Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Moderator: James Steele
Forum rules
Here's where to talk about preamps, cables, microphones, monitors, etc.
Here's where to talk about preamps, cables, microphones, monitors, etc.
- Kellog
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Black Mountain, NC
Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Looking at either an apogee rosetta 200, or go cheaper and just monitor with good D to A- then looking at the RME ADI2 or the DAC Benchmark. My question is if your are just monitoring through good DA, how much difference does it make to your mixes (cuz you cant maste through it, right? You just 'hear' better right?)?
I'm very excited to have a clearer listening field/experience. Should I spend the extra money to have 2 available channels going in thru good A to D as well. Does it make a huge difference. Any help greatly appreciated! Kelly
I'm very excited to have a clearer listening field/experience. Should I spend the extra money to have 2 available channels going in thru good A to D as well. Does it make a huge difference. Any help greatly appreciated! Kelly
Mac mini (2018) 3.2 Ghz 6 Core Intel Core i7 w/64 GB ram, OSX Catalina 10.15.7, DP 10.13, UAD Apollo Quad, Komplete 13 Ultimate, Superior Drummer 3, EZ Keys, EZ Bass, EZ Mix 2, Stylus RMX 1.7f, Avid Eleven Rack.
- HCMarkus
- Posts: 10090
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:01 am
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Rancho Bohemia, California
- Contact:
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
I suggest that you work with a retailer who will let you try before you buy. You may find the difference between your current set up an a "flagship" A/D/A to be either imperceptible or so subtle as to be immaterial. Just a thought... there's a lot of hype in this department.
- BradLyons
- Posts: 2635
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: Windows
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Contact:
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
DA conversion is one of the most important things to any studio, yet for home studios is rarely of the most concern. Instead too many get caught up in the best mics, pres, A/D converters, etc.....well that too is VERY important of course, but you can only hear what you are able to hear. In other words when your D/A conversion is not to the level that the rest of the gear is (or ahead of like it should be!) then you can't hear the issues, better placement of mics, selection of microphones etc. What I mean is when I record whether it's live or in the studio, I am constantly listening through my monitors to decide what is best BEFORE I record. This is where having great converters really do make a significant difference in a significant way. Does this mean your recordings will be better now? NO, it will not---nor does it mean that all of your problems are solved. BUT it will allow your monitors to do their job fully and even tell you if your monitors are failing you. It will let you hear what is really going on and allow you to make the mix changes you feel are needed based upon what you are able to hear.
With that said too many put their faith into just converters---thinking buy great converters and it doesn't matter how good the rest of the stuff is. Remember, converters only allow the other gear to do its job--it doesn't make up for not so great products.
There are some wonderful solutions, the Rosetta200 is certainly one of them. I used to own one myself, great box! What are you using right now? What monitors do you have as well? What about a monitor controller, do you have something like that?
As to "working with a retailer" HEY, I like that option
With that said too many put their faith into just converters---thinking buy great converters and it doesn't matter how good the rest of the stuff is. Remember, converters only allow the other gear to do its job--it doesn't make up for not so great products.
There are some wonderful solutions, the Rosetta200 is certainly one of them. I used to own one myself, great box! What are you using right now? What monitors do you have as well? What about a monitor controller, do you have something like that?
As to "working with a retailer" HEY, I like that option
Thank you,
Brad Lyons
db AUDIO & VIDEO
-Systems Advisor, CTS
Brad Lyons
db AUDIO & VIDEO
-Systems Advisor, CTS
- monkey man
- Posts: 13977
- Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Case in point:
To take Brad's example, you're choosing a microphone for an instrument/vocalist or indeed experimenting with its placement. Question: Will your choice of DA (say, MOTU 24I/O quality at the base sample rate of 44.1kHz) see your choosing a different mic from the one you might have chosen using even the very best technology has to offer?
Somehow, I doubt it.
Another: Will the EQ and dynamics decisions you make on an important (aren't they all?) mix differ in any meaningful, perceptible manner from those you'd have made using the latest and greatest converters?
I... doubt it, but am happy to be shown the light.
I s'pose what I'm saying is that the decisions and tweaks we make to our tracks and mixes are an order of magnitude more crude than the (comparatively) extremely subtle nuances of the various high sampling rates and DA specifications. Bit depth, on the other hand, could conceivably affect outcomes in readily-recognised ways, but then... we're all using at least 24bits for mixing these days.
FWIW, given the crudeness and radical nature with which we affect tracks and mixes, especially in pop music, I also feel that the aforementioned subtleties are all but lost where input (AD) is concerned too.
Brad's gonna hate me for sayin' this, but I'm just sayin' is all.
To take Brad's example, you're choosing a microphone for an instrument/vocalist or indeed experimenting with its placement. Question: Will your choice of DA (say, MOTU 24I/O quality at the base sample rate of 44.1kHz) see your choosing a different mic from the one you might have chosen using even the very best technology has to offer?
Somehow, I doubt it.
Another: Will the EQ and dynamics decisions you make on an important (aren't they all?) mix differ in any meaningful, perceptible manner from those you'd have made using the latest and greatest converters?
I... doubt it, but am happy to be shown the light.
I s'pose what I'm saying is that the decisions and tweaks we make to our tracks and mixes are an order of magnitude more crude than the (comparatively) extremely subtle nuances of the various high sampling rates and DA specifications. Bit depth, on the other hand, could conceivably affect outcomes in readily-recognised ways, but then... we're all using at least 24bits for mixing these days.
FWIW, given the crudeness and radical nature with which we affect tracks and mixes, especially in pop music, I also feel that the aforementioned subtleties are all but lost where input (AD) is concerned too.
Brad's gonna hate me for sayin' this, but I'm just sayin' is all.
Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack
Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here
- Kellog
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Black Mountain, NC
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Thanks Brad for the reply. I currently use 2 Motu 896's (one as master clock) firewired into my G5 running Dp 7.21. From DP out firewire into an 896, 896 main out into my Mackie 24 ch board (just 2 normal input channels- no eq added). From the board I use the main outs to my Mackie HR824's. I also use a sub-mix out to NS 10's w/a Klipsch Sub Woofer (consumer level).
I would like at least one set of monitors to get direct feed from a converter, no Mackie 'influence'.
I want the Rosetta 200 so I'd have clock, DA and also 2 channels of AD at my disposal when I'm not tracking large numbers (most of the time actually). $ may be an issue so I was thinking more like just DA for now to see what kind of difference I get. That would be perhaps the Benchmark DAC 1. Or RME 1?
How will the Apogee or Benchmark actually connect to my 896's? Thru adat optical, or AES? Will Apogrr/Benchmark and both 896's all be ok in one line going into the DAW? You can see I'm green in this area (AD/DA).
Thanks again
I would like at least one set of monitors to get direct feed from a converter, no Mackie 'influence'.
I want the Rosetta 200 so I'd have clock, DA and also 2 channels of AD at my disposal when I'm not tracking large numbers (most of the time actually). $ may be an issue so I was thinking more like just DA for now to see what kind of difference I get. That would be perhaps the Benchmark DAC 1. Or RME 1?
How will the Apogee or Benchmark actually connect to my 896's? Thru adat optical, or AES? Will Apogrr/Benchmark and both 896's all be ok in one line going into the DAW? You can see I'm green in this area (AD/DA).
Thanks again
Mac mini (2018) 3.2 Ghz 6 Core Intel Core i7 w/64 GB ram, OSX Catalina 10.15.7, DP 10.13, UAD Apollo Quad, Komplete 13 Ultimate, Superior Drummer 3, EZ Keys, EZ Bass, EZ Mix 2, Stylus RMX 1.7f, Avid Eleven Rack.
- Kellog
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Black Mountain, NC
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
So Monkey Man, I guess you don't use dedicated (pricey!) AD/DA? I was wondering the same thing last night working on a mix- making eq changes and hearing them happen (I think-can't really upgrade my ears... now there's an industry waiting to happen!) Thanks for reply.
Mac mini (2018) 3.2 Ghz 6 Core Intel Core i7 w/64 GB ram, OSX Catalina 10.15.7, DP 10.13, UAD Apollo Quad, Komplete 13 Ultimate, Superior Drummer 3, EZ Keys, EZ Bass, EZ Mix 2, Stylus RMX 1.7f, Avid Eleven Rack.
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Here's a few things I've learned to be true:
• You can't work properly on what you can't hear properly, so great monitoring is imperative. (Yes, you absolutely WILL pick different mics and set your EQ and compressors vastly different, depending on the quality of your monitoring...)
• Your room's acoustics are BY FAR the single most important ingredient for great monitoring. Don't even THINK about first-class speakers, amps or DA until you take care of that.
• Once your room is treated OK, good speakers are the next important step. If they are passive, be sure to pair them with an equally good amp.
• Once you have good speakers/amp inside a good room, only then is improving the DA the next step. But you will be positively floored by the difference between a decent DA and a great DA, provided you have a good room and good speakers to monitor.
