|
Post by roundbadge on Jan 13, 2014 14:32:23 GMT -6
FWIW I found the Burl DA a step up sonically from the Avid IO DA
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 13, 2014 14:55:43 GMT -6
FWIW I found the Burl DA a step up sonically from the Avid IO DA You are using a Mothership, if I recall correctly? I think it would be a fair assumption that the B2 DAC is sonically identical.
|
|
|
Post by roundbadge on Jan 13, 2014 15:00:51 GMT -6
FWIW I found the Burl DA a step up sonically from the Avid IO DA You are using a Mothership, if I recall correctly? I think it would be a fair assumption that the B2 DAC is sonically identical. I'm told it's just slightly different. The MS supposedly gets a little more vibey when you hit the outs harder. The B2 supposedly stays more linear when you push it.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 13, 2014 15:22:52 GMT -6
Gotta find $5k somewhere ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) The donate button is available, guys ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 13, 2014 17:43:43 GMT -6
A very good b2 review is at tape op Remember that the b2 DAC is not a monitor controller The comment earlier about the apollo monitor outs maybe requires a little clarification An apollo dbox combo set up properly apollo trs 1-8 > on dsub dbox Apollo mon > dbox analog in Apollo spdif > dbox DAW dbox speaker > monitors my point is you only hear the mon out from apollo when you depress the Analog button on the dbox for monitoring in real time ( with or without ua plugs) as this is an all analog signal path: depressing the DAW brings up the digital path and of course the dbox speaker outs are post its DA driven from the dsub in and presenting that fine dbox sound. The link to thread ? personally i think the combo of a bla modded apollo( the whole analog path and decoupled converters and the similar signal path dbox/ b2 DAC), makes it kind of the middle class man's b2 DAC plus you gain the actual monitor controller I am sure the b2 DAC actually sounds more refined but i think i would spend $2500 elsewhere, but after buying the b2 ADC i'll admit to just about pulling the trigger on a used DAC !
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jan 14, 2014 7:19:47 GMT -6
Remember that the b2 DAC is not a monitor controller I am sure the b2 DAC actually sounds more refined but i think i would spend $2500 elsewhere, but after buying the b2 ADC i'll admit to just about pulling the trigger on a used DAC ! I have a Dangerous Monitor ST for control, so I'm covered there. And yes, if I could find a used B2 DAC, I just might have to pick one up. But there's also the Dangerous DAC, which I've heard is pretty good. Choices, choices.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 10, 2014 18:54:48 GMT -6
Da Burl may or may not be in da hizzouse...
First order of business? Calibration. I laid one track...and it's obviously no where NEAR calibration of the RME...and the compensation is off. So, I've got to square that up...or I'll be nudging stuff around and cursing for days. This, BTW--is also a good reason to NOT mix and match converters.
Anyone in Nashville got a Benchmark ADC? Mytek? Larvy blue/black? I'd like to have a modern clean one to compare when I get to switching it to 48khz.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 10, 2014 19:17:40 GMT -6
So, Popmann. How about starting a thread on calibrating converters? I would be interested in how you do it.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 10, 2014 19:36:16 GMT -6
So, Popmann. How about starting a thread on calibrating converters? I would be interested in how you do it. Yes, very interested.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 10, 2014 21:45:46 GMT -6
You know...I may not know anymore. Ha. I think Cubase is actually automatically compensating FOR the latency delay plug in...see below:
So, there are two things that NEED to be adjusted--you want the same gain...and you need to make sure that they're at the same point in time.
The Burl takes an additional 37 sample (at 88.2) to convert. Now, when it's not a comparison, there's a setting that you can just tell Cubase to offset recording by 37 samples (from what RME tells it for it's own IO)...so, as long as you're not tracking through both--we'd be done with that part. The temp fix is to insert the Voxenego Latency Delay in the RME for 37 sample...but, it's like Cubase's autocompensation is now compensating FOR that now...so, I'm having to move the track after recording, which is kinda...ghetto.
