Gearslutz.com

All Advertisers
Go Back   Gearslutz.com > The Forums > Mastering forum


New Reply New Reply Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31st May 2006   #1
Gear nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: san diego california
Posts: 114

Thread Starter
Signal chain question for analog mastering from digital source

I have a few questions about mastering with analog outboard gear. Where in the chain do you insert something like an AVOCET or GRACE 902? DAW->DAC->EQ->limiter->ADC->DAW2?
DO you use the avocet dac to get out of the source computer?
Also do the coverters need to be synched to a master clock?
Can source DAW be the destination DAW?

thanks, daniel m.
snaysup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st June 2006   #2
Mastering
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,099

Quote:
Originally Posted by snaysup
I have a few questions about mastering with analog outboard gear. Where in the chain do you insert something like an AVOCET or GRACE 902? DAW->DAC->EQ->limiter->ADC->DAW2?
DO you use the avocet dac to get out of the source computer?
Also do the coverters need to be synched to a master clock?
Can source DAW be the destination DAW?

thanks, daniel m.

Unfortunately, the Avocet is not a (processing) console, just a monitor controller. I don't know if the Grace has processing inserts.

So you cannot use the Avocet DAC for this purpose. I use the Cranesong HEDD for analog inserting, as it now has an excellent DAC (with the upgrade) and always has had a superb A/D. But you can use any separate high quality D/A and A/D converter you like.

Here's a chain, just like the one you drew above:

DAW-----> DAC -----> chain of analog processors -----> ADC -----> [optional digital processors] ----> back to same DAW or a different DAW if working at different sample rate.

For the lowest jitter, use as jitter-immune a pair of converters as possible. In my chain, my ADC is most stable when run on internal clock, so I run the ADC as the master clock. As you can see from the above chain, the ADC can be the master clock even if it is not in the front of the chain.

I run the ADC at 96K, usually. I use a live sample rate converter (The Weiss) to take the end of the chain back down to 44.1K for capture to the CD rate.

The DAC is on external sync, since most DACs slave to the incoming (SPDIF or AES) signal, the DAC has to be as jitter-immune a model as possible. Any converter that's slaving to external has to be jitter-immune. It's possible to find a DAC model that has internal clock and lock the main DAW to it (I believe the Weiss has that feature, and also the DCS and the TC Finalizer) but with the quality of jitter-immune DACs these days, you can slave the DAC to the DAW and not hear any difference.

Unless you're one of the lunatic fringe who claim that "you can never make a CD that will ever sound like the master, and a clone of a hard disc sounds different than the source" in which case you'll never be satisfied.
__________________
Bob Katz DIGITAL DOMAIN http://www.digido.com
"There are two kinds of fools. One says-this is old and therefore good. The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
bob katz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st June 2006   #3
Lives for gear
 
Darius van H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,716

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob katz

I run the ADC at 96K, usually. I use a live sample rate converter (The Weiss) to take the end of the chain back down to 44.1K for capture to the CD rate.
Bob, out of interest, why do you capture at 96k then downsample to 44?......why not just capture at 44 (if the end SR is 44.1)?
__________________
www.amsterdammastering.com
Darius van H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st June 2006   #4
Mastering
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,099

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darius van H
Bob, out of interest, why do you capture at 96k then downsample to 44?......why not just capture at 44 (if the end SR is 44.1)?
It's subtle to many ears, but the bottom line is because it sounds better to me done that way. But objectively, many non-liinear digital processors perform, and sound better at 96K. My ears are very sensitive to alias products, and there are far fewer in-band alias products at 96K. Processors such as the Cranesong HEDD really sound better at 96K, digital compressors do as well. The Weiss units all internally double sample, but I feel that you minimize the tradeoff by upsampling at the beginning and downsampling at the end of the chain, which turns off the up/down sampler in each Weiss unit.

So, when analog processing, the DAC feeds the analog chain, and the A/D then runs at 96K, and that feeds the digital chain, so in this case the A/D is my upsampler.
bob katz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st June 2006   #5
Mastering Moderator
 
Riccardo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Always on the Run
Posts: 2,570

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob katz
It's subtle to many ears, but the bottom line is because it sounds better to me done that way. But objectively, many non-liinear digital processors perform, and sound better at 96K. My ears are very sensitive to alias products, and there are far fewer in-band alias products at 96K. Processors such as the Cranesong HEDD really sound better at 96K, digital compressors do as well. The Weiss units all internally double sample, but I feel that you minimize the tradeoff by upsampling at the beginning and downsampling at the end of the chain, which turns off the up/down sampler in each Weiss unit.

So, when analog processing, the DAC feeds the analog chain, and the A/D then runs at 96K, and that feeds the digital chain, so in this case the A/D is my upsampler.

I feel and do the same thing, maybe is just me but at 96 it seems that whatever I do with in the analog chain is better captured, and the L2 seems to sound better. Not sure about the D/A upsampling...
__________________
Velvet Room Mastering



"Can you imagine how great the Beatles or Pink Floyd could have sounded if they had used better cables?

I expect a Nobel prize to someday be awarded to an audiophile cable designer, as they clearly are way ahead of the rest of us.
" - DC -
Riccardo is offline   Reply With Quote
New Reply New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread starter Forum Replies Last Post
Digital vs Analog Mastering A/B.. Wavs Posted Bang High end 47 11th May 2010 07:50 PM
Best/Cleanest way to split source signal needlz High end 4 22nd May 2006 01:37 PM
Question for Apogee FireMix users on monitoring analog/digital signals Mark Warren So much gear, so little time! 1 23rd November 2005 11:02 AM
Mastering - does use of signal crush maximizers make mastering compression - redunda Jules Mastering forum 15 30th August 2005 05:55 PM
VO signal chain Micazon So much gear, so little time! 0 4th April 2005 06:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:09 AM.

 
 
Powered by vBulletin®
Gearslutz.com Limited - UK Company Number 7597610.
Registered Office: 35 Ballards Lane, London, N3 1XW.

SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.