Stock Digi 003 R vs Digi 003 with Rosetta 800

barryjohns · 12th January 2008, 09:15 PM

Ok, I've been asked this several times, so I gave it a try today. Click on the link below and you will find samples that I did comparing using the Stock Converters vs. using a Rosetta 800 via ADAT Converters.

None of these are samples of the 003's Pre's.

The samples used here are recorded through a Pearlman TM1 through a Great River ME1NV Pre.

Recorded through the Rosetta first and then channel 5 of the Digi 003.

I tried to get levels close so don't slam me on that one ok. The files are WAV files and not MP3's. So download them and bring them into your DAW to hear. There are individual files as well as one file that has each sample one after the other in 1 file.

This was not done for a debate, just to take a listen and get an idea for those that don't have experience with the Rosetta or the 003.

Rosetta vs. Digidesign 003

Let's talk about it.

jmarkham · 12th January 2008, 09:37 PM

First of all, thank-you for taking the time to put this together. I love
this stuff ;-)

I find the Rosetta waves to be "brighter" and the transients to be crisper
than the 003. The pres and converters on the 003 are much improved
over 002 .. but still have a ways to go and need to be supplemented
to get high-end results (IMHO). This test is interesting because it's
just the converter that's varying as opposed to the entire front-end
path.

The BlackLion tweakhead mod makes a huge difference.

For my 003 .. I've been using the Focusrite ISA 828 with the A/D
option. The new TI Burr-Brown converters sound great to me and
Focusrite mated it up with a good clock.

jeff

ps: as an aside, how do you compare/contrast the Pearlman TM1 to the
Telefunken? I know the capsule is very close, if not identical.

EspionageWHW · 12th January 2008, 10:42 PM

barryjohns, Thanks a ton for taking the time to do this! I own the Digi 003 and have been really wanting to purchase a Rosetta 800 but have not done it yet because I wanted to know just how much of a difference it would make before I went out and spent the dough. Now I can make the purchase and go into it feeling confident. Thanks again for help me out (and everyone else here)!

I agree with jmarkham in that the Rosetta waves sound brighter. The audio capture is definitely more precise and full.

John_K · 3rd July 2008, 11:44 AM

Did you use both own clocks on the test, or did you use the rosetta clock on both of them?

nighttrainpete · 3rd July 2008, 06:22 PM

For some reason the files were corrupted and I couldn't de-compress with WinRar. Odd.... anyone else having issues with those files?

I really want to hear them.... baad.

John_K · 3rd July 2008, 06:30 PM

Nope, i just downloaded the separate vox and guitar files, unpacked them, and they worked.

masp84 · 4th July 2008, 07:47 PM

I didn't really notice a difference... at least not one that justifies the extra dough for Rosetta, Nevertheless this test isn't scientific at all, variations on pitch and proximity were noticed, and those can make a huge difference on the recording. thanks for putting this up as I had the chance to hear Pearlman TM-1.

supermosey · 1st August 2008, 02:05 AM

I have been wondering for a while whether I should pick up a Rosetta or at least a Lynx and just bypass pro tools all together. I have to say I didn't find the difference as obvious as I had hoped . I think this was in part due to the fact the guitar parts were different.
The Rosetta gtr seemed to have some lower strings (maybe a G chord ?) while the other guitar (perhaps D) utilized the higher strings.. I could hear more of a difference on the Vox where the Rosetta did sound more "authentic" for lack of a better word.. I guess it sounded more like a voice I would hear on an album .
Either way your tones were nice!!! Thanks again !

shanabit · 1st August 2008, 03:13 AM

Rosetta DEF has more clarity and sparkle for a lack of better words.
Id run the ROSETTA anyday over the stock DIGI pres

barryjohns · 1st August 2008, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_K

Did you use both own clocks on the test, or did you use the rosetta clock on both of them?

Yea, they were on their own clock.

pichu · 20th August 2008, 09:03 AM

Nice! thanks for taking the time to do this comparisons, hopefully I'll be upgrading my 002 with a rosetta 800 soon.

Keep on going!

amishsixstringe · 20th August 2008, 09:40 AM

It surely seemed that the 003 converter pass for the vocals had more proximity effect to me. Unless that was a result of the converter on its own. I'd like to hear a mult. Cool though.

Neil

PS. What sample rate were these recorded at?

nukmusic · 20th August 2008, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barryjohns

Yea, they were on their own clock.

try comparing stereo recordings to check the differences in stereo images.

also...think about the differences when you listen back to the files using the 003 D/A vs the Rosetta D/A. analog-to-digital is only one half of the benefit.

