photos from theatre organ gig

[hollywood_steve]

some poor quality photos from the Ebell Theatre with its 3/13 Barton organ:

[Rick Sutton]

Hey Steve, Looks like fun. Did you record to the Genex? How's the Genex holding up for you? Haven't sold mine yet and I'd really like to hang on to it (need to find the right jobs for it) and am curious if yours is being stable and friendly to use. Also curious as to what other gear your lugging around to your remotes. . Got any more pictures? Best regards, Rick

[hollywood_steve]

Yeah, I recorded to the Genex using the KM184s in XY. I also threw up the Bottle w/ the B6 capsule and the Coles just to hear how they sounded on an organ (I don't anticipate that I'll have lots of opportunities to record pipe organs.....). You can see the Bottle in the lower right corner of the 3rd photo.

Good news about the Genex, it has worked flawlessly on the last several remote gigs AND there is a major software upgrade due this coming week which addresses lots of little issues we have been talking to Genex about. Remarkably, this upgrade will also be accompanied by a manual; this will be the first time that the manual matches the current software revision.

Rick, as you are well aware, Genex had some "issues" with the roll-out of the GX9000/9048 models but they have done a good job of addressing every concern that many of us have had. And more importantly, I'm getting "Oh my god!" type comments from clients about sound quality; these machines really do have exceptional potential, IF everything else in your chain is up to the task.

For anyone interested in the future of "High Resolution" recording, the LA AES chapter is putting on a one day seminar at the Beveryly Garland next month. In addition to the usual presentations and workshops, many of the gear manufacturers offering HiRes products will be there as well. Go here for more info:
http://www.aes.org/sections/la/workshop.html

[Remoteness]

Steve,

Cool...

Any pictures of your recording rig, during this event?

[hollywood_steve]

top - location setup
Genex, RME QuadMic (KM184s) and Vintech (Bottle & Coles)

bottom - edit rig
Dorrough meters, Genex, SV3800 and HHB BurnIt-plus


I can't believe I've gone hardcore digital! When did that happen?

[Remoteness]

Sweet!

Do you mix (or remix) your hi res tracks to an available pair of tracks within the Genex, then dub a low res version to the CDR & DAT?

[Ari]

Very cool Steve ! Thanks for sharing.

Best

Ari

[hollywood_steve]

Do you mix (or remix) your hi res tracks to an available pair of tracks within the Genex, then dub a low res version to the CDR & DAT?


Although I am recording to DSD and have the ability to provide DSD or high res PCM files to my clients (24b/ 96 or 192khz), my clients are only looking for 16b/44kHz CDs. I'm hoping to slowly work my way up the foodchain and I'm really looking forward to an SACD project, someday....

As long as my final "product" is limited to 16/44, the internal mixer on the Genex works fine for the very limited mixing that I do. (typically, nothing more than mixing one or two spots into the main stereo image.) The mixer has 24b/96kHz capabilities, so it offers some flexibility. But I do want to develop DSD and unrestricted PCM mix capabilities, so I have a couple of options that I am looking at.

One option is an outboard analog summing box; it will require one round of D to A and then back A to D using the Genex converters. I don't use a DAW, so I need a summing box with level and pan controls, I can't use one of those "blind" summing units like the Folcrom or D2B. The 8x2 line mixer from Dangerous is my current leading choice for this work, although the proposed unit from Forsell looks very nice.

http://www.dangerousmusic.com/mixer.html
http://www.forsselltech.com/ALM%20Small.PDF

A second option is some sort of digital summing solution. Genex has announced their new editing software package but I haven't been able to find any detailed info on it, and I have no idea if it includes a mix utility. And the only existing DSD capable products that I know of (SADIE, Pyramix, etc.) cost more than I could even consider spending, and I would probably never use more than 5% of their capabilities.

My big fantasy right now is that Sony decides to become a serious player in the desktop pro audio market and develops an all-software digital mixer for both DSD and HiRes PCM. Add this to their CD Architect 5.0 and Sound Forge 7.0 products and Sony would be a real player with three very focussed products. (as opposed to those do-everything products that don't do any one thing particularly well.) But I'm just dreaming.....

Back in the real world, I'll keep using the onboard 8x2 mixer for the simple 3x2 mixing that I usually do. ( As long as my SV3800 holds out, I'm all set. I can't stand going straight to CD from HD; I just don't have the control with the HHB that I do with the SV3800.) And I'm still undecided about the analog option.

[Fred]

I too am using a Genex 9000 for live remote 8 track recordings. I took it out on the road and recorded about 26 hours of live concert performance in two week. Because we were moving around so rapidly, I opted to use the Genex internal A-D in DSD mode instead of the EMM Labs/Ed Meitner MkIV converters. I was quite pleased with the how the Genex internal A-D sounded.

While we were doing this recording, I used the GX9000's internal mixer for monitoring. I think it works really well and sounds great, but I recommend using a different headphone amp. I use the Grace 901 headphone amp which accepts the AES/EBU mixer output from the Genex and converts it to analog before passing it to the headphone amplifier. It is a very good sounding combination, light-weight, and it is small.

I had the Genex 9000, one of my 6-channel discrete JFET mike preamp prototypes, and room to space in a single 8 space rack. I could have added an addition 6-channel preamp, but we only required 6 channels of recording on this tour, so I opted for a lighter set-up.

The music that we recorded was played by two extremely good mandolin players who play incredibly well and have extremely good tone and instruments. I used DPA-4011 mics on them since these mikes were split to the FOH as well. I used DPA 4006 mics for the room. I mention this because I find that the mandolin is a really good instrument to use when comparing the sonic differences between recording formats, converters, preamps, and mics. When good sounding mandolins are being played be good players, getting a good recording is fairly demand of the equipment used.

The bottom line for me, is that I love DSD as a multi-track recording medium. But there are currently some issues that need to be taken into account if you want to use this format. As Steve mentioned, if you do recordings in DSD format then you have a very limited (and expensive) choice of DAW systems available to you. I am currently using the newest Sony Sonoma system, but Sony does not offer it for sale and I will have to give it back at some point. So if I decide that I want a full blown DSD DAW, I can buy a Sadie DSD (at about $30k?), or a Pyramix (at about $16k). If I decide to go to more than 8 tracks, the Sonoma is out, the Sadie is out, and the Pyramix needs a upgrade that is not available yet (and may increase the cost to $30k). Not really pleasant choices, IMO.

What I am doing now is converting from DSD back to analog (via the Meitners) and mixing analog through one of my large format console designs. The only problem there is metering. There is a lot of HF noise present on the output of a DSD converter (it sits at about -60 dBu at 60-100 KHz) and if your console design is good, you can actually see this noise as a static level on your two mix meters. It can be unsettling at first. There are some ways around this, but I won't go into that here.

I am mixing analog to a 1/2" 2-track and to a Sonic Soultions PCM system at 44.1k for ref CD's. That all sounds really, really good, to me anyway. But it leaves one unaddressed issue. What if you need to do track editing on the multi-track DSD master? Back to the expensive DSD DAWs?

As Steve mentioned, Genex is going to offering track editing software (I'm still waiting for a beta test version of this). If it works out, that could be perfect for what I am doing right now. Record DSD multi-track, edit the multi-track as needed using the current not available Genex track editing software, convert from DSD back to analog using the best converters you can get your hands on, mix on the best console you get your hands on (and it needs to be able to handle HF noise without slew-rate problems), master to analog 2-track and burn ref CD using PCM (where the anti-alias filter will take care of the HF noise), and IF you are going to go to SACD, you'll need to recovert to DSD from the analog 2-track master.

In the meantime, I have to say that I love the GX9000 for recording 8 track DSD. It is a maturing product (meaning it isn't perfect, but is well on its way to being a great machine) and Genex seems to be working hard on getting it together. I love the on-board mixer and use it all the time to generate a 44.1k digital stereo signal to burn CD's with my Sony W33 (I do this live in real time as well) I love the fact that I can write to mirror drive in real time, providing safety AND a back-up copy of my recordings without having to do the back-up at a later time. Man, does that save a bunch of time.

