|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 15, 2018 1:41:37 GMT -6
I like the 828es...... A control room and the same sound as the 16a at your fingertips...... If you can manage on 8 outs to the sumbus, then having your dedicated monitor outs, HP cues...... Might be the perfect box for you, and that price I still can't get over. Plus two mic inputs that I would bet don't sound bad at all.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 11, 2018 13:06:16 GMT -6
Hey jimwilliams what do you think of the Topping DX7S? TOPPING DX7s is a full balanced DAC & headphone amp with USB, Coaxial, Optical, AES input and Line Out, XLR, 6.35 headphone and balanced headphone output. DX7s use XMOS(XU208) + 2 x ES9038Q2M + 4 x OPA1612 for DAC DX7s use customized drivers(Win 7 or above) from Thesycon, all these factors makes DX7s support 32bit/768kHz and DSD512(Native). USB IN :44.1kHz-768kHz/16Bit-32Bit、DSD64-DSD256(Dop)、DSD64-DSD512(Native) COAX OUT: 44.1kHz-192kHz/16Bit-24B I was going to get that one but it doesn't decode MQA And that's basically the same specs for the S2 besides the balanced outs. More money than the S2 and doesn't utilize the ESS surrounding parts like the voltage reg and the ESS headphone amp (Ahhmazing) that the S2 uses. Also I don't think the specs on clocking are near as good as the S2. I did a ton of research and shopping before I finally listened to Jim and got the S2, I came really close to buying the DX7S only because it had balanced outs, when honestly the unbalanced outs are just as good. It also could be that my Antelope Satori compensates, but from what the others said in the S2 thread, they're more than happy with it.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 19:35:55 GMT -6
I, for one, welcome any expert commentary on clocking or digital audio in general. My brief understanding of the Lavry viewpoint is that every converter is its own best clock, and introducing an external clock signal over various types of cabling can only be worse that what was there before. TECHNICALLY speaking, measurements I mean. What you could hear who knows. This is what always gets me...… Dan Lavry says that and then..... he sells this...… Lavry Engineering MASTER CLOCK
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 19:30:01 GMT -6
I slave my 16a to the MKIII version, it makes a difference for sure. The 16a upsamples the DAC but still uses a reference, a lot of people will try and argue that because most DAC's upsample they "use their own clock" while they use their own clock, yes, that clock still needs a reference and all the factors like accuracy and jitter still matter. It's engineering fundamentals that external clocking w/ modern interfaces in most cases makes things worse, there's Lavry papers / AES papers / SOS articles etc. etc. that bang on about this subject for days but the long and short of it is it's a myth.. You also run the risk of additional issues like cheaped out clock interconnects causing issues with ground loops, RF noise etc. I don't like to talk shop, but I've worked on everything from old telecom DPNSS clocking systems to TDM, ISDN, SDH, L2 MUX's, switches, VOIP PBX's to state of the art RTP based conversion systems. I’ve come across the Sabre 32’s before, from what I remember the rate conversion is pretty much unlimited with a clock rate of around 40Mhz from 4Khz in one step with the output DNR above 170dB.. As well as a JRC operating with the rate converter in principle hitting 100% jitter reduction.
The Sabre's are complicated but they are also pretty damn good..
