| Author
|
If your mixes lie to you...read this....
|
ess765
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
25
Posts :
169
Posted : May 20, 2007 21:39
|
I rarely see people here concerned with the quality of the converters when monitoring during mixing or mastering process. Of course budget might be a reason; but when you ask yourself why your personaly mixed and mastered tracks tells you there s some important details lacking, although you have good monitors, your poor quality converters from your popular soundcard(like m audio, etc)might be a possible answer.
Of course we can t afford and go up in price for units like Prism, that can make it cost more than U$10000,00 for d/a converters. Maybe we can t go to a midrange prices gear such as Lynx, Apogee, Lavry Engineering and Benchmarch around U$3000.00.
But the good news are that each time more, those nice companies have been working hard and bringing us real affordable units around U$1000.00. So that s real nice sugestions for you people that would ike to compose, mix and master at your homestudio without having poor mixes due to poor monitoring once no monitor can perform miracles one they are not fed by pristine quality signal.
So, I ve tested at a friend s studio some d/a converter to monitor and I m really impressed with the details you can get. I simply can t describe it for you. As many other people might think, Apogee is not the only or even best option. I ll tell you people 2 real amazing brands that whenever you decide to go for nice converters, under a reasonable budget but with real pro results:
1 - Lavry engineering DA10
http://www.lavryengineering.com/index_flash.html
2 - Benchmark DAC1
http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/dac1/
Here are 2 interesting reviews about those 2 products:
http://studioforums.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/694106689/m/6611090261/p/1
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=161032
Another insteresting detail abut windows xp and vista native digital mixers capability described by Benchmarks engineers at their website:
"Microsoft Windows® Test Results
Windows® 2000 and XP operating systems have a digital mixer known as 'Kmixer'. All audio streams must go through the Windows® Kmixer to reach native USB audio devices. The performance of Kmixer is critical to any native USB audio solution, so we tested it extensively.
We found that Kmixer can perform with full or near full bit-transparency under the right conditions. But, under the wrong conditions, Kmixer can do a great deal of damage.
Kmixer's sample-rate-conversion is of very poor quality (under XP and 2000) and must be avoided. Benchmark's Advance USB Audio solution allows Kmixer to default to a transparent mode of operation that avoids sample rate conversion.
In contrast, sample-rate-conversion is outstanding in Vista. By default, Vista up- samples to the highest sample rate supported by the connected audio device. This up- sampling is so well designed that it should not be capable of generating audible artifacts. Nevertheless, if true bit-transparent operation is desired, Vista.s sample rate conversion can be tuned of by manually setting the system sample rate.
In any Windows® operating system, true bit- transparency is only achieved when the 'Wave' volume control is set to maximum. Nevertheless, we discovered that the Windows® volume controls are very well executed and are distortion-free when streaming to a 24-bit output device."
Of course there are other options such as Apogee mini DAC, etc...but I tested those 2 units above and believe me they really impressed me...
Regards to all..
  Ess765 (aka Physical Absence)
Visit me at my project s page at:
www.myspace.com/physicalabsence
"when you think you know all the answers, life suddenly changes all the questions" |
|
|
|
orange
Fat Data
Started Topics :
154
Posts :
3918
Posted : May 20, 2007 21:53
|
|
astrotec
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
193
Posted : May 20, 2007 23:03
|
|
the digidesign M-Box has focusrite converters in it, which are alright and not too expensive either. |
|
|
|
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
162
Posts :
8087
Posted : May 20, 2007 23:17
|
|
if you need a good a/d yes why not but just for the d/a it s too expensive for the small jump in quality if you have already a rme or a lynx soundcard,the room acoustic must be good before imo (maybe i m wrong ,but i dont think a good d/a ll make my mix translate better) |
|
|
|
Get-a-fix
Getafix
Started Topics :
147
Posts :
1441
Posted : May 20, 2007 23:21
|
|
Seppa
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
485
Posted : May 20, 2007 23:26
|
Yes converters are important especially if you have external sources coming into your DAW.
This is why I use 2 rme fireface 400 which have good converters and good preamps. I can mix knowing that The signal fed to the speakers is descent.
on gear slut many test have been conducted comparing rme 400 converters to rosetta's and many people including me actually prefered the rme (but that just opinions
so I don't think the need to go and spend £ 2000 is necessary for home studio. if people could spend a little extra on the audio interface they would save a whole lot by not buying converters.
I see people buying motu 828, ultralight, emu, focusright, they are cheaper but not that much cheaper. the converters are descent but not good.
On the other hand spending thousands on high end hardware isn't something everybody can afford and having expensive converters is not gonna make you mix any better. I've seen people mixing on well done but humble setups and getting a descent sounding mix, so skills are important here.
|
|
|
|
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
162
Posts :
8087
Posted : May 20, 2007 23:27
|
|
i ll say these are "pro" and the fireface semi pro. |
|
|
|
Psytracked
Inactive User
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
424
Posted : Sep 25, 2007 19:58
|
Quote:
|
On 2007-05-20 23:03, astrotec wrote:
the digidesign M-Box has focusrite converters in it, which are alright and not too expensive either.
|
|
Sorry the mic preamps are by focusrite. And these are bus powered so are not capable of achieving the S/N ratio of a mains powered unit. |
|
|
|
brasirc
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
299
Posted : Sep 26, 2007 00:25
|
yeah well, get used to mixing on more common monitors first, getting to know your own monitor flaws and sound distortions in any way, and learning the way around them, comparing to pro-sourced material checking how those sound off in your system...
theeeeen when you`re confortable, consider buying $1000+ equip, after all, they wont make any magic by themselves, right? =p
un-fucking-believable |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : Sep 26, 2007 06:11
|
There are much more reasons to having a "lying mix". Acoustics, your ear, etc.
Spending so much on converters and psuedo-usb-stuff will hardly improve anything.
|
|
|
|
rodrigosmaniotto
Started Topics :
0
Posts :
13
Posted : Sep 26, 2007 06:16
|
|
the last two posts are very wise i guess |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Sep 26, 2007 09:52
|
I personally find that A/D conversion really is underestimated, but anyway not so important for most of the "in the box" musician.
D/A is what we all have to deal with. And I personally, with my speakers (bm6a) a relatively well room, mediocre cables can hear differences between my fireface800 and my NI kontrol and my laptop soundcard, but not in between my RME adi2 and the fireface800.. furthermore I can hear a difference between the kontrol and the RME but I wouldn't say that its better or worse...
I would say, that in D/A the difference achieved by a +1000$ converter is not audible with speakers, rooms and cables in our range.
Probably I'm wrong. but I believe buying a +1000$ converter and connecting it with 50$ cables to maybe 2000$ speakers doesn't bring anything.
Different with D/A - A/D and sending stuff over mastering geat etc. of course.
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
Elad
Tsabeat/Sattel Battle
Started Topics :
158
Posts :
5306
Posted : Sep 26, 2007 11:25
|
why mix lie to you ??? there is much more then fancy convertors 100%.
1.damaged ears
2.cheap speakers (include cheap monitors like beringer or m-audio , samson etc.)
3.acoutstics
4.lack of understand what u realy want and how to achieve it
5.quality of synths most use - vst, is not always the best option specialy if u dont have monster cpu
6.lack of balls try something out of the box
7.here might be your convertor quality and cables , mixer etc.
offcourse the better the gear is the better the sound is , but compare to the list i mention i think it shouldnt be on spotlight, not for begginers anywayz
8.poor mastering
9.wrong stereo image in the room
10. now is the time to get RME 
www.sattelbattle.com
http://yoavweinberg.weebly.com/ |
|
|
|
shamantrixx
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
549
Posted : Sep 26, 2007 13:34
|
I have to say that this first post is nothing more than an advertising trick for boosting sales of Vista platforms. On a local (ex Yu) forum we have done numerous tests of summing the audio tracks on different gear. Tests included various outboard gear (analog tables such as neve and ssl) as well as various Mac and PC sequencers mostly with soundcards like rme, m-audio, creamware etc. Test ware made with different materials ranging from test signals to entire mixdowns.
From many test I've heard I can say this:
1. AD converters DO matter a lot. Tracks summed on HD-3 sound better than any other. Test was blind and the tracks ware labeled as A, B, C, D, E etc. So only after the voting we find out who is the winner.
The difference is very obvious on my 400 Eur monitors with 50 Eur cabels in my non treated studio/living room. So each euro invested in this direction will make a difference.
2. Outboard gear can add subjective warmth in few cases. Mix desks like SSL can add some extra punch and warmth but such equipment is very, very expensive and hard to find even if you have that small fortune available.
However... 90% of outboard gear will add noise and distortion to the signal. Digital sound is noise free as long as it's in the box!!!
3. Even compared with extra expensive SSL tables mix "in the box" can get equally good (when using same prerecorded material). Mix "in the box" was done on Win XP with Cubase and plugs like Vintage Warmer, Waves etc. There is a difference between ITB and OTB mixes but voting showed 50:50 results before we found out which is which. Both sounded good... difference was subtle and subjective.
So screw Vista and save the money for something that will make a difference. When used right and with adequate knowledge m-audio card running cubase on Win XP can get so close to pro outboard gear with pro AD converters that it's impossible to spot a difference on a blind test. Surely... with SSL table you'll make it faster since everything is optimized with years and years of manufacturing experience and place under your fingertips. But few of us are paid to mix an album per week where such equipment is wort having.
"It occurred to me by intuition, and music was the driving force behind that intuition. My discovery was the result of musical perception"
Albert Einstein, speaking about his theory of relativity |
|
|
|
Chemogen
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
166
Posts :
713
Posted : Oct 2, 2007 20:15
|
|
How can one tell if they've damaged their ears, though? I was listening to Metal at high volumes on my iPod for years, I don't have any ringing or hearing damage and thing I can discern the differences between frequencies quite well, but how can I be sure I'm not hearing things totally different to everyone else? |
|
|
|
