Sound Quality in DP

[croyal]

Hey Timeline,

Because of the number of tracks involved, have you tried mixing using lower output levels? I know it shouldn't matter since you're summing OTB.- but try it. I've heard things clear a bit when not pushing the outputs to the max- and in your case a lot of outputs.

Just trim everything back by 3db or so.

Chris

[Archer]

Tripit,

I don't expect DP to work with DAE in the same way PT does. Plus floating point/fixed point math. Plus different bith depth. In PTHD it is possible to mix at lower levels because of the mix bus architecture/bit depth. Thanks to that, you can mix at lower level without loosing resolution. And it is virtually impossible to overload the mix bus.

<small>[ July 22, 2005, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: Archer ]</small>

[erockerboy]

Interesting debate - and one that has long been a hot topic for me personally.

For whatever it's worth - a few years ago, I sold all my Digi TDM cards and interfaces, and went w/ an all-native MOTU setup. There was a DEFINITE audio quality hit - but it took me months to realize it, let alone quantify it.

(Before anyone yells at me that "it's the converters" - I should point out that I was using the same console and converters with both setups. An Apogee AD-8000 for the front end and dual Yamaha 02R's for the back end, all clocked to Aardsync.)

In listening back to mixes done on my TDM rig vs. the MOTU kit, and also subjectively while mixing on the MOTU, I noticed a definite difference. The MOTU mixes sounded narrower and harsher, with less stereo spread and an overall "cloudiness" to the sound... less air on the top, less depth on the bottom. My old TDM mixes sounded bigger, wider, and more detailed by contrast.

After a few years of dealing with this, last year I finally got rid of all my MOTU interfaces and went back to Digidesign. Again, my converters and console are the same - I am using the exact same AD-8000 and 02R's that I was using 5 years ago. And again, I noticed the same diffs going back to Digi.

I hate to say it but to my ears at least, there definitely is something to the whole native vs. TDM debate. I am not shilling for Digidesign - indeed, I would still be on MOTU hardware were it not for the fact that both I and my production partners consistently felt like our MOTU setups were not giving us what we wanted sonically.

Digidesign is expensive, proprietary, and generally a pain in the ass to deal with in a lot of ways (especially if you are not using ProTools software as a front end - we are using Logic and DP here). Unfortunately, it does indeed seem to "sound better"... at least to all the sets of ears here at our shop.

Next stop: the Dangerous 2-Bus (we just ordered two). Lots of people seem to think it makes a big diff - can't wait to check it out myself.

Anyway, great discussion - carry on!

<small>[ July 22, 2005, 11:59 AM: Message edited by: Erik Huber ]</small>

[Timeline]

Croyal & Archar...

Yes, lowering the level does help I found out and I run the OP's at around +4 DBM. This sets my peaks about 3/4 scale on a HD192.

There is a subject that you have not brought up that is likely the 'real deal' relative to sound quality. Chip-sets used in OP drivers and driver circuit design.

The music industry is really dumb when it coms to cutting corners to save pennies. They will use really cheap amps and most don't care much about audio quality other than distortion specs.

Engineers who design electronics now build out IO's and likely don't listen to them or compare, as far as i can tell. If they did we would have better sonic products.

Years ago, JRC Japan developed a two chip OP that shared the + &- separately as a balanced OP feed thereby increasing headroom with +-15V rails to +27 without a transformer.

A cheap solution that MOTU uses today. The problem is, don't you dare load it with less than 10K or levels will drop like a rock.

This concept is still the common circuit used by all DACs Mfgs.

I happen to think the industry lacks the guts to build a transformer coupled studio quality DAC that would really kick the ass of every product out there sonically.

I'm not convinced that most sound issues are a digital problem at all with FPP engaged.
The UA 2192 is proof that it can be done although they skimped on the OP too but it sounds a billion % better on the input.

Balanced Class A front in A to D with a corresponding , discrete
Masenberg style balanced Class A or transformer coupled OP for each channel that can produce +27 or better would fix our woes. I would prefer the transformer personally and suggest Lundahls on every OP. (http://www.lundahl.se/)

It might be possible to add these to an HD192 for WAY improved tone. Yes, they are expensive but what a sound!

[Archer]

Programs working as front ends simply won't work in the same way PT does. And it is normal. Also, I don't trust translators, because floating and fixed point are like two different languages, and at some point during the process of translation errors (rounding, truncation) occur when going from one system to the other.

As it is not possible to make tests under the same lab conditions, a balanced comparison cannot be done. There are differences.

Does DP sound better than PTHD, or viceversa? Hmmm, do apples taste better than oranges? Hmm...

Honestly, both system allow users to get pro results.

[Archer]

Timeline,

yes, very often companies save money where they should invest it. That the sad part of the story. I'll take a look at the lundhal site, thx.
Recently I could listen to the apogee DA-16X, which also have an improved circuit desing. I liked it.

[joconnel]

Dp can run on PT hardware...

[joconnel]

oops, i was reading the wrong post....

[MT]

Originally posted by Erik Huber:
Next stop: the Dangerous 2-Bus (we just ordered two). Lots of people seem to think it makes a big diff - can't wait to check it out myself.

You'll notice a definite improvement. I certainly don't want to turn this thread into a summing argument, but I bought the LT last year and the difference it made wasn't even subtle. Totally and obvious widening. The Dangerous people are helpful as hell as well.

MT

[porieux]

dbs