph". Both tracks are set to output to a bus assigned to analog outs 5-6. Apogee Maestro is configured to mirror Analog Outs 5-6 to the SPDIF output. That bus mimics the volume controller on the symphony, so i set it to around -30dbFS, and leave the channels with the aif files set around 0 and -5, respectively.
I use my Artist mix to toggle between the two via the 'On' buttons. one channel is muted, one is not. I press the two channels' ON buttons simultaneously to flip their state
If I want to hear the symphony: I press Pause, then flip the channel's mute state via the Artist Mix, then I unplug the SvartBox from the patchbay.
If I want to hear the SvartBox: I press Pause, then flip the channel's mute state via the ArtistMix, then I plug in the SVartBox to the patchbay.
it took me a bit to figure out an efficient method for switching between the two, but it works. There are audible differences between the two converters.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 28, 2015 15:03:11 GMT -6
Ok, small update.
Finally got word from the machine shop that the front panels are "ready for shipping", although I haven't gotten an actual date for shipment. I figure in the next few days..
Anyway, these will still need to be finished with some paint, which I will do myself for the first couple batches as I figure out how to get someone else to do it for me later.
So, we're coming down to the last stretch before shipping these things!
I'm ordering boxes and getting the acetates made for the silkscreens in the next few days too!
I'll be contacting each person on the list soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 28, 2015 15:10:25 GMT -6
proud papa !!
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 28, 2015 16:07:35 GMT -6
Woohoo. Just spell RGO Speedwagon correctly.
|
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on May 28, 2015 19:32:08 GMT -6
lol
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 29, 2015 4:18:20 GMT -6
"There are audible differences between the two converters."
Fascinating, please tell us more !
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 29, 2015 8:48:07 GMT -6
Which post are you quoting from kcat? I'd like to know what's being compared.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 29, 2015 9:03:20 GMT -6
Which post are you quoting from kcat? I'd like to know what's being compared. Looks like this one: realgearonline.com/post/61063/thread From what I've read, I expect the symphony to be a bit more hyped in the lows, and softer in the top than my converter. We'll wait to see what he says, although it sounds like his setup needs a lot of hoop-jumping to work, so some of the comparisons might be apples and oranges. |
|
|
|
Post by LesC on May 29, 2015 9:32:45 GMT -6
I'm looking forward to an in-depth review. Did dandeurloo do one? If so, I missed it, could someone please give a link? |
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 29, 2015 9:35:48 GMT -6
I'm looking forward to an in-depth review. Did dandeurloo do one? If so, I missed it, could someone please give a link? John summed it up for him: realgearonline.com/post/60466/threadThe gist is that his superbeast was modded, and he felt it was more 'hi-fi' sounding than mine, although he also felt that the unmodded superbeast and my converter were on par. |
|
|
|
Post by LesC on May 29, 2015 9:43:33 GMT -6
I'm looking forward to an in-depth review. Did dandeurloo do one? If so, I missed it, could someone please give a link? John summed it up for him: realgearonline.com/post/60466/threadThe gist is that his superbeast was modded, and he felt it was more 'hi-fi' sounding than mine, although he also felt that the unmodded superbeast and my converter were on par. Thank you! I now remember seeing that. It would be interesting to know what modifications were done to the dandeurloo superbeast. |
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 29, 2015 9:46:03 GMT -6
John summed it up for him: realgearonline.com/post/60466/threadThe gist is that his superbeast was modded, and he felt it was more 'hi-fi' sounding than mine, although he also felt that the unmodded superbeast and my converter were on par. Thank you! I now remember seeing that. It would be interesting to know what modifications were done to the dandeurloo superbeast. It was a combination of filtering changes and decoupling. |
|
|
|
Post by LesC on May 29, 2015 9:56:36 GMT -6
Thanks again!
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 29, 2015 9:59:27 GMT -6
Maybe Charles doesn't want to poop on the party, but I'll lay it out there and he can correct if he wants. He didn't like it nearly as much as his Symphony. Felt it had less bottom (it does) and a more "clinical" top (he's right). He also felt like the imaging was much better on the symphony. (That wasn't my experience) Just as a counterpoint - one man's "clinical" is another man's "revealing." Svart is going to publish the graph of the measured response here soon - and I think he mentioned earlier it's flat to within a blah blah of whatever. I've owned three symphony's and they're a great box. The DA is beautiful - but I didn't particularly find it to be extremely true. Seems like it's got a bigger bottom and the top is a bit rolled off. ( cowboycoalminer maybe you can confirm/deny that) - which would totally line up with what Charles is saying. I have to say, I thought the depth and width of the stereo imaging on the svartbox was even better than my RM - which I thought was better than the Symphony...so, I'm not sure what's going on. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 29, 2015 10:06:55 GMT -6
Which post are you quoting from kcat? I'd like to know what's being compared. bannedchuck above ? "it took me a bit to figure out an efficient method for switching between the two, but it works. There are audible differences between the two converters." |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 29, 2015 10:15:02 GMT -6
I personally have found Apogee definitely has a sound. From reading the comments so far about the svartbox, I feel that he met his design objective for flat, (linear ),hi resolution converters, that you can color to taste.
Isn't the Symphony well in excess of 2 grand usd and USB ? The fact that the svart box is spdif allows one to plug and play with a variety of interfaces.
I understand that the symphony test was about relative sonics not a direct box to box, feature to feature comparison.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 29, 2015 11:33:49 GMT -6
I personally have found Apogee definitely has a sound. From reading the comments so far about the svartbox, I feel that he met his design objective for flat, (linear ),hi resolution converters, that you can color to taste. Isn't the Symphony well in excess of 2 grand usd and USB ? The fact that the svart box is spdif allows one to plug and play with a variety of interfaces. I understand that the symphony test was about relative sonics not a direct box to box, feature to feature comparison. Yes, I think i did hit my design goals. Super flat, super clinical. From the feedback I've had so far, it seems that folks who have been listening to devices that aren't as flat have a jarring experience listening to mine. I somewhat expected this to happen, as it happens a lot in listening tests for all kinds of devices in the world, in other words, people like listening to things that are pleasing, not those that expose flaws in mixes. Those that are too clinical tend to sound sterile and weak, but are ultimately closer to "getting out of the way" of the music. I shot for that in my design although I knew some wouldn't like it. I'll be the first to admit that it's not euphonic in the least. It can be hard to listen to, especially when it's presenting things differently than you are used to. Unfortunately, this means that someone's personal opinion will influence how they describe this device, and those opinions will influence others when they read them. I.E., if someone is used to listening to something with a lot of low end, they'll see that as "normal", and then when they listen to this device, they might say it's lacking low end. The problem is that, it gives the impression that my device lacks the low end, rather than their device having hyped low end. However, from my own experience with these, I've gone back and listened to mixes I thought were good through both the ADC and DAC. I can clearly hear problems with the mixes, and once fixed they translate MUCH better on other systems, but that's just my opinion. I'll have measurement data to publish soon in any case. |
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on May 29, 2015 11:55:16 GMT -6
I'm looking forward to an in-depth review. Did dandeurloo do one? If so, I missed it, could someone please give a link? John summed it up for him: realgearonline.com/post/60466/threadThe gist is that his superbeast was modded, and he felt it was more 'hi-fi' sounding than mine, although he also felt that the unmodded superbeast and my converter were on par. I didn't say anything because I didn't want to shape anyone's thoughts who reviewed it after me. I did do a lot of listening to them and they sound great. For the money (and rapid delivery time) these things are gonna kill most options out there. They have a very similar sound to the RMA stuff. The differences are in things like width, depth and low end (size and effortless reproduction) and top (smooth). They are again not HUGE differences but they are there. I did mod my DA (nothing to the AD yet) and I told both Ross and Svart about my mods in case they want to test and implement them. Its pretty simple stuff, nothing new but was well worth the effort. My modded Superbeast isn't what I would call Hi-Fi sounding. It is just more effortless sounding and natural. I would say the un modded SuperBeast and the Svart box sound very similar from what I remember. The only thing I thought sonically was difference (from memory) was they SuperBeast sounded a little wider. Other then that I think they are Very Very similar. I think SVART has a very nice box on his hands. |
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on May 29, 2015 11:58:59 GMT -6
I personally have found Apogee definitely has a sound. From reading the comments so far about the svartbox, I feel that he met his design objective for flat, (linear ),hi resolution converters, that you can color to taste. Isn't the Symphony well in excess of 2 grand usd and USB ? The fact that the svart box is spdif allows one to plug and play with a variety of interfaces. I understand that the symphony test was about relative sonics not a direct box to box, feature to feature comparison. I know the older Apogee's had a sound. I am not sure how many people describe the Symphony has having a colored sound. In fact I know a few mastering guys who use them because they are very decent converters. They would have never used the Apogee X's. Symphony cost a lot more cash! |
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 29, 2015 12:05:59 GMT -6
John summed it up for him: realgearonline.com/post/60466/threadThe gist is that his superbeast was modded, and he felt it was more 'hi-fi' sounding than mine, although he also felt that the unmodded superbeast and my converter were on par. I didn't say anything because I didn't want to shape anyone's thoughts who reviewed it after me. I did do a lot of listening to them and they sound great. For the money (and rapid delivery time) these things are gonna kill most options out there. They have a very similar sound to the RMA stuff. The differences are in things like width, depth and low end (size and effortless reproduction) and top (smooth). They are again not HUGE differences but they are there. I did mod my DA (nothing to the AD yet) and I told both Ross and Svart about my mods in case they want to test and implement them. Its pretty simple stuff, nothing new but was well worth the effort. My modded Superbeast isn't what I would call Hi-Fi sounding. It is just more effortless sounding and natural. I would say the un modded SuperBeast and the Svart box sound very similar from what I remember. The only thing I thought sonically was difference (from memory) was they SuperBeast sounded a little wider. Other then that I think they are Very Very similar. I think SVART has a very nice box on his hands. And thanks again for your testing! |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 29, 2015 12:07:56 GMT -6
Thx Dan. I only meant my comment in the sense of svart's box being designed to be flat not pleasing. I certainly understand the symphony is a very very good piece of equipment and wasn't suggesting otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 29, 2015 12:52:18 GMT -6
Yeah - the Symphony sounds great...I would be interested in hearing if Cowboy thinks the Symphony has color too. Also, he has a 1794 and a Symphony on hand there, so maybe we can hear his thoughts on the differences. cowboycoalminer. Also - in Charles' tests, the Svartbox had to be slaved to the Symphony clock because Symphony USB mode doesn't allow it to be externally clocked. I'm not sure it would have been a huge difference, but just want4ed to point that out. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on May 29, 2015 13:23:03 GMT -6
I demoed the symphony a couple years back, nice box, I too found a little bloat in the lows and a bit of roll off on the top through my rig JK, in the age of digital harshness I have no desire for an AD/DA showing less highs than are actually there. I listened to some of the svart/SB conversion files( I asked D for a couple to check out), i sent him my thoughts and they lined up pretty spot on with what he says, the svart box is very good, exceptionally good for the cost! He should do well.
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on May 29, 2015 13:26:30 GMT -6
Yeah - the Symphony sounds great...I would be interested in hearing if Cowboy thinks the Symphony has color too. Also, he has a 1794 and a Symphony on hand there, so maybe we can hear his thoughts on the differences. cowboycoalminer. Also - in Charles' tests, the Svartbox had to be slaved to the Symphony clock because Symphony USB mode doesn't allow it to be externally clocked. I'm not sure it would have been a huge difference, but just want4ed to point that out. I most certainly do think the Symphony is colored. Always have. In fact, I'd bet that's why people love it so much. It sounds more "analog" to me than any converter I've ever used. Plugged it back up and put it back in use about a month ago. BTW. Very solid converter. |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 29, 2015 15:17:40 GMT -6
We are kind of coming full circle here  do we want the converters to impart a particular sound ( colour/analog) or not and instead to be linear and you mix to the sound you want going into the converter and you want to hear that through its hi resolution ? |
|
do we want the converters to impart a particular sound ( colour/analog) or not and instead to be linear and you mix to the sound you want going into the converter and you want to hear that through its hi resolution ?