And with the level...you would just record something quickly (or test tone if you're geeky) and analyze the peak level....the difference being either adjusted on the converter...or afterwards in the DAW. At it's LEAST attenuated setting, the RME is 2.5db hotter than the Burl. So, for the purposes of this, I've just trimmed the RME channel by -2.5db. I've run into a flaw with pt2, though....this only works for running the Burl with no attenuation...so, we can test as straight AD...but, if you want to run hotter into the Burl, the Y cable will now feed that same level to the RME and clip it out. I don't have an analog attenuator. Which is what I'd need to keep pushing the Burl harder (and still feed the RME. I can already tell this is why people like it. I've yet to be able to digitally clip the Burl. Because it's clipping itself at the transformer and attenuating before handing it to the chip.
So, this is what my initial thought is:
Nominal level at 88.2? I can't tell them apart. I mean I CAN tell they're different....like I can tell most any two AD once I kind of "learn" what to listen FOR....but, point being it's not "better" in any apparent way...BUT...start to push harder...and the Burl stays good sounding and the RME falls apart pretty quickly. It becomes night and day better as the level gets hotter. Like--really so much so it's beyond subjective, I think. But, question would be-are we getting better sound by pushing it louder....or just more forgiveness on sloppy level setting? Both are good things...but, may not monetize in people's minds the same.
Do you keep the SoftLimit on your Symphony? I'm just curious how you dealt with the level discrepancy. Or...were you doing two takes--one into each converter?
I need an ATTY or something pronto...else we're into doing separate takes at different levels...which becomes not really a good short term test. You should always be testing the same take/mic/signal....
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 10, 2014 23:36:57 GMT -6
I don't have a full band so a typical songwriting session has
midi drums (Alesis DM10X into BFD3) vocal mic x1 guitar mic x1
The Burl B2 always gets used for the two mics, via S/PDIF into the Apollo. So I notice no problem with calibration, I just print to PT at -15 to -20 on the armed tracks.
With the Symphony incoming I may re-think this. My config has the 8x8 analog card plus a 16 analog out by 16 optical in. So, I plan on using the 24 outs, sent to the Midas during mix. The 8 ins are for the future, where I can foresee an actual band tracking. Imagine that, a group of people playing all at once. I'm looking forward to it.
The Burl DA will be used primary for 2-Bus monitoring and may handle a stem during mix if things work out. I do not think I will have a problem with Aggregate I/O, I had an MBox 3 running with the Apollo and had no problem at all - PT certainly seemed to compensate. I'll find out on Wednesday.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 11, 2014 0:00:08 GMT -6
Yeah, it's not a problem for just tracking single sources. I mean, that's only what .0004ms or something? You wouldn't hear a 37 sample delay. It's a problem for comparison. And for configuring hardware inserts...to a greater or lesser degree if you're never going to insert hardware on a multimic'd source.
ie....you have to have converters level and time matched...to truly level match, you're gonna cancel phase....which requires time matching.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 11, 2014 18:40:41 GMT -6
Thank you, BlackBird. For being one place I can actually get what I need to do the job of engineering in this town. Phone call and a short drive later...ATTY in line to the RME....time to get to driving it harder.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 11, 2014 21:22:38 GMT -6
Well, now it's losing blind AB tests...so, obviously an ATTY on the other leg is magical, right? ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) (sic) Back to closer to nominal levels. Lesson? Indiscriminately running it hot is not "better". Just louder....and sometimes cool.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 11, 2014 22:27:50 GMT -6
Will continue tomorrow. Something has to be wrong.... It just lost at 48khz blind. I really would've assumed it would take 48 easily....not that I completely care, but I do get things to track onto at single rates still, so I figured I'd give it a shot.
The Atty is nice. I should buy one. What a nice tool to have around. Let's be dial in exactly the same level to the RME as the Burl is handing to the chip. I've been getting about a DB of peak difference eyeballing the meters...that's purty close. Quick trim and they null all but some scratchy highs. See next....
