In my opinion, transparent converters will work with any music styles. The differences will be made in the mic and placement choice preamps and the way the songs are mixed.

A budget solution would be the Orion32 with a madi interface
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Orion32
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MadiXtreme128

But if quality preseeds budget, Focusrite Rednet array is good and can grow with your future needs.
http://www.sweetwater.com/insync/focusrite-rednet-buying-guide/

Solid State Logic also makes nice converters.
But of course, Prism is top of the line if you can afford them..

I think it very depends who are your customer target. If you are entering the big league or not

BTW, I'm no sweetwater seller, I took them as a reference prices point ;)

To add to pcrecord excellent points,

Nothing better than Prism. I've also used Orion 32. Works excellent with MADI interfacing, not so great on USB.

Concerning converters my research yields these three options:-

1. DAD AX 32

2. Merging Horus

3. EMM labs

hipbluescat

Cat -

Could you please elaborate further on what it was in particular that attracted you to these that you've listed?

Along with helping people in the here and now, it could also be of great benefit to others in the future who may be doing an internet search on the subject. ;)

Hi

They seem to be perfect converters with no colouration.

This is what I am looking for.

I guess I've pretty much been under the impression that - past a certain price point - all hi-end converters were the same in that they're transparent - because that's exactly what those who spend that kind of money are looking for.

Are you saying that the Prism - or Burl Audio, SSL or any of the other popular hi-end conversion systems - isn't transparent?

I'm not telling... I really am asking.

hipbluescat, post: 428425, member: 49035 wrote: I am looking for converters that are 100 percent transparent without modifying the sound in any respect.

no such thing exsists and it never will .... you're tilting at windmills.

hipbluescat, post: 428425, member: 49035 wrote: I have also looked at DAD and threads from various people state that the 32 track model

Why would you need 32 channels of DAC?

hipbluescat, post: 428425, member: 49035 wrote: Do certain converters suit specific music production e.g. Live band verse purely electronic music for example.

Why would you need 32 dac for electronic music?

hipbluescat, post: 428425, member: 49035 wrote: I am looking at replacing my AD/DA converters box in my studio.

What "converters box" are you using right now?

Do you think you need gain staging on your converters, what connectors do you want and what interfacing is your preference?

hipbluescat, post: 428449, member: 49035 wrote: Concerning converters my research yields these three options:-

1. DAD AX 32

2. Merging Horus

3. EMM labs

Why?

I totally accept that there could in fact be measurable differences between different models - on paper.

Everything - or anything for that matter, can be measured - if you have a measuring device that is sensitive enough.
I'm sure it wouldn't be impossible to measure the amplitude of an ant's footsteps on rice paper - as long as you had a device that is sensitive enough, and capable of taking a measurement that small.

I guess it begs the question as to whether or not those differences are audible?

I have absolutely no idea what the specs are for a Prism, or for an EMM Labs converter... I'm asking - if they were put side by side, and the exact same signal was routed through each - is there anyone here, or anywhere, who could actually hear a difference between them?

Once again - I'm not being rhetorical with this. I am sincere in my question.

hipbluescat, post: 428425, member: 49035 wrote: I have read that EMM labs are the best per there web site.

only 96k? 192 is the standard even on the cheap side .....the DAD looks real good ... it would be hard out out grow that.

even if you can hear a "difference", who's to say what is causing it? ...... all converters have analog circuitry. some like BURL use transformers on inputs and discreet direct coupled transistor outs. others are completly discreet or op amp inzan'outz. that alone will make for different results.

there are only a handful of chip manufactures. many high end converters use the same chips as the bottom feeders ... example; PRISIM / ALESIS both use Cirrus Logic chips but there's a world of difference in the clocking and more inportant, the analog input and output stages..

the question i have is; with new DSD standards and PCM sample rates @ 192, is the difference between high end and average converters that wide?

my advice is listen and buy what you think sounds best. try to get "transparent" out of your mind. you can't get there from here. period! transparent is an unattainable ideal ... a goal set by engineers frustrated by the limits of state of the art designs.

all electronics have a signature of one kind or the other. nothing is ever improved when it is put through an electronic circuit. it is only altered to something that is desired. but it is degraded. it's never better or even the same. there's no such thing as straight wire with gain. once everyone understands this, the better.

there's a sh*tload of smoke & mirrors floating around in regards to converters. if someone gave me a Prisim or Burl or such, i would use it? for sure and i would shout from the mountain top how wonderful it was (the least i could do, after all they did give me one. lol). but would i make an investment in one? not if i can't see it pay for its self. it's one thing to throw a couple hundred bucks away for sh*ts and giggles but at $2k here and there, it adds up to serious money real fast and i don't see it being worth it unless you are blocked out solid @ $100 an hour.

DonnyThompson, post: 428457, member: 46114 wrote: I guess it begs the question as to whether or not those differences are audible?

Once again you nailed it. Maybe 20 years ago there were real differences between consumer and professional grade converters. But these days even the "prosumer" stuff is clean enough to not color the sound by an audible amount. Now, if someone works ITB but also sends audio out and back in through outboard gear, then that adds two more generations on top of the original source recording. (Well, one really, because it's only one added D/A and one added A/D.) But even after two or three generations, the degradation from modern "affordable" converters is way less than the distortion and response errors in the best microphones and loudspeakers. Not to mention the skewed response of even the best live rooms and control rooms.

These two articles (one with a video) will let you fairly compare converter quality and degradation:

[="http://www.ethanwiner.com/converters.html"]Converter Comparison[/]="http://www.ethanwin…"]Converter Comparison[/]
[[url=http://="http://www.ethanwin…"]Converter Loop-Back Tests[/]="http://www.ethanwin…"]Converter Loop-Back Tests[/]

--Ethan

hmm

No disrespect intended... The obvious that separates the experience for more than a weekend... If you are simply doing a round trip test for the sake of science , I suppose its simple.
But do you guys really think a $200 AD equals higher end ADC DAC in a hybrid mixing or mastering workflow?

(what's good for you may not be good for me).
Converters are subjective to your mixing and summing processes as well. Its can be that simple, but its not that simple once I add gear and start staging why I need more or less gain in or after a piece of hardware in a loop. Or, if I like a simple way to increase gain or have the converter switches from 96 to 44.1 better than some cheap AD with bad drivers.
I also may be cool with USB and there are times where a USB interface is terrible.

Personally, I don't buy converters for just the converter, thats a small part of why I use them. I can tell the OP doesn't even understand what he is asking. Its a dead giveaway. Maybe not to him, but to me it is.
Those who have actually had experience working in an excellent hybrid mixing and mastering system, with excellent mastering and summing gear understand. If you think all converters are equal, that is because you haven't really worked with better ways to interact a DAW with hardware.

Once you "actually" use a good hybrid system, and have used converters like example, RME ADI-8 QS to example what comes in the $200 price range... you stop talking like this.

audiokid, post: 428473, member: 1 wrote: do you guys really think a $200 AD equals higher end ADC DAC in a hybrid mixing or mastering workflow?

no. but is the difference worth the cost? can it really be heard or is it subjective? it's very difficult to quantify. and agian @ 192 will there be as much difference? and where's the market? who's even doing enough business to warrant a 10 to 20K expenditure? maybe Grundman an Katz and Ludwig but i ain't Allen Sides. i can't bill 2500 a day + extras. i can't see spending that kind of cash on something that will be a door stop in 5 or 6 years. there's no way i can amortize it.but i can afford a couple K just for funzies ....

audiokid, post: 428473, member: 1 wrote: I can tell the OP doesn't even understand what he is asking. Its a dead giveaway. Maybe not to him, but to me it is.

yeah i smell a fishing trip too .....

audiokid, post: 428473, member: 1 wrote: Once you "actually" use a good hybrid system, and have used converters like example, [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME[/]="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME[/] ADI-8 QS to example what comes in the $200 price range... you stop talking like this.

i can think of a time when i would have rowfed all over the the place at the thought of working with any of this stuff. but it is what it is. we have all been dragged to the bottom with the "affordable gear" explosion. the only way to compete is to hop on the band wagon.

it's a 3 grand difference ... i wouldn't gross 3 grand in years. and what you advocate would be even more .... second converters for mix ... etc. my entire rig will cost less than one high end 8 channel converter. that's computers (2)/DAW software / monitors / interfaces (2)/passive sum box. i'll be able to do 192 tracking, 8 tracks (24 @ 48k) in one pass on a laptop with low latency then mix to 192 on an iPad or laptop to "master" ... all that for maybe $1500 or 2K and it will sound just fine. i have great pres and the Millennia ORIGIN so i'm set for front end that will be better than the interface pres. i will bet most people won't say,"ugh! that sounds like cheap converters."

i have done tons of searches on the net and i can't find anything negative being said about these Cirrus converters ... in fact i did see they are used in the output stages of Prisim's box's. i'm thinking i'm in good company.

Here the deal from my seat.

There are some revealing indicators. The number one question is: Why do hybrid in the first place?
To me, there really is only one way to use hardware and it most certainly isn't with one DAW and a cheap round trip process.

Lets assume you have invested in a system like mine then. Would you be investing $100,000 worth of gear only to cut yourself short on how you push and pull DAD through the matrix? If all we are doing is passing the audio through the DAAD, what are you even doing that for. How ridiculous.

Forget invest vs return. Once you engage in hybrid, it isn't about return investment. Its the most ridiculous investment ever. A DAW is all we need. But, if you are going to do it. it certainly isn't about $200 converters and the round trip. Well at least not how I hear it.

We all know when we hit the sweet spot and I can tell you for certain, there is a sweet spot between an analog matrix and the DAW, which has nothing to do with the chip and everything to do with interfacing, gear and hearing what you are actually capturing on the capture side.
There is also an un mentioned part to this OP which is, are we mixing other peoples work or just our own static process that really never changes? If we aren't mixing other people work, we won't really understand why we need more ways to gain stage.

Everyone's mix is different. The dead giveaways are, he doesn't even know what cabling he is basing choices on. No mention of the interface. These are dead giveaways to who has actually got into this on a pro level (but "pro" is subjective too).

When it comes to tracking acoustic info with VSTi, how your DAW reacts with the interface, low latency, overdubbing etc... Its pretty clear who has actually done this journey successfully to those who pull out the science card claiming converters are all the same.
The moment this topic comes up again, that last thing we should be focused on are the chips.

I mean, my summing system uses dsubs on DAW one and FW or USB on DAW 2. AES or MADI are the only interface I will use for DAW one and DAW 2, none of this matters. I choose whatever I like. But, I also use another converter for the web. I have three very different steps all connecting to a Dangerous Monitor ST. Why?
Exactly...
Why? ... exactly... its a a dead giveaway.

The reason so many people fail with hybrid is because they really are going about it lame. I'm not about to start this topic over again for the 50th time, but if you are wanting to know how I did the hybrid thing and loved it, it wasn't using cheap converters that lack a great clock and include a few extra buttons. I require an internal card on some things, FW for others.

Bla bla I say. Not until we actually mention the interface, do I even take it serious. And then, discussing why, is when this topic gets interesting.

Hmm, maybe we aren't even asking about mixing here. Is this just about tracking?

tracking, mixing , master ..... it must be that you and i have different goals. i cannot in my wildest dreams imagine a reason to invest 100K in a DAW. i can do stuff that sounds just fine (good enough to make me happy) for far less. btw i am going more for itb for fx , eq and dynamics. just summing passively into a 2nd DAW.

are you mixing into a second DAW / computer? are you using SAMPLETUDE on that DAW? do they allow 2 instances on different machines off the same download or do you have to pop for it twice? i'm wondering this about MixBus. but @ $40 it's not that big of a deal but at 3 grand .... whooo! and 3 k times 2 for interfaces .... and 2 k times 2 for computers ... all which have a five year at best service life. who knows where tech will be by then ?

and why these discussion always end up stupid.

Lot of hearsay...

Let me put it this way, one minute you rave about how great the old days were, pultecs etc. What do those vintage pieces cost? Then you rave about a console that is better than the DAW? And then you rave about 2" tape and the whatever goes along with that. Then , you talk about a $200 converter. I keep wondering how you will compare your current investment to the old days.

I really get all sorts of mixed question and answers from you, Kurt

My point is, you and I are most certainly different but I think we both know we like analog gear and there is something about gain staging that goes a long with that ;)
I'm not saying we need to even go hybrid, but I can tell you, if you are the guy I think you are, the guys that loves analog gear.. $100,000 doesn't go far by the time you are in the big leagues lol. So what league are you and I talking about? Anyone that tells me there is no difference between a $200 ADC and Prism has his head up his butt lol.
Sorry but this topic is whacked.

The cost in how much gear I actually use isn't the the point. The process and making your analog interface well, is. And that my friend, doesn't come in a $200 box sitting beside a rack of high end gear, requiring 32 DA's lol. At least not how "I hear it".
If you are going to go hybrid, you need to invest in a few quality pieces. I am running fast away from hybrid but I do know the difference and where the rubber meets the road. Its not about the chips, its about the interfacing and the analog circuitry around it all. Which is why you end up using excellent gear in the first place. Why use cheap crap hardware when a DAW does most of it better. Thats how you tell who really gets what this is all about.

Carry on, I'm smiling as always. Just saying what I think and know based on experience in hybrid. ... I mean. I actually use the gear I talk about and have built one of the most advanced hybrid systems to date. . Does that matter?... I guess that depends. Point is, I'm not trying to be difficult but the science card just doesn't fly here. The OP mentioned 32 AD DA.
This business is so far gone, its hard to even take half of it seriously anymore.

audiokid, post: 428479, member: 1 wrote: Lot of hearsay..

please elaborate ....

audiokid, post: 428479, member: 1 wrote: I really get all sorts of mixed question and answers from you, Kurt

My point is, you and I are most certainly different but I think we both know we like analog gear and there is something about gain staging that goes a long with that ;)
I'm not saying we need to even go hybrid, but I can tell you, if you are the guy I think you are, the guys that loves analog gear.. $100,000 doesn't go far by the time you are in the big leagues lol. So what league are you and I talking about? Anyone that tells me there is no difference between a $200 ADC and [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.prismsou…"]Prism[/]="http://www.prismsou…"]Prism[/] has his head up his butt lol.

i wouldn't say i'm in the big leagues, never was. more like in the minors, hoping to get called to the big show. guys like Sides and McBride had bank up the waz from the get go ...... deep pockets. i did some good stuff but times change.

i never said Prisim's weren't better ... i pointed out all three use the Cirrus Logic chip and JET anti-jitter technology, as do a lot of other converters out there. there aren't that many chip manufacturers.

as for clocking, this is why i keep asking about higher sample rates. wouldn't clocking be less of an issue at higher S/R? i'm thinking all of it is going to be much more stable.??

yeah i like the good stuff. yes i loved it back then when analog ruled. but tapes 400 bucks a roll .. and costs of keeping a facility have quadrupled while recording budgets shrink. i can't run in the red no matter how much i love it. to tell the truth no one cares about outboard any more. they all want to know what plugs you use.

i do think the cheap stuff i have picked is better than a lot of the other cheap stuff out there. sure it's rack crap (actually desk crap) but i expect good performance considering the cost.

so where's the market? who is our customer? who is our competition? what do we need to compete? time will tell. i'll have my rig running soon and i will post some things ... maybe someone will send me something to mix.

Kurt Foster, post: 428480, member: 7836 wrote: please elaborate ....

( forums and opinions are packed full of hearsay)... and a lot of subjective support of purchase, and a lot of uninformed users. The list goes on.

I have spent the last decade testing this stuff on a daily basis. It baffles me how people are so quick to think they get the whole thing here. Gawd, it took me a year to learn how to improve my latency with my workflow. I trusted a few people early on in my build who raved about FF800 and how those would work. I sold those useless converters and replaced them with AES interfacing and my world improved immediately. clueless. "hearsay". In comparison, FF800 are excellent for really basic tracking.
None of which have anything to do with the chip.

Kurt Foster, post: 428480, member: 7836 wrote: so where's the market? who is our customer?

What does our market have to do with sound quality or how a converter interfaces with someones workflow?

This topic is starting to sound like all cable is the same. I don't think we are talking a bout a straight wire are we?
(edited) Clocking, I don't think we are talking about clocking in the same contexts. That along with the chip was sorted out around 2006.

The OP never mentioned why he even required 32 ADDA.
The chip in this debate is really just a tiny part to the bigger picture. The clock is however, a big part but isn't that somehow intertwined with the "interface" and isn't the interface subjective to our DAW, computer, track count, driver, midi? I bought Prism converters for more reasons than just the chip. I bought Orion 32 for more reasons than the chip. I traded my ADI-8 QS for the Orion 32 but I regretted it in some ways, liked it for others. And so it goes...

:D

Kurt, I feel like I need to say this. I get what we are all saying about being able to hear the difference. I mean, ear buds are the crop of ears today.
But there is a difference in sound too.
But the sound isn't really where it ends. I've tried to share this more than once with you. I hope whatever new ADDA you get, does what you need it to but I can assure you, I could never complete a hybrid mix even in the lowest track count with some of these ADC. For you guys to compare really reputable converters to the lowest end on the market, its hard not to at least point of a few pointers.
The entire music business isn't worth our investments. I would never recommend hybrid after having Sequoia and a nice PC. Some guys are just starting hybrid. Good for them. Eventually, they will comes full circle. DAW's rocks.

There's a very audible difference in interfaces/converters. I belive it is impossible to record and mix an album that competes with current state of the art big budget projects, with prosumer or even excellent gear at a typical home. If it were that easy the whole thing would explode. It's not happening, it's a pipe dream. You need the trifecta of musician rooms and gear. That's comercial. Professional, is more broad, and looser in tolerance.

High end digital sounds better, and more relevant for longer. If you are a professional, you need professional stuff. Otherwise, the prosumer, and for fun markets, are all about the same, with mild differences, in features and sonics. Put up an ls series digital mixer against any of the new a&oh or presonus, and it's sounds noticable better. Same price range now, but 10-15 years old.

$400 for my m audio firewire interface and it's always sounded like budget, and it is useless 6 years later. I got my money's worth. Thousands of hours, reliable, rock solid, as an interface.

The apogee Rosetta smokes the motu, different leagues, but the Rosetta is much older. Side by side same ins same outs.

It's an expensive game of inches. Largely diminishing returns for all but the elite. It's about gear that makes sense for you, the individual.

Analog is hot and takes tons of electricity, digital has no mojo. The truth is, 15k and a booth and a reasonable control room gets you making money producing pop, and singer songwriter stuff. The spread of samples, and now networking, is where it's at. A couple high end Channels from start to finish. That's all simple. Multiply as needed.

Anybody who says gear doesn't make a difference is not hearing things correctly. It does, and it's always worth it, for the sake of art. Practical, not usually. Overpriced, absurdly. But it is better, and it is not possible to simulate or recreate completely unless it's the real deal thru and thru. I'm poor, so I can't be snobby. But let's more often than not, the things that make my ears go ooooh happen to be expensive. Some things are better in pluggin form than hardware, and vice versa.

Get the best gear you can afford. Giving a kid that crappy one string acoustic with bad action is stupid. I've never understood forgiving people trying to learn the worst possible thing. I understand not to give them a race car day one, but there is a 'thing' to the big expensive records none of us are working on, that is only gotten that way. Obviously talking records with live tracked instruments at least layered in.

audiokid Kurt Foster kmetal Ethan Winer

I think my point was missed, ( Ethan got it, though ) and was somehow taken as me being dubious as to whether or not there was a difference between cheap and expensive converters.

My original question wasn't whether or not one could hear an audible difference between the converters in a $99 Tascam i-o and a $2000 Prism or a Burl.

My question was, when you get into the ultra high end conversion systems, like Prism, Burl, EMM, etc., can one hear an audible difference between any of those?

I see absolutely no problem in investing in high end conversion. I don't believe that it's really any different than those who are into analog, who think nothing of investing $2000 into an LA2, or a Pultec EQ... and there's nothing wrong with that either.

But if you are working within digital, the conversion step is a crucial link in your chain which will determine the quality of your recordings - and your mixes, to0, if you also happen to be integrating analog OB gear into that workflow as well.

I'm not doubting that the quality of the conversion matters. I'm saying - when you get to a certain point in caliber, is there any audible difference(s) between those high quality converters?

Hi

I have a Motu 828 mark 3.

I will mix from my protools to a 32 channel desk to the mastering software.

This is the reason.

DonnyThompson, post: 428491, member: 46114 wrote: I think my point was missed, ( Ethan got it, though ) and was somehow taken as me being dubious as to whether or not there was a difference between cheap and expensive converters.

Your point was absolutely irrelevant as was Ethan's. Who cares about the chip. That is a distraction. There is an absolute audible difference as well, and many of us can hear the difference but at this point, this is where the conversation goes sideways. The interfacing and how we use our converters is where the game changes to me anyway. Which is where high end and low audio end parts.

The OP was vague and your points are unintentionally, notoriously off the mark. These converter conversions always end up distracting when someone drops science card, and " can you hear a difference" usually follows right a long, thus no-one ever learns a damn thing lol.

:)

hipbluescat, post: 428495, member: 49035 wrote: I have a Motu 828 mark 3. I will mix from my protools to a 32 channel desk to the mastering software.

Do I understand your setup correctly: you want a 32-channel DAC interface to feed the 32 channels of an analog desk (make and model?), the 2-bus output of which will be digitised by your Motu 828 attached to a separate PC?

there's a lot of pontification about the differences /lack of difference in converters. i have to admit, for the largest part i don't hear it. i think what a lot of people don't like about cheap interfaces is the abysmal mic pres that are associated with them, implemented in a way that makes them difficult to bypass. if one uses a good mic and pre and can bypass the preamp in their low cost interface there's a good chance what is recorded will actually come out decent even at 24/48. Tame Impala made their first 2 records on a Boss porta studios ... it can be done.

other than anecdotal comment, there is very little quantifiable information. a lot of he said she said ... and to my ears, some of the less expensive converters actually sound ok. i have always been fond of the Alesis converters because their use of Cirrus Logic chips ... . i have a pair of AI3's which are imo, just as good as the PreSonus stuff everyone here seems to be so enamoured with that are line in and out, free of those awful PreSonus pre amps. . if they weren't limited to 24 /48 i would still be using them. they sound just fine but i couldn't sell them for .10 cents on the dollar if i tried. ....

audiokid, post: 428498, member: 1 wrote: Who cares about the chip. That is a distraction

it's easiest to dismiss a point when you don't have a good answer. just dismiss it. i think the chip is an integral part of the converter. it's what does the conversion lol. how could you say the chip makes no difference? imo, clocking is NOT the issue. jitter is not the problem. maybe in the past but not today. that's just marketing pablum. it's all they have. there's a lot of smoke and mirrors marketing when it comes to this topic.

i have always resisted deep expenditures when it comes to any digital tech because of digital equipments short shelf life. i don't know about others but i worked hard for my money. i don't have disposable income to squander and i'm not Allen Sides. i have to make the correct decisions when it comes to money matters. no matter what anyone says, i can not see the wisdom of spending 3 k + here and 3 k + there, on things that will need to be replaced in a few short years unless there's enough business and client demand (for the items) to warrant the purchase. can the expense be amortized? it's a simple business decision.

audiokid, post: 428482, member: 1 wrote: What does our market have to do with sound quality or how a converter interfaces with someones workflow?

it would be nice not to have to consider these things but in the real world we have to figure out how to pay for this stuff. it doesn't come free in the mail does it? if i have a client that is booking $2000 a week for 2 months and they say" I need some Burl converters here", i would be hotfooting it to the GC and ordering them for them in a heart beat! but that ain't happening. no one cares what converters local studios use ... what they want to know is what plugs and DAW you use and if you can cut them a deal on that $20 per hour rate. ... then they ask about mic pres.

in the end, i need to trust what i hear. i need to make good decisions on expenditures. i am not free of economic concerns. i don't hear anything that justifies a 1000% difference in cost. i think this segment of the business is rife with snake oil salespeople, over the top promotion by hucksters, outright lies and misinformation that are eagerly gobbled up by deep pocket snobs and studio operators who are desperate to create distance between what they have to offer and what the average street recordist can do. this is why this topic always gets heated when discussed.

audiokid, post: 428479, member: 1 wrote: I really get all sorts of mixed question and answers from you, Kurt ..... I can tell you, if you are the guy I think you are, the guys that loves analog gear.. $100,000 doesn't go far by the time you are in the big leagues lol.

i can go out and buy a PULTEC and if i keep it maintained, in ten years i can expect it will be worth something and still be a piece that is desirable and functional. who can say that about any converter that is 10 years old? in the end it's all junk you can't bring yourself to toss so it sits on a shelf gathering dust. do these high end converters make "better" and more "transparent" doorstops? don't stub your toes! :giggle:

Kurt, you keep digressing here. The OP is not interested in marketing, he is interested in what the title is about. Its impossible to reach you.
One that note: I'm out on this thread.

audiokid, post: 428501, member: 1 wrote: Kurt, you keep digressing here. The OP is not interested in marketing, he is interested in what the title is about. Its impossible to reach you.
One that note: I'm out on this thread.

and another dismissal. disappointing.

to the contrary, the op is is marketing. the op is on a fishing trip ... he's trying to create buzz about one of those converters he mentioned. that's why the posts are so cryptic ... to hide who it is. he asks questions and then gives the answers ... if it is the rule to keep threads on topic, there's a lot of yard work to do around here.

Chris, all i can say is your insistence over the past months that i and others can't be serious unless we're willing to spend 6 k +on converters 6 k + on software 6 k + on monitor controllers, coupled with an unwillingness to accept some have to go with more affordable alternatives makes me (and others i suspect) feel like maybe i should just shoot myself since i'm such a worthless piece of sh*t who can't afford 20 k for toys.

Really, and I keep saying you should drop the whole idea of hybrid and buy a StudioLive console for under $1000 and be done with it LOL. Really..:love:

Thats 16 pres, converter and software for peanuts. And I would expect that to sound just as good (better) as what you are trying to accomplish with the toys you are now looking at.

You talk about Radar Studio a few weeks ago, and I say what a bunch of nonsense. I think you are seriously miss reading a lot of everything. You keep going on about how analog is superior and I keep saying all we need is a DAW and an "interface that works. You are thinking about summing OTB and wanting to avoid latency. How do you do that Kurt, especially in a hybrid workflow?
Kurt, you are really off the mark in a lot of today. You are all over the map. One minute total budget, then onto Radar.

You are in a "round about way" suggesting a $200 converter to Prism is what? What are you talking about? You've never even used this stuff. That I am 100% sure of.
All I am doing here my friend is demystifying what keeps coming out of you. We all don't need a $6000 converter. But if you are constantly putting down this world, scratching your head yet using the crap you only have used, its no wonder Pal. I keep trying to help you and now you are in this direction. Non of what have anything to do with the market. Did the OP say he was on a budget and worried about paying his bills?

We need an interface that fits with the workflow, something you are clearly not getting at all. You invest in the interfacing that is suited for your requirements. If the OP needs 32 IO . I would suggest AES EBU, or MADI. but we also need to know what he is connecting to etc and what he is expecting. Maybe you are fine with a $200 all in one box. I don't think the OP is. Nor is he so blind to think it will get into "mastering level?

And I am having fun here, its not personal like you are getting. The forum is asking for opinion and if ya don't like it, what can I say. I don't like what you are suggesting because its really whacked. Interfacing is key. The chip is really blind men talking.

Bos is here. Thats leaves us in good hands.

:)

Kurt Foster

I can't resist because this really solidifies something here.

In fun btw... If you recall... I used 2" TV speakers and a laptop to help freightgod on some pointers in the master this mix. If I recall... you commented "all our mixes sound "good enough".

I was hoping the crowd would have got into the fact that all I used was a TV and cheap headphones. I did that for a reason.
Ironically, the ME used a whole array of analog gear to produce what? Same with Chuck. Did it matter that much? My studio here is ITB on a laptop soundcard. The other one is in shipping.
It would have been interesting to here you try that? Why didn't you?
I mean, all I used was a laptop and a sharp TV. How hard would it be to play along and see how easy it is to mix on a sound card? Show your stuff?

I participated in that topic to prove a point that is still brewing. I continue to say over and over... , if we choose the right tools for the job, thats all we really need. You don't need a $6000 converter or a vintage console or tape. And you most certainly don't need 20 different plug-ins of EQ's. But. until we all participate in these mixes. I don't care who you are. Hearing is believing.

I'll be direct. You invested in that passive box and are now thinking the Yamaha 2 channel box is going to be what? Better than ITB. I hope you stand up to what you claim and we have a little shootout to see if that really helps you. I mean, you will be suggesting this to others but how do we really know its a good thing to do?

Without hearing your examples, I would say, don't do it and save your money. I suppose that would bother you?

No need to respond, Kurt. The topic is interesting, a bit derailed but interesting indeed. I'm all about interfacing on this one.

I think that converter quality is very important. I do not know how different budget ones and highend ones compares, because most budget ones can't be seperated from the preamps of the unit.
Maybe my saffire 56 as the best converters, but if I plug something in it, it will go through the preamps and it would be pointless to compare them that way.
So yes the chip is part of the sound but the circuit around it is also very important for the sound quality.
So what if I could strip down my 56 ? would the converters be the same quality as a Lavry or mytek ?
Maybe it's like the langery phenomena, the smaller the tissue, the higher the price ;)

Unless you do a proper blind test, you really don't know how much difference there is between various prosumer and high-end converters. Doing a proper blind test is not easy, and in fact is quite difficult. So almost nobody does it. But some people do, and the results generally align with what Donny and I are saying. As always, I'm willing to drive an hour or two from my home in western Connecticut to meet with anyone here and help do a proper test.

--Ethan

audiokid, post: 428504, member: 1 wrote: Really, and I keep saying you should drop the whole idea of hybrid and buy a [="http://www.presonus.com/"]StudioLive[/]="http://www.presonus…"]StudioLive[/] console for under $1000 and be done with it LOL. Really..:love:

i don't like PreSonus pres and i doubt the converters are really any better than what i already have. think about it. my i/o26 has 8 pres and converters. cost new was in the $600 range. PreSonus is you say $1000? for 16 pres and how many converters? 20? (with auxs) how could they be any better? i need pres with enough gain for SM7 .... xmaxx pres don't do it.

audiokid, post: 428504, member: 1 wrote: Thats 16 pres, converter and software for peanuts. And I would expect that to sound just as good (better) as what you are trying to accomplish with the toys you are now looking at.

talk about toys. what will a Live console be worth in a few years? $0?

i already have software, some really great pres and a killer channel strip. did i say i don't like PreSonus pres?

audiokid, post: 428504, member: 1 wrote: You talk about Radar Studio a few weeks ago, and I say what a bunch of nonsense. I think you are seriously miss reading a lot of everything. You keep going on about how analog is superior and I keep saying all we need is a DAW and an "interface that works. You are thinking about summing OTB and wanting to avoid latency. How do you do that Kurt, especially in a hybrid workflow?
Kurt, you are really off the mark in a lot of today. You are all over the map. One minute total budget, then onto Radar.

i wouldn't spend 16 k for a radar or any recording gear. i mentioned the Radar because i thought it was cool. i'm always looking for something that is more elegant and simpler than a computer. really, i pretty much hate computers on a number of levels.

as far as how it works ... i have a firewire interface for multi tracking .... i can do 8 tracks in one pass at 192, 24 if i'm willing to run the session at 48. that's plenty for me. latency should be minimal but if it isn't i can monitor input though a software console provided free with the interface.

when i mix it would be itb with plugs through the summing box into a second recorder. i don't think i will be inserting any hardware. .... latency isn't an issue. if it's there, so what? i just want to hear the file the way it will play back. i would like to use the highest sample rate possible for long archive life but i have been reading that for some reason 96k sounds better than 192 ... something about 30 k being plenty.

audiokid, post: 428504, member: 1 wrote: You are in a "round about way" suggesting a $200 converter to [[url=http://="http://www.prismsou…"]Prism[/]="http://www.prismsou…"]Prism[/] is what? What are you talking about? You've never even used this stuff. That I am 100% sure of.

i've heard it .... i've been in studios where its in use and done sessions with it ... in no way do i say a $200 converter is as good as a Prism .... but i do think the differences are close. not as dramatic as you seem to think. i'm not sure i'm willing to pay 1000% more for a 10% improvement especially if i don't have client demand.

audiokid, post: 428504, member: 1 wrote: All I am doing here my friend is demystifying what keeps coming out of you. We all don't need a $6000 converter. But if you are constantly putting down this world, scratching your head yet using the crap you only have used, its no wonder Pal. I keep trying to help you and now you are in this direction. Non of what have anything to do with the market. Did the OP say he was on a budget and worried about paying his bills?

i'm not putting down any ones world. but what you suggest on one hand is not possible ... and your low cost "solution" is no improvement in my eyes.

audiokid, post: 428504, member: 1 wrote: And I am having fun here, its not personal like you are getting. The forum is asking for opinion and if ya don't like it, what can I say. I don't like what you are suggesting because its really whacked. Interfacing is key. The chip is really blind men talking.

i'm joining a conversation not responding to some mystical op who is on a fishing trip. a lot of threads get sidetracked into completely different topics
i'm not sure what you think i'm suggesting that isn't possible. i'm not recommending anything.

what else is there to a converter other than the chip? in and out amps and a clock? and do 192 or 96 k clocks perform better than 16 bit clocks?

audiokid, post: 428505, member: 1 wrote: I'll be direct. You invested in that passive box and are now thinking the Yamaha 2 channel box is going to be what? Better than ITB. I hope you stand up to what you claim and we have a little shootout to see if that really helps you. I mean, you will be suggesting this to others but how do we really know its a good thing to do?

all i am trying to get from the Yamaha is 192 .... and perhaps make up gain. i would love to get a Crimson or a DA3000 for this but it too much for me to swing at the moment (a $500 to $700 difference). but i kind of look forward to futzing with it ... it looks pretty cool. it can always serve duty as a portable location front end or for Podcasting .... kind of a swiss army knife of interfacing. in the nd, if the summing box or the Yami are junk, how bad does it hurt? less than $400 ....
will i get better converters if i can later, especially for the 2-bus mix ?.... you bet.

Kurt Foster Ethan Winer
Again, sorry guys but I can tell you really haven't done real world test at all here. You guys are talking two different languages. A test for you is running a signal through an AD to judge a converter? OMG. This is exactly why these topics are ridiculous.. You guys really have never done hybrid mixing and mastering to any degree while also tracking and incorporating VSTi / all expecting low latency in large track counts. How would we ever do a test like that? Its subjective at this point. We aren't measuring a chip here. We are measuring the ability for the converter to transfer audio under load in personal workflows.

I can't believe we are even in the debate at this point of DAW knowledge. Its a bit shocking you are both this far back.

Chris,
what you just said

audiokid, post: 428509, member: 1 wrote: A test for you is running a signal through an AD to judge a converter? OMG. This is exactly why these topics are ridiculous.. You guys really have never done hybrid mixing and mastering to any degree while also tracking and incorporating VSTi / all expecting low latency in large track counts.

i never said that. i do not think scientific measurements have anything to do with music. but this is why there will always be differing opinion. it's subjective. you hear it one way, i hear it another. Ethan and Donny hear it another two different ways. who's right? true double blind tests could shed light on it but even those have their drawbacks. a proper test would be recording the same source through two converters at the same time .... how do we do that? split the channel outs? then we would have to match playback exactly and switch from one to the other with no discernible artifacts to give away what the subjects are hearing. there would have to be multiple tests (passes of the same content) and repeated question / answers. in the end all results would need to be averaged out. i predict the results would be one or two "golden ears" would claim to hear drastic differences but may not accurately id the right converters when asked. the rest would most likely say the two are more similar than different.

i have mixed hybrid. i was telling you about it ten years ago and you thought i was nuts. you are correct about my not using VSTi's ... why would i want to do that?

i think i'm going to work on this challenge. i bet i can run an ad in CL and get someone who has a Prisim or RME or something to come over and record a few files on two different DAWs with different converters.

again, missing the point. Its not about being "right" at all. Its not about what you, Ethan or Donny hears as similar to the cheap vs "high end" . Prove what?
Are you guys kidding? Until you actually get into audio like some requiring better or more complexed conversion solutions, this is a head banger lol. I could name 100 studios who use different methods to get analog to play with their DAW's and monitors!. None of us will ever be talking about the chip lol. o_O
We will be talking about latency, stability, how the converters sound and remain stable in x environment. PSU and interfacing options.

The reason many acoustic engineers prefer Prism I suppose is because the pre's and the software remain rock solid and in the end, sound very true to the performance. The yammy you are talking about, kurt, I would expect that to start popping and crunching in seconds. Especially with a 100 feet of cable and 10 grand in ribbon mics at the end.

You guys are way out there man.

Today this topic is more about the interfacing and the ability of a clock/ software/drivers/ to remain stable under a workflow. No doubt the analog relationship to the chip is important but that is where the analog circuitry comes in. . You guys are way back in the 90's on this one.

DonnyThompson, post: 428491, member: 46114 wrote: My question was, when you get into the ultra high end conversion systems, like Prism, Burl, EMM, etc., can one hear an audible difference between any of those?

DonnyThompson
check the last issue of Tape Op... Burl speaks on his converters. they are transformer loaded and his intent was to add some color.

audiokid, post: 428511, member: 1 wrote: None of us will ever be talking about the chip lol. o_O
We will be talking about latency, stability, how the converters sound and remain stable in x environment. PSU and interfacing options.

other than PSU, all functions of the chip. what else would it be ... input amp, chip/ processor, output amps right? oh i remember, "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"....

audiokid, post: 428511, member: 1 wrote: The yammy you are talking about, kurt, I would expect that to start popping and crunching in seconds. Especially with a 100 feet of cable and 10 grand in ribbon mics at the end.

why would i need to do that? i'm recording in a bedroom. even if i move out to my 30 X 40 foot building, when am i going to run 100 feet of mic cable?

do you read my responses? i'm thinking of using it for 2-bus at 192 and a monitor controller. i'll never use the pres ... lol that's silly! 5 volt rails! snarffff! later i want to get a Crimson

Hi

This is the setup

Mic to Preamp and eq / maybe compressor into Dad converters to protools to record tracks.

Mix down

Protools to Dad converters to quad eight desk to mastering converters into another piece or software for mastering.

The Motu is the weak link in the system I have.

I want to replace this.

I am also looking for a ad converters for mastering.

Are there any devices that would out perform the dad for this?

hipbluescat, post: 428514, member: 49035 wrote: The Motu is the weak link in the system I have.

I want to replace this.

I am also looking for a ad converters for mastering.

Are there any devices that would out perform the dad for this?

You should include the DA in this because you want the ADDA to be matched to the capture.

I like any Prism FW or USB interfacing for my Mastering converter but whatever you choose, it should have the monitoring ability in it as well. You should be on the DA side of the capture to benefit the most. Do you understand why I suggest this?
Whatever mastering ( 2/ 4 /6 /8 channel ADDA) I include a monitor controller in this step being the most important part to this investment . The better you can hear "cause and effect" on the capture (mastering side) right before the export online persay... , the better your master will translate.
Are you planning on stem mastering?
Antelope Audio Pure 2
looks great. They have it right. I also love Lavry Blacks.

What interface are you choosing?
I also recommend capturing to a second DAW for mastering. Which is why I am suggesting a few extra things to think about. Round trip is not what I would do. I'm unclear of your complete workflow.

hipbluescat, post: 428513, member: 49035 wrote: Protools to Dad converters to quad eight desk to mastering converters into another piece or software for mastering.

(edit) Uncoupling from your mixdown is great. If that means another piece, right on!

Ethan Winer, post: 428507, member: 1430 wrote: Unless you do a proper blind test, you really don't know how much difference there is between various prosumer and high-end converters. Doing a proper blind test is not easy, and in fact is quite difficult. So almost nobody does it. But some people do, and the results generally align with what Donny and I are saying. As always, I'm willing to drive an hour or two from my home in western Connecticut to meet with anyone here and help do a proper test.

--Ethan

( Ethan Winer Any time you want to make the treck up to my studios in R.I, your welcome to stay in the brand new apartment we have in the back for guests. you might get a kick out of the 80s LEDE control room.

I will say I'm not sure what your idea of proper is. But I listened to some familiar tunes in the identical conditions, other than pluggin the apogee instead of the motu and it was audible. More solid. Same for tracking. I'm not near the expertise level of you sir, but I can say that just listening passively, with eyes closed, and somone else swapping the cables, I heard a difference. )

And really if your talking one or two tracks it doesn't matter. It's the collective of 16 drum tracks of mid teir stuff. The scratchy gars, then vocals. Then layer in samples which are super detail oriented, and it's an ugly, cheapening contrast. Most gear guys I talk to say that it's the overall design of the interface, not just the clocking and conversion. So you pick your fav of the two of three converter chips out there, and the rest is the rest of it.

I've recorded the same signal thru my m audio, then, thru my soundblaster USB. There was a big difference in the bottom. But one cost $30 and the other $400. And the $30 one is still good enough for home demos. There's a lot more going on than what chipset is there, and I belive the same to be true all the way up. At some point in certain areas like say 'military' spec tubes, it's a question of whether they pass reliability requirements. Nothing to do with 'subjective' quality.