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
Really having trouble deciding on converters. Digital Converters
Old 6th September 2014
  #91
Lives for gear
 
shelterr's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Slate View Post
The Lynx Aurora is extremely linear. When compared to another converter that has some curve in the frequency response (many do), it can sound less flattering. But it's giving you what you put in or out of it, that I'm certain of.

Cheers,
Steven
I'm a fan of yours Steven, but your assessment of the Lynx Aurora is disappointing and misleading. It has a clear (and negative) impact on the fidelity of anything you put through it. I'll agree with you that the Aurora isn't flattering, but that is not to be confused with it being flat or accurate. It is neither and I'm bothered that posts like yours proliferate such nonsense.
Old 6th September 2014
  #92
Lives for gear
 
Oldone's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by shelterr View Post
I'm a fan of yours Steven, but your assessment of the Lynx Aurora is disappointing and misleading. It has a clear (and negative) impact on the fidelity of anything you put through it. I'll agree with you that the Aurora isn't flattering, but that is not to be confused with it being flat or accurate. It is neither and I'm bothered that posts like yours proliferate such nonsense.
Sounds like some pain from the past there.
Old 6th September 2014
  #93
Lives for gear
 
shelterr's Avatar
 

I'm familiar with the convertor for sure. I bought one back in the day to run my HD rig partly due to the positive comments by members on here. Obviously it's a good value for the I/O it gives you, but the sound was terrible. Filled with digital artifacts and very crunchy and mid-forward. I would have been better off with a stock Digi 192.
Old 6th September 2014
  #94
Quote:
Originally Posted by shelterr View Post
I'm a fan of yours Steven, but your assessment of the Lynx Aurora is disappointing and misleading. It has a clear (and negative) impact on the fidelity of anything you put through it. I'll agree with you that the Aurora isn't flattering, but that is not to be confused with it being flat or accurate. It is neither and I'm bothered that posts like yours proliferate such nonsense.
Wow that is some strong hate towards a converter there. Having actually shot it out with my BLA rig, and tracked drums through it, I strongly disagree with this. Yes, it wasn't as good as my current conversion, but it killed the Apollo, and was relatively good, not to mention very stable.
Old 6th September 2014
  #95
That being said, after wiring my compressors in as inserts and setting up the HW delay, I may be looking for a new converter again. The output latency has changed three times in three days, and I've had to recalibrate it each time.

Upon further googling/gearslutting, it seems that FireWire isn't reliably constant in its outputs, even on the same settings; which makes trying to run anything in parallel (two distressors for a parallel drum bus) nearly impossible without having to calibrate every time I launch PT.

Sad times...
Old 6th September 2014
  #96
Lives for gear
 
Oldone's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sam guaiana View Post
Wow that is some strong hate towards a converter there. Having actually shot it out with my BLA rig, and tracked drums through it, I strongly disagree with this. Yes, it wasn't as good as my current conversion, but it killed the Apollo, and was relatively good, not to mention very stable.
The Aurora's certainly didn't impact the Daft Punk album negatively. I think maybe shelterr might have had a bad unit.
Old 6th September 2014
  #97
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ben_allison View Post
Haven't read the thread, but what about the SPL Madison?

I used to own a Metric Halo ULN8, and downsized to the Crimson. I picked the SPL convertors over the MH ones (ULN2 in that case) blind, repeatedly. That result really surprised me.

Anyway, they're worth a gander.
I'd like to see more reviews about the Madison... it's fairly unknown at the moment. Madison + RME Madi interface (TotalMix etc) would be a nice option.
Old 6th September 2014
  #98
Lives for gear
 
shelterr's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldone View Post
The Aurora's certainly didn't impact the Daft Punk album negatively. I think maybe shelterr might have had a bad unit.
Ahh yes...the ol' Daft Punk chestnut.

First off, their system was clocked with the 10M. So there's that.

Secondly, I'm not saying that musicianship and craft are rendered useless if someone uses an Aurora. Obviously you can make a record on anything and if the song/players and engineers are talented, that song will not be ruined by the converters of choice.

That being said, converter differences are still real and converters still matter. If they make the next Daft Punk record with a Behringer ADA-8000, it doesn't make the conversion any better than it is in reality.

I'm not going to pretend the Lynx Aurora sounds better than it does because someone made a good record on it. I know exactly how it stacks up because I have used it extensively and compared it to many other converters.

I'm not offended at the notion that people use the Lynx Aurora. Depending on your I/O needs and budget it might make sense to buy for some people. I'm offended at the contention that it's a "you get back what you put in" kinda box. It isn't. If you can't hear the impact it has on sound...that's too bad.
Old 6th September 2014
  #99
Lives for gear
 
burns46824's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by shelterr View Post
I'm not going to pretend the Lynx Aurora sounds better than it does because someone made a good record on it. I know exactly how it stacks up because I have used it extensively and compared it to many other converters.
Are you using Prism conversion exclusively now, shelterr?
Old 7th September 2014
  #100
Gear Addict
 
xcskier's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sam guaiana View Post
... You can run it with Thunderbolt (just as good as PCI) for way less,...
Without any reference to price (or to my lack of knowledge with ProTools minutia), it would be a rather troubling overstatement to indicate TB interface is as good as PCI(e). There is no way any mission-critical enterprise system would use TB. TB is simply a useful consumer level periphery.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerchunis View Post
....
As for the main system i want, i am leaning towards protools hd native/ hd 16x16. I really want to have a pci system with low latency, and i am very comfortable in protools software, it seems like a very practical choice. Ive read alot of people who prefer these converters over symphony also.

If i had the money i think i would really want a merging setup. While a 16x16 horus dsd daw setup would be great, its a lot more expensive, and more difficult to setup (and possibly use?). It looks like the hapi would be a great addition to an existing setup at less cost, or possibly even just running hapi with asio , or core audio drivers running cubase ( or others that support ravenna). Down the line , you could always expand your setup, with a few different options (more merging stuff, dad,etc,or connect via madi to other things.) The hapi would be sweet to run via ethernet with a laptop running cubase, for portable / small system.

Im pretty much split between wanting a protools hd native, or the merging hapi. The hapi would have to sound noticeably better to justify the extra cost/fewer channels, and the drivers would need to be as reliable, and with the latency of the Pro tools hdn setup. Can anyone chime in here?
....
Hey Kerchunis, year later and you still haven't got the system I get it, last summer we invested months of research...

Perhaps we should revive the conversation on that old thread from last year.

If you are thinking of PT HD, AX32 might be the choice since it comes with (standard?) Interface for Protools on SDR (min) connectors with 16 or 64 mono I/O channels (64 channel Pro Tools Hub). However the Horus is great, and quite to the contrary, it's not at all difficult to use, but like any cutting edge professional equipment, you do want to read the manuals.
Old 7th September 2014
  #101
Quote:
Originally Posted by xcskier View Post
Without any reference to price (or to my lack of knowledge with ProTools minutia), it would be a rather troubling overstatement to indicate TB interface is as good as PCI(e). There is no way any mission-critical enterprise system would use TB. TB is simply a useful consumer periphery
I don't know if I fully agree with that, and I think a bit of research into the workings of TB would yield a different opinion. It would take a lot of balls on Apple and Avid's part to release a professional grade computer with only TB ports, as well as an HD based system running on TB and that spells out incredible faith in TB to be the PCIe killer.

I can imagine having access to those speeds from a little port seems like it can't be a professional thing, but it is. It would be like looking at at 500 series piece and saying it can't be as good as it's 19" counterpart.
Old 7th September 2014
  #102
Gear Addict
 
xcskier's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sam guaiana View Post
...as well as an HD based system running on TB and that spells out incredible faith in TB to be the PCIe killer.
Does Protools HD no longer offer a PCIe option ? (I'm not a PT user).
Old 7th September 2014
  #103
Gear Addict
 
xcskier's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sam guaiana View Post
I don't know if I fully agree with that, and I think a bit of research into the workings of TB would yield a different opinion. It would take a lot of balls on Apple and Avid's part to release a professional grade computer with only TB ports, as well as an HD based system running on TB and that spells out incredible faith in TB to be the PCIe killer.

