Basic question: What would a MasterLink provide?

[Mike H]

This is a really newbie question. I note quite a number of members have MasterLinks, and I am wondering exactly what benefits one would provide to me. Just a lack of understanding on my part.

I have a ProTools HD system that I am just configuring so that I do processing in outboard gear rather than "in-the-box" (thanks to all for your help in configuring this).

My planned method of storing my final mixes and burning CD's is as follows (assuming the session will be 96/24 in the extreme case):
-Running the mix stems out thru D/A's to outboard processing, then to analog summing, then to a HEDD, then back into ProTools.
-Printing this stereo mix to a new track in the same 96/24 session.
-Bouncing the mix track to disk at 44.1/24, using ProTools to SRC.
-Importing the bounced file into a new 44.1/24 PT session.
-Bouncing the file to disk at 44.1/16, using POW-R for dithering (or Crane Song dither CD).
-Dragging the 44.1/16 file into Toast and burning a CD with my DVD/CD burner in my Mac G4.

Would I gain some big advantages if I had a MasterLink for burning the CD? Is the software for arranging and burning a CD more sophisticated than Toast (or Jam)?

I wouldn't think I would use the MasterLink converters, EQ, compression, limiting, etc. (versus the other outboard gear I have: HEDD, Trakkers, MP, etc.).

One limitation I see is I'm stuck in ProTools/Mac for generating the CD, so I can't use outboard gear for SRC or dithering, because I have to work in one PT session at a time. For example, I can't use the HEDD dither (unless I can just add the dither when going back into ProTools). Not sure this is an issue.

Maybe the advantage is that it better prepares material for shipping to a Mastering studio. Are there plusses here? I do note the CD24 format. But can't I just send the material to a Mastering studio as WAV files on a DVD, or external hard drive, in the original session sample rate?

Any help would be appreciated!!

Thanks,
Mike

[Marshall Simmons]

you would basically place the masterling after you analogue summing. You would set the hedd to be the converter for the masterlink and use it to record as high of a sample rate as you can to send to the mastering engineer.


If you are going to be mastering yourself, i'd reccommend doing the same thing (since most people think that the summing outside of the box is better) then go back out of the masterlink via the hedd, go through your analogue chain to master, and back into the hedd at 16/44 to the masterlink again.


Honestly, i don't really see a reason for you to have it.... your computer will do everything that the masterlink will do.

unless your setup was completely analogue, or if you were doing 2 track remotes.... stick with your current setup.



If you use the hedd to sample rate convert, you can skip several steps. becuase you are going analogue then back to digital, if the input is coming back as 16/44 you do not need to dither, since analogue "does it for you"


I guess since you cant have multiple sample rates in ptools the beinifit of the masterlink is there, but there has to be a simpler way of ding it, without having to sample rate convert in the box, and dither in the box. There isn't any reason to do it after going analogue


marshy marsh

[AAsa]

Mike

I don't understand the steps of bouncing from 96/24 to 44/24 then to 44/16.

To me that's an extra bounce...no matter.

I bounce to disk @ 44/24 thru my outboard and a dangerous 2 bus making a stereo file. When I drag the file to Itunes, it automatically makes a 16 bit copy for buning, leaving the 24 bit file alone.

As far as the Masterlink...one advantage is that you can print your mix at a higher s/r than your session (if you're tracking @ 44 or 48).
It may help with cataloging masters and mixes...having a hard copy CD as opposed to a file floating around in you're computer.

For a while, instead of bouncing to disk I would print to a second computer directly into Peak which does record stereo. Then I could edit etc and burn a disc from there.

One limitation I see is I'm stuck in ProTools/Mac for generating the CD, so I can't use outboard gear for SRC or dithering, because I have to work in one PT session at a time.

This should work.... record your mix back to PT as two mono files, then you could use your Hedd for SRC by inserting it on a master fader and bouncing to stereo. Maybe not, does the session determine the bouce to disk parameters?

If you have a second CPU already, for a little money you could set it up to function as your master recorder.

just a/some thought/s

carry on.

[Marshall Simmons]

when you drag a 24 bit file into itunes, it truncates instead of dithering

[Mike H]

If I've got this right, it would be a "convenience device" by enabling me to more easily burn a CD. Instead of going back into ProTools from the HEDD, I'd SRC (and dither??) with the HEDD, direct to MasterLink. Burn the CD with MasterLink. No bounces, no opening a new session in ProTools, no fooling with Toast, etc.

This also allows me the flexibility to use the HEDD for SRC and dither. However, it also has the disadvantage that I could not use POW-R for dither, which I would normally do "in-the-box".

Have I summarized this correctly?

I don't really see any other plusses for my particular situation.

On the other hand, the "convenience" plus is not trivial. Every time I now want to do a test CD, it is a PITA. Worth thinking about.

Have I missed anything?

Oh, one other item: I don't often mix in surround, but when I do I burn CD's with SmartCode Pro/DTS-CD. I assume I can't do anything in surround with MasterLink, so it wouldn't get used for surround mixes. Correct?

Thanks!
Mike

[Marshall Simmons]

YOu will get a better sound by having the analogue signal converted at 16/44 then doing the dithering things... even with pow-r which is great and i love it

remember less steps is almost always better.

yea--- the surround stuff will have to be burned on the comp

[Mike H]

AAsa,
(1) I do two bounces because I am under the impression I get a better product when I 1st SRC, then dither, in two steps. I believe the dither step to 16 bits is important, before dragging to Toast.

(2) I have not tried it, but you are probably correct that I could use the HEDD as an insert on the mix track (or Master) when I bouce to disk, for SRCing to 16 bits. I assume that this would be equivalent to using L2 on the Master, and setting the dither to 16 bits. I need to try this.



Marsh,
Help a digital guy get out of the box with my thinking.......so to speak.

I am going into the HEDD with an analog stereo mix. You are saying that I will get better mix quality if I SRC with the HEDD direct to the MasterLink? I just need to understand this better. Won't the HEDD 1st A/D convert, then SRC and dither to 44.1/16, then output to the MasterLink? If so, I have converted to digital, then SRC'ed and dithered, just as I would in ProTools. But in ProTools, I would be doing it in two separate steps. In the HEDD, I'm not sure what the sequence would be.

Am I totally, completely off base here? Probably!

I just need some more detail, so I understand it.

Thanks!
Mike

[Marshall Simmons]

no prob---- lemmie see if i can step through this


you record all your songs tracks into ptools at 24/96.

You take the d/a's outputs (24/96) for the tracks into an analogue summing box

Once the audio goes analogue, its analogue. You don't need to worry about dither, src, ect ect ect.


So now that you have an analougue signal, you are going to convert it to digital via the hedd into the masterlink. Becuase the final destination is a cd, you want to convert at 16/44

make sense?

Marshall Simmons

[5down1up]

i simply would do 2 mixes

1st 96/24 bit ( as u mentioned , for mastering etc. )

2nd 44.1/16 bit ( to have a " quick one " to listen from cd )



... or is it really that complicated ?

[jazzius II]

Sample rate conversion sucks....always degrades the sound.......and as for PT SRC?..... ........do like the last guy said.....capture the mix at the SR's you'll need (96/24,44.1/24?)

[dave-G]

PT's more recent-version SR conversion is pretty decent ... (for sample rate conversion)... and a far cry from even the 48>44.1 conversion on Mix-era PT rigs

Back to slightly off-topic, I remain amazed that for all these years since Masterlink was introduced, no other company has made a more "upscale" Masterlink-like product.

-dave

[Mike H]

I'm just a little dense, guys. I'll get it in a minute. Stay with me.

I have an analog stereo mix going into the HEDD.............and I need to end up with:
(1) A 96/24 digital file(s), for saving in the ProTools session, mastering, etc.
(2) A 44.1/16 file, for burning a CD.

My confusion is understanding:
(a) Exactly what I should best do to end up with these files, and
(b) How this differs from my current process in ProTools.

To get from an analog mix to a digital file, I thought the following steps are needed (regardless of where in the chain they occur):
(i) Convert to digital (A/D)
(ii) SRC (to get the 44.1 file)
(iii) Dither (to get the 16-bit file) [optional step, but necessary for good quality].

Then the question becomes: Where in the chain do I do this?

Currently, I do this in ProTools. If, instead I do this in the HEDD on the way to MasterLink, don't these same steps occur in the HEDD?

It seems to me that using the HEDD-to-MasterLink, instead of in doing this in ProTools, means:
(1) I avoid two bouncing steps (but still have to SRC and dither), and
(2) I SRC and dither in whatever sequence occurs in the HEDD.

Am I completely off on this??

Is avoiding the bouncing steps in ProTools the thing that you are emphasizing is a big plus?


Just explain a little more, please.
I'm not dumb..............just confused.

Thanks,
Mike

[Marshall Simmons]

you are off
but thats ok


the analogue stage nulls the need for sample rate changes and dithering.

dither is just low level noise to smooth quanttinazation errors.

the analogue stage when you are summing has noise "built in" so dithering isn't required... just follow the steps i wrote above.

if you want a 16 44 version, perhaps you should do two passes, a 24/96 version and a 16/44 version. That would maintain the highest qualtiy

perhaps someone else can explain this better then i

Marsh

[thethrillfactor]

Originally posted by Mike H
Maybe the advantage is that it better prepares material for shipping to a Mastering studio. Are there plusses here? I do note the CD24 format. But can't I just send the material to a Mastering studio as WAV files on a DVD, or external hard drive, in the original session sample rate?

Any help would be appreciated!!

Thanks,
Mike

This is the benefit in a nutshell, especially if you are summing analog.

You can work at one rate in PT(44.1/48K) and send a higher master(88.2/96k) for mastering.

The CD24 format is an aiff format that can be read by any program.

The latest version of PT SRC(tweakhead) is very good.

[Mike H]

Marsh,
My problem is the opposite:
I will probably be at 96/24, and I will need to go to 44.1/16 for a CD. I can easily store the 96/24 file by bouncing from ProTools HD w/o SRC or dithering.

But, the issue is the same, I think:

Do I end up with a higher quality 44.1/16 file if I go
(a) analog to HEDD to MasterLink, rather than going
(b) Analog to HEDD to ProTools HD, and then convert to 44.1/16 via bouncing from ProTools?

If the answer is clearly yes (because, I assume, conversion in the HEDD involves fewer mathematical manipulations........and maybe better quality manipulations) then that is a stronger argument for the MasterLink than the convenience argument, in my mind.

I'm just trying to understand if this is indeed the case.

Thanks,
Mike

[Marshall Simmons]

i'd say a

[Drumsound]

If your 16/44.1 is just for a reference CD, to listen to in "the real world," or to send home with the client there is a simpler way. Do you mix through your analog summing into the Masterlink using the Head at a high rate (the mastering guy I’ve used a lot lately likes 24/88.2 for the 2:1 math). Then have the Masterlink burn a Redbook 16/44.1 CD. When Masterlink does this it does all the needed mojo and saves an image file (playlist 17 I think). Now you can also make additional, identical copies of the Redbook CD that sound the same because the dither is there, just like when you do it in PT.

The two passes with the Hedd is a good Idea too, and probably faster.

[thethrillfactor]

[ Now you can also make additional, identical copies of the Redbook CD that sound the same because the dither is there, just like when you do it in PT.
[/b][/quote]

One important point.

The Masterlink does not Dither.

It does noiseshaping.

These are 2 different processes.

The Masterlink just doesn't have enough processing power to dither.

Best thing to do is not do any EQing or compressing in it. Whatever processing is left use it for the noiseshaping.

The noise shaping is ok. Not great but ok.

Its not as transparent as POW-R #3.

[5down1up]

i guess the main benefit of an external 2 track :

monitoring , security backup , accesable even when working with the daw , changing sample rates " on the fly " if hitting analogue ( or via the hedds digital options ) .

some great options if money isnt a problem .

i dont have hd neither a hedd or a masterlink ...

there are a lot of ways to do it but i guess having an external unit for the 2 track is just great

[Mike H]

I can see the convenience advantages of the MasterLink. I'm just not sure they are biggies for my particular system. I have multiple internal and external hard drives, so backup is well covered. I monitor from ProTools HD through the HEDD, so that is well covered. I will probably be normally working at 96/24 (or 88.2/24), so I can easily generate a mastering file from ProTools w/o any conversion.

The biggest convenience advantage seems to me to be quick generation of test CD's. That would definitely save me some time.

The key question to me is the sound quality of the CD generated by the MasterLink. I would sure appreciate comments from anyone who has experience listening to the sound quality of the two different approaches of generating a CD:

(a) Analog (after analog summing) to HEDD to MasterLink, then burn CD with MasterLink,
or
(b) Analog to HEDD to ProTools HD (96/24), then convert to 44.1/16 via bouncing from ProTools, then burn a CD on the G4 with Toast (or Jam, etc.).

If (a) is a better quality CD, due (presumably) to avoiding bouncing from ProTools HD, then buying the MasterLink becomes a no-brainer for me. On the other hand, if it is poorer quality, then it probably isn't a plus for me (unless I'm missing something........which is quite possible).

Thanks!
Mike

[5down1up]

when the masterlink was introduced most stuff was still 44.1/48 khz , having a 96khz 2 track was a cool option , if its " really " necessary when u have a 96 khz system ? i dont think so !
you would hit it digital using the hedd ...

so i guess sound improvement is more just like VODOO

[Marshall Simmons]

i think that you would get more of an improvement in speed then sound quality.
Although doing two passes at 24/96 and 16/44 would prolly give you a better sound quality at the lower resolution.

[guittarzzan]

this may have already been touched on. I didn't read every response in detail, but I think the biggest advantage of a masterlink is that you can make 24/96k backups with it. I'm a noob, but I don't think you can do that with your system cd burner...can you?

steve

[Mike H]

guittarzzan,
I don't think I have a problem at 96/24. I will normally run in ProTools HD at 96/24, so I would just bounce from ProTools and save a WAV file to a DVD or external hard drive, w/o any conversion required.

I believe the (possible) advantage is that I can go from summed analog to HEDD to MasterLink at 44.1/16 and burn a CD w/o the conversions and bounces required in ProTools (since everything must return to ProTools at the same sample rate and bit count).

I am trying to get some input as to whether, in fact, the resulting MasterLink CD is a higher quality (i.e., better sounding) CD than one generated from ProTools.

I haven't heard anybody tell me yet that they have found this to be the case.

Thanks,
Mike

[Kenny Gioia]

This is my Masterlink:




This is my interface:





I believe it winds up cheaper. (At least it was when I bought it)

It does other things too.

Peace

[manley moo]

Manley MOO

Been using the masterlink for just over a year and love it.loads of people usE them and get great results.Great all in one unit nothing else competes with it on that level.And even handier when you don,t have access to your daw.


regards

Manley MOO

[seansolo]

Our Masterlink's usually end up as CD players.

Sorry, not very helpful. But I think it's funny.