• Once you have all of the above taken care of, your engineering and mixing skills (as well as the quality of your arrangements in terms of blend, density etc.) will improve considerably. (...kinda like your target shooting skills would, after you put on the proper prescription glasses.)
• Regardless of how well you can monitor, mix, make mic, EQ and compressor decisions, etc., if the music is crap it'll still be crap, albeit recorded and mixed better, which actually sometimes only emphasizes just how crap the crap in question really is...
This is what I know to be true. YMMV.
(I only write "YMMV" because it's the polite thing to do, but to be honest, unless your hearing/listening skills are mediocre to poor, in which case of course none of this makes much difference at all until you improve those skills, this is pretty much the way it is... and to improve your listening skills it's important to have good monitoring, so we're back at YM won't vary at all...)
• You can't work properly on what you can't hear properly, so great monitoring is imperative. (Yes, you absolutely WILL pick different mics and set your EQ and compressors vastly different, depending on the quality of your monitoring...)
• Your room's acoustics are BY FAR the single most important ingredient for great monitoring. Don't even THINK about first-class speakers, amps or DA until you take care of that.
• Once your room is treated OK, good speakers are the next important step. If they are passive, be sure to pair them with an equally good amp.
• Once you have good speakers/amp inside a good room, only then is improving the DA the next step. But you will be positively floored by the difference between a decent DA and a great DA, provided you have a good room and good speakers to monitor.
• Once you have all of the above taken care of, your engineering and mixing skills (as well as the quality of your arrangements in terms of blend, density etc.) will improve considerably. (...kinda like your target shooting skills would, after you put on the proper prescription glasses.)
• Regardless of how well you can monitor, mix, make mic, EQ and compressor decisions, etc., if the music is crap it'll still be crap, albeit recorded and mixed better, which actually sometimes only emphasizes just how crap the crap in question really is...
This is what I know to be true. YMMV.
(I only write "YMMV" because it's the polite thing to do, but to be honest, unless your hearing/listening skills are mediocre to poor, in which case of course none of this makes much difference at all until you improve those skills, this is pretty much the way it is... and to improve your listening skills it's important to have good monitoring, so we're back at YM won't vary at all...)
-
- Posts: 1028
- Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: North America
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Aside from the potential improvements to the A/D or D/A process itself, there's something to be said for having dedicated converters, separate from your interface. Doing so allows you to treat the questions "What do I need from an audio interface?" and "What do I need from an A/D or D/A converter?" separately. Computer needs tend to change much more frequently than converter needs. For example, the PCI slot standard du jour changed from regular PCI to PCI-X to PCIe in, what, five years?
It may well be that you'd be best served by an interface that's also as your primary A/D and D/A (I am), but it's worth considering.
It may well be that you'd be best served by an interface that's also as your primary A/D and D/A (I am), but it's worth considering.
"I don't see any method at all, sir."
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
A friend of mine has a home studio that is based on M-Audio Fast Track and Protools. He got in over his head on a project and I offered to help him finish it. He brought his M-Audio unit and a laptop with all his project files. No matter what we did we couldn't get a good mix. I talked him into exporting his project so I could port it to DP and we could use my converters (Apogee Rosetta 800). Wow! The difference was like night and day. I always thought that the difference between converters (particularly D/A) was splitting hairs, but I was so wrong. It was like a veil was lifted off the music. And, this was AFTER it had all been tracked in Protools with his Fast Track. I'm sold, Brad is right. D/A's make a big difference.
Phil
edit: Wait, did I say, "Brad is right?" Don't let him know I said that.
Phil
edit: Wait, did I say, "Brad is right?" Don't let him know I said that.
DP 11.32, 2020 M1 Mac Mini [9,1] (16 Gig RAM), Mac Pro 3GHz 8 core [6,1] (16 Gig RAM), OS 14.6.1/11.6.2, Lynx Aurora (n) 8tb, MOTU 8pre-es, MOTU M6, MOTU 828, Apogee Rosetta 800, UAD-2 Satellite, a truckload of outboard gear and plug-ins, and a partridge in a pear tree.
- BradLyons
- Posts: 2635
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: Windows
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Contact:
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
But I'm always right, PhilPhil O wrote:A friend of mine has a home studio that is based on M-Audio Fast Track and Protools. He got in over his head on a project and I offered to help him finish it. He brought his M-Audio unit and a laptop with all his project files. No matter what we did we couldn't get a good mix. I talked him into exporting his project so I could port it to DP and we could use my converters (Apogee Rosetta 800). Wow! The difference was like night and day. I always thought that the difference between converters (particularly D/A) was splitting hairs, but I was so wrong. It was like a veil was lifted off the music. And, this was AFTER it had all been tracked in Protools with his Fast Track. I'm sold, Brad is right. D/A's make a big difference.
