phantomvintagegear, post: 458006, member: 40493 wrote: Im wondering the same thing about how far or close the isa and the clarett come with one another

they are different animals altogether. the only thing they have in common is the name Focusrite. the ISA is a Rupert Neve design, absolutely pro with military grade build and the Clarett is an "affordable" offering from Focusrite that uses surface mount build. at some point all gear fails. with through the hole build (military grade) components are easily replaced. with SFM, it's almost impossible. that, plus the difference in design is what sets them apart.

from what i gathered, the air button is a HF boost. The sweetwater rep i talked to a while back said that when compared to antelope and converters in that class, the clarett pres lost in the blind test, ie nobody voted they liked it better. he said when the air button was engaged, that some people voted it as their favorite in the blind test.

HF can be addicting, and immediately alluring, while becoming tiring over time, or cheesy. i have/had a bad habit of boosting too much highs on my old mixes, and the quality of the high end on something like a calrec, mackie, and eureka, are all quite different, and have different listening longevity.

the pre amp topology between an isa, and the clarett are very different, one has transformers and variable impedance- the isa, the other is transistor based with an eq boost button. My guess is the Air button uses a HF boost to try and capture some of the openness and air that the ISA does in such a lovely way.

even if, the eq curves are identical, and inperceivable, you get a certain amount of harmonic distortion from an x-former, and even if that was accounted for w the HF boost as well, to me the isa has a depth, a dimension, a 3d to the sound. thats the difference i notice between commercial gear and the project stuff. from amplifiers, to speakers, to studio acoustics, its the 3d that's most elusive in my experience.

im personally chasing depth and dimension now that ive experienced it.

Ok I did a quick test with the Clarett. Darn I forgot to hit the bass cut button, my bad. there are 2 audio files. the 2nd one starts at 52 seconds. same settings guitar etc. Interesting results

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files File 1.mp3 (2 MB)  File 2.mp3 (2.3 MB) 

I think Id like to try the ISA, I may have an option to return it with full refund.

phantomvintagegear, post: 458064, member: 40493 wrote: Ok I did a quick test with the Clarett. Darn I forgot to hit the bass cut button, my bad. there are 2 audio files. the 2nd one starts at 52 seconds. same settings guitar etc. Interesting results

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

the first clip is the one with the air button engaged? thats what it sounds like to me on these $10 computer speakers. i cant imagine you'd be disappointed with the ISA. It picks up where the Clarett leaves off. that said the built in pres are pretty good, particularly in clip one. id be curious to hear the brick, and the WA stuff as well, out of curiosity. Assuming the conversion is up to the task, i think the ISA is going to sound a little less hyped in the top and more open and dimensional. it reproduces the air, while the eq button, is replicating it. i think you'll find the ISA a different animal, more rich sonically. its difficult to do better in the price range. i still vouch that the eureka is an improvement over the clarett pres, as well, but with the similar stain in the top end. it would be a stronger consideration i think if you didnt already have an OB EQ/comp presently. i have to wonder if they would hold their own in the chain with an isa. as your collection grows, should you want it to, the isa is still a valid choice and wouldnt be rendered obsolete, its a good middle ground. best of luck. keep us all posted.

Thx Kmetal.
Yes the Air is on in the first one. and the second does.
When I listen now it does sound better but its starting to sound like a gimmick (cheesy as you put it)
Im more interested in clarity and depth and focus. It sounds like the isa may be for me.
I was plugging directly into the warm audio stuff last night, Ill have to double check the comp, there may be an issue with it not 100% sure yet.
when I plugged in the eq (although I come from the turning knobs platform) I couldn't dial in what I wanted to hear, but I can with my UAD plugins.
So still unclear, but that stuff may have to go.

The Eureka is a mic pre compressor correct? problem if I had that is that I would still need an interface.

I listen to old mixes too now and there is too much top end. I now try to mix with a completely different approach.
The sense of: what do I notice in the mix. So I start to eq, until nothing is really standing out too much in the mix .
The sense that everything sounds even and nothing stands out and have been getting the best of luck with that.

My old interface was the RME Fireface 800 and it sounded good and lasted a long time. I just wanted to upgrade the pres.
The search continues. Heading out tonight and back next week.

So keeping the isa in mind, which model?

Which model isa?
I have a line on this one for $1300.00 Canadian dollars.
It also comes with Analog to Digital converter card.

phantomvintagegear, post: 458065, member: 40493 wrote: I think Id like to try the ISA, I may have an option to return it with full refund.

The ISA 428 is one of my favorite preamp unit. Its 80db clean power is hard to beat. It get used in nearly all my recording sessions.
I couldn't find a better choice for low level instruments and ribbon mics.. but It rocks on drums electric guitars and bass..
1300 is a good price considering the MK2 is 2099$ and doesn't have the vu which I like better than leds alone.

that's a good price, especially for one that has the digital card already. the one i saw on Reverb was 1600 US and it didn't have a card.

i'd grab it fast!

Anyone know about the difference of made in china vs made in usa isa 428?

pcrecord, post: 458072, member: 46460 wrote: The ISA 428 is one of my favorite preamp unit. Its 80db clean power is hard to beat. It get used in nearly all my recording sessions.
I couldn't find a better choice for low level instruments and ribbon mics.. but It rocks on drums electric guitars and bass..
1300 is a good price considering the MK2 is 2099$ and doesn't have the vu which I like better than leds alone.

Thx PC

i was goin say that the 424 and 828 are the two best bang for the buck in the isa line, partly because the digital conversion card fpr the isa 2 is only $100 cheaper. i was going to suggest the conversion card becuase it is high spec'd, even by todays standards. also cool, and is what nailed the coffin for me on the 428 (or 828) is the 428 has allows you to use all 8 channels of the conversion card, so you get the full use of the card and an "extra" 4 channels of line level ADC in the 428. useful to hook up your brick to, and maybe even a passive summing mixer in a hybrid setup. very very cool.

i like the mk1's looks with the VU meters better. they're may be an additional impedance selection in the mk2, i forget, its been several years since i compared them feature to feature.

as far as price the mk2 428 is going for $1500 new, and the ADC card 500.. not sure how thats translates.

a quote from SOS, regarding the use the the addtional ADC channels. https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/focusrite-isa428

"
It may initially seem odd having an eight-channel A-D card in a four-channel unit, but there is some sense in the madness! Many multi-channel digital interfaces work in eight-channel blocks (such as the ADAT interface), and the ISA428 makes the 'spare' channels of A-D conversion available for four analogue line-level inputs, allowing the ISA428 to serve as an eight-channel interface for a DAW or digital recorder. For those who require eight mic inputs to a digital system, all you need is a second ISA428 and some XLR patch cables to hook the line outputs of the first unit to the line inputs of the second unit's converter card.
"

kmetal, post: 458081, member: 37533 wrote: i was goin say that the 424 and 828 are the two best bang for the buck in the isa line, partly because the digital conversion card fpr the isa 2 is only $100 cheaper. i was going to suggest the conversion card becuase it is high spec'd, even by todays standards. also cool, and is what nailed the coffin for me on the 428 (or 828) is the 428 has allows you to use all 8 channels of the conversion card, so you get the full use of the card and an "extra" 4 channels of line level ADC in the 428. useful to hook up your brick to, and maybe even a passive summing mixer in a hybrid setup. very very cool.

i like the mk1's looks with the VU meters better. they're may be an additional impedance selection in the mk2, i forget, its been several years since i compared them feature to feature.

as far as price the mk2 428 is going for $1500 new, and the ADC card 500.. not sure how thats translates.

a quote from SOS, regarding the use the the addtional ADC channels. https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/focusrite-isa428

"
It may initially seem odd having an eight-channel A-D card in a four-channel unit, but there is some sense in the madness! Many multi-channel digital interfaces work in eight-channel blocks (such as the ADAT interface), and the ISA428 makes the 'spare' channels of A-D conversion available for four analogue line-level inputs, allowing the ISA428 to serve as an eight-channel interface for a DAW or digital recorder. For those who require eight mic inputs to a digital system, all you need is a second ISA428 and some XLR patch cables to hook the line outputs of the first unit to the line inputs of the second unit's converter card.
"

Awesome K-metal, so would I still keep the clarett and basically connect with lightpipe through that?

phantomvintagegear, post: 458082, member: 40493 wrote: Awesome K-metal, so would I still keep the clarett and basically connect with lightpipe through that?

you can keep the clarett if you like it. in addition to lightpipe the isa card supports AES and s/pdif with lightpipe you become compatible with anything that has lightpipe, or an adapter. there's a lot of things that use lightpipe, from stock mac tower sounds cards, to home theater receivers, adat machines (i think), to all sorts of audio interfaces. im not sure what the latency specs are for the clarett but that may be one reason to consider swapping it for something else. RME pcie cards come to mind, and are roughly equal cost/value to the clarett. if you sold the clarett and got a used rme pcie card, you could probably profit from the deal, since claretts are new and popular, and the rme cards well regarded and a mature product. if i remember correctly they do .8ms of latency which is quite fast, with protools HDX being the only thing faster at .7ms. Thunderbolt is pretty high spec, so even if the specs are identical, PCI-e interfacing has reputation for rock solid stability and no-nonsense operation. RME in particular is known for stable drivers, and supporting there products for a long time. PCI-e interfacing is arguably the most 'pro'.

Thunderbolt does use pci-e lanes i believe in its architecture, and is found on some laptops. if i were specing out a system for you, or myself, id lean towards pci interfacing.

one general consideration is lightpipe may not support all sample rates, ie 192, and depending on the design, it may support all sample rates, but reduce channel count, to achieve it via S/MUX. it is possible that it supports all channels and max 192 sample rate, again depending on the design. neither the rme card, or any pcie card i know of for that matter, support 384 or higher sample rates yet. this might not matter to most people. im personally doing a bunch of analog to digital archiving, so high sample rates like that are a consideration for me.

the other consideration for higher than 192k sample rates, is latency Decreases, the as you increase the sample rates. so if a VSTI supports it, you could get closer to realtime, or nano seconds(?) in latency. this holds true for realtime monitoring with native effects as well. some people are very very sensitive to latency. i never was, and 12ms (128 sample buffer @44.1) was always plenty good enough for me.

considering your using the UAD line of effects, they max at 192 right now, so im not sure 384+ would make sense in your case. UAD has a well liked realtime monitoring integration, which im sure your familiar with by now. although you could always track at 384+ and switch to 192 for mixing, but im not sure theres great reason for this, other than being compatible (not having to upsample) whenever 384 becomes standard, which could be a decade or more away. the latest crop of high end mastering/hifi interfaces (antelope pure 2, mytek, RME ADI-pro supports 384, with the adi going up to 768k.) samplitude supports 384, and reaper and sequoia 768. i think reaper will support any sample rate the hardware is capable of.

also cool about the ISA is the inserts, so you can plug in any outboard gear you have like and eq or comp, with two simple cables and no DAW futzing.

If you ever get tempted to compare the ISA428 to the UA 4-710, I can put some light on them (I own both).
I currently use the converters of the 4-710 because my 428 doesn't have a digital card. But both converter units are said to be very good.
Comparing the 428 and 4-710 preamps, the 428 come first in my choices. The 4-710 isn't as clean sounding and solid as the 428. Also, the 4-710 is a bit too easy to saturate. You need to be very careful with gains. The 710 aren't bad preamps, I like them on overhead and toms. But givin the choice between the 2, the 428 is my first choice ;)

So slowly but surely I have been working with the 428. Its fantastic. I love the amount of gain I can get. My Melodium mic even with the transformer is low and this thing gets it going perfectly
I have the digital card and that makes a huge difference. The clarett 4 pre is the interface, and Im using input from the 428. I havent even used the inputs on the clarett though I want to do an audio comparison and post it.

Glad you did this big step. The ISA 428 is a very good preamp unit and it's been underestimated for a long time.
80db of gain without noise is hard to beat..
I hope you'll post some samples of your recordings with it.. ;)

Absolutely. thanks fo all your input.

eek sorry did these real quick lots of acoustic squeek, first song is not the same as the others. This is not a test by any means. Just by what your hearing let me know what attracts your ear, then Im gonna post which mic I used into the isa 428.
just interested in seeing other opinions. Sorry had to post # 6 in the next message.

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files 01.mp3 (2 MB)  02.mp3 (2.4 MB)  03.mp3 (2 MB)  04.mp3 (2.3 MB)  05.mp3 (2 MB) 

#6

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files 06.mp3 (2.2 MB) 

phantomvintagegear, post: 458588, member: 40493 wrote: So slowly but surely I have been working with the 428. Its fantastic. I love the amount of gain I can get. My Melodium mic even with the transformer is low and this thing gets it going perfectly
I have the digital card and that makes a huge difference. The clarett 4 pre is the interface, and Im using input from the 428. I havent even used the inputs on the clarett though I want to do an audio comparison and post it.

Glad to hear your happy, the conversion is high spec on the isa, and the preamp is a beauty! {S ill have a listen to the clips when i am not on the run. cheers!!

I may have to take a better crack it it. they sound like crap on this computer for some reason.

had a quick listen on my laptop speakers. i think #4 an #6 are the better sounding ones, on the finger picking parts. what i instantly heard was uncomplimentary room tone. it was reinforced when i heard the strumming parts. in all fairness without compression its pretty hard to get an ideal fingerpicking and strumming sound, and even with compression, its a compromise. that said, what i think your experiencing is the same thing i did when i got my 414, and was initially disappointed. you got a nice clear recording of a room thats not so nice. alot of that stuff may be masked by equipment that is inferior to what your now using. in addition to [more] room treatment, your location within the room [sweet spot] and your miking technique and positioning may change, from what you were previously doing. when you have a high performance unit that is capable or reproducing the entire frequency range clearly, youll hear things you didnt before, things that may have been rolled off by less capable conversion, and noisier pre's. sometimes when you zoom in, you start to see the warts.

id be curious to hear what your eq contributes to things for curiosity sake. im also not sure if you put new strings on your guitar, they dont sound dead, but its usually a essential to have new strings when recording a guitar. i fathom that with a little bit of room tuning a fresh set of strings [if those werent] and some optimal micing, your eq will enhance some of the pleasantries, and reduce some of the anomalies. with the preamp and conversion no longer the weak link of the chain, its a good time imho, to start looking elsewhere to see what can be improved. a couple moving blankets on mic stands can go a long way, and i really think acoustic foam is an effective and easy to use treatment for the ceiling, which is arguably the most overlooked surface in home studios. id also double check that the recording level was in the typical -24/-18db range, and that the gain and trim settings were optimal. i found the interaction between the two particularly powerful on a calrec i used a few times. also some mics are very sensitive to impedance selection, so this is an avenue worth strolling down. you may find the HPF interacts nicely with your instrument, room acoustics and mic position as well, especially since your eq doesn't employ a parametric design.

Alright-thx k-metal Im doing this again before I reveal the mics
Strings are beyond dead, my baed
Im going to record a parlour guitar I have with string that are fairly decent
Im going to post today

So something interesting Ive never noticed in my setup before is some inherent noise happening while in record, even if I have the setting on line and not mic.
Here is a recording of it. Its extremely low but I could see it on my meters. It was at -52 db. So I brought it up about half of that.
Wondering if it has anything to do with the ISA 428 card or Adat connection. Ive attached an audio clip of it. Not so pleasant.

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files 09-Noise-M.mp3 (3 MB) 

Ive re recorded some files again. Just want to get an idea of what mics to keep and also whats pleasant to your ear.
Have a listen. Yeah there's a few.

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files 01.mp3 (3 MB)  02.mp3 (2.9 MB)  03.mp3 (2.8 MB)  04.mp3 (2.9 MB)  05.mp3 (2.8 MB) 

The Last 3 files.

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

[MEDIA=audio]https://recording.o…

Attached files 06.mp3 (2.8 MB)  07.mp3 (2.8 MB)  08.mp3 (2.8 MB) 

Still trying to simplify my workflow. Im old school I suppose and what Im thinking of may or may not work.
Would love to get some opinions.
I think the most recordings I ever did was when I owned a portastudio.
I want to turn on one button with mics already connected. I want to be able to use the inputs of my isa 428
and output then out of the adat connections. So the unit I need would need adat connections. Also midi if possible.
Drums are mostly recorded for me, I find I only ever use 4 mics at a time at most.
I want that record play fast forward punch in and out transport and hopefully with automation if it exists.
if it has a guitar tuner built in even better. Trying to minimize every stage into one box.
Final mix will be done on my computer using UAD plugins etc.
Ive seen some contenders Tascam DP-24/32 SD,Roland VS2480, Korg D32XD and recommended by SOS the Akai DPS 24.
I must be also able to easily transfer quickly (drag and drop style) onto the computer.
Are there any valid options outside the box in 2018?

phantomvintagegear, post: 458666, member: 40493 wrote: Trying to minimize every stage into one box.
Final mix will be done on my computer using UAD plugins etc.
Ive seen some contenders Tascam DP-24/32 SD,Roland VS2480, Korg D32XD and recommended by SOS the Akai DPS 24.
I must be also able to easily transfer quickly (drag and drop style) onto the computer.
Are there any valid options outside the box in 2018?

Having a mixer is a thing that makes us old school audio guys more confident, I can understand that.
I went that path in the past. I had a 32ch Soundcraft mixers and converter cards. The thing, if I calculate the end value of each preamps, it droped down to 30-50$.
I know value and quality could be independant but with my transition to ISA preamps, I realised that 30 vs 300$ per channel does indeed make a difference.

In your case, you already have the preamps. Your goal should be to not screw the rest of the recipe.
Since you already have a computer, buying a small audio interface with ADAT connexion(s) could be the best way to insure that the good taste of the ISAs are not wasted.
I'm thinking of Audient, RME or Presonus. (even some focusrite scarlett could do).
With a clean path to a DAW, you could invest in another aspect that is a must, Room acoustics and monitoring (if you don't have it all worked out by now)
If you can't resist wanting to touch faders, having a surface controler is a good alternative and help keeping things under a small footprint.

All your contenders are worth it for on the road recording and standalone recording.
Of course they may be faster to powerup, but you could let your mics plugged to the ISA and be ready by the time the computer boot up. For me it means about a minute.

Just my own opinion ;)

https://audient.com/fr/produits/interfaces-audio/id22/presentation/

Your samples are sounding ok. Big part of the sound comes from the instrument, the performance and the mic placement.
If I listen to 06 07 and 08, those tracks could easily fit in a full mix (with drums, bass etc..)
A thing that striked me when I got to highend gear is that a good preamp is more revealing of what the mic captures. You see lowfi hides many things..
But it took me no time to adapt my technic and get better results that I could expect prior upgrading.
So should you !

Thanks precord. I do have a Clarett already that the isa 428 is connected to via adat lightpipe.
But I was wondering if I could record lightpipe into a portastudio from the isa.
I really cant tell if something like that for me would work or not until I try it.
My monitors are NS10's, Auratones, Avantones headphones and powered monitors and the other side of my room has a set of JBL LSR305
My room needs help and Im trying to get that assessed by someone I know.
The standalone recording thing is what I think Im interested in, but I want to be able to have the same quality of the isa as if I was going through the clarett.

I will have to start experimenting now wth the new system mic placements gear etc. The latter 2 mics were cheaper and its funny because I thought the same thing
even when I was recording. I wouldn t have to do anything to the track it sounds just right.

The taskam DP24 doesn't have ADAT ports, so it's a no go.
The VS2480 (discontinued) seem to have an option expension card to various format.. it doesn't say ADAT but possibly yes .
The korg definetly have ADAT capacity so does the AKAI.
But if you go to the used gear route, make sure those optionnal adat card are installed and fonctionnal.
In theory while recording via ADAT, the signal is digital and shouldn't loose any quality while writting to files. So any recorder/computer interface should retain the quality of the ISA
Altought Clocking and Jitters could be a problem if wordclock is not strongly implemented in the units. But it's rarely an issue these days.

phantomvintagegear, post: 458669, member: 40493 wrote: My room needs help and Im trying to get that assessed by someone I know.

Start with bass traps. You can build your own for cheap, youtube if full of DIY projects. Avoid starting with foam as it's just affecting higher frequencies.

Here is a test I did with the ISA428 and various mics :
EDIT : the 428 and 2 x ISA Two ;)

Awesome I love comparisons like this.
It never ceases to amaze me, the trusted sm57 works everytime!
The other thing that caught my ear was the shure KSM44, sounded great to me.
And something in the shure sm81 was pleasing too.
haha maybe I like sure mics.

phantomvintagegear, post: 458672, member: 40493 wrote: Awesome I love comparisons like this.
It never ceases to amaze me, the trusted sm57 works everytime!
The other thing that caught my ear was the shure KSM44, sounded great to me.
And something in the shure sm81 was pleasing too.
haha maybe I like sure mics.

To me the ISAs make them all sound good and usable in a mix. You just need to choose the flavor that fits the song ;)

phantomvintagegear, post: 458669, member: 40493 wrote: I do have a Clarett already that the isa 428 is connected to via adat lightpipe. But I was wondering if I could record lightpipe into a portastudio from the isa.

I may have missed this, but can you clarify why you would want something like a PortaStudio?

With the Clarett, you already have a bit-perfect way of getting ADAT data from your ISA into a computer. Are you looking for something more portable, or perhaps a box that feels more like a tape recorder?

You could always try an Alesis HD24, available these days second-hand at very low prices. One of those with a Little Remote Control (LRC) is as near to a 24-track tape machine as you can get without actually being one. The standard HD24 will record 24 tracks at standard rates or 12 tracks at 96KHz from ADAT inputs; the HD24XR has much higher-quality analogue I/O that will record/play at 96KHz.

Boswell, post: 458675, member: 29034 wrote: I may have missed this, but can you clarify why you would want something like a PortaStudio?

With the Clarett, you already have a bit-perfect way of getting ADAT data from your ISA into a computer. Are you looking for something more portable, or perhaps a box that feels more like a tape recorder?

You could always try an Alesis HD24, available these days second-hand at very low prices. One of those with a Little Remote Control (LRC) is as near to a 24-track tape machine as you can get without actually being one. The standard HD24 will record 24 tracks at standard rates or 12 tracks at 96KHz from ADAT inputs; the HD24XR has much higher-quality analogue I/O that will record/play at 96KHz.

So back in the day I owned the hd24xr that’s what I’m talking about
Got so much work doneventually had 2
But I was connected via light pipe to an emergency fire face 800 but that brought me back into the computer to listen etc
Once I looked at the cost of a console etc
I was forced back into the computer and I’m here full circle missing that simplicity of recording
No screen
Just creativity
Looking for an alternative

So

phantomvintagegear, post: 458677, member: 40493 wrote: So back in the day I owned the hd24xr that’s what I’m talking about
Got so much work doneventually had 2
But I was connected via light pipe to an emergency fire face 800 but that brought me back into the computer to listen etc
Once I looked at the cost of a console etc
I was forced back into the computer and I’m here full circle missing that simplicity of recording
No screen
Just creativity
Looking for an alternative

Sorry about spell check

pcrecord, post: 458673, member: 46460 wrote: To me the ISAs make them all sound good and usable in a mix. You just need to choose the flavor that fits the song ;)

Yes I think your right.