So far....pushing it for electric guitar=cool. Everything else....really take or leave. It's a little sweeter maybe not being pushed--like JK said-in the upper mids, it is "smoother" in that specific region (which is likely why pushing it on Egtr was cool)...and it certainly has much more tolerance for cutting loud-accident or intentionally. That's a selling point. But, at nominal levels...man, I am feeling underwhelmed. They might get their demo unit back early. It's funny-as much as I was telling myself I was buying it for future function...and didn't expect it to sound "that much" better at double rate...I can't help but feel a little let down.
Tomorrow, I'll just start a new project at 96khz. Fresh ears. New sample rate. Side note: annoying fact....with the RME slaved to WC, I have to close Cubase and reopen it to change sample rates. Might just go to SPDIF and see if that changes. That's kinda annoying but has nothing to do with the Burl...that would be the same of any external clock that ASIO can't change.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Feb 12, 2014 6:02:50 GMT -6
Love the info so far. Thanks man. What RME are you using?
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 12, 2014 7:58:50 GMT -6
Will continue tomorrow. Something has to be wrong.... It just lost at 48khz blind. I really would've assumed it would take 48 easily....not that I completely care, but I do get things to track onto at single rates still, so I figured I'd give it a shot. The Atty is nice. I should buy one. What a nice tool to have around. Let's be dial in exactly the same level to the RME as the Burl is handing to the chip. I've been getting about a DB of peak difference eyeballing the meters...that's purty close. Quick trim and they null all but some scratchy highs. See next.... So far....pushing it for electric guitar=cool. Everything else....really take or leave. It's a little sweeter maybe not being pushed--like JK said-in the upper mids, it is "smoother" in that specific region (which is likely why pushing it on Egtr was cool)...and it certainly has much more tolerance for cutting loud-accident or intentionally. That's a selling point. But, at nominal levels...man, I am feeling underwhelmed. They might get their demo unit back early. It's funny-as much as I was telling myself I was buying it for future function...and didn't expect it to sound "that much" better at double rate...I can't help but feel a little let down. Tomorrow, I'll just start a new project at 96khz. Fresh ears. New sample rate. Side note: annoying fact....with the RME slaved to WC, I have to close Cubase and reopen it to change sample rates. Might just go to SPDIF and see if that changes. That's kinda annoying but has nothing to do with the Burl...that would be the same of any external clock that ASIO can't change. Yeah - For me (and I'm only speaking for myself) - the small "improvement" it might have made wasn't worth the investment. It just seemed a little overkill for me and what I do...
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 12, 2014 8:55:36 GMT -6
I can't speak from experience, but from what I've heard on cowboy's mixes and kcatthedog's mixes, the "small improvement" is everything to me. To me, post Burl, it sounds much more like a really good studio was used.
|
|
|
Post by LesC on Feb 12, 2014 9:03:21 GMT -6
I have enough GAS in other areas, my "gold" Burl AD is something I no longer have to think about. I see it as a piece I'll never have to replace in my lifetime. At least till I get hit by a truck tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by RicFoxx on Feb 12, 2014 9:33:38 GMT -6
Subtle but noticeable. i was surprised to how close the Apollo was to it not driving it of course. But I do a lot of Rock n Roll and I love pushing that thing...it does something that no piece does in my opinion. Also, since I mix on a console, running my mixes through it is worth the price of admission alone. The you have to really try to overload the Burl...it seems the harder you push it, the cooler it sounds.
Run some mixes through it...push it...loud naturally compressed, just beautiful!
I really feel with the Burl B2, Symphony and the Apollo, I have a pallet of different sounding converters. Apollo has this upper mid thing and is ultra clean...Symphony just really tight bottom, slightly rolled off highs and ultra hifi---modern and the Burl has vibe and bump like tape to me.
Really cool time to be a music/sound lover!!!!
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 12, 2014 12:34:27 GMT -6
It's an old Multiface...the RME. All monitoring via a Benchmark DAC1.
I'm not printing mixes through it. I mix digitally. I have no interest beyond tracking AD. That the only purpose here.
I don't believe in there being "overkill"...not to be macabre, but whatever I end up with here will likely be my tracking AD for the rest of my life. The way this industry is going...so, I have no issue paying for diminished returns. I functionally need it going forward. As much as I didn't expect to hear any night an day difference (from past conversion experience)...I'm honestly a little surprised--particularly the single rates...nothing here to make 48 closer to 88. Will hit 96 today with fresh ears.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 12, 2014 16:50:10 GMT -6
Not sure there's any piece of gear I'll have for the rest of my life. I reserve that for the wife and kid. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) Gear is fun...buying the same gear the second and third time even more fun ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 12, 2014 21:53:10 GMT -6
Yeah, I just am trying to make sure I have my own tracking solution as an artist. I've been working hard to get digitally agnostic--being able to use any random digital plug in for function...I'm not joking when I say I wouldn't be surprised if I'm on an iPad in a few years. If I can hear what I'm doing (DA)...and get it in right (mic/pre/EQ/AD)...what the hell do I care what the digital 32bit mixing tools are? Even the little $50 Auria gives about the only function I need. DAWs are mature. Have been for years. Boxes just get smaller every year now.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 13, 2014 16:20:05 GMT -6
Hook....meet mouth.
So...I guess you have to know why I'm buying a 2ch AD....to be able to track my analog channels here into "whatever the F" digital thingy is available moving forward. Right? The other part of that, which has nothing to do with the buying stuff...has been to try to get comfortable duplicating classic gear (or my specific uses) without actually relying as heavily on the virtual versions--as who knows what some digital system will have? I can tell you from 15+ year in hardware AND software digital what EVERYTHING has--VCA compressors and EQs that mostly use nearly the same algorithm. So how does that factor in?
Using the built in compression in Cubase (which is really a nicely feature rich version of "that digital compressor" that's everywhere)...the Burl sounds better on vocals--which is the one place I wasn't "feelin it" previously. Use my pleasantly sweet IK Fairchild I tend to use on lead vocals when all ITB? Six of one. You can make an argument that the RME sounds better with it's kind of "more highs" which actually might just be harder highs--because the IK Farichild is so smooth sounding**. But, break out the run of the mill, available everywhere "generic digital compressor"...and the Burl, I guess already having the analog "niceness" sounds great (better actually than the Fairchild)...the RME doesn't hold up. It sounds significantly "lesser"....smaller...so, if I find myself on some random system that has no solid analog saturation modeling...and need to use "Straight digital" algos....the Burl is what you want.
So...there you go. Between allowing me to use any digital EQ/compressor more effectively...and the simply forgiving gain structure, I think I'm keeping it. I didn't post this here, I don't think....but, I went to do a "what happens at 96khz test"...did a old Jackson Browne tune I used for testing mics years ago, since it was so rangey and "belty"... ("I'm Alive" FWIW)...anyway--first take? Overed the RME (even with the ATTY pulling down)...the Burl hit -2dbfs...and sounded fine. Point being--had that been some killer magic take? The RME woulda sounded like shit and taken some serious tech work and maybe punches to get around the overs. That actually is something I knew I was getting, but was questioning the value--until ATTY in line, the stupid singer (ha) still popped the RME.
**I've actually found the teams and certain devs are doing something very similar--which is that their emulation circuits have a "niceness" for lack of a more technical description--it's not authentic (IMO/E), but it's almost like they've made algos with the intent in mind that they be used with less expensive conversion and preamps and maybe preamps. It's like an "harsh remover" in the upper mids....
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 13, 2014 16:24:28 GMT -6
Also--solved the having to close Cubase thing to change sample rates. There's an option in cubase to release the ASIO driver when in the background...I had it unchecked, by allowing it, the "background app" in question is the RME control panel responsible for clocking.
Does still seem weird that I was able to go from 88 to 96...and 44 to 48....but, not 48 to 88. It's like some the multiplier bit or whatever isn't communicating...
But, it works. I was not a fan of having to close Cubase to change rates. Not that I change all that often...but, it takes a while to open Cubase on my old PC with a magnetic drive...
|
|