I can imagine having access to those speeds from a little port seems like it can't be a professional thing, but it is. It would be like looking at at 500 series piece and saying it can't be as good as it's 19" counterpart.
I really don't think this analogy holds. Perhaps look at it this way:

Where do you have cutting edge technology using Real Time Operating Systems ? Multi-million dollar medical Imagining Systems all the way to enterprise level audio; Scientific Research facilities to Military...

Mission Critical systems are not solely concerned with bandwidth. They are concerned with 24/7 reliability. Ask yourself how many workstation/server grade mainboards even employ Thunderbolt ? I have yet to see an example.

Certainly TB throughput is appealing. However the controller does not communicate directly to the Platform Controller Hub. There are intermediary steps to convert from PCH --> PCIe and DisplayPort controllers, then to TB, then back again, before it even connects to the periphery device. A 16x PCIe slot can circumvent all these steps including even the Platform Controller Hub.

Regardless of field, do you think any major enterprise facility will rely on, or feel secure with a flimsy little consumer grade plug that might become physically disconnected if you look at it sideways ? Hyperbole aside, just considering the connector itself, we can all see that it is not that substantial.

I am not arguing that TB isn't a useful high-speed device for consumer level computers, it's just not what any professional association would endorse. The AES/EBU would never even consider adding another protocol article over such a device. Look to articles such as AES3, AES10 (MADI), AES 67 and Ravenna Audio IP, to see some pertinent examples.
Old 7th September 2014
  #104
Quote:
Originally Posted by xcskier View Post
I really don't think this analogy holds. Perhaps look at it this way:

Where do you have cutting edge technology using Real Time Operating Systems ? Multi-million dollar medical Imagining Systems all the way to enterprise level audio; Scientific Research facilities to Military...

Mission Critical systems are not solely concerned with bandwidth. They are concerned with 24/7 reliability. Ask yourself how many workstation/server grade mainboards even employ Thunderbolt ? I have yet to see an example.

Certainly TB bandwidth is appealing. However the controller does not communicate directly to the Platform Controller Hub. There are intermediary steps to convert from PCH --> PCIe and DisplayPort controllers, then to TB, then back again, before it even connects to the periphery device. A 16x PCIe slot can circumvent all these steps including even the Platform Controller Hub.

Regardless of field, do you think any major enterprise facility will rely on, or feel secure with a flimsy little consumer grade plug that might become physically disconnected if you look at it sideways ? Hyperbole aside, just considering the connector itself, we can all see that it is not that substantial.

I am not arguing that TB isn't a useful high-speed device for consumer level computers, it's just not what any professional association would endorse. The AES/EBU would never even consider adding another protocol article over such a device. Look to articles such as AES3, AES10 (MADI), AES 67 and Ravenna Audio IP, to see some pertinent examples.
Yeah, but then consider something like the flimsiness of an Ethernet cable, yet every server and hub on that planet is connected with them. And we've yet to see an example in critical systems because of the sheer age of the technology.

TB is still in it's infancy, and when programmers start to develop for it more, it will find it's place in many high grade things. Whether that means there will be a version with a clip to hold it in like an Ethernet cable, or two screws on the side like a serial cable, the physical protocol itself will probably soon displace PCIe. It's just the typical growth in technology.

Does that mean NASA will adopt TB? Probably not. Does it mean full on professional recording rigs will adopt it. Probably. Maybe not now, maybe not two years. But, as ESATA became a big deal for things like hard drives, so will Thunderbolt
Old 8th September 2014
  #105
Gear Addict
 
xcskier's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sam guaiana View Post
Yeah, but then consider something like the flimsiness of an Ethernet cable ...
Yes I agree with this. I wish Ethernet connectors were more hardy. At one time networks used coax cable with locking style BNC connectors... And yes, expanded proliferation and consumer use of Thunderbolt in the near future is probably a safe prediction.

Nevertheless, I believe you may be missing my point. Imagine a National Broadcast facility running any of its critical chain through TB. It would never happen. There is a reason why professional associations like AES and the European Broadcast Union set standards.

The major National Broadcast companies here in Canada, and one can assume around the world, are adopting either AES 67 or Ravenna AoIP etc. as their internal audio network Hubs. These in turn will interface with AES3, MADI, and so on, for existing equipment and peripheries.

A look to the future might yield 10gig Lan (this already exists) gain over 1gig Lan, but it's doubtful TB will be adopted in any meaningful way for networks. It must be understood that concerns with long cable runs, electromagnetic interference, reflections, crosstalk with wiring variants etc., must be taken into account when establishing a new standard in enterprise level reliability.

Firewire also is considered a consumer level interface, and gets displaced relatively quickly. Thunderbolt is the next Firewire. Sure it's on the scene now, but what happens when competing USB 10gig pops up, or faster PCIe based external plug-and-play protocols (these already exist) appear.

However, there are two important points to keep in mind:
1. By definition TB can not displace PCIe, since TB uses PCIe controllers. In addition the new SATA protocols are more simply understood as PCIe protocols. Other not-too-distant future External peripheries will also rely on PCIe controllers.

2. If your point is that the physical card slots will be displaced in enterprise grade facilities, that too must be seen as a problematic prediction. On Site Service and Repair in any critical operation must be conducted with efficiency. System designs and well-founded investment would never employ computing equipment containing components such as Hard Drives, external interface conduits etc. that could not be immediately swapped or replaced.

Attachment to such devices as TB are not because of recommendations agreed upon by associations governing the standards and practices in the field of audio, broadcasting, or any other professional/technical field for that matter, but rather the drive and market branding of companies changing direction based on the whims of the consumer and their desire to connect the latest device in a simple and 'non-technical' initiated manner. Thus the coining of the term: Plug and Play.

Last edited by xcskier; 9th September 2014 at 02:49 AM.. Reason: Clarity
Old 8th September 2014
  #106
Quote:
Originally Posted by zigziglar View Post
I'd like to see more reviews about the Madison... it's fairly unknown at the moment. Madison + RME Madi interface (TotalMix etc) would be a nice option.
I use the Madison with my Mytek 8x192 and RME Madi card. You can read my other posts about it for more detail, but in a nutshell I have been incredibly impressed and have debated selling the Mytek (which I love) and getting a second Madison more than once
Old 8th September 2014
  #107
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dudleys100 View Post
I use the Madison with my Mytek 8x192 and RME Madi card. You can read my other posts about it for more detail, but in a nutshell I have been incredibly impressed and have debated selling the Mytek (which I love) and getting a second Madison more than once
Thanks for chiming in. RME HDSPe MADI + Madison is something I'm very closely considering. From the audio samples I've heard, I'm starting to think the Madison conversion is better than almost every similarly priced alternative (when factoring in the cost of the HDSPe) and TotalMix FX a better software solution than most of the competitors' too. The option to cascade a second Madison (at such a low price) means I can get set up with just the one unit a lot sooner than other options.

If you are sending out 16 tracks for summing, how do you return the summed output back to the DAW via a mastering converter?

With the HDSPe I/O, I guess you'd need a converter with coax output or a second HDSPe, right?

