Quote:
Originally Posted by
tekn0
Would you say the Quantum is a high step up from the 192 version? Like is it night and day on the conversion side? I understand the DSP is the same.
I know this might sound strange but I wonder if the older version could have benefits. Kind of like when they went from film to digital. More blemishes could be seen. Or in this case, heard. I remember Dave was talking about at a trade show that the transient response was better on the quantum. For some, this might be great. But for me personally, I'm always trying to squash spiky transients.
I didn’t a/b’d them as it should be to say what the differencies are between the 192 and the quantum version..
The 192 was, and still is, a great converter..
(As other much older pieces like the Pacific microsonics and the lavry gold)
Anyway if you feel the need to “massage” the (spiky) transients, I’d suggest a nice compressor before the the AD.
Several comes to mind, from the Red3, to the BAE10DC for starters.
But honestly this starts already with tracking, and “adjusting” the source according to your taste and vision (or ultimately the artist and producer vision).
So it’s not that the last AD stage will do all the magic and it’s done. Some pieces might help to go in a direction or in another, but it’s like a stairs.. it’s made of smaller steps to reach the top.
Cheu