The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Quality Is Back - Keep Your High End
Old 26th October 2019
  #61
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I can’t speak for what you’ve been told, or what you think you’ve been told.

Only for what I understand to be the case.

And if I’VE misunderstood things - someone correct me!

But I’m pretty sure that’s not the case.

It’s not that hard to understand - it does make sense. You just can’t extrapolate to what you think, stuck to what you know.
I do trust you. I agree. And I also agree to ask: please someone else chime in here if there is more to this mystery.. BTW, seriously, who did invent 32bf ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
- what apogee are you thinking is “crappy”? All the apogee products I know are pretty decent.
Ok, I started off decades ago with the Apogee Rosetta (my first converter !)and then later advanced to the 16X's. These are the absolute penuchle for Apogee. I stand behind these. This could be a extremely long story, so I'll keep it simple, and I know I'll get flack here, lol but - Once the 16X's support was dwindling, and I was expanding I did a extremely involved converter test. The right way, blah blah blah - Summary of it all - I ended up with a JCF Latte for Stereo tracking at times when I want that flav and 6 Prism ADA-8XR's for my multiple channel mixing/recording because these hands down sounded the best between all colleagues double blind testing. (and Lavry, Weiss, Apogee, Apollo, and a few more were involved.)

The point to the Apogee statement was this - During that test I involved my old Rosetta and 16X's too along with their new line up (Essemble/Symphony, etc..). First off, their newer line up sound like cardboard across the board. The older units ended up placing above them. The newer Apogees literally ranked bottom of the list in the blind testing. My thoughts are, Apogee fell off, they completely suck now. Sound literally like the recording is on cardboard to me. Hey Prism did too as their newer units (Orpheus, etc.. at that time) sounded good, but no where near as good as the ADA-8XR's.

FYI, The 16X's sounded great. They really do. Just not the best. Apogee now are like kids toys, built for kids. Look like kids marketing, sound even worse. etc.. I nicknamed them Crappy Appy Gee's hence the statement, but I forgot y'all won't get my inside joke ! lol

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
- why are people sending you stuff with plugin processing applied? Get them to send it raw! Yes - in theory, exporting said crappily processed file as 32b could stop clipping if they’ve overshot. You know what’d be better? No processing at all!
I know I know bro... tell them every time. I swear its what I said, cause most the time it is vocals and I think (just my theory) they are embarrassed about something and they fix it. You know how vocalists are, its like, "no one can hear my voice like this, I only send out my voice fixed up a little".

I even tell them the situation (exactly what I am telling you guys) and say don't worry, it will be higher quality in the end to NOT process anything with your stuff, leave all that to me, I don't judge. Don't worry. But it still happens.

But it still happens. See unfortunately when working for money (not my own stuff), I have to deal with unprofessionals. They have their rule of thumbs, etc.. and not everyone listens. I admit a lot do, but not them all. (Do you ever work on Soundbetter?) Thats where it happens the most.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
You are missing my point I think.

My point is that you thought you were right about how bit depth works, and now you seem to think that maybe you misunderstood how that works. Since you just came to that realization you should also consider that perhaps you were also misunderstanding how sample rate 'works'. Because when we sample we deal with bit depth and sample rate, and if you misunderstood 50% of that it's entirely possible that you misunderstood the other half as well.

So it's not about it being "a entirely different subject", because first of all it isn't, and secondly it's all math and technology and if you 'miss' the one you could have missed the other.

I'm actually not entirely opposed to more outlets offering higher resolution audio, I'm just saying that your original post and argument really only boils down to the old tedious debate over sample rates. So any of the million threads about it would do.. if we wanted to talk about it that is..

If all it is is letting us know higher res downloads/streams are now more available then of course we appreciate the info.
Ahhh, yes sir I see your point now and I do that as well. People lose credibility once they are wrong about something. So I see your point.

I want to comfort you though, my statement about sample rates is entirely different than this mystical 32bf thing. I have spent years testing, proving to others within my testing and I also understand it 100% better than the unicorn of 32bf. lol So trust. That one I got.

Also I want to reiterate its not about telling people higher sample rates are better, I just threw that in on the side cause that's my character, lol The real thing/point was/ is like you said, informing us all higher res downloads are offered now and to me that's super cool, because the outlets like iTunes, etc. beforehand weren't even at a 16bit 44.1 level, so the point isn't about that verses higher formats. Its about the crappy mp3 offerings getting better and I think that's a awesome step. And I'd like to spread the word for us all to support it. I'm buying songs now I don't even want just to get the numbers high ! Please everyone do the same is all I am saying. Lets change the world !

About the actual endless meaningless debate of sample rates though - and what this thread is not about nor did I mean it to be, I think I got people riled up over something I did not mean to be a focus - That said I want to say this and be done with that part of the subject. I will admit others might not find important about what I find important (smoothness of delivery timing and plugin reverb tails) about 96k sessions over lower SR sessions, and that's why the debate can be. I get that and I am not trying to change anyones mind. But there can be/should be no debate amongst intelligent people saying that a 96k session doesn't have PROS and cons from 48/44.1k sessions. (everyone just thinks there is the con)

There are pros, that's no opinion, that's fact. Whether your into that difference is a opinion and whether you can even feel/hear that difference I speak of(and no its not high frequencies or any frequency for that matter) is another monkey wrench. I would just like to state that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
As far as I know it is correct that if you go above zero using floating point, and then save that signal in a floating point file, then 'yes', importing that file into a new application that again uses floating point will allow you to avoid clipping.

The recent devices that record to 32-bit float, targeted to location-sound recordists in film/tv production btw, will allow signals 'above zero' for lack of a better word. When importing those files into for example Izotope RX we can see them clipping hard, but by simply lowering the level the dynamics are regained. That's the result of recording to 32-bit float and then importing that into an application that properly supports it.

I suppose the thing to consider here is that the increased dynamic range we get from 32-bit float is really completely unusable at the very end of the process when we actually listen to audio, which in turn means that the much more limited range we need to stick to is.. well.. the limit. In other words we still have to get down to below 0dBFS sooner or later, and going above during production becomes 'questionable' from the standpoint of "best practices". It's really not a good thing to become too used to going above zero is what I'm saying.

But anyway, I think you're partially correct about those implications, if I understood you correctly.
You did understand me correctly. And from what PM said too I know you guys are against it, but it is possible even though I misunderstood 32bf to a extent, that one part of 32bf is indeed helping me in some of my particular workflows and I shall remain to use it then.

Its like a safety net.
Old 26th October 2019
  #62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
I do trust you. I agree. And I also agree to ask: please someone else chime in here if there is more to this mystery.. BTW, seriously, who did invent 32bf ?
Well, it's just maths, so I'm not sure if you "invent" or "discover" it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single...g-point_format


Quote:
Ok, I started off decades ago with the Apogee Rosetta (my first converter !)and then later advanced to the 16X's. These are the absolute penuchle for Apogee. I stand behind these. This could be a extremely long story, so I'll keep it simple, and I know I'll get flack here, lol but - Once the 16X's support was dwindling, and I was expanding I did a extremely involved converter test. The right way, blah blah blah - Summary of it all - I ended up with a JCF Latte for Stereo tracking at times when I want that flav and 6 Prism ADA-8XR's for my multiple channel mixing/recording because these hands down sounded the best between all colleagues double blind testing. (and Lavry, Weiss, Apogee, Apollo, and a few more were involved.)

The point to the Apogee statement was this - During that test I involved my old Rosetta and 16X's too along with their new line up (Essemble/Symphony, etc..). First off, their newer line up sound like cardboard across the board. The older units ended up placing above them. The newer Apogees literally ranked bottom of the list in the blind testing. My thoughts are, Apogee fell off, they completely suck now. Sound literally like the recording is on cardboard to me. Hey Prism did too as their newer units (Orpheus, etc.. at that time) sounded good, but no where near as good as the ADA-8XR's.

FYI, The 16X's sounded great. They really do. Just not the best. Apogee now are like kids toys, built for kids. Look like kids marketing, sound even worse. etc.. I nicknamed them Crappy Appy Gee's hence the statement, but I forgot y'all won't get my inside joke ! lol
Right. I have to say, in the "real world" I never see people sweating about their conversion like I do on here...we just get on with it!

I wouldn't deny Prism etc are amazing - however, you spend a LOT of money to get something a little bit better.

Modern Apogees are great. I don't know what your issue is, but the biggest studio in the world recently ($5m, completed a couple of years ago) chose to equip all their rooms with Symphony IIs. I regularly use an original Symphony, as well as the Ensemble TB in our writing room. They don't sound like "cardboard"; no converter sounds like "cardboard". It's small differences, not "night and day"; and the newer converters are great boxes.

I've used the 16X too, as well as the original AD8000s. They're all good. If they all ranked badly in your test, something was off - it's as simple as that.

Quote:
I know I know bro... tell them every time. I swear its what I said, cause most the time it is vocals and I think (just my theory) they are embarrassed about something and they fix it. You know how vocalists are, its like, "no one can hear my voice like this, I only send out my voice fixed up a little".

I even tell them the situation (exactly what I am telling you guys) and say don't worry, it will be higher quality in the end to NOT process anything with your stuff, leave all that to me, I don't judge. Don't worry. But it still happens.

But it still happens. See unfortunately when working for money (not my own stuff), I have to deal with unprofessionals. They have their rule of thumbs, etc.. and not everyone listens. I admit a lot do, but not them all. (Do you ever work on Soundbetter?) Thats where it happens the most.
I don't love sites like Soundbetter. Lots of people desperate for work, trying to one up each other at cheaper and cheaper prices. like Fivrr Pro. I don't need the work, so I don't have anything to do with it.

But it's kind of what you're doing here - you're entrenched and arguing your position for something being "better" without actually understanding why.

Quote:
You did understand me correctly. And from what PM said too I know you guys are against it, but it is possible even though I misunderstood 32bf to a extent, that one part of 32bf is indeed helping me in some of my particular workflows and I shall remain to use it then.

Its like a safety net.
WHAT is like a safety net? WHAT exactly benefit are you getting? You've COMPLETELY misunderstood what 32b fp storage is (not to an extent - it doesn't do ANYTHING of what you thought it did), so how is it helping you? what part of your misunderstanding are you still clinging to?!
Old 27th October 2019
  #63
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Well, it's just maths, so I'm not sure if you "invent" or "discover" it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single...g-point_format
Right. Invent might be bad word. Everything in this universe is math, even things that someone thinks are not math, are math in areas they do not recognize. Math is literally everything.

But, it takes someone to implement that math into something like this, (formula to something useful) and then after that, implement that useful thing into a device to harness the usefulness. So I was curious who was responsible for taking the formula and implementing it into something like we now see. Obviously it happened one day or Conversion would have been born from day one with 32bf. So "implementation" happened somewhere. Who is that masked man ? LOL




Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Right. I have to say, in the "real world" I never see people sweating about their conversion like I do on here...we just get on with it!