Phil
edit: Wait, did I say, "Brad is right?" Don't let him know I said that.
Thank you,
Brad Lyons
db AUDIO & VIDEO
-Systems Advisor, CTS
Brad Lyons
db AUDIO & VIDEO
-Systems Advisor, CTS
- Kellog
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Black Mountain, NC
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Lots of great insights and opinions guys, thanks! Not sure what I'm gonna do. I treated my room with some professional advising, but still not positive of it's effective-ness. Looking for maybe an iPhone app that'll measure frequencies at my mixpoint (while doubting how precise that could be, and wondering if I can analyze the findings myself...). The search for audio bliss continues. Thanks again all posters!
Mac mini (2018) 3.2 Ghz 6 Core Intel Core i7 w/64 GB ram, OSX Catalina 10.15.7, DP 10.13, UAD Apollo Quad, Komplete 13 Ultimate, Superior Drummer 3, EZ Keys, EZ Bass, EZ Mix 2, Stylus RMX 1.7f, Avid Eleven Rack.
- monkey man
- Posts: 13977
- Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Well there you go. Proof that I'm but a fool, a punk with toilet water behind his ears, as I like to say.
Brad, there's no need to be mad with me now.
Brad, there's no need to be mad with me now.
Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack
Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Here's a few tests you can do with the by far best equipment for the purpose - your ears! (MUCH better than any iPhone app could hope to be.)Kellog wrote:Lots of great insights and opinions guys, thanks! Not sure what I'm gonna do. I treated my room with some professional advising, but still not positive of it's effective-ness. Looking for maybe an iPhone app that'll measure frequencies at my mixpoint (while doubting how precise that could be, and wondering if I can analyze the findings myself...). The search for audio bliss continues. Thanks again all posters!
This is from another thread a little while ago, so ignore the references to the other guy's studio...:
To check, test a few things: play a mix in mono panned center, and at fairly low volume. Sit in your mixing position and close your eyes. The music should be dead center and sound absolutely tiny, as if it came from the head of a needle right in front of you. I wouldn't be surprised if yours retained a certain amount of width and space within the music. That's caused by reflections that muck up your frequency response and transient response.
Next, play a sine wave sweep ("AudioTest" will generate one for you) across the entire spectrum, 20Hz to 20kHz, at nice medium volume, close to the volume you monitor music in. Again mono, panned center. Close your eyes and listen intently. First off you'll hear nothing (on the NS10s you won't reach full volume until you're getting past 100Hz. Not sure how far down the Genes go, probably a bit farther.) Then you'll hear volume changes as the wave passes through the spectrum. My guess is you'll hear fairly substantial changes in volume. I wouldn't be surprised if you had at least two or three major ones, somewhere between 180 and 600 Hz, and with well over 8 or 9dB in volume difference. If you let the sweep complete the full range rather quickly, within about 10-15 sec, the volume changes will be very obvious, like someone playing with the volume knob as the sine wave sweeps. Those theoretically shouldn't be there at all, realistically they should be minute. They indicate frequency ranges that get cancelled out, or amplified due to reflections in your room. Also the wave should stay dead center in front of you, I wouldn't be surprised if you detected some lateral movement in the sweep.
- Kellog
- Posts: 305
- Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Black Mountain, NC
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Thanks Kubi, checking out Audio Test...
Mac mini (2018) 3.2 Ghz 6 Core Intel Core i7 w/64 GB ram, OSX Catalina 10.15.7, DP 10.13, UAD Apollo Quad, Komplete 13 Ultimate, Superior Drummer 3, EZ Keys, EZ Bass, EZ Mix 2, Stylus RMX 1.7f, Avid Eleven Rack.
- HCMarkus
- Posts: 10090
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 9:01 am
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Rancho Bohemia, California
- Contact:
Re: Are you guys using AD/DA conversion? What's best?
Respecting as I do Kubi, Phil, and Brad's comments regarding conversion (and particularly Kubi's remarks about rooms and speakers), I have a real issue with a lot of "high end" audio gear, converters included: The absence of any specifications (THD, IMD, S/N Ratio) from the available literature. In my experience when objective scientific measurements are ignored in favor of subjective experiential description, something is very likely rotten in Denmark.
So, where's the beef when it comes to conversion?
So, where's the beef when it comes to conversion?