Clocking and Conversion, Summing Renders... doing it wrong?

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by strictpolicy

So, I know that summing is a subtle affair but I can't quite hear a noticable difference from when I record back my summed mixes. What am I doing wrong?

I have an Apogee Symphony with 16IN/OUT. The DSUB cables are running out through a Dangerous 2BUS LT Summing Mixer, which I absolutely love. The sound is amazing.

When I am done and ready to bounce the track, I route the output of the Dangerous back into the Symphony (at the same sample rate) and record. Is it normal to use the same sample rate? (48 normally)

Now, when I compare digital bounces to analog sums, I don't hear the difference I hear compared to when I am playing it live through the Dangerous, which sounds big. I am fairly adjusted to the difference between my analog gear live and the same gear recorded, but is the difference THAT subtle?

Another option that just came up, which is why I am asking for your help.. is that my friend just offering a Klark Technik DN360 and Big Ben clock for a ridiculously cheap price. Would I benefit much from the clock if I am only using a symphony?

Thanks guys, youve been a lot of help in the past.

Hard to say what you are hearing. I only use 48K for video.

Are you down converting to 44.1khz on both files? This could be your problem. I certainly think analog summing is worthwhile, in my experience.

The Symphony uses the Big Ben Clock already, but it has been optimized for Symphony's converters. So you do not need to use any external clock for any reason other than synchronizing lots of other digital gear. Even then it still may not be needed, as the Symphony will operate best on Internal Clock and also function as a Master time piece. I certainly would disuade anyone to purchase an external clock here.

[Andrew Kinsey]

When it comes to summing boxes ive allways found that, if everything is set flat with no analog eq's or compressors in the chain then the most noticeable difference will come from the flavour of the amps used in the summing box. There will also be a bit more separation and perhaps a better sense of space between everything depending on how you choose to group things, but this is going to be a subtle difference especially if your summing box and converters are really transparent.

If you can directly AB your summing box analog output with the digital print at the same listening level and hear a difference you don't like; smearing of transients ect.. then you know it is down to the conversion. Its quite a common phenomenon, also the reason why mastering engineers and mixers go all out on dedicated high end converters and clocks.

When it comes to most multi channel intefaces like the Ensemble or Symphony there is allways going to be a compromise between making something really good and making it affordable at the same time. Much in the same way that even high end dedicated converters can benefit from the use of external clocks.

However personally id first look at getting a better converter for printing the main mix: Burl, Antelope, Mytek, Lavry, or Cranesong. These will also have their own internal clock that you can sync with your Apogee. Then and only then can you intuitively decide if adding an external clock makes your system sound even better.

[amarshism]

wait, so youre monitoring direct off the dangerous (sounds great) and then when you record back into daw it sounds less great?

[Doc Mixwell]

You might check your 0DBfS Reference Calibration as well. Not sure how you are monitoring -- but I always listen to the returns through the AD converters so as to adjust for any change.

The Symphony's AD is stellar sounding for the mix, IMO. Never have an issue with it here. It sounds a lot better than my Rosetta 200 at the same reference cal.