I wouldn't deny Prism etc are amazing - however, you spend a LOT of money to get something a little bit better.

Modern Apogees are great. I don't know what your issue is, but the biggest studio in the world recently ($5m, completed a couple of years ago) chose to equip all their rooms with Symphony IIs. I regularly use an original Symphony, as well as the Ensemble TB in our writing room. They don't sound like "cardboard"; no converter sounds like "cardboard". It's small differences, not "night and day"; and the newer converters are great boxes.

I've used the 16X too, as well as the original AD8000s. They're all good. If they all ranked badly in your test, something was off - it's as simple as that.
Yea, I definitely know where you are coming from. I been over this a trillion times with folks. Yes bro, you just met a overly picky person. I get teased all the time by my friends. Just who I am. And I love the results being picky about life gets me. Picky about health, foods I eat, exercise, quality of products I buy, OVERLY picky about looks and women I date, and extremely picky about the things I decide to claim my passion. Its just me man. Go ahead and make fun of me for it, I get it all the time from my slacker friends. lol So I am used to it.

Anyway that said. Prism is not much more if you think about dollar per channel. Its less than the JCF Latte or Antelope Eclipse I got.

You are right, honestly its always small differences, not night and day, BUT that small difference was *going in a direction* of "cardboard" is the way I should have worded it. There were others there too, double blind testing so we couldn't influence each other in anyway. Our results were not 100% equal or identical, but everyone did rank the Symphony and Ensemble lowest. All with the same feeling. Loss of depth. It was a colleague of mine that coined the "cardboard" phrase because of that. I am actually stealing his word, cause it was the best way to describe the inferiority. (even if small like you did point out).

There was nothing wrong with the test, we are pretty meticulous when making tests, variable free, totally fair, etc.. - modern Apogee just aint as good as you think. Blind test it all day against either of them 3 pieces I mentioned above, you'll see.

Apollo was better, even old 16X Apogee AND Rosetta was better. I was truly as surprised as you sound you are too. Trust me. Cause my goal was to buy them ! I came from Apogee. I wanted to buy the new Apogees. Tried to make excuses to buy them. But in my gut I wanted to make sure from testing. Ran the tests and tried to deny it for a while. Then I thought... man, I spent a lot on these tests - time and money.. So shouldn't I let the test do what its suppose to for me, and I should buy the winner. (which was the ADA-8XR). So I did. A year or so later after saving some money back up I then went and got the JCF Latte and Antelope Eclipse too cause they ranked highest in a few instruments, but not overall. So they were like the "runners up" in a sense.

I will say this, this was so many years ago that it was the first editions of the Symphony and Ensemble. So if they got better, maybe I am off base for my remark. But just the way Apogee starting looking, and releasing stuff, bad taste in my mouth. They went the Toys R Us route. Making kids toys is the vibe and energy I feel. The company just isn't the same. Several people left, replaced by marketing tactics types, etc.. I don't think they make things as good as they used to, plain and simple.

I'm tripping out right now how your not freaking out over me more for saying Lavry Gold and Weiss was in the test and didn't win. haha. They didn't dude. To me both them units sound great, BUT they change the audio to sound great. Lavry kinda hypes the low mid. Sounds swollen/thicker compared to source. Weiss has a roll off up top somewhere (people mistake this for "warmth") Now this might be exactly why some would like it. But I am not into *conversion* that hype in or scoop out. I liked the ADA-8XR because nothing changed frequency wise. Nothing at all changed except it somehow did something to the source that made it sound more honest ? Lack of better word ? IDK ? And whatever that is, is undeniable amongst 4 colleagues. I tried (not in the test though) several other known "vanilla" converters, and Prism has something beyond Vanilla, its like Vanilla in the right parts, but gives you a better translation of your source than any other converter I've heard, so its not vanilla there, you HEAR that deeper more honest translation. Just a very nice converter and it does D to D on a per channel basis simultaneously, different sample rates per channel simultaneously if wanted, and DSD if wanted AND its 16 channel modular using all XLR, which is very important to me (not a DB25 fan and try to avoid it when possible). So IMO for the price, that aint bad.

To me, just to be honest and blunt, I don't care what 30mil dollar places do, most of the bigger pro places/industries make decisions based on bang for buck and not totality. Which I understand, so I am not bashing them. My point is using them as examples doesn't make any point to me that the conversion they chose is best.. All it means to me is I would not record there. lol

I really don't follow "big box store" mottos. I'm more: the few, narrow path, boutiquey, esentric type. But even more important than that, I use testing to make my decisions. I feel its the most fair to me personally if it me that will be using it. Know what I mean ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I don't love sites like Soundbetter. Lots of people desperate for work, trying to one up each other at cheaper and cheaper prices. like Fivrr Pro. I don't need the work, so I don't have anything to do with it.

But it's kind of what you're doing here - you're entrenched and arguing your position for something being "better" without actually understanding why.
Totally feel you. I am the same way. I turn work down all the time if I don't get minimally my $60 hr. So I am 100% on your side on this one. And frankly I don't even like to work with or for people anyway. Takes me away from my personal projects... so again, I feel ya. Isn't that something I said in the beginning of the thread ? I hate working for price match clowns. I won't do it.

But I just accidentally I guess came across a few that will make it worth my while and I've been helping them out on SB,... so I'm ok with it. Gotta weed through the BS there. And some cool folks eventually come across it.

Also, I sub-contract from SB sometimes too, so I am the buyer in those cases ! All in all, my experiences have been ok there and you know how picky I am.

In all these instances, I've seen files passed to me that have the ol' classic plugin push accidentally pass the 0.0db realm.


Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
WHAT is like a safety net? WHAT exactly benefit are you getting? You've COMPLETELY misunderstood what 32b fp storage is (not to an extent - it doesn't do ANYTHING of what you thought it did), so how is it helping you? what part of your misunderstanding are you still clinging to?!
I thought we just cleared this up ? lol You even confirmed it. Please let me know if this was also misunderstood. If a track has a plugin (or multiple plugin chain) process on that track and the processing you do raises the *tracks* volume enough past the 0.0db, and that track gets exported/bounced with said processing on it, if both sessions had been in/are in 32bf, then that track/file is still ok. Technically never clipped.

If this is true, then I like that safety net is what I am saying. Especially for the unnoticeable cons recording at 32bf gives me.

Now, if this isn't the case - lol Then damn, I misunderstood you and Matt yet again ! haha and please let me know.
Old 27th October 2019
  #64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
Right. Invent might be bad word. Everything in this universe is math, even things that someone thinks are not math, are math in areas they do not recognize. Math is literally everything.

But, it takes someone to implement that math into something like this, (formula to something useful) and then after that, implement that useful thing into a device to harness the usefulness. So I was curious who was responsible for taking the formula and implementing it into something like we now see. Obviously it happened one day or Conversion would have been born from day one with 32bf. So "implementation" happened somewhere. Who is that masked man ? LOL
No idea. Probably some faceless programmer...I don't know what the first DAW to incorporate a floating point summing engine was.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
Yea, I definitely know where you are coming from. I been over this a trillion times with folks. Yes bro, you just met a overly picky person. I get teased all the time by my friends. Just who I am. And I love the results being picky about life gets me. Picky about health, foods I eat, exercise, quality of products I buy, OVERLY picky about looks and women I date, and extremely picky about the things I decide to claim my passion. Its just me man. Go ahead and make fun of me for it, I get it all the time from my slacker friends. lol So I am used to it.
It's not really to do with being picky - we're ALL picky - it's to do with if the conclusions you draw are correct!

Quote:
Anyway that said. Prism is not much more if you think about dollar per channel. Its less than the JCF Latte or Antelope Eclipse I got.
Prism is currently $10.5k on vintage king for 8 channels. the equivalent Avid HDIO is $4.5k at sweetwater for 16 channels, plus a whole load of other functions and integrated support.

Yep, the Prisms are far more expensive, pound for pound...and some have even preferred the HDIOs!

Quote:
You are right, honestly its always small differences, not night and day, BUT that small difference was *going in a direction* of "cardboard" is the way I should have worded it. There were others there too, double blind testing so we couldn't influence each other in anyway. Our results were not 100% equal or identical, but everyone did rank the Symphony and Ensemble lowest. All with the same feeling. Loss of depth. It was a colleague of mine that coined the "cardboard" phrase because of that. I am actually stealing his word, cause it was the best way to describe the inferiority. (even if small like you did point out).

There was nothing wrong with the test, we are pretty meticulous when making tests, variable free, totally fair, etc.. - modern Apogee just aint as good as you think. Blind test it all day against either of them 3 pieces I mentioned above, you'll see.
you're entitled to your opinion. I just don't agree Although I'm not surprised the Prism was the winner!

Quote:
I will say this, this was so many years ago that it was the first editions of the Symphony and Ensemble. So if they got better, maybe I am off base for my remark. But just the way Apogee starting looking, and releasing stuff, bad taste in my mouth. They went the Toys R Us route. Making kids toys is the vibe and energy I feel. The company just isn't the same. Several people left, replaced by marketing tactics types, etc.. I don't think they make things as good as they used to, plain and simple.
Again, don't agree, but that's up to you!

Quote:
I'm tripping out right now how your not freaking out over me more for saying Lavry Gold and Weiss was in the test and didn't win. haha. They didn't dude. To me both them units sound great, BUT they change the audio to sound great. Lavry kinda hypes the low mid. Sounds swollen/thicker compared to source. Weiss has a roll off up top somewhere (people mistake this for "warmth") Now this might be exactly why some would like it. But I am not into *conversion* that hype in or scoop out. I liked the ADA-8XR because nothing changed frequency wise. Nothing at all changed except it somehow did something to the source that made it sound more honest ? Lack of better word ? IDK ? And whatever that is, is undeniable amongst 4 colleagues.
I can understand that. Lavry Gold is a mastering capture converter - it's not even designed for tracking, too high latency...I have no interest in converters that attempt to "add" something to the sound...and plus mixing ITB means I don't *need* a capture converter.

Quote:
I tried (not in the test though) several other known "vanilla" converters, and Prism has something beyond Vanilla, its like Vanilla in the right parts, but gives you a better translation of your source than any other converter I've heard, so its not vanilla there, you HEAR that deeper more honest translation. Just a very nice converter and it does D to D on a per channel basis simultaneously, different sample rates per channel simultaneously if wanted, and DSD if wanted AND its 16 channel modular using all XLR, which is very important to me (not a DB25 fan and try to avoid it when possible). So IMO for the price, that aint bad.
db25s make a LOT of sense when interfacing with a patch bay, but to each their own.

Quote:
To me, just to be honest and blunt, I don't care what 30mil dollar places do, most of the bigger pro places/industries make decisions based on bang for buck and not totality. Which I understand, so I am not bashing them. My point is using them as examples doesn't make any point to me that the conversion they chose is best.. All it means to me is I would not record there. lol
My point is that they did the same sort of shootouts you did and came to a different conclusion.

I really don't follow "big box store" mottos. I'm more: the few, narrow path, boutiquey, esentric type. But even more important than that, I use testing to make my decisions. I feel its the most fair to me personally if it me that will be using it. Know what I mean ?

Quote:
I thought we just cleared this up ? lol You even confirmed it. Please let me know if this was also misunderstood. If a track has a plugin (or multiple plugin chain) process on that track and the processing you do raises the *tracks* volume enough past the 0.0db, and that track gets exported/bounced with said processing on it, if both sessions had been in/are in 32bf, then that track/file is still ok. Technically never clipped.

If this is true, then I like that safety net is what I am saying. Especially for the unnoticeable cons recording at 32bf gives me.

Now, if this isn't the case - lol Then damn, I misunderstood you and Matt yet again ! haha and please let me know.
Right. I'd personally be more worried about what ELSE they're screwing up, and if they're not able to follow the simple request of "turn off all processing before exporting", then they're possibly not going to be able to select the correct bit depth either.

You are right - if someone is competent enough to choose the bit depth you request, but not so competent to be able to follow other basic instructions, AND has the habit of turning things up so they clip...you could be saving yourself.

I'd personally just re-request non-clipped, unprocessed files.....simpler all round!
Old 27th October 2019
  #65
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
It's not really to do with being picky - we're ALL picky - it's to do with if the conclusions you draw are correct!
lol Very true. But the word "correct" is ok to use when dealing with some debate with lets say the 32bf we just went through. But its very hard to use (if not even not proper) when dealing with art/sound opinions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Prism is currently $10.5k on vintage king for 8 channels. the equivalent Avid HDIO is $4.5k at sweetwater for 16 channels, plus a whole load of other functions and integrated support.

Yep, the Prisms are far more expensive, pound for pound...and some have even preferred the HDIOs!

you're entitled to your opinion. I just don't agree Although I'm not surprised the Prism was the winner!
I guess I forgot to mention I feel the new Prisms are not as good as the old ADA-8XR. Since you were comparing 8 channels, I was thinking maybe you were comparing a newer device ? In that case I'd agree.

I got 5 ADA-8XR's for the 80 outs I need (and the In's I need to). I paid approx $5,600 max for each one. Some even cheaper, each came with 16ch. 3 of them I got from my boy Ryan at Vintage King. Most came with I/O config I didn't want, but I sold the ones I didn't need and copped the ones I did. I needed to buy 7 total over time to pull this off then sell the 2 other chassis with the unneeded cards. I know of no other converter with the same quality that hooks directly to HDX with the quality it has AND has so easily swappable I/O which allows me to only need 5 units to cover both In's I need and 80 Outs. (cause I never need 80 Outs while simultaneously needing my In's. When I need IN's then I only need 2 OUTS, when I need the 80 OUTS [for mix] I do not need any IN's). So I do a swapping trick for mix time). Its so simple the way they designed it. It a very fast easy swap. Oh and I calculated it all out and nothing was going to give me the combination of quality nor the price point per channel while hooking directly up to HDX AND being a good channel swappable design (which is what caused for only needing 5 units to cover it.)

I absolutely despise Madi or DB25 protocol/cable connector for analog paths (they are fine for digital) but will never use them for analog, so those units were out. (plus remember the quality opinion I have, that comes first). Bottom line, Prism was best bet for me (or IMO anyone using HDX that needs the highest quality of multiple channels beyond 8+).

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
db25s make a LOT of sense when interfacing with a patch bay, but to each their own.
Agreed, I love the space they save (which is also the ONLY reason companies like to use them too) - But I have a pretty involved patch-bay for all my set up and the cable guy I use (ha, cable guy, no not Jim Carrey, LOL) that custom makes most of LA's big studio patch bays and much more famous ones worldwide back in the 80's can make them all just fine with no DB25. They do make sense for space, but IMO not for quality in analog paths (again, just my opinion, don't really wanna open this debate). He also doesn't like the originally designed Printer connector for analog either. Again, just opinions. Though he had actual technical good points why he feels they are inferior for analog.

Also the Mogami cable I use (again, tested in blind testing and felt sounded best, even better than some $400 cables ! lol no joke) 3173 is hard to fit in them little connectors anyway. But can be done, I got several for my digital side. Thats mostly DB25.



Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I can understand that. Lavry Gold is a mastering capture converter - it's not even designed for tracking, too high latency...I have no interest in converters that attempt to "add" something to the sound...and plus mixing ITB means I don't *need* a capture converter.
I just thought with those quality names and reputations that there was no "attempt" to add anything. I know Dan and Dan (lol) are smarter than that. If it was, then I lost respect. What I was thinking was it was inadvertent part of the design/path ? IDK. But yes +1 I agree with you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
My point is that they did the same sort of shootouts you did and came to a different conclusion.
Do you think they really did run shootouts ? Now a days that's not common practice for a large place. They say they do, but what drives the decision is the deal Apogee gives them for the advertisement. (I bet).

Then they tell you they test to make their customers feel better and also probably part of the deal Apogee wanted to help validate the new products some more.

That said, being just my opinion of big business practice, maybe they did as you said. And if so it goes to show you how opinions are. And I support that. OR they simply didn't have a ADA-8XR in the test. LOL Which I bet is the case, its old, unsupported soon, etc.. Plus tracking down used ones like I did wouldn't be part of their wisest practice just for higher quality.

So just personally, I still don't think their opinions are any better or wiser than mine, for me. Maybe for them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Right. I'd personally be more worried about what ELSE they're screwing up, and if they're not able to follow the simple request of "turn off all processing before exporting", then they're possibly not going to be able to select the correct bit depth either.

You are right - if someone is competent enough to choose the bit depth you request, but not so competent to be able to follow other basic instructions, AND has the habit of turning things up so they clip...you could be saving yourself.

I'd personally just re-request non-clipped, unprocessed files.....simpler all round!
+1,000 !!

Your right and I do request that always. They fix the prob next time, surely. But it still happens sometimes here and there. Anyway good to know we cleared this up. I admit what I think is a good safety net might not be worth it for others. But I am glad we both see my minuscule and avoidable point. lol - So we can leave it at that.

The other thing that's makes me feel more comfortable about it is this - I also back all my sessions up 2 different ways. 1 is the normal manually backing up the session as its entire session folder, etc.. But the other is a 10,000+ year to infinity future proof back up - I bounce every track down as a linear .wav file with all plugins/processing, etc.. So the song could be opened and sound the same (for the most part) even if one day Pro Tools/Daws as we know them now is no more. But .wav playback will last forever.

So to have those files with the 32bf storage applied to them might one day pay off for reasons I/we may not be thinking about now... Just some added insurance. Anything - just throwing this out there as one small example, but if some new invention comes out decades from now and it can do something we are not thinking about now (so lets just not bother to debate it cause its something our brains can not wrap around currently) to your old files IF and only IF those files are 32bf. Something along those lines.

Why not do it then (for me personally). Future proof, plus my immediate benefits which are admittedly small and avoidable.
Old 28th October 2019
  #66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
lol Very true. But the word "correct" is ok to use when dealing with some debate with lets say the 32bf we just went through. But its very hard to use (if not even not proper) when dealing with art/sound opinions.
True. "your conclusion is the only correct one" perhaps then?

Quote:
I guess I forgot to mention I feel the new Prisms are not as good as the old ADA-8XR. Since you were comparing 8 channels, I was thinking maybe you were comparing a newer device ? In that case I'd agree.
I'm talking about whatever's currently for sale - but holds true for the older ones too. They're massively more expensive new than the equivalent Avid interfaces, and whilst one might argue they're "better", you pay a lot more for a little bit better. If money is no object, I suppose that's ok!

Quote:
I got 5 ADA-8XR's for the 80 outs I need (and the In's I need to). I paid approx $5,600 max for each one. Some even cheaper, each came with 16ch. 3 of them I got from my boy Ryan at Vintage King. Most came with I/O config I didn't want, but I sold the ones I didn't need and copped the ones I did. I needed to buy 7 total over time to pull this off then sell the 2 other chassis with the unneeded cards. I know of no other converter with the same quality that hooks directly to HDX with the quality it has AND has so easily swappable I/O which allows me to only need 5 units to cover both In's I need and 80 Outs. (cause I never need 80 Outs while simultaneously needing my In's. When I need IN's then I only need 2 OUTS, when I need the 80 OUTS [for mix] I do not need any IN's). So I do a swapping trick for mix time). Its so simple the way they designed it. It a very fast easy swap. Oh and I calculated it all out and nothing was going to give me the combination of quality nor the price point per channel while hooking directly up to HDX AND being a good channel swappable design (which is what caused for only needing 5 units to cover it.)
Well, no-one could accuse you of not putting your money where your mouth is!

Obviously the Avids do 80 full io in 5 units too.....

Quote:
I absolutely despise Madi or DB25 protocol/cable connector for analog paths (they are fine for digital) but will never use them for analog, so those units were out. (plus remember the quality opinion I have, that comes first). Bottom line, Prism was best bet for me (or IMO anyone using HDX that needs the highest quality of multiple channels beyond 8+).
Sonically, I'm not sure there's an argument to make there - it's just wires, made correctly there's nothing really any different between that and point to point wiring - but reliability wise, especially if you're moving things around you may have a point.

Agreed, I love the space they save (which is also the ONLY reason companies like to use them too) - But I have a pretty involved patch-bay for all my set up and the cable guy I use (ha, cable guy, no not Jim Carrey, LOL) that custom makes most of LA's big studio patch bays and much more famous ones worldwide back in the 80's can make them all just fine with no DB25. They do make sense for space, but IMO not for quality in analog paths (again, just my opinion, don't really wanna open this debate). He also doesn't like the originally designed Printer connector for analog either. Again, just opinions. Though he had actual technical good points why he feels they are inferior for analog.

Also the Mogami cable I use (again, tested in blind testing and felt sounded best, even better than some $400 cables ! lol no joke) 3173 is hard to fit in them little connectors anyway. But can be done, I got several for my digital side. Thats mostly DB25.



Quote:
Do you think they really did run shootouts ? Now a days that's not common practice for a large place. They say they do, but what drives the decision is the deal Apogee gives them for the advertisement. (I bet).

Then they tell you they test to make their customers feel better and also probably part of the deal Apogee wanted to help validate the new products some more.

That said, being just my opinion of big business practice, maybe they did as you said. And if so it goes to show you how opinions are. And I support that. OR they simply didn't have a ADA-8XR in the test. LOL Which I bet is the case, its old, unsupported soon, etc.. Plus tracking down used ones like I did wouldn't be part of their wisest practice just for higher quality.
Err - I wouldn't go speculating about things I don't know! Besides, I don't think ANY studio is "big business". They're all still small businesses really.

Quote:
So just personally, I still don't think their opinions are any better or wiser than mine, for me. Maybe for them.
I didn't say they were. I just said it's far from a universal thought that modern apogees "sound like cardboard".


Quote:
+1,000 !!

Your right and I do request that always. They fix the prob next time, surely. But it still happens sometimes here and there. Anyway good to know we cleared this up. I admit what I think is a good safety net might not be worth it for others. But I am glad we both see my minuscule and avoidable point. lol - So we can leave it at that.
There's a massive disconnect here - you're mixing on an 80io prism rig and dealing with amateurs....?!

Quote:
The other thing that's makes me feel more comfortable about it is this - I also back all my sessions up 2 different ways. 1 is the normal manually backing up the session as its entire session folder, etc.. But the other is a 10,000+ year to infinity future proof back up - I bounce every track down as a linear .wav file with all plugins/processing, etc.. So the song could be opened and sound the same (for the most part) even if one day Pro Tools/Daws as we know them now is no more. But .wav playback will last forever.
That's fair enough - although see comment above re amateurs, is this really projects that are going to need that? I print stems for everything, and very detailed stems too - not every track, but minimal groups - so I figure on the offchance one of my lesser products gets the remix treatment 40 years from now, I'm probably covered...

PS - so for every project, which might be 80 channels, you print a stem through your console (assume you're using a console or summing amp with 80ins?!)? How long does that take?!

Quote:
So to have those files with the 32bf storage applied to them might one day pay off for reasons I/we may not be thinking about now... Just some added insurance. Anything - just throwing this out there as one small example, but if some new invention comes out decades from now and it can do something we are not thinking about now (so lets just not bother to debate it cause its something our brains can not wrap around currently) to your old files IF and only IF those files are 32bf. Something along those lines.

Why not do it then (for me personally). Future proof, plus my immediate benefits which are admittedly small and avoidable.
Again - only if you've clipped the stems at the mix point I suppose. Otherwise its 24b files with a bunch of 00s padding it out.

A 24b file that hasn't been clipped can ALWAYS be converted to a 32b float file at some point in the future - whatever mystical processes might be invented. After all - that's how you created your 32b files in the first place - you captured your stem through your 24bit converter and stored it as a 32b file.

So (again, assuming no f-ups - and I'm assuming if you're invested enough to run 80 channels of prism, you're a bit above an amateur!) you're really NOT future proofing yourself any more than storing at the same sample rate/24bit. Sorry!

I suppose a more sensible thing to do would be to capture all mix passes at 24/96 to a separate, synced up rig. That WOULD be more future proofed. But that's more expensive still!
Old 28th October 2019
  #67
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
True. "your conclusion is the only correct one" perhaps then?
Not mine per se. But the listener. So this applies to us all. So for you and your choices, studio, mixes, etc.. your opinion on sonics should be the correct one for you. I really hope I did not come across as if my opinion was the right one for everyone.

That said, when someone hears something differently than I do, I really like to investigate to see what I might be not pin-pointing on. (this is why I even had that test). Hopefully others do that as well, instead of just saying I'm crazy if I make a claim about something I heard. Test it out now focusing on what I said I heard and see if you then hear something to back my opinions, etc.. I do that for others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I'm talking about whatever's currently for sale - but holds true for the older ones too. They're massively more expensive new than the equivalent Avid interfaces, and whilst one might argue they're "better", you pay a lot more for a little bit better. If money is no object, I suppose that's ok!

Well, no-one could accuse you of not putting your money where your mouth is!

Obviously the Avids do 80 full io in 5 units too.....
LOL, yea and it hurt when I did it too. lol But you always snap back.

The Avid interfaces, you are right, they do (and have done) equivalent I/O possibilities. Another long story there, but if I went Avid, I'd only ever go with the MTRX. But that thing had a couple low level strikes against it for me (even though it is a AWESOME piece). (no XLR, etc..) nothing that important.

Man - for now, sticking with what I got as far as conversion. But I was on the fence about it, so those MTRX's are good pieces for sure. I bet the fluidity that it works with PT is just amazing and zero latency. Definitely would like it for that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Err - I wouldn't go speculating about things I don't know! Besides, I don't think ANY studio is "big business". They're all still small businesses really.

I didn't say they were. I just said it's far from a universal thought that modern apogees "sound like cardboard".
Very true. Just 5mil is indeed a lot to do in one swoop. I'd say they have investors for sure, which puts them in a category of possibly (just possibly) doing as I said for reasons I said.

But, very possibly not as well.



Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
There's a massive disconnect here - you're mixing on an 80io prism rig and dealing with amateurs....?!
Yea, I don't see the disconnect. I will work with anyone that doesn't haggle my prices and whom I like their energy. (those two are a must). And just so has it, some of these folks are great in every aspect except that pseudo clipping one. lol

You know, one of my biggest clients whom I will not mention names, but one of the huge video game companies, are the worse to deal with. These "amateurs" are actually pleasant, creative. etc... As long as someone just pays without the price match Joe blow down the block thing, I am happy with them. I've narrowed down to only those types in my life.



Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
PS - so for every project, which might be 80 channels, you print a stem through your console (assume you're using a console or summing amp with 80ins?!)? How long does that take?!
I rarely, if ever use all 80 channels. Which is why I have 80, cause I want more than I usually use. That said, the usual session IDK, tops off at around anywhere between 50-70 channels for me and my style/approach. Of course pending on genre, artist, etc.. I swear I could easily get by on 64. So the 80 is for the overkill comfort zone. (for me).

So you caught me cutting a corner dude !! lol what I say to never do. haha. But let me explain - The way I do them linear wav file back ups is more like if you got the old Tapes from a old song. I bounce/export the tracks all ITB with all ITB processing/plugs embedded in them. This is a very adequate back up IMO, but the person *will indeed have to mix it through a console again* to get the exact flav. But all my automation is done ITB, I use the console and outboard gear in a good way that you can tell/hear, but due to my exact approach, you will get about 90% of the mix from my ITB exports. I of course take detailed notes and instructions and save them in the wav file folder of all outboard and console settings. But if this is ever gonna happen, they would use a different approach IMO anyway. So starting with my ITB files might even be preferred.

Anyway, because if I didn't do it that way, the backup process could be a nightmare long time. And maybe not what you really want in the end. Better to start a step back, to maybe use a different console, stay ITB, use different outboard, etc..

I'd say doing it this way on average it takes me around 3-5hrs to completely back up each of my songs. Pending on track count and song length and other details/issues popping up.

(P.S. My recording/tracking approach also has a lot (about 80%) of the outboard used printed in the session. Its just how I do it. So the backup files get that too ! But obviously has zero of the final console pass)

If I did it the way you were saying (which I admit is really the best way to mimic it exactly) my god, IDK, might take a full day to back up ? LOL Seriously.


Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Again - only if you've clipped the stems at the mix point I suppose. Otherwise its 24b files with a bunch of 00s padding it out.

A 24b file that hasn't been clipped can ALWAYS be converted to a 32b float file at some point in the future - whatever mystical processes might be invented. After all - that's how you created your 32b files in the first place - you captured your stem through your 24bit converter and stored it as a 32b file.

So (again, assuming no f-ups - and I'm assuming if you're invested enough to run 80 channels of prism, you're a bit above an amateur!) you're really NOT future proofing yourself any more than storing at the same sample rate/24bit. Sorry!

I suppose a more sensible thing to do would be to capture all mix passes at 24/96 to a separate, synced up rig. That WOULD be more future proofed. But that's more expensive still!
You know, you bring up a excellent point here. Didn't think of that. A 24b file can always be converted to 32bf if that weird reason ever approached us. I know why I didn't think of that before, its because I thought 32bf was more than what it is (something happening to it also within the DAW).

Anyway man, very good point !

And your last point/idea is spot on. That'd be dope ! I do have 2 rigs. But the 2nd one wouldn't be suffice for that exact task quite yet. (I/O inferiorities, conversion, patch bay not set up for that, etc..) But that would be ideal ! I don't think they would need to be sync'ed. cause one is just capturing linear files. So in theory, tempo, time, means nothing to it.

I tell you though, I'm a pretty picky dude, and I feel fine with the ITB file backups. It is really a good starting point for a new mix IMO. Almost preferred. It would be easy to match the original exactly with a little work if you wanted that, or go in a another direction (to improve it). Etc..
Old 29th October 2019
  #68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
The Avid interfaces, you are right, they do (and have done) equivalent I/O possibilities. Another long story there, but if I went Avid, I'd only ever go with the MTRX. But that thing had a couple low level strikes against it for me (even though it is a AWESOME piece). (no XLR, etc..) nothing that important.

Man - for now, sticking with what I got as far as conversion. But I was on the fence about it, so those MTRX's are good pieces for sure. I bet the fluidity that it works with PT is just amazing and zero latency. Definitely would like it for that.
I've never seen an MTRX in the flesh - they don't seem that common in studios at all! The latency isn't likely to be that different to any of the HDX interfaces though - you obviously never get "zero" latency with digital.

The advantages of an all avid system are proper io latency compensation, and support - you won't get proper support for your system if you were to have a detailed tech issue, since you're on 3rd party conversion. That may matter, hopefully it won't!

Quote:
Very true. Just 5mil is indeed a lot to do in one swoop. I'd say they have investors for sure, which puts them in a category of possibly (just possibly) doing as I said for reasons I said.

But, very possibly not as well.
No investors save the owner - you'd have heard of him

Quote:
Yea, I don't see the disconnect. I will work with anyone that doesn't haggle my prices and whom I like their energy. (those two are a must). And just so has it, some of these folks are great in every aspect except that pseudo clipping one. lol

You know, one of my biggest clients whom I will not mention names, but one of the huge video game companies, are the worse to deal with. These "amateurs" are actually pleasant, creative. etc... As long as someone just pays without the price match Joe blow down the block thing, I am happy with them. I've narrowed down to only those types in my life.
Maybe I'm doing you a disservice there then - it just seems a little odd to have this massively high end gear and not be dealing with higher end clients, if not only because they're the ones who pay without haggling! but I suppose it depends...



Quote:
I rarely, if ever use all 80 channels. Which is why I have 80, cause I want more than I usually use. That said, the usual session IDK, tops off at around anywhere between 50-70 channels for me and my style/approach. Of course pending on genre, artist, etc.. I swear I could easily get by on 64. So the 80 is for the overkill comfort zone. (for me).
Right

Quote:
So you caught me cutting a corner dude !! lol what I say to never do. haha. But let me explain - The way I do them linear wav file back ups is more like if you got the old Tapes from a old song. I bounce/export the tracks all ITB with all ITB processing/plugs embedded in them. This is a very adequate back up IMO, but the person *will indeed have to mix it through a console again* to get the exact flav. But all my automation is done ITB, I use the console and outboard gear in a good way that you can tell/hear, but due to my exact approach, you will get about 90% of the mix from my ITB exports. I of course take detailed notes and instructions and save them in the wav file folder of all outboard and console settings. But if this is ever gonna happen, they would use a different approach IMO anyway. So starting with my ITB files might even be preferred.
OK that makes sense - and yes I'd do the same if I felt I needed to, I just think the chances of needing to recall that indie EP I did 5 years ago is unlikely most of the time! and I'll keep detailed stems that would do for most purposes anyway.

I've had to deal with a few issues at majors from previous bad archiving efforts though and that's enough to make me want to do things at least slightly correctly!

Quote:
I'd say doing it this way on average it takes me around 3-5hrs to completely back up each of my songs. Pending on track count and song length and other details/issues popping up.

(P.S. My recording/tracking approach also has a lot (about 80%) of the outboard used printed in the session. Its just how I do it. So the backup files get that too ! But obviously has zero of the final console pass)

If I did it the way you were saying (which I admit is really the best way to mimic it exactly) my god, IDK, might take a full day to back up ? LOL Seriously.
Still - 3-5hrs for proper backup, I hope you're charging!

Quote:
You know, you bring up a excellent point here. Didn't think of that. A 24b file can always be converted to 32bf if that weird reason ever approached us. I know why I didn't think of that before, its because I thought 32bf was more than what it is (something happening to it also within the DAW).

Anyway man, very good point !
Exactly you're getting it!
Old 29th October 2019
  #69
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I've never seen an MTRX in the flesh - they don't seem that common in studios at all! The latency isn't likely to be that different to any of the HDX interfaces though - you obviously never get "zero" latency with digital.

The advantages of an all avid system are proper io latency compensation, and support - you won't get proper support for your system if you were to have a detailed tech issue, since you're on 3rd party conversion. That may matter, hopefully it won't!
God that MTRX I truly stand behind. (and I haven't even heard it yet ! lol) And again, if you calculate it out, per channel, what you get... Not really that expensive. Its there with my Prism's. Which I deemed a better deal than people think once numbers are crunched.

I heard the latency is truly the best with that MTRX, yes. And you are 100% right about latency and Avid interfaces, that's what always drew me towards them, but to me the quality was never that great. UNTIL the MTRX brother !! lol I swear I almost jumped the Prism ship. Mainly for the latency calculation as you said.

End of day, I usually don't need tech support that Prism or Avid can't handle (actually so far never had in all my years of having PT and 3rd party converters) and so far man, the Latency on my Prisms (and old Apogee's) are all workable. And I track live drums too ! Never a issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Maybe I'm doing you a disservice there then - it just seems a little odd to have this massively high end gear and not be dealing with higher end clients, if not only because they're the ones who pay without haggling! but I suppose it depends...
Your doing no disservice man, no worries. I totally see your point. Like I said, remember, this SB thing is prob less than 30% of my work. And its even only that high cause recently I had to go there to sub contract people (I'm paying ! lol) - so don't think its all I am doing.

I personally just don't see the difference as long as they are paying. I don't discriminate on knowledge/talent or things like that. Like I said, I sometimes have bigger issues if the client is too large of a company. (late payments, always got to front the work or you don't get the job, etc..).

I like actual personalized people, as they pay upfront, and are easily communicated with. Unlike... ahummm.. *insert large popular company name here*

Keep in mind about 65% of my business is from clients that are probably more like what you're thinking I should have.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
I just think the chances of needing to recall that indie EP I did 5 years ago is unlikely most of the time!
This is soooooo true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Still - 3-5hrs for proper backup, I hope you're charging!
Yea, so here is how I work it. (and it makes sense after you think about it) - When dealing with clients, I charge half-time ($30hr) for backing up. Why ? Well because its not really my talents for engineering being tested there.. lol and its a relaxing environment as I'm not always in front of the computer that entire time.

I think it's fair for them, and not so bad for me. I also give the option for no back ups of course. And obviously choices in those back-ups. (Session Folders only, Linear wav files, both, etc..). Most choose Sessions only. Which is definitely easy for me, so the $30hr is more fair to me in that case.

When I'm doing my own personal stuff (which FYI is a lot lately) I obviously can't charge anyone, lol. And I do both (Session Folders and Linear wav files) and both then get redundant backups to yet another drive (each) that I keep in a separate building miles apart.

Reason for the severity is I am backing up songs not completed yet and ones that are, but not released, sometimes prior to copyright, etc.. So its not for remixes all the time. Its for storage, making sure I can never lose them due to fire, theft, lightening, Zombie Apocalypse, strange acts of god, or me spontaneously combusting or something, haha

I try to stress the importance of redundant back-ups with one stored in a different location than the other to clients. But as you guessed it, only a extremely small few have listened over the years.
Old 30th October 2019
  #70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
God that MTRX I truly stand behind. (and I haven't even heard it yet ! lol) And again, if you calculate it out, per channel, what you get... Not really that expensive. Its there with my Prism's. Which I deemed a better deal than people think once numbers are crunched.
But you haven't heard it...?

Quote:
I heard the latency is truly the best with that MTRX, yes. And you are 100% right about latency and Avid interfaces, that's what always drew me towards them, but to me the quality was never that great. UNTIL the MTRX brother !! lol I swear I almost jumped the Prism ship. Mainly for the latency calculation as you said.
The HDIO is great quality - I've heard people prefer them to your Prisms! The 192 certainly isn't up to Prism standards, but it's also nothing like as bad as people make out.

It's not about "low latency" per se with avid interfaces, it's about how the SYSTEM knows exactly how much latency the converter itself is adding and can compensate accurately. Much is made of the Lynx being matched to the Avid converters so it's a direct replacement; others don't.

The MTRX does indeed look amazing..but so many of it's features simply aren't needed in a recording studio. It looks more like a post/broadcast featured product, and probably a price to match!

Quote:
End of day, I usually don't need tech support that Prism or Avid can't handle (actually so far never had in all my years of having PT and 3rd party converters) and so far man, the Latency on my Prisms (and old Apogee's) are all workable. And I track live drums too ! Never a issue.
But that's the point - Avid won't tech support your system because it's not 100% compatible. For some, that's necessary. And yes the latency isn't an issue of course - it's just not 100% sample accurate.

Quote:
Your doing no disservice man, no worries. I totally see your point. Like I said, remember, this SB thing is prob less than 30% of my work. And its even only that high cause recently I had to go there to sub contract people (I'm paying ! lol) - so don't think its all I am doing.

I personally just don't see the difference as long as they are paying. I don't discriminate on knowledge/talent or things like that. Like I said, I sometimes have bigger issues if the client is too large of a company. (late payments, always got to front the work or you don't get the job, etc..).

I like actual personalized people, as they pay upfront, and are easily communicated with. Unlike... ahummm.. *insert large popular company name here*

Keep in mind about 65% of my business is from clients that are probably more like what you're thinking I should have.
Fair enough - we've only talked about the problems (or potential problems )

Quote:
Yea, so here is how I work it. (and it makes sense after you think about it) - When dealing with clients, I charge half-time ($30hr) for backing up. Why ? Well because its not really my talents for engineering being tested there.. lol and its a relaxing environment as I'm not always in front of the computer that entire time.

I think it's fair for them, and not so bad for me. I also give the option for no back ups of course. And obviously choices in those back-ups. (Session Folders only, Linear wav files, both, etc..). Most choose Sessions only. Which is definitely easy for me, so the $30hr is more fair to me in that case.
OK.

Quote:
When I'm doing my own personal stuff (which FYI is a lot lately) I obviously can't charge anyone, lol. And I do both (Session Folders and Linear wav files) and both then get redundant backups to yet another drive (each) that I keep in a separate building miles apart.

Reason for the severity is I am backing up songs not completed yet and ones that are, but not released, sometimes prior to copyright, etc.. So its not for remixes all the time. Its for storage, making sure I can never lose them due to fire, theft, lightening, Zombie Apocalypse, strange acts of god, or me spontaneously combusting or something, haha

I try to stress the importance of redundant back-ups with one stored in a different location than the other to clients. But as you guessed it, only a extremely small few have listened over the years.
and that also makes sense in the main. Check out Backblaze if you've not got cloud storage already, very simple, easy to integrate with existing setups and it's very cheap!
Old 30th October 2019
  #71
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
But you haven't heard it...?
No I have not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
The HDIO is great quality - I've heard people prefer them to your Prisms!
I have heard this too. And even a step further, correct me if I am wrong, but I heard Avid got Prism to make the HDIO's. But I do not know if that is true.

Even if so, I will humbly say/think that I am not sure these people that preferred the HDIO were comparing to the ADA-8XR or not. Cause again, the newer Prism units are simply not all the way there. The XR was released in 2006 ! lol So.... any slightly more recent comparison to "Prisms" I'd have to bet are verses their newer units.

And as far as Prism making the new HDIO's for Avid, even if true, that doesn't always mean it will be as good. I'm sure you know the story with things like that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
It's not about "low latency" per se with avid interfaces, it's about how the SYSTEM knows exactly how much latency the converter itself is adding and can compensate accurately. Much is made of the Lynx being matched to the Avid converters so it's a direct replacement; others don't.
Yea, totally right. Thats is what I meant too. But starting off with a lower latency in the first place always helps its own self make the delay compensation sound best/compute, whatever I am sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
The MTRX does indeed look amazing..but so many of it's features simply aren't needed in a recording studio. It looks more like a post/broadcast featured product, and probably a price to match!
Yea I'd only get it for the conversion quality and system response. I'm funny, I actually don't like or use features (like those) for the most part. My approach is entirely simple and basic. I never use Mic Pre's or any added fluff in converters. I got my own mic pre's for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
But that's the point - Avid won't tech support your system because it's not 100% compatible. For some, that's necessary. And yes the latency isn't an issue of course - it's just not 100% sample accurate.
Yea I could see that. I think some also don't know how to get creative when getting support. I have indeed used Avid for support, but the only thing I contact them for is actual DAW issue support not involving interfaces. They always help with that fine. Respond quickly, I've never been discriminated against due to my system.

Once PT App is working fine, then if you have a issue in your system's entirety, you know its the interfaces issue (or maybe computer) and you get support from your interface company, and they always help with that. Prism is excellent for that. Especially once you verify that you know for sure PT App is working properly.

Like I said, I never had a problem with support for my system. You just got to know which company to call and when. Never had a problem they didn't fix. Also, due to the fact that the ADA-8XR's directly hook up to PTHD, PTHDX, PTMix, Etc.. just like Avids converters do, they were indeed supported at one time FYI. I don't know if they still are though. Just like the AD/DA 16X's were supported too if you were running HD or Mix system with the HD/Mix modules installed in your converter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
and that also makes sense in the main. Check out Backblaze if you've not got cloud storage already, very simple, easy to integrate with existing setups and it's very cheap!
Wow, thanks for the referral ! I never heard of them. Looks cool. If you buy the 2 year at a time package, that's basically $4.60 a month of unlimited backup !

Being in the cloud has its pluses and minus of course. Retrieve it anywhere ! Thats cool. Set up auto backing, etc.. The minus is, every so often, I'd still want to have a redundant copy of that physically somewhere, so ultimately I'm still dealing with that. And of course the trust issue, if someone hacks into their servers one day, etc..

But all in all, I'm 110% interested. Looking further into it. Do you use it ?
Old 5th November 2019
  #72
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
[. . .] Ray, thanks for making sure I am answered. I have to be honest here... ummmm, I'm still a little confused. I posted my question cause I was/am unsure how I benefit from 32 bit float when recording via my Prism ADA-8XR interface, which is 24bit. [. . .]
Aside from cases were you will some day start recording or be handed a 32-bit float file - likely via a device like the MIxPre II - I expect you needn't look for benefits. Just know that that future is already here for some and coming for many more.


Best regards,

Ray H.

Personal note: Apologies for the long delay in this response - I've been dealing with my father's failing health issues that are still a bit overwhelming. And as so much time has gone by, I suspect you have far less uncertainty now - though I've not had the time to catch up on this thread. It is likely I will continue to be unresponsive as my father's health continues to degrade. But I hope some of this helped.
Old 14th November 2019
  #73
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Firstly - if it's ok, we'll decide what belongs in high end thanks!

Secondly - forget hard drive space, who buys downloads en masse anymore. If something is going to take off, it has to work for streaming.

I think you paint an absolute best case scenario, assuming everyone aside from us engineer types cares about audio quality, and aren't happy listening to crappy phones and bluetooth speakers - but it'd certainly be a good thing to have the option. "Customers like it better" - I don't think most will notice or care unfortunately.

One might hope that at the least, it makes hi-res streaming worth it for those who want to make it available, and not such a niche option.

I'm not arguing from the point of view of what I'D like, more from what I think the masses will want. Can't think like a muso when the target audience isn't (in general).
I only now saw this thread -- I'm about six weeks late -- and I'm already trying Amazon HD lossless.

As much as I'm enjoying it -- and ironically a good pal just comped me into his Tidal Lossless family plan [but I HATE the Tidal player (or the Tidal player as it existed last week; today add-to-queue and play-next are both on appropriate rt-click context menus AND working more as I would have originally expected. But it was def messed up when I wrote this post!] -- I have to agree with psycho_monkey: I just don't think there's popular interest in this -- nor would such interest really make that much sense, perhaps, since most folks, do, indeed, listen on quite inferior gear.

I posted in FB about my exploration of Amazon Lossless and the response was profoundly underwhelming, despite the fact that most of my FB friends are musicians.

But, anyhow, I see the conversation here has moved on to advanced data compression codecs for higher sample rate content, a topic I find less compelling, though it's no doubt fascinating when you get into it.

Last edited by theblue1; 17th November 2019 at 07:48 PM..
Old 17th December 2019
  #74
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
I only now saw this thread -- I'm about six weeks late -- and I'm already trying Amazon HD lossless.

As much as I'm enjoying it -- and ironically a good pal just comped me into his Tidal Lossless family plan [but I HATE the Tidal player (or the Tidal player as it existed last week; today add-to-queue and play-next are both on appropriate rt-click context menus AND working more as I would have originally expected. But it was def messed up when I wrote this post!] -- I have to agree with psycho_monkey: I just don't think there's popular interest in this -- nor would such interest really make that much sense, perhaps, since most folks, do, indeed, listen on quite inferior gear.

I posted in FB about my exploration of Amazon Lossless and the response was profoundly underwhelming, despite the fact that most of my FB friends are musicians.

But, anyhow, I see the conversation here has moved on to advanced data compression codecs for higher sample rate content, a topic I find less compelling, though it's no doubt fascinating when you get into it.
LOL, I know the subject took a turn. Thanks for sharing your experiences Blue.

Yea I actually got 3 people to sign up for it that I actually know for sure. I say its less about it needing to catch on, and the point of the thread was the excitement that its being *offered*. THIS is what will cause the free market competition thing to take place and soon *others will offer it*. NEXT after that will be the .wav offering, no lossless. Etc.. Maybe it won't grab as many purchases, sure, but it being a option is a win for us.

As a offered option now, this will cause for more artists to do as I plan on doing and releasing 24/96k album releases. This my friends is the trickle effect I speak of. Its important, and happening.

Things don't always turn to crap and stay like that. Sometimes its society subconsciously trying it out, thinking its going to take over, and it really doesn't. Example - Back in the 50's and 60's cars here in America were just built absolutely the best ever. No corners cut, no bean counting, just deliver the customer the sexiest piece of steel you can. Ok - then in the 80's through early 90's, cars starting getting extremely cheesy and built like complete crapola. Every new car invention feature was marketed as the best thing ever, always ended up failing miserably, lol. The "muscle car" completely 100% faded out. Compact was in. Front wheel drive was in, No rear wheel drive - (the mp3 of cars). People swore up and down this was it. Never going back. Only forward, so give into the mp3 car, blah blah blah...

Then about 15 years ago and now especially, the awesome ass muscle cars have come back. And obviously selling like crazy cause, well, they look better and drive like beasts !

This cycle happens with everything I feel. The old doesn't 100% come back, but its good parts do with a modern twist once everyone realizes they were dumb for giving it up. This WILL happen with quality of music. So IMO (the concept of the thread), don't give into cutting corners and recording on MBoxes, and Florissant Colored Morning Cereals as DAWs and using sample packs instead of learning how to play instruments just cause some 17 year old says its cool.... lol - And more importantly, don't think the mp3 is the last ever in music quality so therefore you can slack off in quality control down at URABaddAss headquarters. Stay real, it always pays off in the long run *once the dust settles* :-)
Old 17th December 2019
  #75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
LOL, I know the subject took a turn. Thanks for sharing your experiences Blue.

Yea I actually got 3 people to sign up for it that I actually know for sure. I say its less about it needing to catch on, and the point of the thread was the excitement that its being *offered*. THIS is what will cause the free market competition thing to take place and soon *others will offer it*. NEXT after that will be the .wav offering, no lossless. Etc.. Maybe it won't grab as many purchases, sure, but it being a option is a win for us.

As a offered option now, this will cause for more artists to do as I plan on doing and releasing 24/96k album releases. This my friends is the trickle effect I speak of. Its important, and happening.

Things don't always turn to crap and stay like that. Sometimes its society subconsciously trying it out, thinking its going to take over, and it really doesn't. Example - Back in the 50's and 60's cars here in America were just built absolutely the best ever. No corners cut, no bean counting, just deliver the customer the sexiest piece of steel you can. Ok - then in the 80's through early 90's, cars starting getting extremely cheesy and built like complete crapola. Every new car invention feature was marketed as the best thing ever, always ended up failing miserably, lol. The "muscle car" completely 100% faded out. Compact was in. Front wheel drive was in, No rear wheel drive - (the mp3 of cars). People swore up and down this was it. Never going back. Only forward, so give into the mp3 car, blah blah blah...

Then about 15 years ago and now especially, the awesome ass muscle cars have come back. And obviously selling like crazy cause, well, they look better and drive like beasts !

This cycle happens with everything I feel. The old doesn't 100% come back, but its good parts do with a modern twist once everyone realizes they were dumb for giving it up. This WILL happen with quality of music. So IMO (the concept of the thread), don't give into cutting corners and recording on MBoxes, and Florissant Colored Morning Cereals as DAWs and using sample packs instead of learning how to play instruments just cause some 17 year old says its cool.... lol - And more importantly, don't think the mp3 is the last ever in music quality so therefore you can slack off in quality control down at URABaddAss headquarters. Stay real, it always pays off in the long run *once the dust settles* :-)
Well, I'm listening to Amazon HD right now... and I have to say that once I installed the Tidal desktop app (I'd been using the in-browser version), I found myself a little more comfortable over on Tidal than I had been. (But, DAMN, I hate that inflexible queue!!!) And Tidal's Track Info Page view -- when it's populated with the info it was built to hold, anyhow -- is REALLY ACES! I mean... there's just no excuse for all this info being available from the labels for the streamers, a number of which are moving (slowly) to provide places for it.

In the Tidal lossless vs Amazon lossless, here's how it breaks down for me:

I really like the very quick, responsive Amazon UI. It doesn't look great, though it's quite legible (they use alternating background color rows in lists like an old fashioned spreadsheet printout which is easy to see and read but not as slick looking as Tidal's 'cool' black layout) -- but it's lightning fast -- while Tidal is slow as molasses moving through search returns, playlists, and such -- and, much worse, uses an 'endless scroll' (ajaxian, geek terms) system that takes FOR BLOODY EVER to get to the bottom of. (UGH)

But they both sound great (though I had to change my Amazon stream quality setting on the desktop from 'best available' 'down' to 'HD/Ultra' (it seemed to be switching to low quality settings unnecessarily; since changing the settings, it's been fine); I also had to clear out my browser cookies and cache for Tidal because it 'forgot' its normalization setting and switching it on and off did nothing; after flush and refresh, though, it was fine. (I've also uninstalled and reinstalled Amazon a couple times to get past an intermittent gapping/skipping issue; I got that tip from an Amazon chat rep and didn't think it would work but it did. Go figure.)

[Since I'm in the enviable position of having both -- and because my old streamer, Google Play Music didn't have any form of normalization in its desktop player -- AND because I'd explored (and decided I didn't care for) the compression/limiting 'normalization' that first rolled out in Spotify -- AND because I'd read some suggestions that normalization schemes had advanced in some players (like Apple Music) and were using prescanned average volume indexing to provide relatively transparent normalization (without compression/limiting), I decided to test the normalization in both Amazon and Tidal. From my tests -- which produced virtually identical results on the same track in both Tidal and Amazon, down to .02 dB, probably below the margin of error of my measurements and calculations, reducing overall level without appearing to apply any compression at all -- ie, the RMS average was precisely the same before and after, only offset by the amount of level reduction imposed.]