Yikes! That's a hell of a process. It's a good thing the sonic results of DSD are worth the effort... IMO. YMMV.

Fred Forssell
Forssell Technologies

[sonare]

Fred and I traded messages previously on this topic, but I thought I would mention it for everyone else's benefit:

Sequoia says (not publicly, however) that they will have a DSD option in the next year. This would be VERY good news for those unable or unwilling to do SADiE, Sonoma, Sonic Studio, or Pyramix. (Why do most of these start with "S"?)
This would offer full-blown DAW capabilities for much less than those mentioned above because it runs natively. Processor upgrades are much less than new dedicated TDM stuff.

If you are interested in Sequoia the painless way, visit <http://www.sequoiadigital.com>

I have been 110% satisfied with the sound and flexibility of my Sequoia, and 200% pleased with the support that Jeff Sheridan (who is also a working engineer) offers. Without a real SACD project to do, DSD to redbook is a bit of overkill. But if that really is the future, I guess I'll jump too...

Rich

[hollywood_steve]

I'll definitely keep that in mind; those $20k workstations are just silly for someone who does as little processing as I do. But Sequoia sounds like it might be practical for anyone with an interest in DSD but limited funds.

Thanks.

[Plush]

Hello Gentlemen,

It's Good news about the Sequoia. I'll want to follow that.
However, working with DSD is not so exciting with the main problem being that I have not yet found any record company willing to pay me extra for working with an expensive and finicky format. The recording business is like no other. In all other businesses, one invests in new technology and it provides new capabilities---cababilities that you can charge more for using.

Not with DSD recording.

The fact of the matter is that most of the releases of NEW recordings (not back catalog repurposing of two track masters)
is done in pcm and released as an SACD.

As far as going back and forth to analog, that seems silly.
I love analog tape and processing, but I'd sooner record it hi res pcm and have all the post tools available to me.

The fact is that once you've purchased your DSD recorder and a/d's, d/a's, SADiE DSD workstation and all the rest, you still can't charge a higher price to record with that format. That means you can't recoup your investment, which means it's a joke.

DSD and SACD are heavier than air investments.

[Fred]

Well for me, the jury is still out on DSD vs hi res PCM.

I tend to use my DSD recorder as a high res multi-track for recording then convert to analog via the EMM converters and mix analog to 1/2" 2-track. The final product is mastered from the 1/2" 2-track. So far, I prefer the sound of this signal path to mixing with the Sony Sonoma system that I have here. But I'm not ready to etch that opinion in stone.

I've not tried the Merging Tech or Sadie mix software systems, so I can't speak to their sonic quality.

But as I've said before, I love the sonic quality of DSD for multi-track recording. The BIG question is if high sample rate PCM (4Fs) sounds as good as DSD for recording multi-track. My Genex machines allow me to do both, so I'm happy to have them, but the first test I did was DSD vs 2Fs PCM and the DSD won out to my ears. Next is 4Fs vs DSD, but I need to finish my DA converters first, as the EMM labs only do 2Fs.

As I said, for me, the jury is still out.

Fred Forssell
Forssell Technologies

[hollywood_steve]

And the Genex 9000 makes the "return on investement" issue wholly forgettable..... You just need to look at the GX9000 as a very reasonably priced, hi-end 24b/192kHz PCM recorder. That just happens to have a fully independent DSD section thrown in for free!

(its remarkable how many people "forget" that these machines would be considered top of their class if they were strictly PCM recorders. the DSD thing is just a wonderful bonus.)

[Fred]

And the Genex 9000 makes the "return on investement" issue wholly forgettable..... You just need to look at the GX9000 as a very reasonably priced, hi-end 24b/192kHz PCM recorder. That just happens to have a fully independent DSD section thrown in for free!

Yeah man! That's how I feel about the Genex 90xx as well.

Fred Forssell
Forssell Technologies