|
|
Post by matt on Feb 7, 2014 15:20:49 GMT -6
With the imminent arrival of a Symphony I/O, I now have the following to sync up:
Burl B2 AD
Burl B2 DA
Apollo Quad
Symphony I/O
I have read up and understand that external clocking increases jitter. Right now I just chain them together master/slave style, or should I connect them to an external clock? If no external clock, which box to use as master? My current master is the Burl DA, and I have no detectable audio issues. However, the Symphony will be taking over as primary DA, having 8x8 and 16 analog out cards, so maybe it should be the master?
As I'm sure everybody knows, the technical truth of increased jitter is contrasted by many testimonials that external clocking by a dedicated clock increases sound quality of a digital recording system, particularly on complex, multi-unit rigs. This seems to be a controversial topic, and for once I want to be circumspect about jumping on the bandwagon. I would rather just interconnect them if there is no real benefit to using a dedicated clock source.
I am open to any suggestions on how to interconnect them w/o a dedicated external clock. Alternately, if a dedicated clock is worth doing, I might be willing to invest in a Big Ben or Antelope OCX, but the Trinity/10M is out of the question.
I wonder if I have reached the "complex" threshold. I also wonder if having every box march to the same external clock, with matching BNC cables, etc, somehow has a greater euphonic effect than the impact of higher jitter, thus making a dedicated clock worthwhile.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Feb 7, 2014 17:30:36 GMT -6
Dedicated clock IME is the best route. Some will tell you that the main interface or D/A should be the master with everything slaved, but for me the proof was in the pudding. The OCX is a great box, I would look into the BLA Micro clock as well..... for how much that unit cost's it's unbelievable as master clock.
When hooking it all up you have to make sure that everything is terminated properly. You should do this by taking a WC cable from your master, then attaching a T adapter to each slave, then using a 75 ohm termination cap on the final slaved unit. That will give a strong master signal and should eliminate any sort of pops or funky effects from not terminating.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 7, 2014 21:06:19 GMT -6
With the imminent arrival of a Symphony I/O, I now have the following to sync up: Burl B2 AD Burl B2 DA Apollo Quad Symphony I/O I have read up and understand that external clocking increases jitter. Right now I just chain them together master/slave style, or should I connect them to an external clock? If no external clock, which box to use as master? My current master is the Burl DA, and I have no detectable audio issues. However, the Symphony will be taking over as primary DA, having 8x8 and 16 analog out cards, so maybe it should be the master? As I'm sure everybody knows, the technical truth of increased jitter is contrasted by many testimonials that external clocking by a dedicated clock increases sound quality of a digital recording system, particularly on complex, multi-unit rigs. This seems to be a controversial topic, and for once I want to be circumspect about jumping on the bandwagon. I would rather just interconnect them if there is no real benefit to using a dedicated clock source. I am open to any suggestions on how to interconnect them w/o a dedicated external clock. Alternately, if a dedicated clock is worth doing, I might be willing to invest in a Big Ben or Antelope OCX, but the Trinity/10M is out of the question. I wonder if I have reached the "complex" threshold. I also wonder if having every box march to the same external clock, with matching BNC cables, etc, somehow has a greater euphonic effect than the impact of higher jitter, thus making a dedicated clock worthwhile. Good Lord, man...can I borrow some money? |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 7, 2014 21:17:39 GMT -6
With the imminent arrival of a Symphony I/O, I now have the following to sync up: Burl B2 AD Burl B2 DA Apollo Quad Symphony I/O Good Lord, man...can I borrow some money? LOL |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 7, 2014 21:37:50 GMT -6
I've never in my life heard that a DA should be master. Quite the opposite...most DAs do some amount of reclocking internally anyway, no? It's the AD side where the effects of bad or external clocking is printed irreparably into the audio.
Isn't that like $10k for 18x18 IO--all different, so f'd IO compensation if you use ProTools--and all over a FireWire connection?
What's the plan for all the disparate IO?