You can still record/mix good music with ONLY the 003.

Infa · 26th August 2008, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barryjohns

a Rosetta 800 via ADAT Converters.

barryjohns, just a question about the sentence I quoted from your post. I don't even want to listen to this comparison until I understand fully,,,, just to make sure of a few "fairness" points.

When you said "via ADAT Converters", exactly what did that mean ? You used a old school crappy ADAT ? Or do you mean the Rosetta 800 converters via the ADAT optical lightpipe signal ports on the back of the Rosetta 800 ?

Clear this up for me if you can... because honestly if a ADAT was used for only one unit and not the other, then this test is not fair.

Thanks man,,

nukmusic · 27th August 2008, 03:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infa

barryjohns, just a question about the sentence I quoted from your post. I don't even want to listen to this comparison until I understand fully,,,, just to make sure of a few "fairness" points.

When you said "via ADAT Converters", exactly what did that mean ? You used a old school crappy ADAT ? Or do you mean the Rosetta 800 converters via the ADAT lightpipe signal on the back of the Rosetta 800 ?

Clear this up for me if you can... because honestly if a ADAT was used for only one unit and not the other, then this test is not fair.

Thanks man,,

replace the word "converters" with "PORT" (i'm sure its what he meant)

adats I/O ports on the back of the 003.

Infa · 27th August 2008, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nukmusic

replace the word "converters" with "PORT" (i'm sure its what he meant)

adats I/O ports on the back of the 003.

LOL, thats what I figured, but just want to be sure.. ha - you never know these days.

Anyway, I will take your advice nukmusic... thanks !!

I will post back with my opinions in findings.

BTW, barryyjohns , great thread !! I really appreciate your time in setting this up. I hope you don't take my questions in my first post wrong, I sometimes just need to triple clarify things... you know, just to make sure.

barryjohns · 27th August 2008, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infa

LOL, thats what I figured, but just want to be sure.. ha - you never know these days.

Anyway, I will take your advice nukmusic... thanks !!

I will post back with my opinions in findings.

BTW, barryyjohns , great thread !! I really appreciate your time in setting this up. I hope you don't take my questions in my first post wrong, I sometimes just need to triple clarify things... you know, just to make sure.

No problem, nothing wrong with double checking. Yes to confirm, it was from the Adat Out of the Rosetta into the Adat in of the 003. I am guilty of owning quite a few Alesis Adats back in the day, but that day has long since passed, thank goodness. Oh I remember thinking I was the hottest thing going at the time. Funny how people complain about the cost of going Protools HD, I paid 2500 a piece for 3 adats in the 90's, for 24 tracks, and if I remember the Mackie 32x8 ran me almost 3k or more. I lived, ate, and breathed recording on that system back then, 12 hours a day.

Sorry for saying toooooo much.......

Infa · 27th August 2008, 08:12 AM

Ok, yea, to me there is a pretty big difference.... I also did it blind at first to make sure I was judging it fair.

As they both sound "good enough" - To me the "Vox Rosetta" and "Gtr Rosetta" files were alot more full and round sounding. Perfect on the high end, and at the same time had more body than the 003 takes. The guitar through the Rosetta had ALOT more depth as well. The vocals were, well, a little more even as far as depth.

The "Vox 003" and "Gtr 003" files were too brittle sounding for my taste. A touch too tin can sounding. Not enough body was getting interpreted correctly through the 003 converters I am afraid to say. And it was too exaggerated in the highs, along with not representing them correctly.

Now barryjohns, lol - I got another question for you as far as fairness factor here. Was these guitar and vocal takes identical for each converter ? Meaning did you record them two takes first RAW on a separate source (like external sampler or CD), then play back that source to then record that through each converter ? (therefore being really EXACTLY the same take for each converter) -- OR was them files actually 4 different recording takes of you doing them live separately each time ? One of each (gtr and vox) for EACH converter ?

Because as most people like to do it the way of the later, that is completely unfair as well, because it actually could have been you/the performer strumming the guitar accidently with more twang therefore treble one time, or singing with a touch more body the second time around on accident... Do you know what I mean ?

So can you clarify which approach you took for this test ?

Thanks man,

barryjohns · 28th August 2008, 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infa

Ok, yea, to me there is a pretty big difference.... I also did it blind at first to make sure I was judging it fair.

As they both sound "good enough" - To me the "Vox Rosetta" and "Gtr Rosetta" files were alot more full and round sounding. Perfect on the high end, and at the same time had more body than the 003 takes. The guitar through the Rosetta had ALOT more depth as well. The vocals were, well, a little more even as far as depth.

The "Vox 003" and "Gtr 003" files were too brittle sounding for my taste. A touch too tin can sounding. Not enough body was getting interpreted correctly through the 003 converters I am afraid to say. And it was too exaggerated in the highs, along with not representing them correctly.

Now barryjohns, lol - I got another question for you as far as fairness factor here. Was these guitar and vocal takes identical for each converter ? Meaning did you record them two takes first RAW on a separate source (like external sampler or CD), then play back that source to then record that through each converter ? (therefore being really EXACTLY the same take for each converter) -- OR was them files actually 4 different recording takes of you doing them live separately each time ? One of each (gtr and vox) for EACH converter ?

Because as most people like to do it the way of the later, that is completely unfair as well, because it actually could have been you/the performer strumming the guitar accidently with more twang therefore treble one time, or singing with a touch more body the second time around on accident... Do you know what I mean ?

So can you clarify which approach you took for this test ?

Thanks man,

Yea, if you read my original post, you'll see I didn't mean for this test to be too scientific, more of a feel rather than gospel. I sang one take into the 003, played 1 guitar part into the 003. Did the same with the Rosetta into the 003. So what I would expect is for someone to close their eyes, get a sense of depth and clarity to each recording, and get somewhat of an idea as to what the differences may be. I was very hesitant to put this out, as I did not want it to become a debate or anything, just kind of a "get a sense of what both will do for you" kinda thing.

For someone looking for an exact test, they should skip over this thread.

phillysoulman · 28th August 2008, 01:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barryjohns

Yea, if you read my original post, you'll see I didn't mean for this test to be too scientific, more of a feel rather than gospel. I sang one take into the 003, played 1 guitar part into the 003. Did the same with the Rosetta into the 003. So what I would expect is for someone to close their eyes, get a sense of depth and clarity to each recording, and get somewhat of an idea as to what the differences may be. I was very hesitant to put this out, as I did not want it to become a debate or anything, just kind of a "get a sense of what both will do for you" kinda thing.

For someone looking for an exact test, they should skip over this thread.

I like the 003 better..hey, what can I say

Infa · 28th August 2008, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barryjohns

Yea, if you read my original post, you'll see I didn't mean for this test to be too scientific, more of a feel rather than gospel. I sang one take into the 003, played 1 guitar part into the 003. Did the same with the Rosetta into the 003. So what I would expect is for someone to close their eyes, get a sense of depth and clarity to each recording, and get somewhat of an idea as to what the differences may be. I was very hesitant to put this out, as I did not want it to become a debate or anything, just kind of a "get a sense of what both will do for you" kinda thing.

For someone looking for an exact test, they should skip over this thread.

I get it Barry - No big deal. I was not trying to be too scientific.. I just wanted to make sure for my own ears and sanity of what I was hearing was what, and why is why, etc...

I love the test you did. It really helps people I think. Like I said though, I hope no one takes this too much too heart now that it was disclosed how the procedure went.

You could have just accidently played or sang those little differences we hear in each take, and now here we are all giving that possible credit or bash to the converter..
Know what I mean ?

EITHER WAY your awesome man... I love the thread.... keep it up.

andremattos · 28th August 2008, 02:11 AM

Rosseta

ol drippy · 1st September 2008, 01:26 PM

Yeah, thanks again for taking the time to do that.

I'm getting an 003 soon and was wondering about the conversion.

Also i'm curious about running your pre through the channel 5. Does that actually bypass the 003 pre's, or is it still affecting the sample?

I thought the ADAT and S/PDIF were the only way to bypass that preamp and converter?

psycho_monkey · 1st September 2008, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ol drippy

Yeah, thanks again for taking the time to do that.

I'm getting an 003 soon and was wondering about the conversion.

Also i'm curious about running your pre through the channel 5. Does that actually bypass the 003 pre's, or is it still affecting the sample?

I thought the ADAT and S/PDIF were the only way to bypass that preamp and converter?

the 003 only has 4 preamps - like the 002, inputs 5-8 are line input only.

88fingerz · 1st September 2008, 03:45 PM

I like what the 003 conversion does to the acoustic gtr vs the Apogee in this comparison. This actually demonstrates just how good a value the 003 is. It holds it's own just fine next to the Rosetta. Just fine!

JPeters86 · 1st September 2008, 03:57 PM

The Rosetta definitely sounds brighter and more alive in my opinion. I don't know if I'll buy one because of the price, but I do think it sounds better than the 003 (which sounds stunning as well). I'm still quite happy with the converters in my MOTU 8Pre though.