On the cars thing... as much as I loved the old 50s and 60s muscle cars (I was that kind of kid), for the past 25 years, I drove the same Corolla 1800 CC 5 speed I bought new in 1994. It's seen its best days (I'm keeping it to give to a friend who's recovering from a long illness), I was never totally sold on the metallic bronze paint job, but it is, absolutely, the best car I ever owned... finally easing my old Slant 6 Valiant out of number one slot in my heart. [I loved the Val so much I wrote a kind of love song for it.]
Old 17th December 2019
  #76
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
Well, I'm listening to Amazon HD right now... **edit, see original post above**
Very good review man. I like how into it you are. And your not the only one. For me, I download and don't stream. I like listening to files better than a "stream". For that process, everything been fine for me.

IMO, for now, until most artists get their head out their a$$es using "HD" (the 16 bit 44.1 level) is fine because that is the most common end result most labels/artists give the digital distribution places. When in "Ultra HD" mode (24 bit / 96-192k), I guess they are upsampling the original content for the artists that are behind the times ? IDK really. Just guessing.

Some artists did release 24/96k which in that case you will notice a good difference and benefit being in Ultra HD mode. And soon, that's the way it will be everywhere. At least the *option* to. For now just research which songs had a real 24/96k release and make your choice from that.

Oh yea, so when speaking of the auto "Normalization" process they do (if I understood you right, cause there is also a actual manual normalization option feature too), you are inadvertently speaking of LUFS. This is a long story, but end result is its a good thing. Its a "loudness standard" that originated in TV, to keep the commercials from being louder than the real show. Its locked in and now all TV has a volume/loudness standard that no one can deviate from. So its great ! Finally. The bad news is, the music industry has only half ass adopted it so far. But soon it will indeed 100% adopt it. For now, each individual place has its own LUFS level standard, LOL Its great for the place, cause now no matter how loud or quiet each artist mixed their song, they will all sound the same volume while listening on the place your at (Youtube, Spotify, Amazon, etc..). BUT the issue is there is not ONE industry standard yet that all must abide to. So a little confusion will stay until there is.

But what's so beautiful about this standard is, once 100% adopted by the music industry so every place has the same LUFS standard, then that will cause every artist to simply mix/master to that standard AND.... drum roll please.... *the loudness war is finally over !* Music will sound better again because everyone won't be smashing the living hell out of their stuff to appear louder than the next. You do that, and the LUFS standard will just turn that person down and the person that didn't master or compress at all up and they will be same volume end result. So the person that overly smashed his music would have done it for no reason. Over time as people realize this, we will all just stick to the standard and finally be done with the loudness wars.

The cars thing.. ha, for sure man, don't get me wrong, I own a Smart Car ! So I understand compact and gas saving. And yes Toyota and Honda make some long lasting great cars. Thats the "benefit" I speak of when I said my analogy. Thats compared to the fact that MP3's take up no space in your house and are much easier to use and cheaper to get.

But, the other side is the newer compact style cars look like total goofy crap and also just have a much lower "swag" as far as engine sound, people you can fit in them, cruising bonuses, and much lower strength of the bodies and harder to work on yourself compared to the older swag machines. This would compare to the fact that with the great benefits MP3's give us, they just sound like crap and similarly the exact pros can become a cons as far as some other things.

So yea as a Smart Car owner, dude, I am not blind to their benefits ! Its why I got one. But I also was just pointing out, they really are not so much "better" that we should all drive them and only them and cut every other choice out (like people are thinking about the mp3 vs real music file world), they are just different and each have pros and cons. Which is why I keep my old Impala forever and definitely drive it when I want to have a "cruising" day and show off in a sense. I also got a truck for when I need to haul stuff. So again, choices are best.

Nobody really shows off in a Smart Car or Toyota Corolla ! haha
Old 22nd December 2019
  #77
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
it will indeed capture almost all of the audiophile market (they will probably be the most happy as its just too perfect for them) once they realize releases have been geared for 24/96k and its not some upscaling conversion thing.
I'm more cynical about the audiophile market.
I'm sure that if 24/96 becomes anything like a standard it will become useless to audiophiles as a way to differentiate themselves from the commoners.
I don't want to generalize too much and i think there are some sensible audiophiles out there. But the majority? I think they just like to show off.
Old 22nd December 2019
  #78
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
More places to "quantize' your delivery (cause if you don't know ALL digital recording quantizes your delivery, tape does not). This is what EVERYONE overlooks in the debate. And when I bring it up, they have nothing they can say. (other than they overlooked that). Again, its also why the Nyquist Theory is garbage for the most part.
You don't seem to have an idea of what Nyquist-Shannon theory of sampling actually is.
The samples themselves are ideed quantized, but why do you think the timing of the wave information contained in the samples is quantized?
Old 22nd December 2019
  #79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
Very good review man. I like how into it you are. And your not the only one. For me, I download and don't stream. I like listening to files better than a "stream". For that process, everything been fine for me.

IMO, for now, until most artists get their head out their a$$es using "HD" (the 16 bit 44.1 level) is fine because that is the most common end result most labels/artists give the digital distribution places. When in "Ultra HD" mode (24 bit / 96-192k), I guess they are upsampling the original content for the artists that are behind the times ? IDK really. Just guessing.

Some artists did release 24/96k which in that case you will notice a good difference and benefit being in Ultra HD mode. And soon, that's the way it will be everywhere. At least the *option* to. For now just research which songs had a real 24/96k release and make your choice from that.

Oh yea, so when speaking of the auto "Normalization" process they do (if I understood you right, cause there is also a actual manual normalization option feature too), you are inadvertently speaking of LUFS. This is a long story, but end result is its a good thing. Its a "loudness standard" that originated in TV, to keep the commercials from being louder than the real show. Its locked in and now all TV has a volume/loudness standard that no one can deviate from. So its great ! Finally. The bad news is, the music industry has only half ass adopted it so far. But soon it will indeed 100% adopt it. For now, each individual place has its own LUFS level standard, LOL Its great for the place, cause now no matter how loud or quiet each artist mixed their song, they will all sound the same volume while listening on the place your at (Youtube, Spotify, Amazon, etc..). BUT the issue is there is not ONE industry standard yet that all must abide to. So a little confusion will stay until there is.

But what's so beautiful about this standard is, once 100% adopted by the music industry so every place has the same LUFS standard, then that will cause every artist to simply mix/master to that standard AND.... drum roll please.... *the loudness war is finally over !* Music will sound better again because everyone won't be smashing the living hell out of their stuff to appear louder than the next. You do that, and the LUFS standard will just turn that person down and the person that didn't master or compress at all up and they will be same volume end result. So the person that overly smashed his music would have done it for no reason. Over time as people realize this, we will all just stick to the standard and finally be done with the loudness wars.

The cars thing.. ha, for sure man, don't get me wrong, I own a Smart Car ! So I understand compact and gas saving. And yes Toyota and Honda make some long lasting great cars. Thats the "benefit" I speak of when I said my analogy. Thats compared to the fact that MP3's take up no space in your house and are much easier to use and cheaper to get.

But, the other side is the newer compact style cars look like total goofy crap and also just have a much lower "swag" as far as engine sound, people you can fit in them, cruising bonuses, and much lower strength of the bodies and harder to work on yourself compared to the older swag machines. This would compare to the fact that with the great benefits MP3's give us, they just sound like crap and similarly the exact pros can become a cons as far as some other things.

So yea as a Smart Car owner, dude, I am not blind to their benefits ! Its why I got one. But I also was just pointing out, they really are not so much "better" that we should all drive them and only them and cut every other choice out (like people are thinking about the mp3 vs real music file world), they are just different and each have pros and cons. Which is why I keep my old Impala forever and definitely drive it when I want to have a "cruising" day and show off in a sense. I also got a truck for when I need to haul stuff. So again, choices are best.

Nobody really shows off in a Smart Car or Toyota Corolla ! haha
Toyota still makes a pretty good car -- but their designers appear to go way out of their way to make them as ugly as possible. So many ugly, jammed in lines and horrible nonfunctional 'aesthetic' features. Ugh. That said, my last three cars have been Toyotas... and that goes back to the mid 80s.


I'll actually stick up for the lowly mp3 -- with the proviso that they're ALL about the trade-off. Now that we're streaming huge movies and such and we have lossless audio formats like FLAC and AL that deliver virtual transparency in almost all cases, that seems a debatable economy.

BUT, I will say this, at the 320 level -- when encoded with a good encoder they can be very good (like the open source LAME -- I'm not a fan of Fraunhofer; the original is NOT the greatest in my mind -- though I long ago let my Fraunhofer encoder license lapse). At full processing quality/slowest speed, a 320 can sound very good. (I've been unable to suss a well-made 320 of a high quality acoustic jazz/percussion track from full CD quality -- and I HAVE been able to differentiate between a well made 256 and a well-made 320 using ABX test methodology (which, frankly, totally shocked me -- listening ad hoc a few times, I didn't think I'd be able to, but once I got into it, listening to cymbal and reverb tails, I was able to get statistical significance in my differentiation). That was 7 or 8 years ago. Not absolutely sure the ol' ears could still pull that off (I'm old and, strangely, getting older).
Old 22nd December 2019
  #80
Lives for gear
 
memristor's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
I don't want to generalize too much and i think there are some sensible audiophiles out there. But the majority? I think they just like to show off.
I believe its a psychological thing.
Reminds me when me father played a new flute to me, it was a facsimile of an old barock design. And it sounded pretty good, kind of hoarse but warm at the same time. Woody. Expensive. Antique. Till I realized that it was all made from plastic.
Then it sounded like plastic.
Old 23rd December 2019
  #81
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
I'm more cynical about the audiophile market.
I'm sure that if 24/96 becomes anything like a standard it will become useless to audiophiles as a way to differentiate themselves from the commoners.
I don't want to generalize too much and i think there are some sensible audiophiles out there. But the majority? I think they just like to show off.
Maybe, but at that point, even they have to accept that is the pinochle. I consider myself a audiophile, videophile, perfectionphile and I am overly happy with 24/96 files. Maybe, JUST maybe I'd support the desire of 24/192k or some DSD stuff.

But dude, LOL how much further can they go ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
You don't seem to have an idea of what Nyquist-Shannon theory of sampling actually is.
The samples themselves are ideed quantized, but why do you think the timing of the wave information contained in the samples is quantized?
I actually never said that. Sorry, maybe I was less clear than I should be ? I'll explain what I mean. But at the same time, what makes you think they are not ? The wave information can only adhere to the resolution of the session at best. Can it not ? I admit this part I care about less, and is not what I am referring to being a problem, and I admit I know less about it for sure, BUT I do think the wave information can only start and stop its information being recorded at intervals corresponding to the resolution of the session. This means, though you personally might not notice it, lets say your in a 44.1k session, as you record things, say words, hit percussions, etc.. if you happen to deliver a instance of audio between one of the 44.1 thousand places within second that it has to adhere to, then it by the nature of its law has to nudge it to the next closest sample in its resolution universe. This will be a larger jump of "auto nudging" when at 44.1 vs 96k, as 96k has over twice as many places the wave information can start/stop at, therefore equaling a smoother feel timing wise, even if just subconsciously.

BUT - What I was really saying that is unarguable is a smoother delivery at editing/nudging audio around after the fact. This is important to me. As I don't quantize, but I have a magical knack at nudging audio of live recordings around if they got too far off, but I keep them natural sounding. This my friend, if you don't know, when working in Pro Tools (which makes it superior to other DAWS that don't) you can edit/nudge down to a sample level. So the higher sample rate the session, the more nudging points I get. THIS creates the power I like. And I really can tell. (lets not forget for the same reason, reverb tails (if reverb was created from a plugin) sound way better at 96k as well.)

So summary is, I can set up a smoother timing at 96k that someone can at 44.1 if I got every hat chopped down to a tiny clip only as long as its actual sound - due to I have twice as many places to nudge the audio clips. And this works for any audio clips.

Not important for most, I know, and most probably can't tell a difference. But my question is why give that up if the negative side effects are literally none ? No thanks, I stay in 96k as I feel the universe I have within is more free to move.
Old 23rd December 2019
  #82
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
Toyota still makes a pretty good car -- but their designers appear to go way out of their way to make them as ugly as possible. So many ugly, jammed in lines and horrible nonfunctional 'aesthetic' features. Ugh. That said, my last three cars have been Toyotas... and that goes back to the mid 80s.


I'll actually stick up for the lowly mp3 -- with the proviso that they're ALL about the trade-off. Now that we're streaming huge movies and such and we have lossless audio formats like FLAC and AL that deliver virtual transparency in almost all cases, that seems a debatable economy.

BUT, I will say this, at the 320 level -- when encoded with a good encoder they can be very good (like the open source LAME -- I'm not a fan of Fraunhofer; the original is NOT the greatest in my mind -- though I long ago let my Fraunhofer encoder license lapse). At full processing quality/slowest speed, a 320 can sound very good. (I've been unable to suss a well-made 320 of a high quality acoustic jazz/percussion track from full CD quality -- and I HAVE been able to differentiate between a well made 256 and a well-made 320 using ABX test methodology (which, frankly, totally shocked me -- listening ad hoc a few times, I didn't think I'd be able to, but once I got into it, listening to cymbal and reverb tails, I was able to get statistical significance in my differentiation). That was 7 or 8 years ago. Not absolutely sure the ol' ears could still pull that off (I'm old and, strangely, getting older).
True, I agree ! and I admit I stick up for the convenience too. (in any field). I by no means am saying lets do away with mp3's and new ugly cars.. lol - No. What I do not stand for though is to totally delete a way to get the truly better older stuff just cause its too big, less convenient, uses more gas, too heavy, whatever. I feel options should always be there. And that's what I am fighting for.

BTW, totally agree, a 320 Mp3 is great sounding. You'll be hard pressed to tell the difference between it and a 16bit 44.1k file/CD. When I make a mp3, its always at 320. Yes I do make MP3's !! haha
Old 23rd December 2019
  #83
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
BUT I do think the wave information can only start and stop its information being recorded at intervals corresponding to the resolution of the session. This means, though you personally might not notice it, lets say your in a 44.1k session, as you record things, say words, hit percussions, etc.. if you happen to deliver a instance of audio between one of the 44.1 thousand places within second that it has to adhere to, then it by the nature of its law has to nudge it to the next closest sample in its resolution universe.
Good grief man!

You're so far off how it works it's unbelievable you have the balls to speak with such authority. Tell me you're joking, please....
Old 23rd December 2019
  #84
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by memristor View Post
I believe its a psychological thing.
Reminds me when me father played a new flute to me, it was a facsimile of an old barock design. And it sounded pretty good, kind of hoarse but warm at the same time. Woody. Expensive. Antique. Till I realized that it was all made from plastic.
Then it sounded like plastic.
A lot of it is always to do with that I feel too. I mean in every field. Life, politics, etc.. literally everything. If you want to believe this and that are the cause of this and that, you will make it true within yourself. And if your powerful enough with enough strings to pull, you can then make it true to others too !

BUT, somethings (like even your experience) could possibly be true. Or have a shred of merit. Like, it takes a small realization to then scrutinize the "XXXX" more and then you do notice some issues.

So then to differentiate between what is truly only psychological vs just maturing realizations and suddenly noticing certain details you didn't before once something was brought to your attention (and the monkey wrench of it being a combination !!! lol) is always a tough line to walk.
Old 23rd December 2019
  #85
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
Good grief man!

You're so far off how it works it's unbelievable you have the balls to speak with such authority. Tell me you're joking, please....
Read what I said more. I said this part I do not know, and care less about, BUT to me this is how I see it. Please elaborate if not.. Know what I mean ?

Of course I could be wrong, I even stated that ! lol Please tell me you're kidding.

Why didn't you quote this and tell me I'm wrong ? Good grief and all that, lol -

Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
What I was really saying that is unarguable is a smoother delivery at editing/nudging audio around after the fact. This is important to me. As I don't quantize, but I have a magical knack at nudging audio of live recordings around if they got too far off, but I keep them natural sounding. This my friend, if you don't know, when working in Pro Tools (which makes it superior to other DAWS that don't) you can edit/nudge down to a sample level. So the higher sample rate the session, the more nudging points I get. THIS creates the power I like. And I really can tell. (lets not forget for the same reason, reverb tails (if reverb was created from a plugin) sound way better at 96k as well.)

So summary is, I can set up a smoother timing at 96k that someone can at 44.1 if I got every hat chopped down to a tiny clip only as long as its actual sound - due to I have twice as many places to nudge the audio clips. And this works for any audio clips.
Thats the part I said in the beginning was what I was talking about.
Old 23rd December 2019
  #86
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
Read what I said more. I said this part I do not know, and care less about, BUT to me this is how I see it. Please elaborate if not.. Know what I mean ?

Of course I could be wrong, I even stated that ! lol Please tell me you're kidding.
You're wrong because there's a continuously varying analog waveform that's being sampled at consistent intervals. There's no nudging or moving around or quantization in the time domain of the analog waveform. How would that even work?

It's a continuously varying analog voltage.
Old 23rd December 2019
  #87
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
You're wrong because there's a continuously varying analog waveform that's being sampled at consistent intervals. There's no nudging or moving around or quantization in the time domain of the analog waveform. How would that even work?

It's a continuously varying analog voltage.
Ahh, my wording might be wrong or messed up what I am trying to convey ? Either way, thanks for telling me this. As I love the info !!

The word "nudging" and "quantizing" is what is wrong. But I also must stress, this is not what I claim to be right about, I am only shooting the breeze with this.

So, are you saying just like recording on analog tape, and punching in and out of recording as fast as your finger can press it, doing the same thing recording digitally it gets 100% of the same linear recording as the tape would ? To me it seems like it couldn't due to/pending resolution limits.

My question/debate with this is this. Similar to you can't have 4k of video information in a 1080 screen, how can you record in places that is not there in the resolution grid/place/universe ? So less of nudging, and wondering if it just misses the info there then ?

So IE, in a 44.1k recording session, there are only 44.1 thousand pictures of the audio taken per second, and due to it being a resolution, there are therefore only 44.1k *places* per second these recordings can start and/or stop. Lets think about this down to the billionth of a nano second. If I were to press record or stop at a specific time that these 44.1 thousand pictures were between their resolution limits, would it not need to either start or stop me rounding off to the next nearest sample ? Because I initiated something between the grid lines (in a sense). This is a question, NOT a statement.

(this is about starting and stopping the recordings, not ONCE you started recording btw)
Like, you know when you got a sequencer that's a low resolution old school sequencer say 64PPQ, you press the button here, but it can only register you at its designated places that is one of its 64PPQ resolution places.

With analog tape, it can't help but truly be 100% linear down to the Planck length - lol (you know what Planck is ?) no matter how quick you pump the punch in/out button. This is because there is no resolution. Doesn't resolution = the fineness of the grain, therefore a gap somewhere, like more or less pixels, etc.. small sand vs bigger grains in a jar, etc.. ? Hence the higher the resolution, the less gaps. (again, in a sense) only a analogy.

So thinking higher resolution sample rate wise will equal more places your recordings can start and stop ? Or no ?

And Thanks for sharing your knowledge in advance ! It is appreciated.
Old 23rd December 2019
  #88
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
So IE, in a 44.1k recording session, there are only 44.1 thousand pictures of the audio taken per second, and due to it being a resolution, there are therefore only 44.1k *places* per second these recordings can start and/or stop. Lets think about this down to the billionth of a nano second. If I were to press record or stop at a specific time that these 44.1 thousand pictures were between their resolution limits, would it not need to either start or stop me rounding off to the next nearest sample ? Because I initiated something between the grid lines (in a sense). This is a question, NOT a statement.

(this is about starting and stopping the recordings, not ONCE you started recording btw)
The sampling circuit itself doesn't operate at a rate of 44.1kHz though, it's usually in the MHz range. It then gets converted down to whatever sample rate you choose.

I suppose we could hypothesize a system where that wasn't the case and instead it did operate at 44.1kHz, in which case the question would be if you - along with everything mechanical that's involved (keyboard etc) - is capable of executing something at that timing resolution in the first place. I'm 100% you're not. Think about it;

- Suppose we set up a computer to play back audio at a 44.1kHz sample rate, and then we've recorded a click track at say 60bpm or so, and the converter operates at 44.1kHz in this hypothetical example, but we're not recording music or sound as the input, we're recording key presses on a keyboard. Do you really think you would be hitting the key with sample accuracy? If you did you'd be an absolutely astoundingly amazing musician. I bet you that's not what would happen.

And so based on that thought experiment I really think we can conclude that the timing resolution as far as triggering record is concerned is sufficient because you can't execute with any greater resolution anyway.
Old 23rd December 2019
  #89
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Infa View Post
Maybe, but at that point, even they have to accept that is the pinochle.
I think you're behind. The next goal is 32fp/384kHz
Enough is never enough.
Old 23rd December 2019
  #90
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
I think you're behind. The next goal is 32fp/384kHz
Enough is never enough.
lol, you know your probably right here. After typing what I did, I realized exactly what you just said - for some of these guys, enough is never enough.

I do agree, its not all of them, but *some*, not most, I'd say some of them audiophile nutcases are more about snobbery than the actual sound. Plus bragging rights to their friends about who got what in their set up, etc..
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump