The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Stock Pro Tools HD Vs. Mytek Pro Tools LE
Old 9th August 2007
  #1
Stock Pro Tools HD Vs. Mytek Pro Tools LE

I wondering if the Mytek converters with my Pro Tools LE system will give me enough to compete with a stock Pro Tools Hd rig. I have an intel Mac, with Waves Plug Ins.
Could this be consider a pro system?

I know that there are other factors, pre's eq's etc. but as far as the front end go's

any opinions?

Last edited by hubercraft; 9th August 2007 at 09:45 PM.. Reason: mistake
Old 9th August 2007
  #2
Gear Addict
 

a mytek AD with a digidesign LE interface is a great way to go. you can also use Logic/Performer/Cubase and compete with pro tools HD. I personally don't like 192I/O interfaces anyway. i would stay away from them. i've had great results with Logic Pro and Apogee and Prism Converters. what genre of music are you recording? What mics and pres are you using?
Old 9th August 2007 | Show parent
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

For tracking purposes, you definately can compete with the HD interfaces. The mytek sounds better IMO. However, don't confuse being able to compete with HD on a mix level. Tracking is the only place where this is possible. But for those that want to track high quality audio files in LE and then mix on HD, that would be an excellent way to go and again I too believe it would sound better than the Digi interfaces.
Old 9th August 2007 | Show parent
  #4
I do mostly R&B and Smooth Jazz

I do mostly R&B and Smooth Jazz I also like 70's rock
Old 9th August 2007 | Show parent
  #5
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Mytek converters can give you outstanding sonic quality on any system. This is not the same thing as having a pro system, however. For live tracking, at least, it should be functionally equivalent other than reliability issues.

JSL
Old 9th August 2007 | Show parent
  #6
Gear Maniac
 

Interesting, just 5 minutes ago I came back from the Mytek shop (which is a few blocks away from my studio) and I had read your post before I went there and decided to ask there for you...

The owner and designer of all the gear showed me one of the Mytek A/D D/A converter and swears that it sounds better than Pro Tools HD converters. Of course he has an interest in saying that but he also says that listening to HD is like listening to something through curtains and listening to the same thing on Mytek is like opening those curtains.

I personally never used the Mytek converters (I have other Mytek gear, which is why I was there) so I didn't get a chance to A/B although he was kind enough to offer me to borrow his converters to try them out...

He did however mention something that might interest you.
He said that if you go here (let me get the link for you):
MYTEK DIGITAL USA
you can actually listen to samples of different A/D converters.
He pointed out that it is not a true test because you are still listening to your Pro Tools D/A converters (the true test would be to listen through Mytek D/A converters) but at least it is a place to start...

You probably already knew about that link, but the other interesting thing I can tell you is that he told me he has more tests that he is going to upload... I tried to get him to do it right away for you but he was too busy and it might probably take some time for him to do it, but maybe you can keep checking back on the website...

I hope that helps a little bit
Old 9th August 2007 | Show parent
  #7
Thanks for going out of your way

I appreciate your help. People on this fourm seem really cool and knowledgeable as well

thanks again!
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #8
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcnyc View Post
The owner and designer of all the gear showed me one of the Mytek A/D D/A converter and swears that it sounds better than Pro Tools HD converters.
There is no such thing as "Pro Tools HD converters." Converters are not the main feature of a Pro Tools HD system. Pro Tools HD can be used with any converters, including Mytek. Like many studios, we use Mytek as our main AD converters for our Pro Tools HD system.

If you use Mytek converters with Pro Tools LE, your system will not be the equal of ours. Your converters will be equal, but converters are only one small part of your signal path, and your signal path is only one small part of your whole system.

The Digidesign 192 i/o interface, often found with Pro Tools HD systems, includes solid, professional converters. The Digidesign 96 i/o interface, a cheaper option, is considered mediocre. Neither are considered premium converters, as the Myteks are. That probably is what he was trying to convey, but apparently did a poor job of it.

Quote:
He pointed out that it is not a true test because you are still listening to your Pro Tools D/A converters (the true test would be to listen through Mytek D/A converters) but at least it is a place to start...
A very misleading statement. If the Mytek AD's superiority can't be detected except through a Mytek converter, then how much better could it really be? We monitor through Grace DA converters. Mytek DA converters are great, too. There is more than one right answer in this area.

JSL
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
If you use Mytek converters with Pro Tools LE, your system will not be the equal of ours. Your converters will be equal, but converters are only one small part of your signal path, and your signal path is only one small part of your whole system.
His record quality will be equal...
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #10
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post
His record quality will be equal...
No, it certainly will not. Only his AD conversion quality.

