Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87019 is a reply to message #87016] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 08:44   |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger. The sounds
start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no vibe, no
opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're just
a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then they go
to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what you're
suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter. The AD turns
the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly you
will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then your fancy
DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured by
the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these conditions.
So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it did through
the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
TCB
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>
>SORRY for double empty posts !
>
>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
will
>be enouph !!
>What I really want to know is the following.
>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>DA.
>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in sound,
>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>field.
>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get RECORDED
>!
>Isn't that so ?
>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't the
>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>Thats a serious one here !
>Cheers,
>Dimitrios
>
>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>
>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to Mytek
>>
>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar). Mine
>>
>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You might
>>
>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>or
>>
>>>something more colored.
>>>
>>>Deej
>>>
>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds punch
>>
>>>> and
>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>>
>>>> effects
>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>> regards,
>>>> Dimitrios
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87020 is a reply to message #87016] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 08:42 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is because the Mytek is probably reclocking the signal. Mytek has one
of the best clocks made.. You may not think you're hearing jitter from a
system, until you use a high quality DA. Then the difference is obvious.
Much more depth, imaging and clarity. It's the difference between night and
day.
Deej
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote in message news:467be722$1@linux...
>
> SORRY for double empty posts !
>
> DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
> will
> be enouph !!
> What I really want to know is the following.
> I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
> DA.
> After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
> sound,
> sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
> field.
> He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
> So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
> RECORDED
> !
> Isn't that so ?
> If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
> out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't the
> soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
> Thats a serious one here !
> Cheers,
> Dimitrios
>
> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>
>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to Mytek
>>
>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar). Mine
>>
>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You might
>>
>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
> or
>>
>>>something more colored.
>>>
>>>Deej
>>>
>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds punch
>>
>>>> and
>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>>
>>>> effects
>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>> regards,
>>>> Dimitrios
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87021 is a reply to message #87019] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 08:44 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thad,
I'm using aBenchmark DAC-1 for my final D/A conversion. It reclocks anything
it's handed to 96k before it exdcretes it out the D/A. It's a wunnerful lil'
thang.
;o)
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:467bee5d$1@linux...
>
> OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger. The
> sounds
> start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no vibe, no
> opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're just
> a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then they go
> to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what
> you're
> suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter. The AD
> turns
> the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly you
> will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then your
> fancy
> DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured by
> the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these
> conditions.
>
>
> So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it did
> through
> the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
>
> TCB
>
> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>>
>>SORRY for double empty posts !
>>
>>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
> will
>>be enouph !!
>>What I really want to know is the following.
>>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>>DA.
>>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>>sound,
>>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>field.
>>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>RECORDED
>>!
>>Isn't that so ?
>>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't the
>>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>Thats a serious one here !
>>Cheers,
>>Dimitrios
>>
>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>
>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>>>>Mytek
>>>
>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>>>Mine
>>>
>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You might
>>>
>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>or
>>>
>>>>something more colored.
>>>>
>>>>Deej
>>>>
>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>>>>> punch
>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>>>
>>>>> effects
>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87022 is a reply to message #87021] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 08:56 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
But you know you can't record clock. If you did what Dimitrios is talking
about and then attached a crap DA and played back the file you looped through
the Benchmark it would still sound like crap.
TCB
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>Thad,
>
>I'm using aBenchmark DAC-1 for my final D/A conversion. It reclocks anything
>it's handed to 96k before it exdcretes it out the D/A. It's a wunnerful
lil'
>thang.
>
>;o)
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:467bee5d$1@linux...
>>
>> OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger. The
>> sounds
>> start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no vibe,
no
>> opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're just
>> a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then they
go
>> to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what
>> you're
>> suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter. The AD
>> turns
>> the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly
you
>> will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then your
>> fancy
>> DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured
by
>> the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these
>> conditions.
>>
>>
>> So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it did
>> through
>> the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
>>
>> TCB
>>
>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>>>
>>>SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>
>>>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>> will
>>>be enouph !!
>>>What I really want to know is the following.
>>>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>>>DA.
>>>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>>>sound,
>>>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>>field.
>>>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>>RECORDED
>>>!
>>>Isn't that so ?
>>>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>>>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
the
>>>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>Thats a serious one here !
>>>Cheers,
>>>Dimitrios
>>>
>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>>>>>Mytek
>>>>
>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>>>>Mine
>>>>
>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You might
>>>>
>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>>or
>>>>
>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>
>>>>>Deej
>>>>>
>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>>>>>> punch
>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>>>>
>>>>>> effects
>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87023 is a reply to message #87020] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:00 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
But, that difference isn't translated into the bounced-down
stereo mix (as far as I know, anyway) the rendered stereo file
is what it is... unless you're clocking from the cleaner/jitter-
free clock, as well.
IOW, you're just hearing it better over the monitors - not
making a difference as to what the 2-mix will sound like
when you play it back on another system, for example.
This assumes that you're rendering to digital, ITB; not going out
of your DAW into another box or Masterlink or whatever to record
the 2-mix to.
Neil
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>This is because the Mytek is probably reclocking the signal. Mytek has one
>of the best clocks made.. You may not think you're hearing jitter from a
>system, until you use a high quality DA. Then the difference is obvious.
>Much more depth, imaging and clarity. It's the difference between night
and
>day.
>
>Deej
>
>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote in message news:467be722$1@linux...
>>
>> SORRY for double empty posts !
>>
>> DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>> will
>> be enouph !!
>> What I really want to know is the following.
>> I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>> DA.
>> After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>> sound,
>> sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>> field.
>> He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>> So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>> RECORDED
>> !
>> Isn't that so ?
>> If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>> out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
the
>> soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>> Thats a serious one here !
>> Cheers,
>> Dimitrios
>>
>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>
>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to Mytek
>>>
>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
Mine
>>>
>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You might
>>>
>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>> or
>>>
>>>>something more colored.
>>>>
>>>>Deej
>>>>
>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds punch
>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>>>
>>>>> effects
>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87024 is a reply to message #87019] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:02 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear TCB,
Back to the future thing...
The Mytek DA is doing something great to the sound that COMES out from the
analog outputs , right ?
Thats why we can here this on any analo mediumlike my powered monitors.
So lets say we record these Mytek's analog outs to another medium that might
be ana anlog tape machine or another digital device with great AD converters
like say Mytek, ok ?
NOW lets record RME's outputs playing the same file which sound small an
distorted compared to the other and record this on same medium .
Isn't obvious that these two files will be totally different and the first
"myteked file will have at least 90% of what we were hearing from mytek's
out while "RME" file will be like rme was in the first place ?
I am very very curious if we get something here !!!
Regards,
Dimitrios
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger. The sounds
>start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no vibe, no
>opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're just
>a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then they go
>to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what you're
>suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter. The AD
turns
>the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly you
>will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then your
fancy
>DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured
by
>the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these conditions.
>
>
>So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it did through
>the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
>
>TCB
>
>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>>
>>SORRY for double empty posts !
>>
>>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>will
>>be enouph !!
>>What I really want to know is the following.
>>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>>DA.
>>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in sound,
>>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>field.
>>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get RECORDED
>>!
>>Isn't that so ?
>>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't the
>>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>Thats a serious one here !
>>Cheers,
>>Dimitrios
>>
>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>
>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to Mytek
>>>
>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
Mine
>>>
>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You might
>>>
>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>or
>>>
>>>>something more colored.
>>>>
>>>>Deej
>>>>
>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds punch
>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>>>
>>>>> effects
>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>> regards,
>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87025 is a reply to message #87023] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:07 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear Neil (TCB and DJ and others)
I am not just rendering the file !!
I Am RECORDING the analog outputs of the DA which we were hearing !!
Regards,
Dimitrios
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>But, that difference isn't translated into the bounced-down
>stereo mix (as far as I know, anyway) the rendered stereo file
>is what it is... unless you're clocking from the cleaner/jitter-
>free clock, as well.
>
>IOW, you're just hearing it better over the monitors - not
>making a difference as to what the 2-mix will sound like
>when you play it back on another system, for example.
>This assumes that you're rendering to digital, ITB; not going out
>of your DAW into another box or Masterlink or whatever to record
>the 2-mix to.
>
>Neil
>
>
>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>This is because the Mytek is probably reclocking the signal. Mytek has
one
>
>>of the best clocks made.. You may not think you're hearing jitter from
a
>
>>system, until you use a high quality DA. Then the difference is obvious.
>
>>Much more depth, imaging and clarity. It's the difference between night
>and
>>day.
>>
>>Deej
>>
>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote in message news:467be722$1@linux...
>>>
>>> SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>
>>> DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>
>>> will
>>> be enouph !!
>>> What I really want to know is the following.
>>> I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>>> DA.
>>> After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>
>>> sound,
>>> sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>> field.
>>> He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>> So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>> RECORDED
>>> !
>>> Isn't that so ?
>>> If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>>> out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>the
>>> soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>> Thats a serious one here !