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 7, 2014 21:58:53 GMT -6
I've never in my life heard that a DA should be master. Quite the opposite...most DAs do some amount of reclocking internally anyway, no? It's the AD side where the effects of bad or external clocking is printed irreparably into the audio. Isn't that like $10k for 18x18 IO--all different, so f'd IO compensation if you use ProTools--and all over a FireWire connection? What's the plan for all the disparate IO? I've heard that the master should be AD, or DA, hence the question about the master/slave arrangement. All connectivity is via Thunderbolt, including the Symphony (Thunderbridge). I am not using the Apollo AD, and for most tracking (one or two active mics) the Burl gets used via S/PDIF. I will use the Symphony if I need to mic drums, for instance, but that won't happen very often. My system works fine now, my question really revolves around how to best integrate the Symphony when it arrives. |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Feb 7, 2014 22:55:35 GMT -6
I've never in my life heard that a DA should be master. Quite the opposite...most DAs do some amount of reclocking internally anyway, no? It's the AD side where the effects of bad or external clocking is printed irreparably into the audio. Isn't that like $10k for 18x18 IO--all different, so f'd IO compensation if you use ProTools--and all over a FireWire connection? What's the plan for all the disparate IO? I've heard that the master should be AD, or DA, hence the question about the master/slave arrangement. All connectivity is via Thunderbolt, including the Symphony (Thunderbridge). I am not using the Apollo AD, and for most tracking (one or two active mics) the Burl gets used via S/PDIF. I will use the Symphony if I need to mic drums, for instance, but that won't happen very often. My system works fine now, my question really revolves around how to best integrate the Symphony when it arrives. Ok, so you've got an Apollo (interface) a symphony (interface) and 2x2 of Burl is that right? So when you start a typical session when the new box comes in which will be the primary interface to PT? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2014 23:01:05 GMT -6
For me, always the Main AD unit is master clock. In your case, i would take the Burl AD as the master clock hands down. Especially if it is the most used AD in your daily work.
Why should one degrade it by external clocking? Once recorded with inferior clocking, there is no way to make up for this. DA as master clock makes no sense for me in this scenario ... and unless you have a higher amount of digital stuff to sync that would justify it, i would not use an external clock, no matter how good it seems to be or how expensive...
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 7, 2014 23:20:51 GMT -6
I've heard that the master should be AD, or DA, hence the question about the master/slave arrangement. All connectivity is via Thunderbolt, including the Symphony (Thunderbridge). I am not using the Apollo AD, and for most tracking (one or two active mics) the Burl gets used via S/PDIF. I will use the Symphony if I need to mic drums, for instance, but that won't happen very often. My system works fine now, my question really revolves around how to best integrate the Symphony when it arrives. Ok, so you've got an Apollo (interface) a symphony (interface) and 2x2 of Burl is that right? So when you start a typical session when the new box comes in which will be the primary interface to PT? Right now it's the Apollo, with the incoming Symphony handling DA to my Midas Venice during mix, and the Burls on S/PDIF (off the Apollo right now). Obviously, this might change. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 7, 2014 23:22:36 GMT -6
For me, always the Main AD unit is master clock. In your case, i would take the Burl AD as the master clock hands down. Especially if it is the most used AD in your daily work. Why should one degrade it by external clocking? Once recorded with inferior clocking, there is no way to make up for this. DA as master clock makes no sense for me in this scenario ... and unless you have a higher amount of digital stuff to sync that would justify it, i would not use an external clock, no matter how good it seems to be or how expensive... Yes. I do not want to use a dedicated clock like the OCX or BB unless there is a really good reason. |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Feb 8, 2014 0:20:29 GMT -6
Ok, so you've got an Apollo (interface) a symphony (interface) and 2x2 of Burl is that right? So when you start a typical session when the new box comes in which will be the primary interface to PT? Right now it's the Apollo, with the incoming Symphony handling DA to my Midas Venice during mix, and the Burls on S/PDIF (off the Apollo right now). Obviously, this might change. Ok, that's what I thought. So whatever is going to be the device that does most of the A/D should be the master. I'm not sure on the clock in the Apollo, but I know Apogee has a good clock. I think once you get your Symphony in the chain you can figure out if there are going to be any issues with clocking and the devices talking to each other. I have to say though, in the least you should try an external clock and see if there is a noticeable difference. With all those different types of converters I'm willing to bet there will be. If there isn't, send it back. At least you'll know for sure if you're making the right decision. I did this, and I never sent back my external clock, the difference was so significant I couldn't part with it. The definition, the high end, all of it just sounded better, I did plenty of A/B's, sent them off to buddies I trust, and all could tell a massive difference, I was using my Apogee Ensemble's internal vs. the FM192 clock in the BLA REd Sparrow. So, that would be my advice. |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 8, 2014 1:03:48 GMT -6
So, you're going to create an aggregate device in CoreAudio...using a clock source that is neither of the interfaces? I think that changes things. Apple's going to need you to define you clock sync there. Let us know how that goes. I've never even attempted to define aggregates and try to use two different interfaces. That's totally a different ballgame than hooking up converters to AN interface and deciding how to clock it.
|
|
|
|
Post by unit7 on Feb 8, 2014 1:07:36 GMT -6
FWIW, my console has 72 inputs so I've got 1xPrism and 4xHD192. Got the Prism because I wanted something top notch to track and to print my mixes on but also because of all the talk about bad clocking in the HDs. So I'm using Prism as master with the HDs hooked up via an Adwark WC splitter (instead of daisy chain) that I got used for dirt cheap. So, no dedicated WC unit here. Been working great for the five yrs I've had it.
|
|
|
|
Post by RicFoxx on Feb 8, 2014 7:32:19 GMT -6
Here is what Herbie (CowboyCoalMiner) generously replied to me when asking about Apollo/Symphony/Burl Setup. No Burl DA…just AD. Cowboy, Hope you don't mind that I posted this, just figured it would save you some time writing it.
"The way I use my rig is as follows:
Apollo Qaud as my interface. Symphony in standalone ADAT into and out of the Apollo. Then the Burl B2 SPIDF into the Apollo for a total of 18 in 18 out. The outputs go to the console each to their own channel and I monitor through the console. In this scenario, some would say that conversion becomes less critical because once to the console, you can shape each channel with eq. I use the 10 Apollo outs and 8 Symphony outs and once to the console, I can't tell a whole lot of difference. Some but not much. Then I simply print the buss mix back to the daw on mix down. So I'm printing exactly what I'm hearing through my monitors. This is one of the great benefits to mixing analog. No second guessing. What you hear is what you get. No need to check a mix on this system or that, just print and forget. It is what it is.
Recording, I usually just go direct to converters, but sometimes I'll run through an input channel on the console for vocals and various for better cue mixes and zero latency.
Hope this helps.
Herbie"
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Feb 8, 2014 14:47:35 GMT -6
Here is what Herbie (CowboyCoalMiner) generously replied to me when asking about Apollo/Symphony/Burl Setup. No Burl DA…just AD. Cowboy, Hope you don't mind that I posted this, just figured it would save you some time writing it. "The way I use my rig is as follows: Apollo Qaud as my interface. Symphony in standalone ADAT into and out of the Apollo. Then the Burl B2 SPIDF into the Apollo for a total of 18 in 18 out. The outputs go to the console each to their own channel and I monitor through the console. In this scenario, some would say that conversion becomes less critical because once to the console, you can shape each channel with eq. I use the 10 Apollo outs and 8 Symphony outs and once to the console, I can't tell a whole lot of difference. Some but not much. Then I simply print the buss mix back to the daw on mix down. So I'm printing exactly what I'm hearing through my monitors. This is one of the great benefits to mixing analog. No second guessing. What you hear is what you get. No need to check a mix on this system or that, just print and forget. It is what it is. Recording, I usually just go direct to converters, but sometimes I'll run through an input channel on the console for vocals and various for better cue mixes and zero latency. Hope this helps. Herbie" If I had that rig that's exactly how I would hook it up. Not thinking about a console, but I would have the Apollo as my main interface, then use the Symphony in standalone, run the output of the symphony via adat to the Apollo, Burl to Spdif in, and Spdif out to Burl D/A. Then I'd go adat out of apollo into symphony and the analog outs to whatever device/console. I would clock off the Symphony and daisy chain a word clock cable like this Symphony>Apollo>Burl A/D>Burl D/A> Terminate But that's just me, some may do it differently. I just think creating the aggregate device and using multiple interfaces would be a PIA, I've never tried it though, so if he does do this I would definitely be interested in how it worked out, if there were any issues etc. |
|
|
|
Post by mulmany on Feb 9, 2014 17:29:56 GMT -6
I was taught that daisy chaining WC was a bad solution and to only do it as a last resort. It will develop timing errors, but that might only really hold true when doing digital loops in and out of gear.
|
|