If you think converters = "record quality," you must not know anything about recording.

JSL
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #11
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
owning ProTools HD (as compared to ProTools LE) gives you the option of more tracks.... and (basically) zero latency monitoring, and (possibly) more plug-in horsepower, (but not necessarily) .... and the possibility of surround mixing....

In my opinion, NONE of these things mean that the end product will "sound better" if both systems are used mixing stereo, ITB.

Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #12
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
No, it certainly will not. Only his AD conversion quality.

If you think converters = "record quality," you must not know anything about recording.

JSL

I'm not going to argue with you. But if you think some how laying a DIGITAL signal will be better in HD, you're smoking crack. Unless of course you have some evidence to prove that. Which honestly, I love being proven wrong. That's how we learn. Fact is, what signal path is there after conversion? The connecting cables? It's digital. 1's and 0's. If I run the exact same converters as you with LE and you run HD, the tracks will be identical. You can flip the phase and they will cancel. It's digital. The converter does the work. Keep in mind...I run HD so I'm not blindly defending LE. I just know what's real and what's make believe. If you have some evidence to disprove this, I'm all ears. I think you would probably change the industry with proof of this though. So, I wish you luck! If so, please be sure to send me a fair share of your new found wealth.
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #13
Lives for gear
 
ddageek's Avatar
 

Will a Mytrck AD on a LE system sound better than a 192 on a HD System? Probably but if a this about which one to purchase You need to do more research on LE you are going to have 2 ch of 96k i/o so drums and any ensambles are either going to be recorded at 44.1 or 48, HD gives you higher track count, nicer sounding mix engine lower atencey monitering expandable I/O.

Think about the system you are buying into not just "I can afford to make LE sound better than I can afford to make HD sound"
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #14
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddageek View Post
...(snip)....HD gives you .... nicer sounding mix engine .....
SAYS WHO?



prove it.

yes - there is a debate about the sound of 32 bit float (LE) vs 24/48 bit fixed (HD TDM) but is there really any proof that one sounds better than the other?

bring it.
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #15
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post
I'm not going to argue with you. But if you think some how laying a DIGITAL signal will be better in HD, you're smoking crack.
I am not smoking crack.

Quote:
Fact is, what signal path is there after conversion? The connecting cables? It's digital. 1's and 0's. If I run the exact same converters as you with LE and you run HD, the tracks will be identical. You can flip the phase and they will cancel. It's digital.
Without a doubt. But there is a long signal path before the conversion. Conversion quality is not recording quality. You said "his record quality will be equal." The best converters in the world do not, by themselves, give you good or even decent recording quality.

After the conversion, the only difference would be in the mix engine, latency compensation and plug-in quality. Each of these may be significant. The ability to deal with all routing and plug-in processing in real-time during overdubs is also a major difference.

JSL
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #16
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy View Post
SAYS WHO?



prove it.

yes - there is a debate about the sound of 32 bit float (LE) vs 24/48 bit fixed (HD TDM) but is there really any proof that one sounds better than the other?

bring it.
Automatic latency compensation alone represents a vast, vast upgrade from LE to TDM. As for resolution, the correct comparison would be 24 vs. 48 and 32 vs. 56. I think the difference is significant if not overwhelming.

The raging debates you sometimes see about this relate to a TDM system vs. some other, high-end native system. Almost everyone would agree that Pro Tools LE cannot have a mix engine in the same league with Pro Tools HD. There is no real controversy about it.

JSL
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
Automatic latency compensation alone represents a vast, vast upgrade from LE to TDM. As for resolution, the correct comparison would be 24 vs. 48 and 32 vs. 56. I think the difference is significant if not overwhelming.

The raging debates you sometimes see about this relate to a TDM system vs. some other, high-end native system. Almost everyone would agree that Pro Tools LE cannot have a mix engine in the same league with Pro Tools HD. There is no real controversy about it.

JSL
No arguments there. The mix engines are not even in the same league. This topic has been beat to death on here so it's amazing that there are still those that fight against it. Recording is one thing. Mixing is a whole other ballgame.

For mixing...LE can only compensate up to 1024 samples of delay. Where as HD can compensate for up to 8000+ for RTAS and an additional 4000+ on the TDM side. Yeah, I would call that overwhelming.

To put the thread back on topic....there are much better converters into pro tools other than the Digi I/O. Mytek being one of many great options. I've always like Apogee but there are lots of great converters out there. Using the search should bring up a ton of threads on this topic.
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #18
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
Automatic latency compensation alone represents a vast, vast upgrade from LE to TDM. As for resolution, the correct comparison would be 24 vs. 48 and 32 vs. 56. I think the difference is significant if not overwhelming.

The raging debates you sometimes see about this relate to a TDM system vs. some other, high-end native system. Almost everyone would agree that Pro Tools LE cannot have a mix engine in the same league with Pro Tools HD. There is no real controversy about it.

JSL
ADC has nothing to do with absolute sound quality.

Jslevin said: Almost everyone would agree that Pro Tools LE cannot have a mix engine in the same league with Pro Tools HD.

Show me proof of significant sonic differences.
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #19
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post
No arguments there. The mix engines are not even in the same league. .... (snip)...
Show me proof. All you have shown me so far is hearsay.

and - I repeat - ADC (and track count) have nothing to do with absolute internal sound quality of the mix buss of HD vs LE.

Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #20
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy View Post
Show me proof. All you have shown me so far is hearsay.

and - I repeat - ADC (and track count) have nothing to do with absolute internal sound quality of the mix buss of HD vs LE.
It is not my job to prove digital recording 101 to you. I am not teaching remedial music production here. This is the High End forum, for crying out loud. Do some basic homework and educate yourself, then come back and discuss.

JSL
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #21
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
It is not my job to prove digital recording 101 to you. I am not teaching remedial music production here. This is the High End forum, for crying out loud. Do some basic homework and educate yourself, then come back and discuss.

JSL
Look, I know this is the 'high end forum' and I know plenty about recording and digital audio.

my point is that you are saying that the mix buss in ProTools LE sounds worse than the mix buss in HD-TDM, and all i'm asking is that you back up your claims with some proof or evidence. I have never seen that proof or evidence.

Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #22
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
It is not my job to prove digital recording 101 to you. I am not teaching remedial music production here. This is the High End forum, for crying out loud. Do some basic homework and educate yourself, then come back and discuss.
Someone calm him down, please !...
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #23
Lives for gear
 
jslevin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy View Post
my point is that you are saying that the mix buss in ProTools LE sounds worse than the mix buss in HD-TDM, and all i'm asking is that you back up your claims with some proof or evidence. I have never seen that proof or evidence.
I know you haven't seen the proof or evidence. I think you should go find it.

Here are some other assertions for which I will not be providing any proof or evidence:
  1. API preamps don't suck.
  2. Vocal sessions are more enjoyable if the singer can sing roughly on-key.
  3. On most guitar amps, 5 is louder than 2.
  4. It's a good idea to backup your sessions in some way.
  5. The Beatles had at least a few good songs.
  6. It helps to have talkback between the control room and recording room.
  7. People tend to sweat more when it's hotter or more humid outside.
  8. Good monitoring is very important.
  9. Mytek converters are better than Digidesign converters.
  10. This subject is not worthy of an intelligent discussion; it belongs in a Basic Recording classroom.

JSL
Old 10th August 2007 | Show parent
  #24
Lives for gear
 
Stoneface's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface

For mixing...LE can only compensate up to 1024 samples of delay. Where as HD can compensate for up to 8000+ for RTAS and an additional 4000+ on the TDM side. Yeah, I would call that overwhelming.
Here it is again mixerguy...since you missed it. If you don't know why the above quote makes the HD mix engine better than LE, then I'd have to agree and say you'll have to do a search and read up on the diffrences on the two. The above is only one reason. After you get done researching this, you can go and look at the 48 bit depth, which really is 56, given the extra 8 bits over digital zero, worth of headroom. There's lots of topic on here discussing this but the above should be enough to reveal the "proof" you desire.
Old 11th August 2007 | Show parent
  #25
Lives for gear
 

It's a bit of semantics, but I know what mixerdude is saying. If you use the LE system WITHIN it's limits the difference is little if any.

ADC is only important if your introducing latency (although there's manual correction...but still) The mix bus...I don't know about that TBH, but just to be the devils advocate, there is a camp that believes floating point math actually sounds better than fixed point - I don't remember the reasons.

Now if the mix is less than 48 tracks, manually corrected latency, and you know how to gains stage properly within the digital domain, I don't think you would be able to tell the difference between HD or LE - but if you use better converters than 192's on an LE system (I personally find them prosumer, and especially troublesome if you have unbalanced gear like API or Helios (just to name a couple of classics) you can actually achieve better results.

But what an effen way to work I also disagree that LE would make sense for tracking - too much latency for cue mixes, and what if the singer wants verb while tracking....a big PITA.

So while you can work around all these issues and perhaps achieve close to "just as good" - you probably never will. The workflow is just too screwed up in LE. Now OTOH, if your doing Singer/Gtr stuff alot of these issues might be moot.
Old 11th August 2007 | Show parent
  #26
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by jslevin View Post
I know you haven't seen the proof or evidence. I think you should go find it.

......This subject is not worthy of an intelligent discussion; it belongs in a Basic Recording classroom.[/LIST]
JSL

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post

For mixing...LE can only compensate up to 1024 samples of delay. Where as HD can compensate for up to 8000+ for RTAS and an additional 4000+ on the TDM side. Yeah, I would call that overwhelming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post
Here it is again mixerguy...since you missed it. If you don't know why the above quote makes the HD mix engine better than LE, then I'd have to agree and say you'll have to do a search and read up on the diffrences on the two. The above is only one reason. After you get done researching this, you can go and look at the 48 bit depth, which really is 56, given the extra 8 bits over digital zero, worth of headroom. There's lots of topic on here discussing this but the above should be enough to reveal the "proof" you desire.
Wow - jslevin and Stoneface clearly aren’t listening to me, so this post is not for them, but for any ‘newbie’ that might benefit from some clear headed truths:

Is the ADC in ProTools HD a useful thing? Yes.
Is it worth having, if you can afford it? Yes.
Does it make life simpler? Yes.
Does ADC actually improve the actual sound of the mix buss (or mixer) - when mixing ITB - all other things aside? NO.

Can good quality, “pro” mixes be done in LE (as compared to TDM) - yes, in my opinion.

Does the “mixer” in ProTools LE sound significantly worse than TDM, if proper gain staging is used.. all other issues aside? NO. (in my opinion)

I post all this as it relates to the original question.


Oh yeah - jslevin and Stoneface - I hope you can somehow find peace and happiness in your lives..... you both clearly aren’t very happy people now. So much anger and aggression.... it must be very tiring for the people around you.
Old 11th August 2007 | Show parent
  #27
Lives for gear
 
s.d.finley's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post
Here it is again mixerguy...since you missed it. look at the 48 bit depth, which really is 56, given the extra 8 bits over digital zero, worth of headroom.

Old 11th August 2007 | Show parent
  #28
Gear Maniac
 
Hobbyist's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneface View Post
No arguments there. The mix engines are not even in the same league. This topic has been beat to death on here so it's amazing that there are still those that fight against it. Recording is one thing. Mixing is a whole other ballgame.

For mixing...LE can only compensate up to 1024 samples of delay. Where as HD can compensate for up to 8000+ for RTAS and an additional 4000+ on the TDM side. Yeah, I would call that overwhelming.
.

When did LE get any delay compensation at all?
AFAIK there isn't ADC.
Hardware buffer settings are all I know about. It's been a while though.
Old 11th August 2007 | Show parent
  #29
Lives for gear
 
Bierce85's Avatar
 

I think LE compensates up until a point.. I could be wrong. I'm pretty sure I'm right that it's total bull**** that they dont compensate over a certain point.
Old 11th August 2007 | Show parent
  #30
Gear Nut
 

It's been a while since I have read the white papers, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that both LE and HD systems use the same 48-bit fixed-point math when summing - can't find any mention of it in the white papers there now. Is the mixer plug-in the same in both versions?

In the current white papers, it only mentions the TDM version and how it passes data from one DSP chip to another - an option that would not be available on a host-based system.

To my knowledge there was/is no delay compensation in LE. There is a mention of some sort of plug-in:

Digi white papers:
Digidesign | Support | Digidesign Technical White Papers

As for latency in the cue mixes, reducing the hardware buffer size should alleviate this problem.

As far as converters go, the Myteks are very good. Apogees are another good choice. With an LE system, you will only be able to record up to 8 tracks simultaneously at up to 48 kHz with your good converters (ten if you have an additional 2-channel premium AD) - additional simultaneous tracks will end up going through the crappy LE-type interface converters. Were you to spring for the 96 Digital IO box, you could potentially run 16 channels of premium digital conversion at up to 96 kHz simultaneously.

Higher sampling rates aside and all other things being equal, the more channels of premium conversion you are running in a digital multitrack recording, the better the end result can potentially be:

Good source-> good room-> good mic-> good pre-> good converter-> good engineer = good recording

If you have only the first and the last elements in the chain, you still have a fighting chance with a 57 and an Mbox
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 295 views: 61799
Avatar for anguswoodhead
anguswoodhead 26th March 2013
replies: 15929 views: 1493272
Avatar for Ragan
Ragan 11th January 2019
replies: 1296 views: 159769
Avatar for heraldo_jones
heraldo_jones 1st February 2016
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…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump