BIG BEN worth it?

[lucasmusic]

I have a Digi002 w/no frontend gear attached, I just go straight into the digi mic pre's.
Through an attempt to get a higher clarity mixes without eq boosts ofcourse; would a BIG BEN word clock sync be a nice fix, or is this a product thats only helpful when many external devices are linked and one needs to sync all word clocks from each device?

Second question if I may,
Which would more likely improve my sound the most?
Big Ben or an Rosetta 800??

[Johnkenn]

I would go for the 800. I have a 200 and when I tried the Big Ben with it, I could really hear no audible difference. Mind you, I'm going from the pre into the Rosetta, FW into the Mac, so no other external devices are being used. I've read a couple of places that people thought the 800's sound improved with the BB, but the 200's was actually degraded. I could tell no difference - YMMV.

[Rufuss Sewell]

Wow... definitely get the Rosetta 800 before you get a big ben. I have both, and the Rosetta has an immediate clarity that would be hard to ignore when compared to my previous cheap converters. The addition of Big Ben is kind of like... hmmm... I think I hear something?!? For me the Big Ben is a tool I use so that I can avoid clicks and pops when running all of my digital gear. I didn't really buy it to improve the sound quality.

[picksail]

Well, the Apogee AD/16X sounds brilliant with it's built-in proprietary Big Ben clock.

I know that the Big Ben contributes a vast improvement, when clocking to a Digi 192, so I can't see why it couldn't improve a Rosetta 200/800.

Of course, I would get the converters before the Big Ben.

[mahasandi]

Get the better convertors.

a clock is only one element of good conversion.

you know the saying " only as strong as the weakest link"

or" you can't squeeze water from a rock "

or "why is the fat lady staring at me"

[Thumper]

Do you need the extra I/O?

If not, get the Black Lion Audio modifications. It will change the analog side of the converters as well as the pres.

You'll notice a bigger difference with this vs. the Apogee converters.

If you DO need the extra I/O... sure... get an adat input device.

Otherwise, get some different mics/pres. Conversion is the last step in a good chain, with the others providing a bigger difference.

Mics/Room will be the biggest difference that you can provide. The only other thing that will make a bigger improvement is the performance. And that's either your fault, or it's not. Don't blame the gear.

I'm liking Apogee conversion less and less... I prefer a 192 over a Rosetta 200. I thought it would be the opposite until I A-Bd them a couple of days ago. I HATED the Rosetta.... The 192 sounded excellent!!!

[Sqye]

Originally Posted by mahasandi

or "why is the fat lady staring at me"

lol

[Ashermusic]

Better converters will always improve the sound of a single audio interface more than a better clock. In fact the clock can sometimes make it worse as it will increase jitter.

The Big Ben was designed to clock mutiple devices.

[raal]

Originally Posted by Thumper

I'm liking Apogee conversion less and less... I prefer a 192 over a Rosetta 200. I thought it would be the opposite until I A-Bd them a couple of days ago. I HATED the Rosetta.... The 192 sounded excellent!!!

sooo.. the consensus is and i agree, go for the verters.

FWIW i just have to say i own digi 192s and apogee 16X. IMO when the 192s are clocked to the 16X they sound way better (read closer to the original source in sound and stereo image). just another opinion. have nothing to do with apogee, just an end user and have never heard rosetta 200 or 800. will be getting BB when i add more verters to the chain.

[lucasmusic]

thanks everyone, this helps; looks like ill be going with the rosetta!

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by Ashermusic

Better converters will always improve the sound of a single audio interface more than a better clock. In fact the clock can sometimes make it worse as it will increase jitter.

The Big Ben was designed to clock mutiple devices.

Someone should write this in stone around here, somewhere.

In fact, people like Dan Lavry, Bob Katz, and even Digidesign will tell you that, while external clocking is sometimes more practical, particularly in a complex, multi-converter rig, it will actually tend to increase jitter by the very nature of the process.

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/ind...t/14324/15450/

[raal]

Originally Posted by theblue1

Someone should write this in stone around here, somewhere.

In fact, people like Dan Lavry, Bob Katz, and even Digidesign will tell you that, while external clocking is sometimes more practical, particularly in a complex, multi-converter rig, it will actually tend to increase jitter by the very nature of the process.

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/ind...t/14324/15450/

of course this stands to reason, i'm not at all contesting what luminaries like mr.lavry and mr.katz say, and i've never heard lavry blue or gold.

but imho in the particular case of digi 192s being clocked to BB, the difference for the better (closer to the analog source in sound and stereo image) is noticeable. if this is in spite of, or because of extra jitter i have no idea, but i'm going to have to go with my ears on this one.

but IDHMMMPVFY (i drive a hummer so my mileage most probably varies from yours).

[Thumper]

Originally Posted by crazycharlie

how can hate the rosetta compared to digi192. was the 192 hooked up to bb

Why yes it was. And so was the Rosetta. The 192 kicked the Rosettas ass all the way to Timbuktu.

I was shocked.

[Tony Shepperd]

I'm with raal on this one.
I have been using Big Ben for almost 3 years now.
For me, it's an integral part of my sound.
I hear what the nay sayers say, the proof to me is when my clients keep coming back.
My stereo image, is deeper and wider with it. The tail end of reverbs can be heard shimmering all the way to the very end.

Go to the websites of some of these guys who don't believe in Big Ben.
Listen to their mixes. Then go around and listen to guys who use it. The difference is night and day.
And yes, before you say anything, they might be better engineers (mixers), but don't you think,
if you like the mixes you hear with Big Ben, then you might give it the benefit of the doubt?

[The MPCist]

I'm with Raal and Tony on this.

I use a Big Ben and it's master clocking everything in my setup from PT 192's, Cranesong HEDD, to the TC6000 --- everything digital basically. It sounds more than fine and I like what I get out of the system sonically.