Jmaucoin · 15th October 2008, 12:25 AM

hey there
I have a 003 with a digimax in adat right now with my ssl alpha channel in spidif and my la 610 in the line in. in the future im thinking about a rosetta 800 to replace the digimax in the adat but perhaps another alpha channel first.
my question: Seeing as one alpha channel is in Spidif will another run on the 2nd channel if connected into the "out" jack? I'd like these for both tracking and mastering and found the converters quite nice.

I'm imagining the rosetta is nicer? anyone compared ?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Rosetta 800 / Digi 003 Rack ADAT Routing Issue	barryjohns	So much gear, so little time!	3	9th January 2008 05:32 PM
RME Fireface 800 vs Digi 003	rndanny	Electronic Music Instruments & Electronic Music Production	8	10th September 2007 03:48 PM
Digi 003 to Fireface 800 + Big Knob	Harsh	Low End Theory	11	19th July 2007 11:43 AM

12th January 2008, 09:15 PM	#1
barryjohns Lives for gear Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 2,366	Stock Digi 003 R vs Digi 003 with Rosetta 800 Ok, I've been asked this several times, so I gave it a try today. Click on the link below and you will find samples that I did comparing using the Stock Converters vs. using a Rosetta 800 via ADAT Converters. None of these are samples of the 003's Pre's. The samples used here are recorded through a Pearlman TM1 through a Great River ME1NV Pre. Recorded through the Rosetta first and then channel 5 of the Digi 003. I tried to get levels close so don't slam me on that one ok. The files are WAV files and not MP3's. So download them and bring them into your DAW to hear. There are individual files as well as one file that has each sample one after the other in 1 file. This was not done for a debate, just to take a listen and get an idea for those that don't have experience with the Rosetta or the 003. Rosetta vs. Digidesign 003 Let's talk about it. __________________ My hope is we will be able to debate our passion, vice argue a subjective point. Oh, if you ever want to talk about Jesus, PM me

1st August 2008, 02:05 AM	#8
supermosey Gear interested Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 17	thanks !! I have been wondering for a while whether I should pick up a Rosetta or at least a Lynx and just bypass pro tools all together. I have to say I didn't find the difference as obvious as I had hoped . I think this was in part due to the fact the guitar parts were different. The Rosetta gtr seemed to have some lower strings (maybe a G chord ?) while the other guitar (perhaps D) utilized the higher strings.. I could hear more of a difference on the Vox where the Rosetta did sound more "authentic" for lack of a better word.. I guess it sounded more like a voice I would hear on an album . Either way your tones were nice!!! Thanks again !

20th August 2008, 09:03 AM	#11
pichu Gear interested Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: South America - Ecuador Posts: 11	Nice! thanks for taking the time to do this comparisons, hopefully I'll be upgrading my 002 with a rosetta 800 soon. Keep on going! __________________ www.can-can.org -> independent south american band that sounds like the bastard child conceived in an orgy between New Order, Sonic Youth, Moloko and Kudu. www.laincreiblesociedaddelcan.com

20th August 2008, 09:40 AM	#12
amishsixstringe Gear addict Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 422	It surely seemed that the 003 converter pass for the vocals had more proximity effect to me. Unless that was a result of the converter on its own. I'd like to hear a mult. Cool though. Neil PS. What sample rate were these recorded at? __________________ "I put my pants on the same way as everyone else. One leg at a time. But, when my pants are on I make gold records. Now give me some more cowbell." www.myspace.com/amishelectricchair PUNK ROCK

12th January 2008, 09:37 PM	#2
jmarkham Lives for gear Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: San Francisco Bay Area Posts: 714	First of all, thank-you for taking the time to put this together. I love this stuff ;-) I find the Rosetta waves to be "brighter" and the transients to be crisper than the 003. The pres and converters on the 003 are much improved over 002 .. but still have a ways to go and need to be supplemented to get high-end results (IMHO). This test is interesting because it's just the converter that's varying as opposed to the entire front-end path. The BlackLion tweakhead mod makes a huge difference. For my 003 .. I've been using the Focusrite ISA 828 with the A/D option. The new TI Burr-Brown converters sound great to me and Focusrite mated it up with a good clock. jeff ps: as an aside, how do you compare/contrast the Pearlman TM1 to the Telefunken? I know the capsule is very close, if not identical.

12th January 2008, 10:42 PM	#3
EspionageWHW Gear nut Join Date: May 2006 Location: Queens, NY Posts: 132	barryjohns, Thanks a ton for taking the time to do this! I own the Digi 003 and have been really wanting to purchase a Rosetta 800 but have not done it yet because I wanted to know just how much of a difference it would make before I went out and spent the dough. Now I can make the purchase and go into it feeling confident. Thanks again for help me out (and everyone else here)! I agree with jmarkham in that the Rosetta waves sound brighter. The audio capture is definitely more precise and full.