Or do you actually feel that the Madison is sufficient to sum the master back to digital?
Old 8th September 2014
  #108
I have the madi option on my Mytek so they cascade into each other. I have returned my SUM from the mixmaster through the Mytek and Madison and when clocked by the Mytek I couldn't hear a difference so now I just return on the Madison and keep the Mytek in's open for tracking.
Old 8th September 2014
  #109
Whats the best way to hook up a Madison?
Old 8th September 2014
  #110
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dudleys100 View Post
I have the madi option on my Mytek so they cascade into each other. I have returned my SUM from the mixmaster through the Mytek and Madison and when clocked by the Mytek I couldn't hear a difference so now I just return on the Madison and keep the Mytek in's open for tracking.
Well there you go then, eh. Sounds like the Madison could be a great option up until I get more into mastering (probably a long ways off), at which point I could just use a Weiss ADC2 and send the final mix to the DAW via firewire. Simple.
Old 8th September 2014
  #111
sam guaiana-

The Madison only has Madi, so you only got 1 option for hooking it up I love RME (reliability, flexibility, zero latency, etc, etc) so thats my vote.

zigziglar-

You may want to grab the RME MADI "FX" card for future options because it has AES built in. This way you could get a nice 2 channel mastering converter down the road and clock the Madison off of it also. Plus you get the benefit of FX built in to monitor through.
Old 8th September 2014
  #112
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dudleys100 View Post
sam guaiana-

The Madison only has Madi, so you only got 1 option for hooking it up I love RME (reliability, flexibility, zero latency, etc, etc) so thats my vote.

zigziglar-

You may want to grab the RME MADI "FX" card for future options because it has AES built in. This way you could get a nice 2 channel mastering converter down the road and clock the Madison off of it also. Plus you get the benefit of FX built in to monitor through.
I only just discovered this card as you replied! Thanks! The FX provides a complete round trip solution for my situation. Time to book in a demo of the Madison for my own ears, I think.
Old 8th September 2014
  #113
Keep in mind there is a slight improvement, to my ears, when they are clocked by the Mytek, but they are stellar on their own also.
Old 8th September 2014
  #114
Gear Head
 
ntpjl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by xcskier View Post
If you are thinking of PT HD, AX32 might be the choice since it comes with (standard?) Interface for Protools on SDR (min) connectors with 16 or 64 mono I/O channels (64 channel Pro Tools Hub).
The AX32 does indeed come with 64 channel ProTools HD interface as standard. You can even have two ProTools systems share one AX32 as long as they use the same sample rate. That will give 32 channels to each ProTools system. On top of that, the mic pre's in the AX32 can be controlled from ProTools.

The AX32 also includes 8 AES3 (16 channels) and one coax MADI as standard. As options you can get Dante audio over IP and an additional 2 MADI. With the built-in router, you can connect e.g. 3rd party converters via AES, MADI or Dante and route these to ProTools in parallel with the analogue I/O on the AX32. So xcskiers term "64 channel ProTools hub" is actually a very description.

And you can obviously also use it with other DAW systems with MADI, AES or Dante I/O, not just ProTools.
Old 8th September 2014
  #115
Lives for gear
 
nickelironsteel's Avatar
 

How much is 64 channels i/o of conversion to pthdx and no extras with the dad system?
Old 8th September 2014
  #116
This all sounds amazing, but something tells me it may come at a cost much higher than I would like to spend. Either way, seems pretty unreal

Quote:
Originally Posted by ntpjl View Post
The AX32 does indeed come with 64 channel ProTools HD interface as standard. You can even have two ProTools systems share one AX32 as long as they use the same sample rate. That will give 32 channels to each ProTools system. On top of that, the mic pre's in the AX32 can be controlled from ProTools.

The AX32 also includes 8 AES3 (16 channels) and one coax MADI as standard. As options you can get Dante audio over IP and an additional 2 MADI. With the built-in router, you can connect e.g. 3rd party converters via AES, MADI or Dante and route these to ProTools in parallel with the analogue I/O on the AX32. So xcskiers term "64 channel ProTools hub" is actually a very description.

And you can obviously also use it with other DAW systems with MADI, AES or Dante I/O, not just ProTools.
Topic:
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