Audio converter buyer list

Understood, but we're talking 3dB for like 100$.. Anyway, I'll continue to research it.  Lets take the technical stuff back to the secret project thread though.

I'm 100% with Tony. The price point your at is ridiculously low already so I have no problems paying more. We're talking something in the lynx Hilo category if not better for 5 or 6 hundred bucks. No Brainer!! I'm in for one of each now

I would go for broke on the DAC too. Don't know if I can swing both right this second, but probably could by the time it is made.

I think the DAC is a add on that goes into the AD case. You won't be able to have the DAC separate.

If the only difference is 3dB of noise floor down below 100dB.. come on guys, get serious. If there is no other change in tone or functionality... really...

whats the noise floor of your gear? Whats the dynamic range of your material?


I often wonder about what I call "spec madness"


in a few months, something else will come along that has .0000567 of a bees fart better spec on something or other.

I will be in for a ADC and DAC at whatever you decide svart even just to support something like this getting off the ground.

I will pay whatever the consensus is, but really someone explain to me in what scenario AT ALL the difference (at the levels we are talking ) that 3dB change in noise floor is going to make?

cheers

Wiz

Hrmpf...mumble...3dB...mumble...mixing and mastering hollywood movie soundtracks, maybe....
;-)

I'll buy one of each. AD with DA add-on.
I've been looking at the R.M. for awhile, but I'd rather go with you.
I'm in for sure.

It's possible there might be a SPDIF to ADAT converter, which could take 4 of the stereo converters and bring them into an adat interface. That's the best that I'll be able to do. Multiplexing datastreams is no trivial matter, especially if it'd need some kind of way into a computer.

That would be great!  I just realized also that if you could eventually build a stereo ADDA with a built-in ADAT interface, you'd have the equivalent functionality of the UA 2192.  A lot of people have lamented the fact that the 2192 is no longer available, maybe you could ultimately fill that void.

  it's not this simple, this is an "all the small things add up" sum game we play, as you stack tracks everything good and bad in quality is multiplied by track count, if it didn't matter, every one of us would be putting out recordings that sound like Shipshapes "paper airplane", and that ain't happening(particularly from me 8). I DO accept that it depends on what level you intend to play, but i'm personally reaching for as close to a 0 compromise set up as i possibly can get.
   Smallbutfine has already stated that he hears an improvement from the superbeast over RM's other 1794 DAC, I wonder what those differences would sound like comparing 32 tracks captured with a top of the line vs mediocre AD?    I don't see the point of a compromise when you can have it ALL at an obscenely low price point less than a MBOX!! Quite honestly, i'm not interested in a piece of gear where the sound quality was compromised for a measly $100! really? So yes, 3db is totally worth it, not to mention the headroom gains from single supply's. IMO, It just doesn't make sense to bean count.. i mean don't we get enough of that with every company in the world? we have a unique opportunity here to help C earn a little $ while he gifts us with his formidable skills, and I don't doubt that if this thing is as good or better than RM's superbeast, Svart will have to quit his day job to keep up with the orders he's gonna get. 
 
    Anywho, I'm really curious to see what dan thinks about his superbeast as compared to his BLA 002? I expect it should sound better, but i've expected that before, the BLA 002 is completely and uncompromisingly over built, with headroom for days, and it totally shows up in the sound. IMO, the reason others don't match up (i suspect) is that 95% of people who design mediocre sounding audio equipment would look inside that 002 and say "that was completely unnecessary, it only needed just this much to run properly, and that much to be shielded acceptably", that's what makes guys like JW special, he's got the rare combo of amazing electronics engineering chops and dumbo ears, he takes it to the extremes, and will be the first to throw something away if it sounds pretty good.

edit; i wrote this before lesC's posts...which are dead on imo 8)

That's EXACTLY what small was talking about, the rm1794 is the 2 channel single chip as compared to the superbeast dual 1794, 3db diff , on 2 single power supply's, and noticeably better. I think svart spent most of his time on the AD side? But I don't want to get into hypotheticals about what might come out tomrw, the stuff we're talking about is here today, and the bar has been set by RM,  Chris can and should do as he sees fit, but in all honesty, to shoot underneath the bar is a mistake IMO, and means I'll be thinking of how I can get my hands on something better. I've been shooting out converters for about a year now, they are not at all close to one another ime, in fact they proved to be strikingly different.

How did the Beatles ever record anything with all that noise floor!