A/D Converter Shootout (with samples)

[didier.brest]

Updated list of Audio DiffMaker results.

Mytek + Crane-Song
-6,901usec, -0,067dB (L), -0,021dB (R)..Corr Depth: 39,3 dB (L), 40,1 dB (R) Diff: -52,5 (L), -52,2 (R)


Mytek + Lavry
-68,95nsec, 0,079dB (L), -0,003dB (R)..Corr Depth: 35,5 dB (L), 37,7 dB (R) Diff: -54,8 (L), -56,0 (R)

Mytek + Mytek
parameters: 2,52usec, 0,023dB (L), -0,007dB (R)..Corr Depth: 37,3 dB (L), 38,0 dB (R) Diff: -56,4 (L), -56,5 (R)

Mytek + Forsell
parameters: 834,2msec, -0,002dB (L), -0,001dB (R)..Corr Depth: 32,6 dB (L), 33,2 dB (R) Diff: -45,8 (L), -45,6 (R)

Mytek + Prism
-5,032usec, -0,028dB (L), 0,022dB (R)..Corr Depth: 36,2 dB (L), 37,1 dB (R) Diff: -52.63 (L), -52.52 (R)

Mytek + Universal Audio
-239,3nsec, 0,000dB (L), 0,068dB (R)..Corr Depth: 38,7 dB (L), 39,4 dB (R) Diff: -57,8 (L), -57,7 (R)

Loops from Ivo

DAD
-0,515dB (L), -0,545dB (R)..Corr Depth: 29,5 dB (L), 30,2 dB (R) Diff: -50,4 dB (L), -50,7 dB (R)

Forsell
-1,096dB (L), -1,073dB (R)..Corr Depth: 31,9 dB (L), 32,5 dB (R) Diff: -46,0 dB (L), -45,9 dB (R)

Loop from soundgeezer, Mytek 8 x 192
-0,014dB (L), -0,065dB (R)..Corr Depth: 37,2 dB (L), 37,8 dB (R) Diff: -56,8 dB (L), -56,9 dB (R)

Loop from CoolColJ, Lynx Hilo
-0,094dB (L), -0,108dB (R)..Corr Depth: 44,0 dB (L), 44,6 dB (R) Diff: -62,1 dBFS (L), -61,8 dBFS (R)

[Rev. Eslam]

So for those of us who are not so technically-minded, which unit has the best test results?
Hilo?

[CoolColJ]

Originally Posted by Rev. Eslam

So for those of us who are not so technically-minded, which unit has the best test results?
Hilo?

Of the submitted files, Hilo for sure

[CoolColJ]

Also I did loopbacks with the Hilo in Reaper and Sonar X1, and I swear they sound different. Reaper a tad brighter than the original.... even the nulling with the original is different.
But I could be wrong - I can upload the files for you guys to check out.

I ran the Hilo loopbacks from Sonar X1 and Reaper against each other in Audio Diffmaker and I get -

>> Aligning the "Compared" track to the "Reference" track
>> !Sample Rate error is 2.8602 ppm,
>> ! this extraction should be run with Sample Rate Compensation enabled (
>> Parameters: -6.628msec, 0.150dB (L), 0.150dB (R)..Corr Depth: 26.2 dB (L), 26.7 dB (R)

So they are quite different...
Then I turned on sample rate compensation, and crashed and it's hung hard, can't close it!

Will try again
But but it does backup the fact that DAWs sound differnet from each other

[Ben F]

Forrsell didn't go that well despite all the hype. Although often there is some 'user error' involved in these tests.

[VasiliZaitsev]

I am very surprised by the Mytek. Very fine resolution in the Highs.

@Robin - you wrote:
"- All converters were at their neutral or default settings"
Did you bypassed the HEDD Effects with the Bypass Switch or did you only zero the Effect Knobs? Thats not the same. Because if you only zero the Knobs without turn the bypass switch - the Hedd is a little bit more muddy and has less crisp punch - even when you zero the knobs. If you turn off the Bypass Switch you will get a little bit more clearness and punch out of the Hedd. I think thats why the HEDD sounds so different in this test/ comparison. Did you use a Hedd192?

PS: I there a way to test the Mytek for 1 or 2 days in Germany?

[karumba]

Originally Posted by VasiliZaitsev

PS: I there a way to test the Mytek for 1 or 2 days in Germany?

i've bought mine from digital audio service. i'm very sure they will send you a unit for testing if you are interested.

[VasiliZaitsev]

to all mytek 8x192 user:
is there a significant difference between the "Blue" Mytek 8x192 Version and the "Grey" Mytek 8x192 Version? Or is it just the "look"? Thanks!

[Rev. Eslam]

Isn't the grey just a bad quality photo of the unit?

[karumba]

no. my mytek 8x192 really is grey.

[Rev. Eslam]

Perhaps they were manufactured in another continent. AFAIK They are now made in Poland not in the USA.

[shelterr]

So I did the test blind and I chose the Orpheus as my hands down favorite with the Lavry Golds as my second favorite. I own Lavry Golds and I knew which one was the Golds because I am so used to the sound, but I really enjoy the big full sound of the Orpheus. I liked the Mytek and the Forssell the least. The Forssell sounded thin and awkward, and the Mytek sounded really hazy. The HEDD and 2192 were both okay by me, but they didn't stand out like the Orpheus and the Gold.

Maybe it's been discussed already, but were the convertors clipped at all? The reason I ask is that I don't really ever enjoy the sound of the Lavry Golds until they are clipped at least a little bit (if not a lot). I have always imagined that Prism would be a better choice for the non-clipped convertor kind of guy, but I have always wondered how they would clip compared to the Lavry Gold. And before the "clipping convertors is always bad" crowd show up to try and ruin the party, let me say that the golds really are a converting/gain staging/tone shaping tool. The soft saturation (although not always used) can be a real life saver and does things that no other limiter/compressor I have ever heard does. Also, the way you can stop the golds from generating digital overs by manipulating the last bit yields a very smooth sound, even under heavy clipping.

[Earcatcher]

Originally Posted by Rev. Eslam

Perhaps they were manufactured in another continent. AFAIK They are now made in Poland not in the USA.

Mytek has always been manufactured in Poland. That's the original homeland of the guys running the business in the US. So they have their products made "back home", where grandma makes her best pies and labour is affordable. The grey faceplate is simply an aesthestic update. I am not aware of any changes inside the boxes.

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by shelterr

So I did the test blind and I chose the Orpheus as my hands down favorite with the Lavry Golds as my second favorite. I own Lavry Golds and I knew which one was the Golds because I am so used to the sound, but I really enjoy the big full sound of the Orpheus. I liked the Mytek and the Forssell the least. The Forssell sounded thin and awkward, and the Mytek sounded really hazy. The HEDD and 2192 were both okay by me, but they didn't stand out like the Orpheus and the Gold.

Maybe it's been discussed already, but were the convertors clipped at all? The reason I ask is that I don't really ever enjoy the sound of the Lavry Golds until they are clipped at least a little bit (if not a lot). I have always imagined that Prism would be a better choice for the non-clipped convertor kind of guy, but I have always wondered how they would clip compared to the Lavry Gold. And before the "clipping convertors is always bad" crowd show up to try and ruin the party, let me say that the golds really are a converting/gain staging/tone shaping tool. The soft saturation (although not always used) can be a real life saver and does things that no other limiter/compressor I have ever heard does. Also, the way you can stop the golds from generating digital overs by manipulating the last bit yields a very smooth sound, even under heavy clipping.

I've found that the lavry gold and prism AD-2 can handle exactly the same amount of clipping, the lavry gets that low mid distortion if pushed and the prism tends to be more in the upper end of the spectrum. I imagine the Orpheus to be similar, although cant be 100% sure as the lavry and prism AD-2 both use discrete front ends hence their cost.

[MattGray]

For those that tried the first Forssell units and weren't convinced about the mids, it's definitely worth checking out the 'a' revision units and prepare to fall in love! They still have all the detail but with smoother highs and a fuller more accurate midrange and overall tonal balance compared to the previous model.

Here is what Fred had to say about it...

There are many changes/improvements to the analog sections of both the DA and the AD. The DA analog section is a completely different design and uses a new discrete FET current-to-voltage circuit, but otherwise is identical to the non-"A" version. The AD has new discrete FET opamps for the front end, and has the DSP working in a different mode that allows you to easily push it into digital clipping. The original version of the AD limited the signal for signals above -0.1 dBFS.

While not a huge departure from the previous model sonically, it's a very worthwhile and noticeable improvement to an already great converter.

[atma]

Originally Posted by 24-96 Mastering

- There was a bit of copper between the D/A and the A/D

sorry for my ignorance, but what exactly do you mean by this?

[chrissugar]

Originally Posted by MattGray

For those that tried the first Forssell units and weren't convinced about the mids, it's definitely worth checking out the 'a' revision units and prepare to fall in love! They still have all the detail but with smoother highs and a fuller more accurate midrange and overall tonal balance compared to the previous model.

Hi Matt

How recent is this revision? Do you have idea from what serial number starts the A rev? Mine was built in late june 2011 so I'm curious if it is A or not.
Thank you.

chrissugar

[ISedlacek]

Oh yes... the original versions sounded great ... The "a" revision (that I extensively tested and compared) sounds simply incredible ... full, smooth, extremely detailed, natural ... simply highest fidelity organic sound imaginable

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by ISedlacek

Oh yes... the original versions sounded great ... The "a" revision (that I extensively tested and compared) sounds simply incredible ... full, smooth, extremely detailed, natural ... simply highest fidelity organic sound imaginable

Wait, I thought A was all of that already? So B is even more of A, or different to A?

[MattGray]

Originally Posted by Ben F

Wait, I thought A was all of that already? So B is even more of A, or different to A?

You're probably stirring the pot Ben but just in case there is any confusion...

There is MADA-2 (original version)
Now there is MADA-2a ('a' revision)

With the listening tests you did with the original version Ben, I remembered that you liked the Forssell DAC with the Prism Dream ADC. Big presentation, great mids. I think you'll be surprised at how good the 'a' revision sounds, it's all that in the one unit and more. Let me know if you want an 'a' revision demo unit. Maybe Leon might want to check it out if he hasn't got his Lavry Gold back from repair yet. My guess is the gold will sound different now anyway if it was sent back to Lavry.

One other thing that has also improved is the front panel and button quality. nicer front panel and firmer buttons. Not that I see mine, they're under the desk.

[phild]

I'm curious about this REV A.
I've got a demo unit here and it's got a strident/wispy quality that I don't like.
I've contacted Fred and he's going to look into it.

Nowhere near the fullness/neutrality of my AD2. Not as warm and elegant as the 122

The price is right and I want to love this thing but haven't been able to commit to a recording with it yet.

[Brad Blackwood]

Everybody likes different things, but after trying virtually everything over the years, I fell in love with the Forssell ADC (rev a). Had him build a custom unit for me, sounds jaw-dropping.

[phild]

What is jaw-dropping for me is how different the highs are conveyed with this unit. I had just finished balancing some aggressive cymbals in a song I was working on and when I put the MADA in it became very sharp up there. I hesitate to say unmusical but... different tastes I supposes.

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by atma

sorry for my ignorance, but what exactly do you mean by this?

a bit of copper between the D/A and the A/D = a few feet of cable

[chrissugar]

Originally Posted by MattGray

One other thing that has also improved is the front panel and button quality. nicer front panel and firmer buttons. Not that I see mine, they're under the desk.

There are two front panels.
the old one:

and the new one:

The old one is a flat panel, the new one is more 3D. If you look at the second picture (at the rack holes) you see it is a machined panel. Also the engravings are different, and there is an additional LED on the old one.

I have the second one but considering it is a one year old unit I have no idea if it is the original electronics or the A revision. Will have to ask Fred.



By the way I did some calibrated double conversion tests with the MADA-2 and the results are almost indistinguishable from the original high resolution files (did the same thing with HEDD192, Lavry Blue/Black and many other units) The MADA-2 is my reference AD/DA.

chrissugar

[Spartacus]

Originally Posted by chrissugar

By the way I did some calibrated double conversion tests with the MADA-2 and the results are almost indistinguishable from the original high resolution files (did the same thing with HEDD192, Lavry Blue/Black and many other units) The MADA-2 is my reference AD/DA.

chrissugar

Could you plase send a link here for us with the new MADA-2 files? It would be great to have a listen!

thanks!

[ISedlacek]

Originally Posted by phild

What is jaw-dropping for me is how different the highs are conveyed with this unit. I had just finished balancing some aggressive cymbals in a song I was working on and when I put the MADA in it became very sharp up there. I hesitate to say unmusical but... different tastes I supposes.

Well, it can very well be the real sound, don't blame the mirror for it ) In my long-term everyday experience MADA-2 (especially "a" revision) is as transparent as something could be

[phild]

I'm not blaming anything here. I want to like this converter. I'm not precious about the gear I use and I would I'd gladly dump anything I own if I thought I had found something better. The intention was to buy this if it was better than what I currently own. The issue *I have* with the MADA I am hearing on everything. I will see if my unit is a Rev A.

[MattGray]

Originally Posted by phild

I'm not blaming anything here. I want to like this converter. I'm not precious about the gear I use and I would I'd gladly dump anything I own if I thought I had found something better. The intention was to buy this if it was better than what I currently own. The issue *I have* with the MADA I am hearing on everything. I will see if my unit is a Rev A.

Hi Phil, you should be able to tell easily if you look at the pictures that Chris Sugar posted above. If you have a Rev 'a' it will have the machined recess around the rack ears. and a 2pac shiny metallic blue paint. The old ones are a thinner anodised blue aluminium face plate.

There is certainly nothing sharp about the high end on the Forssell rev 'a'. It's as smooth as they come. You should also have a chat to Jack the Bear as he is also using the rev 'a'.

Let us know what model you have... if it's an original request the rev 'a'.

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by MattGray

You're probably stirring the pot Ben but just in case there is any confusion...

There is MADA-2 (original version)
Now there is MADA-2a ('a' revision)

With the listening tests you did with the original version Ben, I remembered that you liked the Forssell DAC with the Prism Dream ADC. Big presentation, great mids. I think you'll be surprised at how good the 'a' revision sounds, it's all that in the one unit and more. Let me know if you want an 'a' revision demo unit. Maybe Leon might want to check it out if he hasn't got his Lavry Gold back from repair yet. My guess is the gold will sound different now anyway if it was sent back to Lavry.

One other thing that has also improved is the front panel and button quality. nicer front panel and firmer buttons. Not that I see mine, they're under the desk.

What me, stir the pot? Thanks for the clarification.

I ended up fixing Leons Lavry Gold it was the power supply caps- a 5 cent part! Tony kindly sent me up his old unit so I could check voltages etc. I know he is very happy with the Forssell.