3rd July 2008, 11:44 AM	#4
John_K Gear interested Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3	Did you use both own clocks on the test, or did you use the rosetta clock on both of them?

3rd July 2008, 06:22 PM	#5
nighttrainpete Gear interested Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 11	For some reason the files were corrupted and I couldn't de-compress with WinRar. Odd.... anyone else having issues with those files? I really want to hear them.... baad.

3rd July 2008, 06:30 PM	#6
John_K Gear interested Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3	Nope, i just downloaded the separate vox and guitar files, unpacked them, and they worked.

4th July 2008, 07:47 PM	#7
masp84 Gear nut Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 109	I didn't really notice a difference... at least not one that justifies the extra dough for Rosetta, Nevertheless this test isn't scientific at all, variations on pitch and proximity were noticed, and those can make a huge difference on the recording. thanks for putting this up as I had the chance to hear Pearlman TM-1.

1st August 2008, 03:13 AM	#9
shanabit Lives for gear Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 1,013	Rosetta DEF has more clarity and sparkle for a lack of better words. Id run the ROSETTA anyday over the stock DIGI pres

27th August 2008, 08:12 AM	#18
Infa Gear maniac Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 299	Ok, yea, to me there is a pretty big difference.... I also did it blind at first to make sure I was judging it fair. As they both sound "good enough" - To me the "Vox Rosetta" and "Gtr Rosetta" files were alot more full and round sounding. Perfect on the high end, and at the same time had more body than the 003 takes. The guitar through the Rosetta had ALOT more depth as well. The vocals were, well, a little more even as far as depth. The "Vox 003" and "Gtr 003" files were too brittle sounding for my taste. A touch too tin can sounding. Not enough body was getting interpreted correctly through the 003 converters I am afraid to say. And it was too exaggerated in the highs, along with not representing them correctly. Now barryjohns, lol - I got another question for you as far as fairness factor here. Was these guitar and vocal takes identical for each converter ? Meaning did you record them two takes first RAW on a separate source (like external sampler or CD), then play back that source to then record that through each converter ? (therefore being really EXACTLY the same take for each converter) -- OR was them files actually 4 different recording takes of you doing them live separately each time ? One of each (gtr and vox) for EACH converter ? Because as most people like to do it the way of the later, that is completely unfair as well, because it actually could have been you/the performer strumming the guitar accidently with more twang therefore treble one time, or singing with a touch more body the second time around on accident... Do you know what I mean ? So can you clarify which approach you took for this test ? Thanks man, __________________ As your dog says: "Hey barkeep, whose leg do you have to hump to get a Dry Martini around here?"

28th August 2008, 02:11 AM	#22
andremattos Lives for gear Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Brazil - Amazon (the heart of the world) Posts: 705	Rosseta __________________ Record Engineer - Musician - Producer Brazil - Amazon http://www.palcomp3.com.br/andremattos

1st September 2008, 01:26 PM	#23
ol drippy Gear interested Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: SLC, UT Posts: 10	Yeah, thanks again for taking the time to do that. I'm getting an 003 soon and was wondering about the conversion. Also i'm curious about running your pre through the channel 5. Does that actually bypass the 003 pre's, or is it still affecting the sample? I thought the ADAT and S/PDIF were the only way to bypass that preamp and converter?

1st September 2008, 03:45 PM	#25
88fingerz Lives for gear Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 540	I like what the 003 conversion does to the acoustic gtr vs the Apogee in this comparison. This actually demonstrates just how good a value the 003 is. It holds it's own just fine next to the Rosetta. Just fine!

1st September 2008, 03:57 PM	#26
JPeters86 Lives for gear Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Posts: 886	The Rosetta definitely sounds brighter and more alive in my opinion. I don't know if I'll buy one because of the price, but I do think it sounds better than the 003 (which sounds stunning as well). I'm still quite happy with the converters in my MOTU 8Pre though. __________________ Best wishes, JPeters86

15th October 2008, 12:25 AM	#27
Jmaucoin Gear interested Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4	003 SPIDIF 2 channel? hey there I have a 003 with a digimax in adat right now with my ssl alpha channel in spidif and my la 610 in the line in. in the future im thinking about a rosetta 800 to replace the digimax in the adat but perhaps another alpha channel first. my question: Seeing as one alpha channel is in Spidif will another run on the 2nd channel if connected into the "out" jack? I'd like these for both tracking and mastering and found the converters quite nice. I'm imagining the rosetta is nicer? anyone compared ?