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dimitrios
>>>
>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
Mytek
>>>>
>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>Mine
>>>>
>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You might
>>>>
>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>> or
>>>>
>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>
>>>>>Deej
>>>>>
>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
punch
>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>>>>
>>>>>> effects
>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87026 is a reply to message #87022] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:18 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dear TCB,
If I record this to an analog two tape machine using the Mytek's DA and connect
then tape's out to the same monitors won't I hear the "better" mix ?
Regards,
Dimitrios
"TCB " <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>But you know you can't record clock. If you did what Dimitrios is talking
>about and then attached a crap DA and played back the file you looped through
>the Benchmark it would still sound like crap.
>
>TCB
>
>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>Thad,
>>
>>I'm using aBenchmark DAC-1 for my final D/A conversion. It reclocks anything
>
>>it's handed to 96k before it exdcretes it out the D/A. It's a wunnerful
>lil'
>>thang.
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:467bee5d$1@linux...
>>>
>>> OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger. The
>>> sounds
>>> start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no vibe,
>no
>>> opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're
just
>>> a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then they
>go
>>> to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what
>>> you're
>>> suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter. The
AD
>
>>> turns
>>> the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly
>you
>>> will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then your
>
>>> fancy
>>> DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured
>by
>>> the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these
>>> conditions.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it did
>
>>> through
>>> the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
>>>
>>> TCB
>>>
>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>
>>>>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>>> will
>>>>be enouph !!
>>>>What I really want to know is the following.
>>>>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>>>>DA.
>>>>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>
>>>>sound,
>>>>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>>>field.
>>>>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>>>RECORDED
>>>>!
>>>>Isn't that so ?
>>>>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>>>>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>the
>>>>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>>Thats a serious one here !
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>Dimitrios
>>>>
>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>
>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>
>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>
>>>>>>Mine
>>>>>
>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
might
>>>>>
>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>>>or
>>>>>
>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>
>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
these
>>>>>
>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87027 is a reply to message #87023] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:14 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Correct...you would have to be recording through the D/A to somethihnglike a
Masterlink, but dimitrios' converter has a BNC clock out (it's an AD/DA and
so he should be able to clock the whole system with this.
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:467bf212$1@linux...
>
> But, that difference isn't translated into the bounced-down
> stereo mix (as far as I know, anyway) the rendered stereo file
> is what it is... unless you're clocking from the cleaner/jitter-
> free clock, as well.
>
> IOW, you're just hearing it better over the monitors - not
> making a difference as to what the 2-mix will sound like
> when you play it back on another system, for example.
> This assumes that you're rendering to digital, ITB; not going out
> of your DAW into another box or Masterlink or whatever to record
> the 2-mix to.
>
> Neil
>
>
> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>This is because the Mytek is probably reclocking the signal. Mytek has one
>
>>of the best clocks made.. You may not think you're hearing jitter from a
>
>>system, until you use a high quality DA. Then the difference is obvious.
>
>>Much more depth, imaging and clarity. It's the difference between night
> and
>>day.
>>
>>Deej
>>
>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote in message news:467be722$1@linux...
>>>
>>> SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>
>>> DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>
>>> will
>>> be enouph !!
>>> What I really want to know is the following.
>>> I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his
>>> primary
>>> DA.
>>> After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>
>>> sound,
>>> sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>> field.
>>> He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>> So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>> RECORDED
>>> !
>>> Isn't that so ?
>>> If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>>> out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
> the
>>> soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>> Thats a serious one here !
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dimitrios
>>>
>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>>>>>Mytek
>>>>
>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
> Mine
>>>>
>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>>>>>might
>>>>
>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>> or
>>>>
>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>
>>>>>Deej
>>>>>
>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>>>>>> punch
>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>>>>>> these
>>>>
>>>>>> effects
>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87028 is a reply to message #87024] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:16 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:467bf2b3$1@linux...
>
> Dear TCB,
> Back to the future thing...
> The Mytek DA is doing something great to the sound that COMES out from the
> analog outputs , right ?
Yes.
> Thats why we can here this on any analo mediumlike my powered monitors.
> So lets say we record these Mytek's analog outs to another medium that
> might
> be ana anlog tape machine or another digital device with great AD
> converters
> like say Mytek, ok ?
Yes.
> NOW lets record RME's outputs playing the same file which sound small an
> distorted compared to the other and record this on same medium .
> Isn't obvious that these two files will be totally different and the first
> "myteked file will have at least 90% of what we were hearing from mytek's
> out while "RME" file will be like rme was in the first place ?
> I am very very curious if we get something here !!!
> Regards,
> Dimitrios
You are correct.
>
> "TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger. The
>>sounds
>>start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no vibe, no
>>opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're just
>>a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then they go
>>to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what
>>you're
>>suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter. The AD
> turns
>>the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly you
>>will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then your
> fancy
>>DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured
> by
>>the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these
>>conditions.
>>
>>
>>So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it did
>>through
>>the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>>>
>>>SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>
>>>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>>will
>>>be enouph !!
>>>What I really want to know is the following.
>>>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>>>DA.
>>>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>>>sound,
>>>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>>field.
>>>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>>RECORDED
>>>!
>>>Isn't that so ?
>>>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>>>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't the
>>>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>Thats a serious one here !
>>>Cheers,
>>>Dimitrios
>>>
>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>>>>>Mytek
>>>>
>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
> Mine
>>>>
>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>>>>>might
>>>>
>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>>or
>>>>
>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>
>>>>>Deej
>>>>>
>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>>>>>> punch
>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>>>>>> these
>>>>
>>>>>> effects
>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87029 is a reply to message #87027] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:26 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Then yes, based on your post & his last one before it, he would
indeed be recording the "better (jitter-free) mix to the 2-track
tape. IOW, in this connection/routing scenario, it would be the
same mix as he would be hearing over the speakers.
Neil
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>Correct...you would have to be recording through the D/A to somethihnglike
a
>Masterlink, but dimitrios' converter has a BNC clock out (it's an AD/DA
and
>so he should be able to clock the whole system with this.
>
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:467bf212$1@linux...
>>
>> But, that difference isn't translated into the bounced-down
>> stereo mix (as far as I know, anyway) the rendered stereo file
>> is what it is... unless you're clocking from the cleaner/jitter-
>> free clock, as well.
>>
>> IOW, you're just hearing it better over the monitors - not
>> making a difference as to what the 2-mix will sound like
>> when you play it back on another system, for example.
>> This assumes that you're rendering to digital, ITB; not going out
>> of your DAW into another box or Masterlink or whatever to record
>> the 2-mix to.
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>This is because the Mytek is probably reclocking the signal. Mytek has
one
>>
>>>of the best clocks made.. You may not think you're hearing jitter from
a
>>
>>>system, until you use a high quality DA. Then the difference is obvious.
>>
>>>Much more depth, imaging and clarity. It's the difference between night
>> and
>>>day.
>>>
>>>Deej
>>>
>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote in message news:467be722$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>
>>>> DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>>
>>>> will
>>>> be enouph !!
>>>> What I really want to know is the following.
>>>> I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his
>>>> primary
>>>> DA.
>>>> After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>>
>>>> sound,
>>>> sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>>> field.
>>>> He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>> So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>>> RECORDED
>>>> !
>>>> Isn't that so ?
>>>> If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>>>> out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>> the
>>>> soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>> Thats a serious one here !
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>
>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>
>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>> Mine
>>>>>
>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>>>>>>might
>>>>>
>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>>> or
>>>>>
>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>>>>>>> these
>>>>>
>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87030 is a reply to message #87029] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:23 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Right.
;o)
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:467bf844$1@linux...
>
> Then yes, based on your post & his last one before it, he would
> indeed be recording the "better (jitter-free) mix to the 2-track
> tape. IOW, in this connection/routing scenario, it would be the
> same mix as he would be hearing over the speakers.
>
> Neil
>
>
> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>Correct...you would have to be recording through the D/A to somethihnglike
> a
>>Masterlink, but dimitrios' converter has a BNC clock out (it's an AD/DA
> and
>>so he should be able to clock the whole system with this.
>>
>>
>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:467bf212$1@linux...
>>>
>>> But, that difference isn't translated into the bounced-down
>>> stereo mix (as far as I know, anyway) the rendered stereo file
>>> is what it is... unless you're clocking from the cleaner/jitter-
>>> free clock, as well.
>>>
>>> IOW, you're just hearing it better over the monitors - not
>>> making a difference as to what the 2-mix will sound like
>>> when you play it back on another system, for example.
>>> This assumes that you're rendering to digital, ITB; not going out
>>> of your DAW into another box or Masterlink or whatever to record
>>> the 2-mix to.
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>This is because the Mytek is probably reclocking the signal. Mytek has
> one
>>>
>>>>of the best clocks made.. You may not think you're hearing jitter from
> a
>>>
>>>>system, until you use a high quality DA. Then the difference is obvious.
>>>
>>>>Much more depth, imaging and clarity. It's the difference between night
>>> and
>>>>day.
>>>>
>>>>Deej
>>>>
>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote in message news:467be722$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>>
>>>>> DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when
>>>>> money
>>>
>>>>> will
>>>>> be enouph !!
>>>>> What I really want to know is the following.
>>>>> I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his
>>>>> primary
>>>>> DA.
>>>>> After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>>>
>>>>> sound,
>>>>> sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider
>>>>> stereo
>>>>> field.
>>>>> He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not
>>>>> quite.
>>>>> So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>>>> RECORDED
>>>>> !
>>>>> Isn't that so ?
>>>>> If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the
>>>>> spdif
>>>>> out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>>> the
>>>>> soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>>> Thats a serious one here !
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>
>>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>> Mine
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>
>>>>>>>might
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice"
>>>>>>>mode,
>>>>> or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>
>>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>
>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87031 is a reply to message #87029] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:34 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Ok then,
The analog tape would show the difference, what about a recording using AD
again with SAME clock (mytek's own), wouldn't that be also a "better mix
" ?
If all the above have some truthness then the mastering houses might using
the Gold Lavry's to embeddend the "better sound coming out of them !
Regards,
Dimitrios
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>Then yes, based on your post & his last one before it, he would
>indeed be recording the "better (jitter-free) mix to the 2-track
>tape. IOW, in this connection/routing scenario, it would be the
>same mix as he would be hearing over the speakers.
>
>Neil
>
>
>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>Correct...you would have to be recording through the D/A to somethihnglike
>a
>>Masterlink, but dimitrios' converter has a BNC clock out (it's an AD/DA
>and
>>so he should be able to clock the whole system with this.
>>
>>
>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:467bf212$1@linux...
>>>
>>> But, that difference isn't translated into the bounced-down
>>> stereo mix (as far as I know, anyway) the rendered stereo file
>>> is what it is... unless you're clocking from the cleaner/jitter-
>>> free clock, as well.
>>>
>>> IOW, you're just hearing it better over the monitors - not
>>> making a difference as to what the 2-mix will sound like
>>> when you play it back on another system, for example.
>>> This assumes that you're rendering to digital, ITB; not going out
>>> of your DAW into another box or Masterlink or whatever to record
>>> the 2-mix to.
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>This is because the Mytek is probably reclocking the signal. Mytek has
>one
>>>
>>>>of the best clocks made.. You may not think you're hearing jitter from
>a
>>>
>>>>system, until you use a high quality DA. Then the difference is obvious.
>>>
>>>>Much more depth, imaging and clarity. It's the difference between night
>>> and
>>>>day.
>>>>
>>>>Deej
>>>>
>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote in message news:467be722$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>>
>>>>> DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>>>
>>>>> will
>>>>> be enouph !!
>>>>> What I really want to know is the following.
>>>>> I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his
>>>>> primary
>>>>> DA.
>>>>> After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change
in
>>>
>>>>> sound,
>>>>> sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>>>> field.
>>>>> He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>>> So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>>>> RECORDED
>>>>> !
>>>>> Isn't that so ?
>>>>> If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the
spdif
>>>>> out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>>> the
>>>>> soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>>> Thats a serious one here !
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>
>>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>> Mine
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>
>>>>>>>might
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>>>> or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>
>>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>
>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87032 is a reply to message #87029] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:37 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
To clarify - you can get jitter in two places - going
in/recording and going out/playback. The worst, is of course,
going in - because you're stuck with that... once it's there,
you can't get rid of it.
Unless there's a De-jitterizer plugin that I'm not aware of :)
Neil
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>Then yes, based on your post & his last one before it, he would
>indeed be recording the "better (jitter-free) mix to the 2-track
>tape. IOW, in this connection/routing scenario, it would be the
>same mix as he would be hearing over the speakers.
>
>Neil
>
>
>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>Correct...you would have to be recording through the D/A to somethihnglike
>a
>>Masterlink, but dimitrios' converter has a BNC clock out (it's an AD/DA
>and
>>so he should be able to clock the whole system with this.
>>
>>
>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:467bf212$1@linux...
>>>
>>> But, that difference isn't translated into the bounced-down
>>> stereo mix (as far as I know, anyway) the rendered stereo file
>>> is what it is... unless you're clocking from the cleaner/jitter-
>>> free clock, as well.
>>>
>>> IOW, you're just hearing it better over the monitors - not
>>> making a difference as to what the 2-mix will sound like
>>> when you play it back on another system, for example.
>>> This assumes that you're rendering to digital, ITB; not going out
>>> of your DAW into another box or Masterlink or whatever to record
>>> the 2-mix to.
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>This is because the Mytek is probably reclocking the signal. Mytek has
>one
>>>
>>>>of the best clocks made.. You may not think you're hearing jitter from
>a
>>>
>>>>system, until you use a high quality DA. Then the difference is obvious.
>>>
>>>>Much more depth, imaging and clarity. It's the difference between night
>>> and
>>>>day.
>>>>
>>>>Deej
>>>>
>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote in message news:467be722$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>>
>>>>> DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>>>
>>>>> will
>>>>> be enouph !!
>>>>> What I really want to know is the following.
>>>>> I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his
>>>>> primary
>>>>> DA.
>>>>> After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change
in
>>>
>>>>> sound,
>>>>> sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>>>> field.
>>>>> He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>>> So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>>>> RECORDED
>>>>> !
>>>>> Isn't that so ?
>>>>> If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the
spdif
>>>>> out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>>> the
>>>>> soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>>> Thats a serious one here !
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>
>>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>> Mine
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>
>>>>>>>might
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>>>> or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>
>>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>
>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87033 is a reply to message #87032] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 09:55 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mytek's own device has THRE dejitterizers !!
for analog and digital ins/outs !!
Super !
Regards,
Dimitrios
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>To clarify - you can get jitter in two places - going
>in/recording and going out/playback. The worst, is of course,
>going in - because you're stuck with that... once it's there,
>you can't get rid of it.
>
>Unless there's a De-jitterizer plugin that I'm not aware of :)
>
>Neil
>
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>Then yes, based on your post & his last one before it, he would
>>indeed be recording the "better (jitter-free) mix to the 2-track
>>tape. IOW, in this connection/routing scenario, it would be the
>>same mix as he would be hearing over the speakers.
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>Correct...you would have to be recording through the D/A to somethihnglike
>>a
>>>Masterlink, but dimitrios' converter has a BNC clock out (it's an AD/DA
>>and
>>>so he should be able to clock the whole system with this.
>>>
>>>
>>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote in message news:467bf212$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> But, that difference isn't translated into the bounced-down
>>>> stereo mix (as far as I know, anyway) the rendered stereo file
>>>> is what it is... unless you're clocking from the cleaner/jitter-
>>>> free clock, as well.
>>>>
>>>> IOW, you're just hearing it better over the monitors - not
>>>> making a difference as to what the 2-mix will sound like
>>>> when you play it back on another system, for example.
>>>> This assumes that you're rendering to digital, ITB; not going out
>>>> of your DAW into another box or Masterlink or whatever to record
>>>> the 2-mix to.
>>>>
>>>> Neil
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>This is because the Mytek is probably reclocking the signal. Mytek has
>>one
>>>>
>>>>>of the best clocks made.. You may not think you're hearing jitter from
>>a
>>>>
>>>>>system, until you use a high quality DA. Then the difference is obvious.
>>>>
>>>>>Much more depth, imaging and clarity. It's the difference between night
>>>> and
>>>>>day.
>>>>>
>>>>>Deej
>>>>>
>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote in message news:467be722$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>>>
>>>>>> DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when
money
>>>>
>>>>>> will
>>>>>> be enouph !!
>>>>>> What I really want to know is the following.
>>>>>> I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his
>>>>>> primary
>>>>>> DA.
>>>>>> After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change
>in
>>>>
>>>>>> sound,
>>>>>> sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider
stereo
>>>>>> field.
>>>>>> He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>>>> So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>>>>> RECORDED
>>>>>> !
>>>>>> Isn't that so ?
>>>>>> If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the
>spdif
>>>>>> out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>>>> the
>>>>>> soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>>>> Thats a serious one here !
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached
to
>>
>>>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>>> Mine
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>>
>>>>>>>>might
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice"
mode,
>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>>
>>>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>>
>>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad
??
>>>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87036 is a reply to message #87026] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 10:28 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Then it will sound different because of tape.
My point is if the DA and AD do their jobs correctly the files will be literally
_identical_. Down to the last bit. If it doesn't then your converter is being
used as an effect, which I think is insane. You could just as easily render
the file, burn it to a CD and listen through your Mytek.
It's your stuff, do what you want. I still go by the dinosaur, mid-90's thought
that once it's 1s and 0s the smart thing to do is avoid DA/AD conversions,
SRC, multiple dithering, and such like.
TCB
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>
>Dear TCB,
>If I record this to an analog two tape machine using the Mytek's DA and
connect
>then tape's out to the same monitors won't I hear the "better" mix ?
>Regards,
>Dimitrios
>
>"TCB " <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>But you know you can't record clock. If you did what Dimitrios is talking
>>about and then attached a crap DA and played back the file you looped through
>>the Benchmark it would still sound like crap.
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>Thad,
>>>
>>>I'm using aBenchmark DAC-1 for my final D/A conversion. It reclocks anything
>>
>>>it's handed to 96k before it exdcretes it out the D/A. It's a wunnerful
>>lil'
>>>thang.
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:467bee5d$1@linux...
>>>>
>>>> OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger. The
>
>>>> sounds
>>>> start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no vibe,
>>no
>>>> opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're
>just
>>>> a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then they
>>go
>>>> to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what
>
>>>> you're
>>>> suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter. The
>AD
>>
>>>> turns
>>>> the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly
>>you
>>>> will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then your
>>
>>>> fancy
>>>> DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured
>>by
>>>> the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these
>>>> conditions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it did
>>
>>>> through
>>>> the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
>>>>
>>>> TCB
>>>>
>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>>
>>>>>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>>>> will
>>>>>be enouph !!
>>>>>What I really want to know is the following.
>>>>>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>>>>>DA.
>>>>>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change in
>>
>>>>>sound,
>>>>>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>>>>field.
>>>>>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>>>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>
>>>>>RECORDED
>>>>>!
>>>>>Isn't that so ?
>>>>>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the spdif
>>>>>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>>the
>>>>>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>>>Thats a serious one here !
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>Dimitrios
>>>>>
>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached to
>>
>>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>
>>>>>>>Mine
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>might
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice" mode,
>>>>>or
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>>
>>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>these
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87040 is a reply to message #87036] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 11:36 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thad, it's not about using the convertors as an effect (Unless
you're talking about what some of the mastering guys are doing
with the apparently undistortable Lavry Gold's & Prim's); it's
about samplerate stability/jitter & how that affects the quality
of the sound.
Interestingly enough, Dan Lavry's White Paper on jitter mentions
that as bitrate increases, jitter effects become more
noticeable... perhaps that's why Brian T. always insisted that
Paris sounded better at 16 bits than at 24!
Here's a link to that piece, BTW:
http://www.lavryengineering.com/white_papers/jitter.pdf
Neil
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>Then it will sound different because of tape.
>
>My point is if the DA and AD do their jobs correctly the files will be literally
>_identical_. Down to the last bit. If it doesn't then your converter is
being
>used as an effect, which I think is insane. You could just as easily render
>the file, burn it to a CD and listen through your Mytek.
>
>It's your stuff, do what you want. I still go by the dinosaur, mid-90's
thought
>that once it's 1s and 0s the smart thing to do is avoid DA/AD conversions,
>SRC, multiple dithering, and such like.
>
>TCB
>
>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>>
>>Dear TCB,
>>If I record this to an analog two tape machine using the Mytek's DA and
>connect
>>then tape's out to the same monitors won't I hear the "better" mix ?
>>Regards,
>>Dimitrios
>>
>>"TCB " <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>But you know you can't record clock. If you did what Dimitrios is talking
>>>about and then attached a crap DA and played back the file you looped
through
>>>the Benchmark it would still sound like crap.
>>>
>>>TCB
>>>
>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>Thad,
>>>>
>>>>I'm using aBenchmark DAC-1 for my final D/A conversion. It reclocks anything
>>>
>>>>it's handed to 96k before it exdcretes it out the D/A. It's a wunnerful
>>>lil'
>>>>thang.
>>>>
>>>>;o)
>>>>
>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:467bee5d$1@linux...
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger. The
>>
>>>>> sounds
>>>>> start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no vibe,
>>>no
>>>>> opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're
>>just
>>>>> a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then they
>>>go
>>>>> to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what
>>
>>>>> you're
>>>>> suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter. The
>>AD
>>>
>>>>> turns
>>>>> the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly
>>>you
>>>>> will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then
your
>>>
>>>>> fancy
>>>>> DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured
>>>by
>>>>> the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these
>>>>> conditions.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it
did
>>>
>>>>> through
>>>>> the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
>>>>>
>>>>> TCB
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>>>
>>>>>>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when money
>>>>> will
>>>>>>be enouph !!
>>>>>>What I really want to know is the following.
>>>>>>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his primary
>>>>>>DA.
>>>>>>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change
in
>>>
>>>>>>sound,
>>>>>>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider stereo
>>>>>>field.
>>>>>>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>>>>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>
>>>>>>RECORDED
>>>>>>!
>>>>>>Isn't that so ?
>>>>>>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the
spdif
>>>>>>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>>>the
>>>>>>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>>>>Thats a serious one here !
>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>Dimitrios
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached
to
>>>
>>>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>>
>>>>>>>>Mine
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>>might
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice"
mode,
>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>>>
>>>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>>these
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad
??
>>>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87041 is a reply to message #87040] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 11:56 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
But you can't _record_ that. Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF of
an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy
in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the worst)
and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark. So
what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop, with
infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact same
file as the original. So why do it? Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter
is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter, it can't any
more than tape can have a head misaligned.
Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful,
will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better
will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME?
I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly it
would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because
even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way on
other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row? Will we get
incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth' with
each pass?
And the theme for the day is that there are diminishing returns when it comes
to audio precision, and they show up way, way before most people in this
racket seem to realize. Which is why I think Brian T didn't just track at
16 bit I think he truncated individual tracks and then dithered the stereo
mixdown. Smart guy, that Brian.
TCB
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>Thad, it's not about using the convertors as an effect (Unless
>you're talking about what some of the mastering guys are doing
>with the apparently undistortable Lavry Gold's & Prim's); it's
>about samplerate stability/jitter & how that affects the quality
>of the sound.
>
>Interestingly enough, Dan Lavry's White Paper on jitter mentions
>that as bitrate increases, jitter effects become more
>noticeable... perhaps that's why Brian T. always insisted that
>Paris sounded better at 16 bits than at 24!
>
>Here's a link to that piece, BTW:
>
>http://www.lavryengineering.com/white_papers/jitter.pdf
>
>
>Neil
>
>
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>Then it will sound different because of tape.
>>
>>My point is if the DA and AD do their jobs correctly the files will be
literally
>>_identical_. Down to the last bit. If it doesn't then your converter is
>being
>>used as an effect, which I think is insane. You could just as easily render
>>the file, burn it to a CD and listen through your Mytek.
>>
>>It's your stuff, do what you want. I still go by the dinosaur, mid-90's
>thought
>>that once it's 1s and 0s the smart thing to do is avoid DA/AD conversions,
>>SRC, multiple dithering, and such like.
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>>>
>>>Dear TCB,
>>>If I record this to an analog two tape machine using the Mytek's DA and
>>connect
>>>then tape's out to the same monitors won't I hear the "better" mix ?
>>>Regards,
>>>Dimitrios
>>>
>>>"TCB " <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>But you know you can't record clock. If you did what Dimitrios is talking
>>>>about and then attached a crap DA and played back the file you looped
>through
>>>>the Benchmark it would still sound like crap.
>>>>
>>>>TCB
>>>>
>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>Thad,
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm using aBenchmark DAC-1 for my final D/A conversion. It reclocks
anything
>>>>
>>>>>it's handed to 96k before it exdcretes it out the D/A. It's a wunnerful
>>>>lil'
>>>>>thang.
>>>>>
>>>>>;o)
>>>>>
>>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:467bee5d$1@linux...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger. The
>>>
>>>>>> sounds
>>>>>> start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no vibe,
>>>>no
>>>>>> opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're
>>>just
>>>>>> a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then they
>>>>go
>>>>>> to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what
>>>
>>>>>> you're
>>>>>> suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter. The
>>>AD
>>>>
>>>>>> turns
>>>>>> the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly
>>>>you
>>>>>> will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then
>your
>>>>
>>>>>> fancy
>>>>>> DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured
>>>>by
>>>>>> the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these
>>>>>> conditions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it
>did
>>>>
>>>>>> through
>>>>>> the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TCB
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when
money
>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>be enouph !!
>>>>>>>What I really want to know is the following.
>>>>>>>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his
primary
>>>>>>>DA.
>>>>>>>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change
>in
>>>>
>>>>>>>sound,
>>>>>>>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider
stereo
>>>>>>>field.
>>>>>>>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not quite.
>>>>>>>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could get
>>>
>>>>>>>RECORDED
>>>>>>>!
>>>>>>>Isn't that so ?
>>>>>>>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the
>spdif
>>>>>>>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>>>>the
>>>>>>>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>>>>>Thats a serious one here !
>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>Dimitrios
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached
>to
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Mine
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA. You
>>>might
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice"
>mode,
>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>>>these
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad
>??
>>>>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87044 is a reply to message #87041] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 12:48 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
TCB nice post.
regarding the DA yes this is an "effect" sound as anything else.
My creamware's own card ,although noisy,converters are even better than RME's
because they have a Parislike round sound but have punch which rme does
not know even the word !
So while we accept that DA has its own sound why not print it ?
If the same spdif produces different sound on two pairs of analog out then
why not use the pair of analog outs that sounds better ?
Regarding the 10 times ad conversion-recording this can be done but you eventually
start to loose things than gain because there is a limit to everything.
I respect though your oppinion and I agree with 16 bit recordings , thats
what I do, and I surely believe that BrianT is a pioneer in sound sculpting.
Regards,
Dimitrios
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>But you can't _record_ that. Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF
of
>an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy
>in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the worst)
>and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark. So
>what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop, with
>infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact same
>file as the original. So why do it? Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter
>is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter, it can't any
>more than tape can have a head misaligned.
>
>Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful,
>will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better
>will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME?
>
>I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly it
>would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because
>even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way on
>other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row? Will we get
>incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth'
with
>each pass?
>
>And the theme for the day is that there are diminishing returns when it
comes
>to audio precision, and they show up way, way before most people in this
>racket seem to realize. Which is why I think Brian T didn't just track at
>16 bit I think he truncated individual tracks and then dithered the stereo
>mixdown. Smart guy, that Brian.
>
>TCB
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>Thad, it's not about using the convertors as an effect (Unless
>>you're talking about what some of the mastering guys are doing
>>with the apparently undistortable Lavry Gold's & Prim's); it's
>>about samplerate stability/jitter & how that affects the quality
>>of the sound.
>>
>>Interestingly enough, Dan Lavry's White Paper on jitter mentions
>>that as bitrate increases, jitter effects become more
>>noticeable... perhaps that's why Brian T. always insisted that
>>Paris sounded better at 16 bits than at 24!
>>
>>Here's a link to that piece, BTW:
>>
>>http://www.lavryengineering.com/white_papers/jitter.pdf
>>
>>
>>Neil
>>
>>
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Then it will sound different because of tape.
>>>
>>>My point is if the DA and AD do their jobs correctly the files will be
>literally
>>>_identical_. Down to the last bit. If it doesn't then your converter is
>>being
>>>used as an effect, which I think is insane. You could just as easily render
>>>the file, burn it to a CD and listen through your Mytek.
>>>
>>>It's your stuff, do what you want. I still go by the dinosaur, mid-90's
>>thought
>>>that once it's 1s and 0s the smart thing to do is avoid DA/AD conversions,
>>>SRC, multiple dithering, and such like.
>>>
>>>TCB
>>>
>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Dear TCB,
>>>>If I record this to an analog two tape machine using the Mytek's DA and
>>>connect
>>>>then tape's out to the same monitors won't I hear the "better" mix ?
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Dimitrios
>>>>
>>>>"TCB " <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>But you know you can't record clock. If you did what Dimitrios is talking
>>>>>about and then attached a crap DA and played back the file you looped
>>through
>>>>>the Benchmark it would still sound like crap.
>>>>>
>>>>>TCB
>>>>>
>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>Thad,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I'm using aBenchmark DAC-1 for my final D/A conversion. It reclocks
>anything
>>>>>
>>>>>>it's handed to 96k before it exdcretes it out the D/A. It's a wunnerful
>>>>>lil'
>>>>>>thang.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>;o)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote in message news:467bee5d$1@linux...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK, I want to poke my eyeballs out with a sharpened coat hanger.
The
>>>>
>>>>>>> sounds
>>>>>>> start out as 1s and 0s. Nothing more, nothing less. They have no
vibe,
>>>>>no
>>>>>>> opinion, no mojo, no plans, no depth, no clarity no nothing. They're
>>>>just
>>>>>>> a bunch of effin 1s and 0s, a whole flipping bunch of them. Then
they
>>>>>go
>>>>>>> to your DA converter and are turned into electricity. If you do what
>>>>
>>>>>>> you're
>>>>>>> suggesting, then that electricity goes back to the AD converter.
The
>>>>AD
>>>>>
>>>>>>> turns
>>>>>>> the electricity back into 1s and 0s. Now, if it does its job perfectly
>>>>>you
>>>>>>> will have EXACTLY THE SAME STRING OF 1s AND 0s! If you don't, then
>>your
>>>>>
>>>>>>> fancy
>>>>>>> DA converter is not doing its job, and DA converters should be measured
>>>>>by
>>>>>>> the degree to which they can exactly replicate a file under these
>
>>>>>>> conditions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, if your mytek does its job your mix will sound EXACTLY like it
>>did
>>>>>
>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>> the RME when you play it back through the RME again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TCB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dimitrios" <musurgio@.....> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>SORRY for double empty posts !
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>DJ I know your praises about portico which is on my wishlist when
>money
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>>>be enouph !!
>>>>>>>>What I really want to know is the following.
>>>>>>>>I went to a friend's studio and he used rme fireface (yak) as his
>primary
>>>>>>>>DA.
>>>>>>>>After [putting the mytek immediately there was r\tremendous change
>>in
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>sound,
>>>>>>>>sparkle lack of high frquency ditortion defined low end and wider
>stereo
>>>>>>>>field.
>>>>>>>>He asked OK now my mixes will sound like this and I sai hhmm not
quite.
>>>>>>>>So after a long debate there I thought that thiese changes could
get
>>>>
>>>>>>>>RECORDED
>>>>>>>>!
>>>>>>>>Isn't that so ?
>>>>>>>>If you record the da of mytek back to myte's ad and then route the
>>spdif
>>>>>>>>out to get recorded as digital file on any medium ,pc or dat... isn't
>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>soundmix becoming "myteked" ??
>>>>>>>>Thats a serious one here !
>>>>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>>>>Dimitrios
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@oten....> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>I use a good AD and DA in my master bus insert which is attached
>>to
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Mytek
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Stereo A/D converters (hmmmm..seems you may have something similar).
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Mine
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>has a device (a Portico 5042) in the chain between that AD/DA.
You
>>>>might
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>want to try that with a clean comp line and RNC in "Really nice"
>>mode,
>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>something more colored.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Deej
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"Dimitrios" <musurgioNOSPAM@otenet.gr> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>news:467bdf35$1@linux...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field
adds
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> punch
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE
>>>>these
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> effects
>>>>>>>>>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad
>>??
>>>>>>>>>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>>>>>>>>>> regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Dimitrios
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87048 is a reply to message #87041] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 13:50 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>But you can't _record_ that.
You can if you go out of the Mytek (or whatever's) analog outs
to tape or another digital machine's analog in's... if that 2nd
machine is clocked to the Mytek (or whatever's) clock, then it
could preceiveably result in a higher-quality 2-track file.
>Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF of
>an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy
>in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the worst)
Oh, I'm not running down the RME stuff... I LOVE my Multifaces
(Multifascia?). Are there better convertors? Apparently...
though I don't know if a Mytek or Benchmark are among those.
>and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark. So
>what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop, with
>infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact same
>file as the original. So why do it?
To improve upon a convertor that may have a more jittery clock?
I guess if he's going out of an RME's analog outs to 2-track
tape, and he's hearing a difference with the Mytek's output,
then that difference would be translated to tape.
>Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter
>is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter,
>it can't any more than tape can have a head misaligned.
What I said was that you can get jitter upon recording... that
jitter you're stuck with - you can't get rid of it; and then you
can also get additional jitter at playback.... if you're finding
that using a different clock or set of convertors on playback
improves things - that could be the reason it's doing so...
you're eliminating or lessening the amount of playback jitter.
>Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful,
>will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better
>will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME?
I have no idea - frankly I'm surprised that someone's finding a
better convertor set than RME stuff at any price point south of
the super-ultra top-end gear. I'm just giving Dimi the benefit
of the doubt for the sake of the current discussion.
>I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly it
>would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because
>even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way on
>other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row?
The idea isn't that it's an "effect" that can be enhanced with
cascading several of a given convertors, the idea is that it's
(again, theoretically, assuming there IS an improvement that's
being heard) kind of a sonic Windex that can remove grime in the
form of artifacts created by jitter... using Windex (the non-
sonic kind LOL) can only get a glass so clean, right? I mean if
there's something embedded in the glass, Windex can't get that
out, so if there's record-end jitter embedded in the source, you
can't remove it, but playback-end jitter can be minimized or
possibly even eliminated.
>Will we get
>incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth'
with
>each pass?
Nope, you can only get the glass so clean... if there are newly-
embedded jitter artifacts on a rendered file and you pass it
through another stage, you can't get it any cleaner.
We're not talking about rendering it more than once, we're
talking about the one & only rendering of the final mix to a two-
track file prior to mastering.
Unless I'm misunderstanding something here.
Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87050 is a reply to message #87048] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 14:22 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056
Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Neil thats nice post...
So regarding mytek versus RME there is a big big difference.
RME is good until you hear something better.
My Lavry DA sounds fantastic !
So the most importanty conclusion if some other aggree here is that a very
good da and ad clocked by the same jitter minimal clock can produce a BETTER
sounding stereofile than just the rendered Paris or Cubase file.
Do we agree here ?
Cheers,
Dimitrios
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>But you can't _record_ that.
>
>You can if you go out of the Mytek (or whatever's) analog outs
>to tape or another digital machine's analog in's... if that 2nd
>machine is clocked to the Mytek (or whatever's) clock, then it
>could preceiveably result in a higher-quality 2-track file.
>
>>Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF of
>>an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy
>>in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the worst)
>
>Oh, I'm not running down the RME stuff... I LOVE my Multifaces
>(Multifascia?). Are there better convertors? Apparently...
>though I don't know if a Mytek or Benchmark are among those.
>
>>and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark.
So
>>what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop, with
>>infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact same
>>file as the original. So why do it?
>
>To improve upon a convertor that may have a more jittery clock?
>I guess if he's going out of an RME's analog outs to 2-track
>tape, and he's hearing a difference with the Mytek's output,
>then that difference would be translated to tape.
>
>>Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter
>>is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter,
>>it can't any more than tape can have a head misaligned.
>
>What I said was that you can get jitter upon recording... that
>jitter you're stuck with - you can't get rid of it; and then you
>can also get additional jitter at playback.... if you're finding
>that using a different clock or set of convertors on playback
>improves things - that could be the reason it's doing so...
>you're eliminating or lessening the amount of playback jitter.
>
>>Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful,
>>will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better
>>will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME?
>
>I have no idea - frankly I'm surprised that someone's finding a
>better convertor set than RME stuff at any price point south of
>the super-ultra top-end gear. I'm just giving Dimi the benefit
>of the doubt for the sake of the current discussion.
>
>>I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly it
>>would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because
>>even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way on
>>other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row?
>
>The idea isn't that it's an "effect" that can be enhanced with
>cascading several of a given convertors, the idea is that it's
>(again, theoretically, assuming there IS an improvement that's
>being heard) kind of a sonic Windex that can remove grime in the
>form of artifacts created by jitter... using Windex (the non-
>sonic kind LOL) can only get a glass so clean, right? I mean if
>there's something embedded in the glass, Windex can't get that
>out, so if there's record-end jitter embedded in the source, you
>can't remove it, but playback-end jitter can be minimized or
>possibly even eliminated.
>
>
>>Will we get
>>incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth'
>with
>>each pass?
>
>Nope, you can only get the glass so clean... if there are newly-
>embedded jitter artifacts on a rendered file and you pass it
>through another stage, you can't get it any cleaner.
>We're not talking about rendering it more than once, we're
>talking about the one & only rendering of the final mix to a two-
>track file prior to mastering.
>
>Unless I'm misunderstanding something here.
>
>
>Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87051 is a reply to message #87050] |
Fri, 22 June 2007 14:38 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I'll agree with you if by saying: "a BETTER sounding stereofile
than just the rendered Paris or Cubase file" you mean the actual
final mix two-buss rendering or out-routed file AS IT'S BEING
CREATED. IOW, you're in an active mixdown, going from your
Multitrack files, through your 2-buss & either rendering it to
disk, or routing the L&R out through your convertors into
another device (tape, in your case) that will record the 2-track
mixdown.
If you're talking about an ALREADY-EXISTING 2-track mixdown that
already has jitter embedded in it, then no, you're not going to
be able to get rid of that. You could, in theory (by using a
good or well-clocked convertor to play that back as opposed to a
poorly-clocked convertor) eliminate any MORE jitter from
entering the picture, but that's about it.
Neil
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@ote.......> wrote:
>
>Neil thats nice post...
>So regarding mytek versus RME there is a big big difference.
>RME is good until you hear something better.
>My Lavry DA sounds fantastic !
>So the most importanty conclusion if some other aggree here is that a very
>good da and ad clocked by the same jitter minimal clock can produce a BETTER
>sounding stereofile than just the rendered Paris or Cubase file.
>Do we agree here ?
>Cheers,
>Dimitrios
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>But you can't _record_ that.
>>
>>You can if you go out of the Mytek (or whatever's) analog outs
>>to tape or another digital machine's analog in's... if that 2nd
>>machine is clocked to the Mytek (or whatever's) clock, then it
>>could preceiveably result in a higher-quality 2-track file.
>>
>>>Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF of
>>>an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy
>>>in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the
worst)
>>
>>Oh, I'm not running down the RME stuff... I LOVE my Multifaces
>>(Multifascia?). Are there better convertors? Apparently...
>>though I don't know if a Mytek or Benchmark are among those.
>>
>>>and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark.
>So
>>>what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop, with
>>>infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact same
>>>file as the original. So why do it?
>>
>>To improve upon a convertor that may have a more jittery clock?
>>I guess if he's going out of an RME's analog outs to 2-track
>>tape, and he's hearing a difference with the Mytek's output,
>>then that difference would be translated to tape.
>>
>>>Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter
>>>is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter,
>>>it can't any more than tape can have a head misaligned.
>>
>>What I said was that you can get jitter upon recording... that
>>jitter you're stuck with - you can't get rid of it; and then you
>>can also get additional jitter at playback.... if you're finding
>>that using a different clock or set of convertors on playback
>>improves things - that could be the reason it's doing so...
>>you're eliminating or lessening the amount of playback jitter.
>>
>>>Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful,
>>>will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better
>>>will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME?
>>
>>I have no idea - frankly I'm surprised that someone's finding a
>>better convertor set than RME stuff at any price point south of
>>the super-ultra top-end gear. I'm just giving Dimi the benefit
>>of the doubt for the sake of the current discussion.
>>
>>>I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly
it
>>>would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because
>>>even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way
on
>>>other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row?
>>
>>The idea isn't that it's an "effect" that can be enhanced with
>>cascading several of a given convertors, the idea is that it's
>>(again, theoretically, assuming there IS an improvement that's
>>being heard) kind of a sonic Windex that can remove grime in the
>>form of artifacts created by jitter... using Windex (the non-
>>sonic kind LOL) can only get a glass so clean, right? I mean if
>>there's something embedded in the glass, Windex can't get that
>>out, so if there's record-end jitter embedded in the source, you
>>can't remove it, but playback-end jitter can be minimized or
>>possibly even eliminated.
>>
>>
>>>Will we get
>>>incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth'
>>with
>>>each pass?
>>
>>Nope, you can only get the glass so clean... if there are newly-
>>embedded jitter artifacts on a rendered file and you pass it
>>through another stage, you can't get it any cleaner.
>>We're not talking about rendering it more than once, we're
>>talking about the one & only rendering of the final mix to a two-
>>track file prior to mastering.
>>
>>Unless I'm misunderstanding something here.
>>
>>
>>Neil
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87061 is a reply to message #87060] |
Sat, 23 June 2007 09:11 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Bill,
The bottom line of all this is to reduce jitter as much as possible at all
stages of the recording process. Jitter creates a lot of the *digital
harshness* and midrange/low end flabbyness/wierdness that everyone complains
about. To that end, as far as Paris is concerned, an external clock source
makes quite an improvement. I tried to use the Paris D/A's to mix and was
going crazy trying to nail the mid frequencies. I finally took my mix down
to Catcusfire's studio in Taos (remember Andy?) and played it back through a
Cranesong HEDD and discovered that there was nothing wrong with the mids, it
was the D/A converters I was using (Paris on Paris clock). Not long
afterwards, MikeClaytor came to Durango and brought a Benchmark DAC-1 and we
patched it into a mix and the difference was very obvious. Not long after
that I got a Lucid GenX 6 and clocked my entire system to it. The A/D and
D/A conversion (D/A's that I was using for processors on inserts) improved
as well and the system, overall, exhibited more clarity, depth /better
imaging. I would strongly recommend an external clock for any Paris user.
As far as Cubase goes, I'm clocking my RME hardware to the BNC output of a
Mytek Stereo A/D. I think the RME hardware reclocks everything it sees to
it's own internal clock, but I'm not sure exactly how they do this. At any
rate, I am happy with whqat I'm getting from the 24 RME AD/DA's I've got
here whether they are being clocked by the Mytek or whether the Mytek clock
is being reclocked to the RME clock. I am still monitoring everyghing from
the Benchmark DAC-1 and if I was recording to tape or something like a
Masterlink, I'd be using the DAC-1 outputs to send the 2bus to the recorder
and monitoring off the playback heads if it was an analog deck and making
final mix decisions based on what the tape was telling me. As far as
digital goes, I would not be making final tweak decisions by monitoring off
the D/A's of the mix deck because I could be certain that whatever the DAC-1
was feeding the digital recorder would be what I''d (supposedly) end up with
as the final product and the digital deck's D/A's probably wouldn't be up to
the level of the DAC-1's D/A converters.
Deej
"Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:467d3c4b@linux...
>I have not finished reading this thread because it seems moot, but in case
>anyone else has not mentioned this obvious point, Dimitiros, the only way
>to get a better in the box mix with converters is to use better A-D.
>
> Dimitrios wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds punch
>> and
>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>> effects
>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>> regards,
>> Dimitrios
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87067 is a reply to message #87061] |
Sat, 23 June 2007 10:15 |
LaMont
Messages: 828
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Neil, you are right. Superior clocking means everything. At the commercial
studio at our church, we tested the Digi Clock, Apoge Big ben and the Licid
GN-x192..The Lucid won out..
The test was done by our senior engineer to show us (Producers) how much
of a difference there was btw clocking units.
What still amazes me is when he would dis-engage a unit(no clocking) btw
he 3 HD 192's...Just liek what Neil stated...Flubby mids and lows..Truth
is, that reminded me immediatly of how my Paris rig sounded...So, I was use
to mixing to that flub..ADN..get this....This scenario had nothing to do
with summing... As the HD system mentioned above was linked to an SSL G seriers
console...Still, with no clock, flub...Lucid..Tight round botom and mids...
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>Bill,
>
>The bottom line of all this is to reduce jitter as much as possible at all
>stages of the recording process. Jitter creates a lot of the *digital
>harshness* and midrange/low end flabbyness/wierdness that everyone complains
>about. To that end, as far as Paris is concerned, an external clock source
>makes quite an improvement. I tried to use the Paris D/A's to mix and was
>going crazy trying to nail the mid frequencies. I finally took my mix down
>to Catcusfire's studio in Taos (remember Andy?) and played it back through
a
>Cranesong HEDD and discovered that there was nothing wrong with the mids,
it
>was the D/A converters I was using (Paris on Paris clock). Not long
>afterwards, MikeClaytor came to Durango and brought a Benchmark DAC-1 and
we
>patched it into a mix and the difference was very obvious. Not long after
>that I got a Lucid GenX 6 and clocked my entire system to it. The A/D and
>D/A conversion (D/A's that I was using for processors on inserts) improved
>as well and the system, overall, exhibited more clarity, depth /better
>imaging. I would strongly recommend an external clock for any Paris user.
>
>As far as Cubase goes, I'm clocking my RME hardware to the BNC output of
a
>Mytek Stereo A/D. I think the RME hardware reclocks everything it sees to
>it's own internal clock, but I'm not sure exactly how they do this. At any
>rate, I am happy with whqat I'm getting from the 24 RME AD/DA's I've got
>here whether they are being clocked by the Mytek or whether the Mytek clock
>is being reclocked to the RME clock. I am still monitoring everyghing from
>the Benchmark DAC-1 and if I was recording to tape or something like a
>Masterlink, I'd be using the DAC-1 outputs to send the 2bus to the recorder
>and monitoring off the playback heads if it was an analog deck and making
>final mix decisions based on what the tape was telling me. As far as
>digital goes, I would not be making final tweak decisions by monitoring
off
>the D/A's of the mix deck because I could be certain that whatever the DAC-1
>was feeding the digital recorder would be what I''d (supposedly) end up
with
>as the final product and the digital deck's D/A's probably wouldn't be up
to
>the level of the DAC-1's D/A converters.
>
>Deej
>
>"Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:467d3c4b@linux...
>>I have not finished reading this thread because it seems moot, but in case
>>anyone else has not mentioned this obvious point, Dimitiros, the only way
>>to get a better in the box mix with converters is to use better A-D.
>>
>> Dimitrios wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds punch
>>> and
>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>>> effects
>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>> regards,
>>> Dimitrios
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87070 is a reply to message #87061] |
Sat, 23 June 2007 10:39 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
> and monitoring off the playback heads if it was an analog deck and making
> final mix decisions based on what the tape was telling me.
Arrrggghhhh!!!!......I meant the "repro head".
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote in message news:467d47ad@linux...
> Bill,
>
> The bottom line of all this is to reduce jitter as much as possible at all
> stages of the recording process. Jitter creates a lot of the *digital
> harshness* and midrange/low end flabbyness/wierdness that everyone
> complains about. To that end, as far as Paris is concerned, an external
> clock source makes quite an improvement. I tried to use the Paris D/A's to
> mix and was going crazy trying to nail the mid frequencies. I finally took
> my mix down to Catcusfire's studio in Taos (remember Andy?) and played it
> back through a Cranesong HEDD and discovered that there was nothing wrong
> with the mids, it was the D/A converters I was using (Paris on Paris
> clock). Not long afterwards, MikeClaytor came to Durango and brought a
> Benchmark DAC-1 and we patched it into a mix and the difference was very
> obvious. Not long after that I got a Lucid GenX 6 and clocked my entire
> system to it. The A/D and D/A conversion (D/A's that I was using for
> processors on inserts) improved as well and the system, overall, exhibited
> more clarity, depth /better imaging. I would strongly recommend an
> external clock for any Paris user.
>
> As far as Cubase goes, I'm clocking my RME hardware to the BNC output of a
> Mytek Stereo A/D. I think the RME hardware reclocks everything it sees to
> it's own internal clock, but I'm not sure exactly how they do this. At any
> rate, I am happy with whqat I'm getting from the 24 RME AD/DA's I've got
> here whether they are being clocked by the Mytek or whether the Mytek
> clock is being reclocked to the RME clock. I am still monitoring
> everyghing from the Benchmark DAC-1 and if I was recording to tape or
> something like a Masterlink, I'd be using the DAC-1 outputs to send the
> 2bus to the recorder and monitoring off the playback heads if it was an
> analog deck and making final mix decisions based on what the tape was
> telling me. As far as digital goes, I would not be making final tweak
> decisions by monitoring off the D/A's of the mix deck because I could be
> certain that whatever the DAC-1 was feeding the digital recorder would be
> what I''d (supposedly) end up with as the final product and the digital
> deck's D/A's probably wouldn't be up to the level of the DAC-1's D/A
> converters.
>
> Deej
>
> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:467d3c4b@linux...
>>I have not finished reading this thread because it seems moot, but in case
>>anyone else has not mentioned this obvious point, Dimitiros, the only way
>>to get a better in the box mix with converters is to use better A-D.
>>
>> Dimitrios wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> i was wondering if a great DA which opens up the stero field adds punch
>>> and
>>> clarity to sound reproduction etc can be recorded and so CAPTURE these
>>> effects
>>> on a stereo file, by recording the da's output using a good ad ??
>>> It sounds as it can be done but do I miss something here ?
>>> regards,
>>> Dimitrios
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87131 is a reply to message #87048] |
Sun, 24 June 2007 17:01 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Sorry I didn't respond to this earlier. I've been _very_ busy chasing girls
and playing golf.
I think we agree more than we don't here. But what we're talking about then
is recoding from source A to destination B and using the Mytek as an effect.
Which I think is insane but, yes, it's possible. Passing the sound out the
Mytek and then tracking it back via the Mytek seems more insane. But we're
talking about using a converter as an effect, and I guess its come to this.
TCB
"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>But you can't _record_ that.
>
>You can if you go out of the Mytek (or whatever's) analog outs
>to tape or another digital machine's analog in's... if that 2nd
>machine is clocked to the Mytek (or whatever's) clock, then it
>could preceiveably result in a higher-quality 2-track file.
>
>>Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF of
>>an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy
>>in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the worst)
>
>Oh, I'm not running down the RME stuff... I LOVE my Multifaces
>(Multifascia?). Are there better convertors? Apparently...
>though I don't know if a Mytek or Benchmark are among those.
>
>>and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark.
So
>>what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop, with
>>infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact same
>>file as the original. So why do it?
>
>To improve upon a convertor that may have a more jittery clock?
>I guess if he's going out of an RME's analog outs to 2-track
>tape, and he's hearing a difference with the Mytek's output,
>then that difference would be translated to tape.
>
>>Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter
>>is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter,
>>it can't any more than tape can have a head misaligned.
>
>What I said was that you can get jitter upon recording... that
>jitter you're stuck with - you can't get rid of it; and then you
>can also get additional jitter at playback.... if you're finding
>that using a different clock or set of convertors on playback
>improves things - that could be the reason it's doing so...
>you're eliminating or lessening the amount of playback jitter.
>
>>Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful,
>>will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better
>>will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME?
>
>I have no idea - frankly I'm surprised that someone's finding a
>better convertor set than RME stuff at any price point south of
>the super-ultra top-end gear. I'm just giving Dimi the benefit
>of the doubt for the sake of the current discussion.
>
>>I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly it
>>would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because
>>even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way on
>>other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row?
>
>The idea isn't that it's an "effect" that can be enhanced with
>cascading several of a given convertors, the idea is that it's
>(again, theoretically, assuming there IS an improvement that's
>being heard) kind of a sonic Windex that can remove grime in the
>form of artifacts created by jitter... using Windex (the non-
>sonic kind LOL) can only get a glass so clean, right? I mean if
>there's something embedded in the glass, Windex can't get that
>out, so if there's record-end jitter embedded in the source, you
>can't remove it, but playback-end jitter can be minimized or
>possibly even eliminated.
>
>
>>Will we get
>>incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth'
>with
>>each pass?
>
>Nope, you can only get the glass so clean... if there are newly-
>embedded jitter artifacts on a rendered file and you pass it
>through another stage, you can't get it any cleaner.
>We're not talking about rendering it more than once, we're
>talking about the one & only rendering of the final mix to a two-
>track file prior to mastering.
>
>Unless I'm misunderstanding something here.
>
>
>Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87169 is a reply to message #87131] |
Mon, 25 June 2007 07:32 |
Rich[3]
Messages: 132
Registered: January 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Sorry I didn't respond to this earlier. I've been _very_ busy chasing girls
>and playing golf.
Man I wish I was this busy...
I guess I'm surprised that the converters would make that much of a diference
that they would be used as an "effect"...
D your saying that they open things up enough to use them this way?
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>Sorry I didn't respond to this earlier. I've been _very_ busy chasing girls
>and playing golf.
>
>I think we agree more than we don't here. But what we're talking about then
>is recoding from source A to destination B and using the Mytek as an effect.
>Which I think is insane but, yes, it's possible. Passing the sound out the
>Mytek and then tracking it back via the Mytek seems more insane. But we're
>talking about using a converter as an effect, and I guess its come to this.
>
>
>TCB
>
>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>
>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>But you can't _record_ that.
>>
>>You can if you go out of the Mytek (or whatever's) analog outs
>>to tape or another digital machine's analog in's... if that 2nd
>>machine is clocked to the Mytek (or whatever's) clock, then it
>>could preceiveably result in a higher-quality 2-track file.
>>
>>>Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF of
>>>an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy
>>>in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the
worst)
>>
>>Oh, I'm not running down the RME stuff... I LOVE my Multifaces
>>(Multifascia?). Are there better convertors? Apparently...
>>though I don't know if a Mytek or Benchmark are among those.
>>
>>>and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark.
>So
>>>what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop, with
>>>infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact same
>>>file as the original. So why do it?
>>
>>To improve upon a convertor that may have a more jittery clock?
>>I guess if he's going out of an RME's analog outs to 2-track
>>tape, and he's hearing a difference with the Mytek's output,
>>then that difference would be translated to tape.
>>
>>>Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter
>>>is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter,
>>>it can't any more than tape can have a head misaligned.
>>
>>What I said was that you can get jitter upon recording... that
>>jitter you're stuck with - you can't get rid of it; and then you
>>can also get additional jitter at playback.... if you're finding
>>that using a different clock or set of convertors on playback
>>improves things - that could be the reason it's doing so...
>>you're eliminating or lessening the amount of playback jitter.
>>
>>>Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful,
>>>will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better
>>>will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME?
>>
>>I have no idea - frankly I'm surprised that someone's finding a
>>better convertor set than RME stuff at any price point south of
>>the super-ultra top-end gear. I'm just giving Dimi the benefit
>>of the doubt for the sake of the current discussion.
>>
>>>I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly
it
>>>would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because
>>>even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way
on
>>>other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row?
>>
>>The idea isn't that it's an "effect" that can be enhanced with
>>cascading several of a given convertors, the idea is that it's
>>(again, theoretically, assuming there IS an improvement that's
>>being heard) kind of a sonic Windex that can remove grime in the
>>form of artifacts created by jitter... using Windex (the non-
>>sonic kind LOL) can only get a glass so clean, right? I mean if
>>there's something embedded in the glass, Windex can't get that
>>out, so if there's record-end jitter embedded in the source, you
>>can't remove it, but playback-end jitter can be minimized or
>>possibly even eliminated.
>>
>>
>>>Will we get
>>>incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth'
>>with
>>>each pass?
>>
>>Nope, you can only get the glass so clean... if there are newly-
>>embedded jitter artifacts on a rendered file and you pass it
>>through another stage, you can't get it any cleaner.
>>We're not talking about rendering it more than once, we're
>>talking about the one & only rendering of the final mix to a two-
>>track file prior to mastering.
>>
>>Unless I'm misunderstanding something here.
>>
>>
>>Neil
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Can a DA change the sound of a mix if recorded ?? [message #87172 is a reply to message #87169] |
Mon, 25 June 2007 07:49 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey Rich,
If you track back up the thread you'll see me saying I think this is a crazy
idea, but yes, that's what Dimitrios is thinking about doing. Taking the
output from a high end D/A converter and recording that output to a second
source. Originally the idea was to loop it back through the same box and
the the A/D conversion but I pointed out that if the box is doing its job
then the net result should be a bit for bit copy of the original.
Personally I think this is an example of false precision, and I'm essentially
positive it would fail a test for diminishing returns. But hell, I'm deaf
anyway, and audiophiles pay over $1k for six feet of speaker cable and this
appears homespun farmer's almanac sensible compared to that.
TCB
"Rich" <studiodog_99@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Sorry I didn't respond to this earlier. I've been _very_ busy chasing girls
>>and playing golf.
>
>Man I wish I was this busy...
>
>I guess I'm surprised that the converters would make that much of a diference
>that they would be used as an "effect"...
>
>D your saying that they open things up enough to use them this way?
>
>
>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>
>>Sorry I didn't respond to this earlier. I've been _very_ busy chasing girls
>>and playing golf.
>>
>>I think we agree more than we don't here. But what we're talking about
then
>>is recoding from source A to destination B and using the Mytek as an effect.
>>Which I think is insane but, yes, it's possible. Passing the sound out
the
>>Mytek and then tracking it back via the Mytek seems more insane. But we're
>>talking about using a converter as an effect, and I guess its come to this.
>>
>>
>>TCB
>>
>>"Neil" <OIUOIU@OIU.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>But you can't _record_ that.
>>>
>>>You can if you go out of the Mytek (or whatever's) analog outs
>>>to tape or another digital machine's analog in's... if that 2nd
>>>machine is clocked to the Mytek (or whatever's) clock, then it
>>>could preceiveably result in a higher-quality 2-track file.
>>>
>>>>Put another way, if Dimitrios fed the SPDIF of
>>>>an RME Mutliface (BTW - running down RME gear on sonics is pretty ballsy
>>>>in my opinion. Maybe not the best in the world, but certainly not the
>worst)
>>>
>>>Oh, I'm not running down the RME stuff... I LOVE my Multifaces
>>>(Multifascia?). Are there better convertors? Apparently...
>>>though I don't know if a Mytek or Benchmark are among those.
>>>
>>>>and ran it through Deej's Benchmark it would sound like the Benchmark.
>>So
>>>>what Dimitrios is hearing is the converter. A perfect DA -> AD loop,
with
>>>>infinite sample rate and word length, would create exactly the exact
same
>>>>file as the original. So why do it?
>>>
>>>To improve upon a convertor that may have a more jittery clock?
>>>I guess if he's going out of an RME's analog outs to 2-track
>>>tape, and he's hearing a difference with the Mytek's output,
>>>then that difference would be translated to tape.
>>>
>>>>Clock jitter? You said yourself jitter
>>>>is a record/playback issue. The file doesn't have any jitter,
>>>>it can't any more than tape can have a head misaligned.
>>>
>>>What I said was that you can get jitter upon recording... that
>>>jitter you're stuck with - you can't get rid of it; and then you
>>>can also get additional jitter at playback.... if you're finding
>>>that using a different clock or set of convertors on playback
>>>improves things - that could be the reason it's doing so...
>>>you're eliminating or lessening the amount of playback jitter.
>>>
>>>>Even if the Mytek is used as an effect, if the RME converter is so awful,
>>>>will the Mytek'd file played through it sound better? And how much better
>>>>will the final playback devices be sonically than the RME?
>>>
>>>I have no idea - frankly I'm surprised that someone's finding a
>>>better convertor set than RME stuff at any price point south of
>>>the super-ultra top-end gear. I'm just giving Dimi the benefit
>>>of the doubt for the sake of the current discussion.
>>>
>>>>I'm saying this is a bad idea theoretically in that if done perfectly
>it
>>>>would just create a copy of the file, and a bad idea practically because
>>>>even if it's a good 'effect' it won't be audible in a significant way
>on
>>>>other equipment. I mean, why not Mytek it 10 times in a row?
>>>
>>>The idea isn't that it's an "effect" that can be enhanced with
>>>cascading several of a given convertors, the idea is that it's
>>>(again, theoretically, assuming there IS an improvement that's
>>>being heard) kind of a sonic Windex that can remove grime in the
>>>form of artifacts created by jitter... using Windex (the non-
>>>sonic kind LOL) can only get a glass so clean, right? I mean if
>>>there's something embedded in the glass, Windex can't get that
>>>out, so if there's record-end jitter embedded in the source, you
>>>can't remove it, but playback-end jitter can be minimized or
>>>possibly even eliminated.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Will we get
>>>>incremental (or maybe even compound) increases in 'clarity' and 'depth'
>>>with
>>>>each pass?
>>>
>>>Nope, you can only get the glass so clean... if there are newly-
>>>embedded jitter artifacts on a rendered file and you pass it
>>>through another stage, you can't get it any cleaner.
>>>We're not talking about rendering it more than once, we're
>>>talking about the one & only rendering of the final mix to a two-
>>>track file prior to mastering.
>>>
>>>Unless I'm misunderstanding something here.
>>>
>>>
>>>Neil
>>
>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Nov 19 03:49:21 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.05077 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
