The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Bricasti users I/O s Digital or Analog which do you use ? Modular Synthesizers
Old 17th December 2010
  #1
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
Bricasti users I/O s Digital or Analog which do you use ?

I have an M7 coming in the next month or so and I was really interested in finding out who uses which path for I/Os and why ?
I have searched and been reading threads for about 2 days and find only peripheral references . I was told there was some discussion but cant seem find it.
Say for example Rob Kings cello samples in the Old Bricasti whooo thread were those through the Digital or the analog I/Os Thanks, Kev
Old 17th December 2010
  #2
Lives for gear
 

I used to use the analog in/outs, but I switched to the digital AES in/outs. My reason is so simple though. I just wanted to take advantage on my 192's digital i/o and open up some analog in/outs for other hardware. Both options sound the same to me, and they sound excellent. - paul
Old 17th December 2010
  #3
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
I would not worry about using either unless you have inferior adda on your end. The adda is very transparent
(wish they would sell those as standalones).
That being said, i use AES whenever possible to keep the path as short as possible
Old 17th December 2010
  #4
Lives for gear
 

Camp 1-

AES- no wasting analog I/O for a dedicated send since its going to be on every session. Unless your digital I/O is maxed out- most of us its not.

Camp 2-

Analog- some think ANYTHING sounds better analog or its hooked to an analog board send. (AES not an option).


We have 3 and theres no way we are dedicating 6 channels of analog I/O for reverb when it sounds wonderful via AES.

I think it simply comes down to how you want to hook it up. I think all would agree the difference is negligible.

I didn't hear any benefit to running it analog- but admittedly, and often inadvertantly influential, I didn't want to either...
Old 17th December 2010
  #5
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
Hey thanks for the responses

To clarify a bit further:
My studio is for my personal use only ,the result being I will usually only be recording 1 or to channels at a time. So tying up 2 analog I/Os would not be a major issue for me. My interest here is in the sound. if there is no noticeable difference ? then I will prob just go AES.... OF course I will try both but was just interested in what others are doing.

I record mostly Acoustic guitar and vocals occasionally with some lite percussion and or midi tracks.

My System will consist of PTHD Native. Tracking = A Brauner Phantom V (vocals) and/or a Schoeps CM6 4 (acoustic gtr) thru A Designs MP2A into AVID OMNI into Mac Pro .
Mixing is ITB out to Bricasti for verb.
Old 18th December 2010
  #6
Lives for gear
 
Rob King's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevWind View Post
Say for example Rob Kings cello samples in the Old Bricasti whooo thread were those through the Digital or the analog I/Os Thanks, Kev
Those were through DIGITAL. I have all my M7's patched to a 192 digital via AES/EBU. Sounds fantastic to me.

Cheers & Happy Holidays

Rob
Old 18th December 2010
  #7
Lives for gear
 
feck's Avatar
Digital.
Old 18th December 2010
  #8
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
Thanks again . yes I thought the cello clips were superb.. thumbsup I am getting excited ..
Old 18th December 2010
  #9
When this box was hanging in our room I used it on the track a lot, before the daw. In other words, I patched my mic amps into it, and it into an AD box to commit to a sound. Of course this was not the only way I used it, but it was strange for me, as I've never done that before with others. Recently - I pulled up the tracks; and they're great! I can see using it both ways - and I can see using all digital when ITB and all analog when OTB or hybrid. Or the other way around.
Old 18th December 2010
  #10
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc Mixwell View Post
When this box was hanging in our room I used it on the track a lot, before the daw. In other words, I patched my mic amps into it, and it into an AD box to commit to a sound. Of course this was not the only way I used it, but it was strange for me, as I've never done that before with others. Recently - I pulled up the tracks; and they're great! I can see using it both ways - and I can see using all digital when ITB and all analog when OTB or hybrid. Or the other way around.
I think that as I get to know this box I will try some tracking and or at least have it the cans when I go to overdub the vocal. Up to now with only plug verbs I have always recorded dry. and in fact thats is also how I have mixed for the last year or so haven't used any verb at all on my mixes, guitar or vocals. Because buy the time I got the verb to where it was not so obvious, I was already -14 to -16 db down and decided I might as well not use it and opt for more clarity. For example there is none on the first 4 tracks on my myspace page. There is some delay on the little lead riffs but thats it. So this should be great fun to now go this route.

I really appreciate you guys taking the time to respond.
Old 18th December 2010
  #11
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
BTW I will be away from the computer for 10 days, finally a vacation after 30 yrs.!! So I wont be responding until then but please keep the thoughts and responses coming. As I will study them with great interest, upon my return. Thanks, Kev
Old 18th December 2010
  #12
Lives for gear
 
Bryce's Avatar
Digital.

dB
Old 18th December 2010
  #13
Lives for gear
 

Bricasti users I/O s Digital or Analog which do you use ?

Kev just make sure you compensate for the bricasti's latency using the hw insert delay tab in the io. In my rig, it's 6 samples over AES and 45 analogue. But of course the pt hw insert delays are ms, so divide latency in samples by sample rate (samples per millisecond ie 48 not 48000) to get values in ms. Obviously they're different depending on sample rate. Eg at 44.1k over AES you need 0.14ms and at 48k 0.12. Easiest way to check that you're ok is just to make the bricasti 100% dry for a moment.

J
Old 18th December 2010
  #14
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
Maybe things have changed with v2, but here is what casey had to say on latency when I asked:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casey View Post
The wet path is between 5 and 6 milliseconds for all modes. The host I/O interface will of course add additional latency.



-Casey
Old 18th December 2010
  #15
Lives for gear
 

Well the way I tested it, and which seems to sound right in use is to make it 100% dry, and then print a click through it. That should compensate in such a way that if you used it in series, using the wet dry balance on the unit itself, you'd get the same result.

J
Old 19th December 2010
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Casey's Avatar
 

Jack is right as far as compensating between analog and digital.

The dry path does not pass through the DSP processing. The wet path of course does, and the 5 to 6 millisecond figure is about right for V1 and V2.



-Casey
Old 19th December 2010
  #17
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
It would, as such, not be adviceable to latency compensate for the onboard 5-6ms latency unless you use 100%wet and 0% dry.
Old 19th December 2010
  #18
Lives for gear
 
brian_delizza's Avatar
 

Analog
Old 19th December 2010
  #19
Lives for gear
 
MichaelPatrick's Avatar
 

Either way the box sounds great.
Old 19th December 2010
  #20
Lives for gear
 
Casey's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by klaukholm View Post
It would, as such, not be adviceable to latency compensate for the onboard 5-6ms latency unless you use 100%wet and 0% dry.
Let me just say first that one should ALWAYS use 100% wet / 0% dry when using the M7 in a typical send/return (parallel) configuration. The wet/dry adjustments are only used when using the M7 inline or as a channel insert (serial.)

The easy answer to the question of Latency Compensation is no. You do not need to compensate for the M7 wet path latency.

If your I/O interface is adding several milliseconds or more, then you should look at compensating for that.

The early reverb of the M7 is designed to be very forgiving of latency variations.

More careful consideration of the latency is required for some reverbs in order to avoid coloration caused by comb filtering between the early reflections and the source.



-Casey
Old 19th December 2010
  #21
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
By the way, off topic:
Great job on the v2 release Casey!!
Old 29th December 2010
  #22
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casey View Post
Let me just say first that one should ALWAYS use 100% wet / 0% dry when using the M7 in a typical send/return (parallel) configuration. The wet/dry adjustments are only used when using the M7 inline or as a channel insert (serial.)

The easy answer to the question of Latency Compensation is no. You do not need to compensate for the M7 wet path latency.

If your I/O interface is adding several milliseconds or more, then you should look at compensating for that.

The early reverb of the M7 is designed to be very forgiving of latency variations.




-Casey
Thanks, is this true in digital as well as analog send/return ?
Old 29th December 2010
  #23
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Ruston View Post
Kev just make sure you compensate for the bricasti's latency using the hw insert delay tab in the io. In my rig, it's 6 samples over AES and 45 analogue. But of course the pt hw insert delays are ms, so divide latency in samples by sample rate (samples per millisecond ie 48 not 48000) to get values in ms. Obviously they're different depending on sample rate. Eg at 44.1k over AES you need 0.14ms and at 48k 0.12. Easiest way to check that you're ok is just to make the bricasti 100% dry for a moment.

J
thumbsupthumbsup Thanks again. Kev
Old 29th December 2010
  #24
Lives for gear
 
Casey's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevWind View Post
Thanks, is this true in digital as well as analog send/return ?
Yes.

The latency is longer in analog but not so much that you would notice. If you go back and forth between analog and digital on the same mix, one could argue that adjusting the latency would be needed. But I wouldn't.

Again, the main reason you would adjust the latency at such fine levels for a reverb is primarily to avoid changes in coloration that is caused by the interaction of the early reverb with the source. But this a non-issue with the M7.



-Casey
Old 30th December 2010
  #25
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
Thanks, Casey I am waiting with excitement, for its arrival
Old 4th January 2011
  #26
Lives for gear
 

Initially i was using it via analogue i/o with an Aurora 16... But i slimmed down to 1 Aurora 16 and linked it up via the digital connection.

That takes four conversions out of the picture and means i now have more space for other gear which has no digital i/o
Old 6th January 2011
  #27
Lives for gear
 
KevWind's Avatar
Hay thanks so much for all the reply's , Kev
Old 6th January 2011
  #28
Lives for gear
 
Marjan's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casey View Post
the main reason you would adjust the latency at such fine levels for a reverb is primarily to avoid changes in coloration that is caused by the interaction of the early reverb with the source. But this a non-issue with the M7
thumbsup
Old 6th January 2011
  #29
Lives for gear
 

Hi Casey

Why would you say that it's a non-issue?...I find it bothers me a lot if its not properly compensated. In fact, I had exactly this issue the other day. I was mixing and brought the reverb in, but immediately was unhappy with what I felt was a strange early reflection. I checked my latency according to the formula which I posted in this thread and found it was correct. But then checking the dry path vs original signal it was wrong. So this tells me a few things...1. That I've probably got that formula wrong...In fact I have because I've calulated it based on samples at 44.1k but of course it should only ever be in ms because with changes in sample rate come changes in ms. and 2. That there might well be some quirks in the PT software in terms of how it adjusts stuff. Its always worth just checking it to be sure.

But it does bother me if it isn't right. Am I weird?

J
Old 6th January 2011
  #30
Lives for gear
 
Casey's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Ruston View Post
Why would you say that it's a non-issue?...I find it bothers me a lot if its not properly compensated.

But it does bother me if it isn't right. Am I weird?
No, just better ears.

Do you find that it affects the coloration, or is it "the sound being out of place" ?



-Casey
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Mattski / High end
4
shamsundra / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
7
Kenny M / High end
6
Mark Warren / So much gear, so little time
1

Forum Jump
Forum Jump