Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32

Thread: Here's the tentative list-thoughts?

  1. #21
    Haigbabe's Avatar
    Haigbabe is offline 3D VIP 2004, '05, '06, '07, '08, '09, '10, '11, '12
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,714
    This is an area of great interest to a number of us and hopefully we can see a great result.

    I recently used an ESI souncard (Ego-sys) for mixing a Jazz CD (Nuendo as the editor) and the converters were very good. It is the Waveterminal 192X 2in/6out 24/192 AD- 24/192 DA.

    Considering the current advances in technology such as this, it would be extremely useful to compare this card with current RME stand alone converters. Also a comparison with the TangoII card (which is touted as being the "best soundcard ever" [Sound on Sound]) would be useful. (I don't think they would mind being tested, even if they are slow in responding at present.)

    Respectfully,

    Haigbabe
    Proud supporter of 3D as a 2012 3D VIP

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    25
    I think it would be interesting to see how the digi 96 interface compares to the 192. Many people are debating whether its worth it to go all out for the 192 or not...Also there is speculation that digi might have "dumbed down" the 96 converters so that people would have a reason to go for 192...

    p.s. I emailed the DB tech guy to try and get him to send a test unit...

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    25
    I also think it would be cool to include a converter that is considered absolute crap. Something consumer and cheap and just pure crap. This would provide a reference to see exactly what a really bad converter can do to audio, and could give at least a clue as to what kind of things to listen for in the tests.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN, USA
    Posts
    27,246
    Originally posted by Haigbabe:
    <STRONG>This is an area of great interest to a number of us and hopefully we can see a great result.

    Considering the current advances in technology such as this, it would be extremely useful to compare this card with current RME stand alone converters. Also a comparison with the TangoII card (which is touted as being the "best soundcard ever" [Sound on Sound]) would be useful. (I don't think they would mind being tested, even if they are slow in responding at present.)
    </STRONG>
    They aren't slow in responding. They don't want to be involved. They declined my invitation. As did dB Tech.
    Lynn Fuston
    3D Audio

    Making beautiful music SEEM easy since 1979.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN, USA
    Posts
    27,246
    Originally posted by emilano:
    <STRONG>I also think it would be cool to include a converter that is considered absolute crap. Something consumer and cheap and just pure crap. This would provide a reference to see exactly what a really bad converter can do to audio, and could give at least a clue as to what kind of things to listen for in the tests.</STRONG>
    I have decided to throw in the oldest sound card that I know of, which is the Audio Media II, dating back to 1985 or so. It has an analog noise floor (no matter what the specs claim) of about -56 dB. After debating its inclusion for a while, I decided to use it as a historical and budgetary benchmark. Even as recently as 1995, these NuBus cards were selling for over (or right at) $1000. That will give us a good idea of how far we've come.

    As far as including the HD192 and the HD96 interface, Digi has suggested that I use the 192 instead of the 96. They are not the same converter design and the 192 is supposedly far superior to the 96. That will mean having an AMII, Digi 001, an 888|24, and the HD 192 in the lineup. That's 10% of the slots I have available. In fairness to the other mfrs., and there are a lot of them, I can't give up another slot for Digi. There are already more ADCs than I have room for on the CD.
    Lynn Fuston
    3D Audio

    Making beautiful music SEEM easy since 1979.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    350
    Originally posted by 3D Audio Inc.:
    <STRONG>

    There are already more ADCs than I have room for on the CD.</STRONG>

    Then you aren't going to like this suggestion very much, Lynn.

    In thinking about the post about including some converters to give a frame of reference, I wondered if you are planning to include a good quality 20 bit converter on the CD?

    My reason for suggesting this is that it might help to show that it isn't all just the number of bits in the specs.

    If you still have your 20 bit Mytek AD, you might include it just to show that a 20 bit ADC done right can sound better than many 24 bit converters.

    It may also help for those interested in higher end ADCs by showing that higher bit depths do matter when it is done right (and how much it helps), for example, 20 bit Mytek vs 24 bit Mytek. I think you already were planning on including the latter.

    Most importantly, it might help the cause of encouraging listening rather than spec reading.

    One last thought. Have you considered adding to the CD "Includes an option for assessing your monitoring setup" (grin)? Seriously, many of the differences are going to be subtle and will challenge a less than optimal monitoring setup.

    John www.springstonestudio.com

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    83
    I personally have no interest in 20 bit converters, and don't care if a good 20 bit converter compares favorably to a poor 24 bit converter. I'll never buy a 20 bit converter at this point, so putting them on the CD is a total waste of space in my opinion. That ship has sailed.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    350
    And what if a good quality 20 bit converter sounds as good or better than a good quality (not poor quality as you suggested I intended) 24 bit converter? Will you still junk your 20 bit converters and blow $5K, give or take a few, just because it is 24 bit?

    I'm not suggesting that anyone is likely to go out and buy a 20 bit converter - although some may still be interested in them on the used market.

    I'm interested in looking at the relative gains that each new generation of ADC offers. Just comparing what is currently available doesn't help me one bit (so to speak) in deciding whether I should upgrade or not. I have done A/B comparisons in my studio of good quality 20 bit converters with **good** quality 24 bit converters (such as the AKM 5393) and depending on the unit, 20 bit can sound better. Much depends on the analog front end, the way clocking is handled, degree of jitter, etc.

    As the converters have become more linear, etc., thermal noise and other aspects of the analog front end are becoming more and more important. If we haven't hit the limit already, we will soon (I'm still anxious to hear DSD, though).

    It is pretty much assured that no 24 bit converter delivers 24 true bits of audio information. The point that I was making is that it is getting near time to stop looking at the marketing bits. Sure, in pursuit of the ultimate ADC, there have been some recent improvements that came from improved converters.

    But, I think the biggest gains are happening with the units that have improved the analog part of the ADC.

    As I said, "Most importantly, it might help the cause of encouraging listening rather than spec reading."

    Peace,

    John

    Originally posted by Albert:
    <STRONG>I personally have no interest in 20 bit converters, and don't care if a good 20 bit converter compares favorably to a poor 24 bit converter. I'll never buy a 20 bit converter at this point, so putting them on the CD is a total waste of space in my opinion. That ship has sailed.</STRONG>

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Songwriter Gulch, Nashville TN
    Posts
    516
    An old friend tells me that just substituting a 24 bit chip in a circuit that was originally designed for an 18 or 20 bit part offers little or no improvement. On the other hand the new chips offer you the opportunity to use differential connections to the chips that can offer a 20dB+ improvement in RFI. Until manufacturers learn how to use these chips, the results are likely to be all over the map but there is a huge possibility of some real "giant-killers" turning up.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Lyn, someone else suggested that you add the DAD stuff to your list, I think that's a must...I would also suggest the merging sphynx which is another serious contender as well as it's lower cost little brother the DUALL. These are little known, but impeccable options.

    Jay

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Maintaining a baseline Mic & Pre List?!?!
    By DonM in forum Microphones and Preamps
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-01-2005, 04:28 PM
  2. Sennheiser 421 || vs 421 U5 thoughts?
    By amixer in forum Microphones and Preamps
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-07-2004, 06:49 PM
  3. Replies: 51
    Last Post: 08-26-2004, 08:10 PM
  4. How about a "home Run front end" list?
    By john parry in forum Microphones and Preamps
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-09-2002, 01:35 AM
  5. Thoughts on compressing & eq'ing a final mix to DAT.
    By long day fall in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-05-2002, 03:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •