Skip to main content

24bit 96k vs. 24bit 192k converters

I'm buying a new converter and interface for my MixDream hybrid DAW system and a modest attempt in mastering that I call polishing at this point.
I need 16 IO and an interface. The Prism ADA-8RX or less expensive RME are in the running for me.
I mention mastering because I know you guys are the end result and could save me grief. You may have some for-warned advise that I should hear before I make the plunge.

I have Lavry Blacks with the http://www.dangerou…"]Dangerous Master[/]="http://www.dangerou…"]Dangerous Master[/] for my polishing rig but haven't even gotten there yet so its a ways away from turning on the power for that part of the studio.

Do you ever use 24bit/ 192 ? Is this a waste of money and is there better choices that I could make for the combo of both area's of my studio?
I could save a pile of money if I chose the 96k Prism ADA. I have considered Blues but they are way out of my price range. Lavry is of course 96k which is why I'm asking this question in the first place. I have no need to ever record that high. Do you see me needing this and/or who does? Dan Lavry is @ 96 so... What's all the fuss with 24/192 converters?

Any suggestions on converters, 96k vs. 192k and/or anything the comes to mind would be appreciated.

Comments

TrilliumSound Fri, 04/15/2011 - 15:10
Hi, you certainly meant 192k. I have never used 192k so I can't say much about this but Lavry's articles talks about this. Prism ADA8's are great converters but I doubt that they are cheaper than the Blues. I use Prism and love it (@96k max.). I liked the Blacks also but I need at least 8 channels for my workflow.

Hope this helps.

Richard

audiokid Fri, 04/15/2011 - 17:25
Hi Richard, yes I meant 192, fixed thanks!

Richard, hey... can you explain the ADA's configuration better for me? 1 unit can be used 8 AD DA or 16 in or 16 out. So, am I correct that this would do it for me? The only time I am going to be using 16 outs would at the end of my sessions, thus, sending stems out to be summed in the MixDream. I would then either return back or continue on the two bus into the Dangerous Master, either way, 2-bus back to print via the AD10 Black to DAW #2.

Plus, I am able to use the same ADA for a remote AD via firewire. Am I getting its functionality correct?

Thanks Link555, I read that long ago but just wanted some conformation from the ME here.

TrilliumSound Fri, 04/15/2011 - 18:01
Hi,

Yes, 16 channels could be done. Stock, it comes with 8 Analog in and 8 Analog out. There is also the AES I/O card that provide 8 Digital in and 8 Digital out. Firewire card also provide 8 I/O. I have both cards and the flexibility is just superb. Both path are also clock and sample rates independant. You can of course monitor any path and channels anytime.

I did some comparaison with Benchmark, Apogee (Rosetta) and Lavry Black. I personally prefered the Black over the Benchmark and Apogee but I needed multiple channels with flexibity.. so the Prism was a GO for me. Of course, it's all a matter of personal taste when it is about sound preference and I must say that the difference were pretty subtle between the Prism and the Lavry Black (transparency, stereo image and depth). Honestly, I had no desire and time to spend on testing many hours to compare, proper blind testings need to be done... I believe that when you go with Prism, Lavry, Benchmark... you can't go wrong in my opinion, it's a matter of personal taste (how different these could be) workflow and reliabilty with a solid clocking! About RME.. I never used one but I heard good words but not in a real AD/DA Mastering chain but more as a Audio Interface card. I am sure some people could comment about this with real situation and comparaison.

Again, it is only my opinion and personal experience. Good luck with your choice!

Richard

TrilliumSound Fri, 04/15/2011 - 18:11
Forgot to mention that you can find a ADA-8 used for 4k (not the ADA-8XR). Specs are the same but the XR goes up to 192k instead of 96k.

Here's some info in case you did not see them: [="http://www.prismsound.com/music_recording/products_subs/ada8xr/ada8xr_home.php"]ADA-8XR Home Page[/]="http://www.prismsou…"]ADA-8XR Home Page[/] and [[url=http://="http://www.prismsou…"]ADA-8XR technical Specifications[/]="http://www.prismsou…"]ADA-8XR technical Specifications[/] or [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.prismsou…"]ADA-8XR Options and Configurations[/]="http://www.prismsou…"]ADA-8XR Options and Configurations[/] .

Hope this helps.

Richard

TrilliumSound Fri, 04/15/2011 - 18:40
Yes, it is discontinued and have been replaced by the XR. I don't see them a lot on the used market but I will keep an eye for you ;-). What about this: [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.prismsou…"]Orpheus Recording Interface Home Page[/]="http://www.prismsou…"]Orpheus Recording Interface Home Page[/] , reviews are just great! Is this could work for you?

Richard

audiokid Fri, 04/15/2011 - 19:20
Yes, if I don't get something like the ADA, the Orpheus is on my list for my remote rig. I'm waiting to hear back on those after the show in the Germany. Orpheus is what got me thinking about the ADA-8's. I've known about ADA's for years but never thought about them much. I thought they where dated and newer converters like Lynx where better value but I now know what value means :)
Rebuilding the new system from ground up has been a learning curve sifting through 12 years of dealer hype and the uninformed/misinformed. The ADC are the last on my list.

I really need something that will hook nice and neat to my MixDream. 25 pin dsub is choice so what's out there that's ideal.

Have you compared anything to the Aurora there? No one I know here has what I am doing. Its wide open up here. But, the drawback on buying anything, its all special order. I have nowhere to go a listen within a 1000km. I'm not so concerned with shootouts. You sound like me, I hear something and know right away. I just want to get something and be satisfied as close enough but, the Lavry's changed my life and its impossible for me to go to far backwards. I don't have 15 grand though.

RME AD8-QS are perfect design but I'm worried I will hear what I don't want to hear.
I'm a nightmare to live with right now.

Big K Sat, 04/16/2011 - 05:21
I used 192 kHz SR only to test it for myself and could not find a reason to record with it.
Even 96 kHz SR projects are not that often received for mastering, here, but with some material it has its merrits.
About a third of our work we do in 88.2 kHz SR.

Chris...
Didn't you promise to stop your Convertor spams??
LOL....

Why-oh-why don't you order what you want to test and send it back when you don't like it?
I do that a few times a year and about 2 out of 5 devices I send back. We don't even pay for any shipping.
Aren't there any shops who offer the same service?
I am suffering like a dog watching you agonizing over your pending purchase.

:tongue:

audiokid Sat, 04/16/2011 - 09:54
HA! that made my day!!


We are certainly going to be attracting new members looking for converters but what about interfaces!
Am I correct to assume this is just as important.

My research tells me RME is choice because their drivers are solid, I like TotalMix and PCIe will have less latency and faster conversion. We've covered MADI vs AES/EBU and how MIDI is connected via breakout cable on the card , what else is essential when choosing an interface? If I was going AES/EBU do they all interface quite well or are their key things to consider?

Have you all found better results with different cards or brands? Do you have regrets after you've chosen one?

Big K Sat, 04/16/2011 - 11:39
There is a great danger when going AES/EBU !!!
With many AES/EBU I/Os it changes pitch and instrument!! Especially RME!!
If you put in a heavy metal axe sound you get a thin violine out of it ( 8 kHz/ 8 bits)
Really, really awful...! Any Brahms or Puccini replays as a Guns N Roses underwater live gig in half speed.
With Wagner there is even the smell of Bratwursts in the air when replaying... I am quite desperate!!
:eek:


Oh my, AES/EBU is rock solid up to the 192...
I have never heard any complaint about it from any brand over many years...
You should be just fine.. as long as you buy gear that has a socket for it...lol...



See the latest RME third party plugin tool for decidophopia stricken Studio owners:


 
Attached files

audiokid Sat, 04/16/2011 - 12:20
Thanks for being so patient but I'm still suffering here :)

So, if I choose to order the [="http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_hdspe_aes.php"]RME: HDSPe AES[/]="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME: HDSPe AES[/] or http://www.lynxstudio.com/product_detail.asp?i=16 does this mean any third party AES converter like Lynx, RME, [[url=http://="http://www.digitala…"]DAD[/]="http://www.digitala…"]DAD[/], Lavry, DirectOut... will work?

Remember, in order for me to test any converter, I need a new card so I'd like to get that all sorted and hear any concerns. You are saying yes, either a Lynx or RME would work for the described converters and either one would provide the same results? Either on has the same stability? The difference is the software like TotalMix via and whichever I choose to favour?

TrilliumSound Sat, 04/16/2011 - 21:15
I think RME or Lynx is a good choice for the sound card interface, both have solid drivers and have been very stable over generation. But if you go with converters with Firewire, you don't need a sound card, your converter will be your sound card. Just like the Prism ADA with Firewire (which I use), no need for sound card anymore and only one source and solid Clocking.

audiokid Sat, 04/16/2011 - 22:27
Very interesting you are using firewire for mastering, Richard! Wow. I am going away from FW because of the latency I'm experiencing with MIDI. Its minor but enough to be annoying and a detriment. I'm guessing you aren't using MIDI and are direct monitoring so latency isn't ever an issue?

When we are buying the interface, example : Lynx is approx $700 and the RME is $1200. What are we paying for?

Big K Sun, 04/17/2011 - 07:35
Are you planing on more then one setup?
The RME AES has no Optical I/Os. The 16 AES/EBU I/Os will be filled up, soon, when you want to ad some outboard FX or Digital Mics.
It would not be the right card for me. I went with Optical connections and can work with 36 I/Os (mic-pres or Line I/Os ).
Mucho flexibility... incl. 1 AES, 1 SPDIF...

TrilliumSound Sun, 04/17/2011 - 09:34
Yep, Firewire is one of the best thing for me and my workflow, less is more ;-). But latency, if there is, has no impact about what I am doing (Mastering only). Before the FW option card, I was using a Lynx One card (AES out to AES in to the Prism). The Lynx was solid, stable and SIMPLE. I like simplicity (I'm getting old I guess ;-).

In your case, I think Big K has a good point; more options and flexibility is what you should look at. With these brands, I think you can't go wrong.

Richard

audiokid Sun, 04/17/2011 - 22:19
Big K, post: 369050 wrote: Are you planing on more then one setup?
The RME AES has no Optical I/Os. The 16 AES/EBU I/Os will be filled up, soon, when you want to ad some outboard FX or Digital Mics.
It would not be the right card for me. I went with Optical connections and can work with 36 I/Os (mic-pres or Line I/Os ).
Mucho flexibility... incl. 1 AES, 1 SPDIF...

I hear ya on the 16 IO Big-K, but that would mean buying a MADI converter which I'm not sure that's the best move for me at present. But if there is a MADI / 16 AES combo, interface, I do that! Is there a card that has this you know of?

TrilliumSound Mon, 04/18/2011 - 06:33
audiokid, post: 369030 wrote: I should mention the RME [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.rme-audi…"]HDSPe AES[/]="http://www.rme-audi…"]HDSPe AES[/] has Midi where the Lynx doesn't, but other than that, they will both work and "sound wise" both would sound the same? Interfaces don't have their own sound like a converter have correct?

In my experience, interfaces (AES, s/pdif etc...) don't have a sound on its own, it is just a different transport protocol, connectors, cabling, voltage etc..) but "soundwise" being the same.

Richard

Big K Mon, 04/18/2011 - 06:42
Hmm,
You said, the devices are not far appart, so, MADI would not be my choice. Why go AES/EBU? Do you have gear that can only work with AES?

Now, this is just a quick list:
-RME RayDAT with 4 x 8 optical I/Os ( + AES & SPDIF & Analog I/O -36 ch in total, up to 192 kHz + MIDI ) for 850.-$ US in an i7 PC:
-Outboard: Micstasy, ADI-8 QS, + 3 more 1 to 8 channel Line/ Mic inputs an outputs.
-If you have more digital devices that need to cooperate, you might want a solid houseclock like the Rosendahl nanoclocks.
-Connections: only a bunch of good quality optical cables and a few cheap coax cables for wordclock.

audiokid Mon, 04/18/2011 - 10:40
Thanks Richard,

Rainer, yes, much better option. I was looking at the RME RayDAT but missed the concept of using the ADAT out of the ADI-8 QS or other possible converters without ADAT. When I read the RME RayDAT accepts AES, it looked like it was for only 2 tracks.

I've never used ADAT for anything other than 2 channels before so I'm unaware of all the various ways to use breakout cables and how versatile the RME RayDAT is compared to just an AES/EBU interface.
I'm so bend out of shape thinking ADAT is old tech.... for the Tascam DA 88 generation back in the 80's and not a simpler and continued and alternative solution to connect digital/ thus... I'm missing the mark here but I see the light finally.

Yes, the, [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME: HDSPe RayDAT[/]="http://www.rme-audi…"]RME: HDSPe RayDAT[/] is a much better choice. Thank you, you've helped me more than you know!!

audiokid Mon, 04/18/2011 - 11:25
Richard/ Rainer, reading this below is why I was wondering what the differences are with all these cards:
Quote from RME:

HDSPe AIO is the newly developed PCI Express version of the [[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.rme-audi…"]HDSP 9632[/]="http://www.rme-audi…"]HDSP 9632[/]. A newly developed genuine PCI Express core consequently takes full advantage of the new format, achieving significant performance gains in multitrack audio and lowest latency.
Learning you are using Firewire for mastering changes my game!

I was considering something like this card above to connect my Dangerous Master Stereo Outs to Lavry AD10 (for my Mastering CP) but now see I can use my Fireface 800 as the interface only?
I could use the AD10 spdif out to FF800 spdif in and bypass the RME converters altogether, yes? This... benefiting 100% Lavry's via firewire, yes?

edit> do adat or spdif bypass the converters on all interfaces?

audiokid Mon, 04/18/2011 - 12:33
I have one question however, I have read numerous times over the years that many people feel AES/EBU ( within a short distance) has better transfer with lengths than other types connections. So back to my question... I'm assuming anywhere up to 12 ft, they all are unmeasurable yes?

So my obvious route, now that I have this sorted, ADAT like Rainer is suggesting is by far the most pro active direction for me? Cable costs, greater flexibility and more channel count.

TheJackAttack Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:20
An AES or TDIF D25 connector carry 8 channels regardless of the sample rate. Toslink (ADAT) carries 8 channels at 44.1/48k and via SMUX (combining light channels or bit splitting) it carries 4 channels at 88.2/96k and 2 channels at 176.4/192k. SPDIF is always only two channels again regardless of sample rate.

Now we have already covered that virtually no one works at 192k because if they are going to that effort then most likely they are working DSD 1 bit which a whole other animal. The key to digital interfacing is a master clock and bnc cables. While ADAT and SPDIF will carry the clock with them it is not as reliable as a central word clock.

audiokid Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:26
Rainer, looking at these two

Rosendahl nanoclocks [="http://www.vintageking.com/Rosendahl-Nanoclocks"]Rosendahl Nanoclocks Digital Audio Clock Server | VintageKing.com[/]="http://www.vintagek…"]Rosendahl Nanoclocks Digital Audio Clock Server | VintageKing.com[/]
or

[[url=http://="http://www.sweetwat…"]RME HDSP 9632 Word Clock Module (WCM) | Sweetwater.com[/]="http://www.sweetwat…"]RME HDSP 9632 Word Clock Module (WCM) | Sweetwater.com[/]

Big difference in cost. I see the advantage of the Rosendahl having more connection. Do they both come close in stability if all I am doing is the two QS's right now?

The raydat needs a clock so if I go this route, I need a clock

TheJackAttack Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:34
I'll interject but Rainer will I'm sure give his perspective too. The best clocking source is a star array. Each device gets it's own home run to the clock which is more stable that a daisy chain. This is what makes the Nano desirable. The RME WCM would be no different than using the FF800 as the clock source. You end up having to daisy chain devices. Now if you have two pieces of gear that you are syncing then it's a moot point.

audiokid Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:37
TheJackAttack, post: 369149 wrote: An AES or TDIF D25 connector carry 8 channels regardless of the sample rate. Toslink (ADAT) carries 8 channels at 44.1/48k and via SMUX (combining light channels or bit splitting) it carries 4 channels at 88.2/96k and 2 channels at 176.4/192k. SPDIF is always only two channels again regardless of sample rate.

Now we have already covered that virtually no one works at 192k because if they are going to that effort then most likely they are working DSD 1 bit which a whole other animal. The key to digital interfacing is a master clock and bnc cables. While ADAT and SPDIF will carry the clock with them it is not as reliable as a central word clock.


Ah, now I'm back to what for again lol. I understand what I was reading on that now. Then I don't want to be messing around with all this and simply have a simple 16 ADDA I'm back to AES/EBU.

John, you know I'm doing here. ( 16 IO all to sum into the MixDream) . I want to stay at 88.2 and need 16 DA for this. What do you think is the right direction.


Everyone, please help audiokid with his new system!

audiokid Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:44
TheJackAttack, post: 369152 wrote: I'll interject but Rainer will I'm sure give his perspective too. The best clocking source is a star array. Each device gets it's own home run to the clock which is more stable that a daisy chain. This is what makes the Nano desirable. The RME WCM would be no different than using the FF800 as the clock source. You end up having to daisy chain devices. Now if you have two pieces of gear that you are syncing then it's a moot point.

Got it! This is what I have figured. So, at this point, only using two QS's for this MixDream summing system, I'm tight with the basic clock from RME? If, however, I expand my requirements and add a third QS, a star array would then be absolute at that point?

audiokid Mon, 04/18/2011 - 13:49
TheJackAttack, post: 369154 wrote: The Raydat will do 16 channels of ADAT at 88.2k. Four channel per ADAT connector (4) makes sixteen channels. I think that is a good option as far as the computer itself. You still have to get the analog converted to ADAT first.

Thank you John, very helpful here.

So if I'm ordering cable $: I need 4 ADAT cables for 16 channels of 88.2? If I just stay with AES/EBU with the AESe card, I have 16 channels of any bandwidth regardless , yes?
x

Register

Your recently read content