They can also burst an oversampled filter to correct clock edge of the high speed clock. I seriously doubt MOTU don’t know what they’re doing and the only instance an external clock will help is if they royally screwed things up. Not to say people might prefer a bit of jitter in their coffee, but lets not confuse accuracy with preference. Well I've been doing this for a pretty good while, I've heard internal clocks that sounded great and then I've heard gear that sounded like crap instantly sound better from just hooking it up to a clock...… I've seen engineers hook up clocks to their rigs and jump up and down with excitement..... I don't know about any papers but you can put me in the camp that knows my ears and knows when something sounds better and is better. The Motu 16a when clocked off a Black Lion Micro Clock MKIII sounds better on both the ADC and the DAC. In fact, I reached out to Motu back when I was considering upgrading clocks and it was them that told me about the 16a overclocking but having a master clock with good or great specs only made that overclocking better and thus the box sound better.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 14:44:35 GMT -6
Awesome..... It's truly an invaluable tool. One way to use it is instead of letting it apply the fixes, see if you can hear the fixes yourself.... meaning, see if you can fix what it's wanting to fix but instead of globally, on individual tracks. For someone wanting to better their skills this could be one way to train your ears. Izotope Ozone is truly something everyone should have, not just people starting out, but pro's as well, it is a game changer in pushing the envelope of the hi-res hi-quality audio threshold. Another thing I would suggest to you c0rtland, is take a day and sit in your mix room with the highest quality tunes you know and love. Just sit in your mix position and listen, and listen, and listen etc. etc. and keep listening. If you've got another free day, preferably the next day, do it again and the next day, if you can, do it again. Your ears and brain will train themselves to how things sound in your room. Next, pull up a mix from scratch and go at it, each time you start to work on a critical element in your mix, pull up a reference mix that highlights that critical element and burn the sound of it in your head, then pull your mix back up and go at it. If you combine both the Ozone and that technique I think your mixes will start going in the direction you're wanting. But, remember, I've been doing this for 15 years and I can't say this enough, that experience and constant practice is what makes you better, that along with the quality of what you're mixing.
|
|
|
Clarity
Aug 10, 2018 13:25:56 GMT -6
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 13:25:56 GMT -6
Nope..... It doesn't work like that. You can trial the advanced version and try it out. Just find the mixes you like the most and load them in and trust what it gives you. I will usually tweak a little but will leave the majority of what it does alone. The static eq curve and compression I normally don't touch.
|
|
|
Clarity
Aug 10, 2018 13:00:47 GMT -6
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 13:00:47 GMT -6
Ozone 8 is definitely invaluable to me and the tools and features in that program are worth far more than any compressor or eq you'd spend thousands on out there. Just load your favorite mixes as a batch into the reference section, then allow Ozone to learn the dynamics, loudness and tone of your track against the combined curve of the references and it'll blow you away. The program is scary intelligent, it's not just analyzing the eq/saturation/compression/width of the references, but the "sound" of them and then uses all those aforementioned tools to match your track. Izotope has really changed the way I work and also allowed me to damn near be completely ITB. I hate to admit it, but I use the mastering assistant thing all the time. It hears things - especially with the Dynamic EQ that I hadn’t before. Of course, I tweak, but it’s badass. Btw - I did t know it could analyze a batch of songs. Need to read up. Yep, just make a folder with all the best songs you like, open the folder, cmd+a and it'll build a reference from all of them. The more the better. Ozone 8 is definitely invaluable to me and the tools and features in that program are worth far more than any compressor or eq you'd spend thousands on out there. Just load your favorite mixes as a batch into the reference section, then allow Ozone to learn the dynamics, loudness and tone of your track against the combined curve of the references and it'll blow you away. The program is scary intelligent, it's not just analyzing the eq/saturation/compression/width of the references, but the "sound" of them and then uses all those aforementioned tools to match your track. Izotope has really changed the way I work and also allowed me to damn near be completely ITB. Johnkenn and jeromemason , does Ozone 8 Standard have this feature as well, or is it just Ozone 8 Advanced? It looks like Standard has it, as well, but I wanted to check. It sounds like a pretty cool feature. It's the "Mastering Assistant" If it says it has that then you're good. I have the Advanced versions of Ozone and RX6.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 12:46:26 GMT -6
I slave my 16a to the MKIII version, it makes a difference for sure. The 16a upsamples the DAC but still uses a reference, a lot of people will try and argue that because most DAC's upsample they "use their own clock" while they use their own clock, yes, that clock still needs a reference and all the factors like accuracy and jitter still matter.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 12:29:33 GMT -6
Maybe I posted this earlier in this thread, but I have found Ozone 8 to be invaluable in this regard. It has the one touch reference thingy where you can a/b any reference tracks...and I’ve found the tonal balance thing to be super helpful. Ozone 8 is definitely invaluable to me and the tools and features in that program are worth far more than any compressor or eq you'd spend thousands on out there. Just load your favorite mixes as a batch into the reference section, then allow Ozone to learn the dynamics, loudness and tone of your track against the combined curve of the references and it'll blow you away. The program is scary intelligent, it's not just analyzing the eq/saturation/compression/width of the references, but the "sound" of them and then uses all those aforementioned tools to match your track. Izotope has really changed the way I work and also allowed me to damn near be completely ITB.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 9, 2018 14:30:14 GMT -6
Nice.... Would you mind running a mix through those when you get them all set up?? I was thinking about building a pair to have on my mix buss but didn't know anyone with a pair.
Also, what was the final build cost and time for you??
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 8, 2018 22:23:06 GMT -6
Well, I never have the money per se...but if I were to decide to keep it, I would make like $1200 and add 8 channels...BUT...I know me and if the Symphony DA is slightly better it’s gonna be hard for me to pull the trigger. Plus, the extra 8 channels would be for an eventual additional 8 channels of sumbus...and I don’t HAVE to have that. The $1200 extra would be nice... Maybe status quo is good.
The Symphony MK2 DA is going to be better, there's no doubt about it.. The real question is how necessary is it? The subjective differences between a lot of converters ain't massive and as we discussed earlier it's not always about "technical efficiency", ala there's examples of a metric ton of people preferring the MRX816 even though specs wise it sucks compared to an MOTU 16A..
John you know I'm as fussy as the best of them, but a reality check is needed once in a while.. If you can't cut amazing tracks on the MOTU, it ain't the interfaces fault.
I'm not in the camp of the Symphony's D/A being better..... I've heard both and I honestly believe the Motu is more extended on top. Apogee has always from memory tuned their converters to be a little softer/smoother sounding. Honestly the Motu and Symphony as so close in builds that some guys did a null test on the purple site and found they nulled out to something like -76db. You can do a search and find that thread over there. Now, that was the MKI not the MKII, but the D/A side of the MKII were not all that much different, mainly the A/D side was what Apogee made much better. If you look at the guts of the MKII and 16a two things are absolute; the MKII uses the AKM A/D chips (which are great, but so are the Cirrus chips used in the 16a, which both Prism and Cranesong HEDD192 uses) and the other is the MKII uses the OPA1632's as the diff amp into the A/D. The 16a is set up a little different, but changing over the opamps to the OPA1642's would likely keep the detail extension of the 16a but also give it a bit more of a warmer/softer overall tone. Swapping all the opamps I truly believe would put the 16a over the Symphony, but that's just my theory, whether this is true or not is probably about to be found out as I believe I've got someone willing to mod 2 channels to start. I believe this person also still has their MKII's as well, so we'll absolutely know for sure. The bigger picture here is that if you can get a 16a for $850 or ever $1k, it can be tuned and upgraded to go above Apogee and you're saving a pile of money for the I/O.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 8, 2018 17:35:33 GMT -6
I’ve got a line on one for $850. Should I pull the trigger? Surely I could get my money back if I decide not to go with it, right? That's an insane deal..... For the quality and I/O count how could you not? Unless you don't have the $$$, that's the ONLY reason I wouldn't grab that. Damn sure wish I had the spare cash, I'd grab that sucker and use it as R/D to mod. If anyone has a 16a that they don't depend on every day and can live without for a few days I'll do the mod if you cover all the parts and shipping etc. I'm considering modding 2 channels both in and out to see how it does...... The only problem is I can't be down for more than half a day. I truly believe this mod will take it beyond the Apogee Symphony MKII's.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 8, 2018 15:26:41 GMT -6
Something else that is interesting and that I'd really love to find out is that ESS states that the new ES9026PRO is a pin compatible direct upgrade to the ES9016. If that's true it seems like you could upgrade the DAC's as well. The only thing that makes me think no is that the new generation has the built in filters, distortion compensation and a few other features. I'm not sure if there are some dead pins on the 9016 that they use for these features on the 9026. If that's the case then it technically could be possible to drop the new generation chip in and go. I guess Motu would be the only ones to answer that one. In fact, I would bet that when they do another version of the 16a, instead of going up to the ES9038PRO they'll go to the ES9026PRO because they don't have to change the architecture of what is there now, and would only have to program in the distortion compensation and filters.
The Pro-ject S2's filters and distortion compensation don't do a whole lot IMO. I usually keep the dist comp off and keep the filter at brick wall. Anyways, If the 9026 would drop in along with dropping in the OPA16XX's, for a $100 or so you could juice your 16a up quite a bit. The 4580's and NE5532's have a plastic sound to my ears and are not very open. Remember that the 4580 is basically the same chip as the JRC4558 (the chips used in the Tubescreamers) only I believe it'll drive heavier loads. I imagine the reason they've used 4580's is because the 16a doesn't have dedicated HP outs, so they used the 4580's in case someone planned on using the box for a massive HP Dist. I surely can't think of anything my 16a drives that a OPA2134 or OPA1612 isn't more than capable of handling.
Also, on the DAC opamps, you could remove the coupling caps and bridge the pads. That's another mod to note.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 8, 2018 14:04:17 GMT -6
So it's using 4580's and NE5532's which are prime candidates for dropping in OPA16XX's
That alone would put these at another level and they're in good places for using the air gun too without too much risk of heating other component's. I would say you could also track down the coupling caps and remove them because of the much lower DC offset of the OPA16XX's but when it comes to converters the conversion chips don't like any DC, much different than a preamp etc.
The voltages need to be checked and such, but I'd say there is a 99% chance that you could just drop the new chips right in. Two different ones I'd consider, the OPA1612 if you're wanting extremely transparent and high detail, or the OPA1642 if you wanted it to be a little fatter. Both are excellent choices and you wouldn't go wrong with either, but I've noticed the 1642 has a little more of a fatter tone. The 1612 seemed much more flat and super detailed. I'm surprised they went ESS and Cirrus 5381's only to use 4580's and 5532's...... I'm sure when BLA does their mod that's the first thing they swap.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 7, 2018 22:09:42 GMT -6
I don't normally critique mixers but since I threw some advice I'll drop a couple of nuggets here.
I'd open the mix up, L/R harder panning of the band, that will let the drums breathe more. The drums, I'd maybe smash the rooms a bit or make a medium room for them just to get the cymbals to sit back some. I'd for sure throw some compression on the band parts to make them sit back a little and give some depth without them jumping into the listeners face. I'd probably put a couple of compressors in series on the vocal and hit them with like -3db each and then ride the vocal into the chorus. The bass could probably use some more compression to get some more sustain unless you're going for the sound it's at now. That's sort of the whole issue of doing this, I have no idea what your idea for the song is, but if I were handed it and told to mix it I'd for sure do those things. Compressing those electrics and panning them harder will open it up though and your drums will be more solid. I like the tone of the acoustic, so I'd maybe do like a de-esser just to tame the pick down.
Good going man, keep grinding.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 7, 2018 17:18:04 GMT -6
Yes. The low end is difficult to sort out. Typical. I go back and forth between how much low mids to cut and what to leave. Really appreciate your time looking at this. I didn't quite expect that! It does help. Apparently I'm on the right path just ignored too many issues. Helps to have the feedback. Thank you. Try HPF'ng all your tracks, yes, even the bass and kick. Don't be afraid to HPF those acoustics until the boom gets out, or the electrics until they start cutting..... The less you do with a parametric EQ the better, the phase cancelations from too much EQ causes more problems in translation I promise you that. That is why I suggested constantly monitoring in M/S and Mono because those two options will tell you right quick if you've got phase problems. Leaving noise, hiss, hum, dead air etc eats up bandwith even though it may not seem like it. I do editing for one person and along with getting things tightened up a little I will chop out anything that isn't lending itself to the tune. Also, a very very wise investment is Izotopes RX6. It's vital when you get into the bigger leagues. There is so much you can do with that software it's truly an invaluable tool. I'm endorsed by them, but I'm proud as hell of it, their software is changing the game. Another Izotope product I'd suggest trying, Ozone 8. Use the Reference feature and import a mix that you really love. Ozone will sort out the difference's between your mix and the reference and apply both static and dynamic eq to make yours fall in line with the reference. I use it on every mix I send out, it's the last piece in my chain and I wouldn't work without it. If anything you'll start seeing where it's doing all the work to your mix and you'll know the problem area's you need to work on. A funny story, kind of like how Jim Williams was talking about these mastering engineers having these insanely expensive DAC relics on full display and a Pro-ject S2 hidden when clients sat in...… The way I found out about Ozone was when I sat in on a mastering session with a big time guy here in town..... He accidently flashed it up and I called it out and he explained the Reference feature and how he used it..... Long story short, he had probably $100k worth of EQ's and Comps that the mixes were running through, but Ozone was doing most of the heavy lifting. It was brilliant.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 7, 2018 15:13:48 GMT -6
HPF/LPF, balance the tracks, make sure the vocal, drums and bass are solid and feather in the band. Check your mix as you're going in M/S and mono and when it feels done, it's done. Over analyzing and spending massive amounts of time on mixes will only make them worse. Also always remember it's not a fair criticism of yourself to be discouraged by big time reference mixes. The best of the best tracking engineers and producers made those tracks and they sounded fantastic before the mixer ever loaded them into his rig. His job is just not to screw it up and give it a signature.
Experience trumps anything out there. I've been doing this 15 years and the reason I believe my mixes sound good is because the material I'm handed is exponentially better than what I started out working with.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 1, 2018 23:25:23 GMT -6
The DIYRE Pultecs, the way you can broaden the Q out so it's basically the exact same thing as if you were doing the bass/treble on a home or car stereo, this has been the most useful way to use 2 buss eq's I've found yet. It almost never fails when you're listening to a mix in the car, if it's a little dull/bright/flat/skinny/boomy, almost every time just by adjusting the "bass" or "treble" on the home/care stereo makes you go "that's it, that's what I wanted it to sound like!" Well I figured by setting up my pultecs that way would both speed up my workflow and also let me easily throw some shine/mask or bottom/skinnier when I pull up a reference before I print. It works every time, hasn't failed me yet, and those eq's with the Capi Xformers and SL1731's have a beautiful top and really wide/broad bottom. I suggest anyone out there thinking 2 buss eq, take a detour from the surgical stuff and try some extremely broad eq, I bet it will serve you more than the surgical. Besides, surgical is for the ME to get into, I can't even hear surgical in my room, but a ME in a true mastering house sure can.
On buss compression, the best advice I can give some folks is find one that allows parallel compression. You can save your dynamics while also leveling out your mix, it's hard to beat. I really love the SSL style with parallel happening. something like 70% wet seems to be where I land.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jul 28, 2018 0:38:22 GMT -6
Buss comp for sure...
After I custom built my SSL/RED3 hybrid'ish the differences in my mixes totally speak for themselves. But, I would also say too that there could be another hat thrown in here, and that's the combo of both the buss eq and comp together, working as a team. The DIYRE Pultecs, even though they have that little $199 price tag, they are truly incredible EQ's for that money. I built mine with the Capi Xformers, SL1731's and a few other little mods in the input chip.
Honestly I think there are so many little things that are extremely important when it comes to the 2buss. My Antelope Satori, the summing mixer built into it, it's sounds is super clean, detailed and it allows me to do one of the most important things I've found since I've been chasing getting a hybrid rig to feel like a console; and that's gain staging. It took me a long time to get my 2buss chain in the sweet spot of the gain staging and that's all the way down to the A/D. Since my Lavry allows me to juice it's input with +13db of gain, I get ultimately 4 layers of gain stages. 16a>Satori>Pultecs>buss comp>Lavry. It took me hours upon hours of finding the sweet spot of each of those units, I did it in a way that lets me view my DAW output meters, and depending on about 6db of headroom with those meters I know how much heat I'm putting on each mix. The beauty there is that every piece in my buss stays static on it's input/output level, there by allowing me to keep it consistent.
If you want your mixes to have that dynamic movement and open/wide/console sound, pick out multiple layers/stages of gain in analog buss pieces, make sure they're either transparent or not going to saturate too heavily and you'll be hearing that big dynamic sound.
Honestly, I love the RED3, but it clamps too fast, but it no doubt makes the mix sound large. The SSL can be transparent, maybe too transparent, and what I found was making the signal path of the comp RED3 and the transparent compression of the SSL is perfect to my ears. So I'd say the comp is the most important or critical one piece of gear, but if you're going after that console sound and trying to get there with a hybrid setup, increase the number of gain stages and figure out the sweet spot of each one, then figure out how to keep them static and rely on your DAW output level.
The best candidate out there to start with is the Audioscape buss comp, the mods you can lay over the top of that clone are inexpensive but highly worth it. Eliminating near all but 2 of the coupling/bypass caps and transformers on the inputs gives it the RED3 large sound. I know that's way more potatoes for the sack than the original question asked, but hopefully what took me damn near 3 years to figure out, that knowledge might help some get there quicker, making a plan and budget.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jul 20, 2018 22:29:10 GMT -6
I really like the Chop Shop, love the Harrison..... that one is just really hard to beat. The sleeper would be the Electra... it does some magical stuff when the HPF and low knob work together, not to mention the top end you get along with it.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jul 20, 2018 14:19:53 GMT -6
Here’s the setup that I’d think ideal, and please, please let me know if I’m going about this the wrong way, or if there’s a better way. I’d like 8-16 channels of AD/DA to use my outboard while mixing. I’d also like 16 channels of DA for my CAPI SumBus. Wouldn’t it be ideal to mix through the SumBus while also being able to insert hardware? For that, I’d need 24-32 channels of I/O. 32 channels of Apogee conversion is a wallet killer (and probably a marriage killer). However, a Motu 16a and a 24 Ao is a lot easier to manage. Am I thinking about this workflow setup the right way? For I/O I'd go with the 24's.... The 16a is like a converter/interface where as the 24's are def more geared at being just converters. The only thing is that's another 8 channels crammed in the same box so I'm not sure if the specs on jitter and conversion are going to be as good, I guess that's something to check into, maybe ask some folks here that have them. I can tell you running two 16a's is pretty damn simple, just set up the AVB streams between boxes, run your ethernet cable, 1 TB cable to the comp and it'll look at it like it's one unit, both Mac and PC. Also the routing via JAVA with the 2 units is really great. Motu did a great job all around with the hardware and software of these.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jul 20, 2018 11:56:44 GMT -6
I surely can't hear a $3k difference....... I ran into this with Randy when we outfitted his place with 2 16a's in place of his Apogee 16X's. What he thought was crispy or brittle was actually more top end information which after using saturation plugs or some of his incredible tube gear, really sounded great. I'm still not sure what A/D chips they're using and opamps for the 16a. Apogee uses the OPA1632 which is a Burr Brown specifically designed for converters..... pretty cool. I guess I need to bust my 16a open and have a look, problem is it's wired in and I definitely don't feel like pulling all that, plus my 16a does exactly what I want it to do so that'll have to be something I do when I truly have down time, unless someone else has one they can pop the lid off of and take some close up pics. That’s kinda what I’m thinking. If I want to round off the top, or warm things up, I’ve got plenty of outboard that can do that. The Zulu alone is perfect for doing that. What I can’t add is depth/dimension. I don’t hear one as being significantly more 3D than the other. When I started clocking from the BLAMKIII I noticed quite a bit more depth and detail.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jul 20, 2018 11:20:02 GMT -6
I surely can't hear a $3k difference....... I ran into this with Randy when we outfitted his place with 2 16a's in place of his Apogee 16X's. What he thought was crispy or brittle was actually more top end information which after using saturation plugs or some of his incredible tube gear, really sounded great. I'm still not sure what A/D chips they're using and opamps for the 16a. Apogee uses the OPA1632 which is a Burr Brown specifically designed for converters..... pretty cool. I guess I need to bust my 16a open and have a look, problem is it's wired in and I definitely don't feel like pulling all that, plus my 16a does exactly what I want it to do so that'll have to be something I do when I truly have down time, unless someone else has one they can pop the lid off of and take some close up pics.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jul 16, 2018 17:41:03 GMT -6
I'm not sure if the Pure2 has a GUI that let's you adjust it's inputs and outputs, or lets you even add some gain . . . . At any rate, it's off topic of the Motu The Pure2 has a GUI that has gain adjustment, but you need to connect USB to see it, and I use it hanging off of SPDIF to my Apogee Symphony MK1. Having the thing offline means it never asks you to update it! IMO this thread has wandered into very interesting territory. Clearly lots of us have varying experience, equipment, and taste when it comes to things technical. It's part of what I love so much about RGO- we have civil discussion with no bashing of posts or posters. And anyone who misbehaves eventually gets shown The Hand. But JK gives lots of latitude, which I also like. I started this thread because I decided to up my I/O to 32x32. But when I did a gear inventory, I realized I need more than that to do the digital insert thing- upwards of 48x48 and ultimately 64x64. Hardware compressors, it's almost a fetish with me. I was sitting around one hot night a couple of weeks ago, and realized that I don't give a shit about anything else in my life (OK, my health matters) and I'm going to make music until I die, and (God Willing) I hope it's for many years to come. So I'm going to lay it down and go all in with equipment. Maybe some day I'll even know how to use it! So have you decided on how to get that I/O count, or already done it? I would have to say that the Orion's look extremely attractive for the money, but I noticed it's said there's issues..... The Motu's really are great for the money, and I'm getting pretty close to cracking mine open and checking out what's under the hood, or dandeurloo modded his, maybe he can tell us what A/D chips and opamps are used in the stock units. If Motu is using the AKM AK5397EQ A/D chips and the 16XX Burr Brown chips then you have the same thing. If they're at least using the AKM's but not the OPA16XX's it would be a mod I'd certainly like to get into. But, I will say that the fact Apogee is using those A/D's and opamps it shows they're going the top of the line. I love the sound of the OPA1642. The 1612 is similar, but the 1642 has a fatter tone to my ears, so I prefer it on multi out's. The 1612 I like better on mix buss outs because of their more transparent and detail, but the 1642 still is very detailed, just not as much as the 1612. The Symphony uses the OPA1632, but I've not tried that one yet, but it does note on TI's site that the OPA1632 is specifically made for driving ADC's, so that just show's you how much Apogee values what it puts under the hood.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jul 16, 2018 16:27:34 GMT -6
I find the Pure2 to be pristine in both directions. I tend to push the AD hard, sending peaks of around -2 into it out of my Sigma. The Sigma just sounds better cranked. I stopped watching the Pure2 meter for overs quite some time ago- the occasional (digital) zero+ is seemingly handled with ease and they are not audible to me. I tend to be more conservative sending DA to my PMC twotwo 8s and sub- they let me know know instantly whether distortion is present. But who knows, a mastering engineer might be horrified by the lack of headroom in my 2-mixes. I'm not a pro, and record myself and my band only, so we tend to turn it up and carry on. I found the Bombers to be less forgiving of level- they start to saturate well before zero. They are awesome, no doubt, but I decided I don't necessarily want transformer saturation on the way in. Sounds on par for Antelope..... My Satori, the summing it offers is probably the best summing mixer I've heard yet. It's a simple 8 channel input with a two mix out, no kind of panning or what not, but what I really love is the ability to open the software GUI for the Satori and being able to pull down the summing outputs. Basically I can send a much hotter signal to the summing inputs and use the summing output fader in the GUI to push my EQP's. With the EA transformers and SL1731's I can push those eq's until the mix has just enough harmonics for the song. Those EQ's sound really good when pushed, with the tranny and opamps I'm running at least. My custom buss comp has Lundahl input trannies as well, they seem to add a really beautiful top when they're pushed, my Lavry let's me jack the signal from the comp up by +13db (1db steps) and I have my output knob on the comp so I can really dial in multiple layers of harmonics and volume. I was listening to old mixes before this setup and it's insane how much more dynamic, wide, deep and loud my mixes are. I'm not sure if the Pure2 has a GUI that let's you adjust it's inputs and outputs, or lets you even add some gain, but I'd think it would. I even believe there is a way that the Satori and Pure2 can work together with another GUI for when you have both boxes. At any rate, it's off topic of the Motu, but I can't speak more highly of Antelope and their ability at having such a pure and clean signal path. Also they pack a lot of features into these boxes. I believe the new Orion's and HD's have the DSP plugins which I've heard sound really amazing. Hopefully if they're having issues they'll get them ironed out, the hardware is totally top shelf. I'd love to hear the Pure2 bending at around +6db...... Svart said his box will let you bend it by around +6db and my Lavry will let you bend it by +6db as well. Be interesting to know what chips they're using in the Pure2, not only the DA/AD chips but all the signal path buffers and amps. That is one thing I highly admire about Apogee with the Symphony, they use the OPA1632's and the OPA16XX line of opamps are the best out there IMO. This is where something like the Motu 16a or other ESS models, if they're using a slightly lower quality opamp could be modded to reach that level. Also using the OPA16XX chips allows you to reduce greatly the amount of signal path caps because of their low DC offset.
|
|