The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
002/Rosetta 800/Big Ben
Old 24th May 2006
  #1
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

002/Rosetta 800/Big Ben

Here are three 30-second clips. It was recorded into PT LE 7.1 thru the Rosetta 800 clocked with the big ben. Clips are 44.1 24-bit. One clip is clocked internally, one clocked by the big ben and rosetta 800, and one clocked by the rosetta 800 alone. Hopefully someone will find this useful

www.cherryhillrecording.com/zip/One.zip
www.cherryhillrecording.com/zip/Two.zip
www.cherryhillrecording.com/zip/Three.zip
Old 24th May 2006
  #2
Gear Addict
 

well call me nuts .... but I like number one ....
Old 24th May 2006
  #3
Lives for gear
 
RKrizman's Avatar
 

Save your money. On all of them the reverb still sounds too sibilant.

Sorry, not meaning to be critical, but really, do you hear that much difference to where it matters?

-R
Old 24th May 2006
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Rufuss Sewell's Avatar
I'm listening back through a Rosetta 800 clocked with Big Ben into Adam s2.5a's.

As far as I can tell...

1. Sounds dullest. Not as much clarity in the high end.

2. Sound the best, more air, clearer top end.

3. Sounds similar to 2 with the tiniest bit less clarity.
Old 24th May 2006
  #5
Lives for gear
I like #2 sample the best.
Especially with the deep sea of reverb, I think #2 sounds clearer...
I'm interested to know the results.
Old 24th May 2006
  #6
Gear Maniac
 
tunasafedolphin's Avatar
 

I never post on these things, but I'll bite.

I dislike #1.
I like #2.

I'm monitoring through a pair of Grado's on my laptop right now. Mediocre monitoring, but I prefer it for tests like these.
Old 24th May 2006
  #7
Lives for gear
 
nathanvacha's Avatar
 

I'm on my laptop w/ headphones... (I don't know why I never listen to these sample at home )

I like #2 best. Easy to rule out #1, 2 & 3 took me a few listens each to decide. For the record, I liked #3 a bit more at first. I like the piano more still I think... maybe just liked the take more.

I'm still a little confused, though... how did you clock to a big ben and the rosetta for one take... two clock sources? I must be missing something...

are you saying:

1. rosetta into 002 clocked from 002
2. rosetta into 002 clocked from rosetta
3. rosetta into 002 clocked from big ben?
(not intending to guess which is which, just are those the 3 setups?)

And where does that crazy reverb come from?


And hey Christian, which Grados? I've been considering getting some... (they are rumored to be great headphones...) but which???
Old 24th May 2006
  #8
Gear Nut
 
Count Dz's Avatar
 

A couple of things i've found out doing something similiar to this. My experiment was mixing down a piano and vox (5 tracks) through the 002 output. So my monitoring converter was kinda lame but even with mix clocked with a BB @ 44.1/24 and 88.2/24. There was a very noticeable change with the BB clocking @ 88.2. So much so that I bought a BB because of this. Everything seems more spacious and the vocal was so smooth as opposed to a bright, harsh, brittle thing it was before. I will say this the difference was not so apparent when I downsampled everything to 44.1 and listened back. Now of course I don't know if this was do to SRC or some other anomolies. Now I will I will give your experiment a listen and let you know my findings. As if what I hear matters to you and your ears.
Old 24th May 2006
  #9
Gon
Gear Head
 
Gon's Avatar
 

If you throw in any two of the tracks in your DAW and invert the phase on one of them, you get perfect cancellation when played back.

I can't imagine that there is an audible difference in these files when they cancel out perfectly, and I can't hear a difference on my playback equipment (although not exactly terribly high-end) either...
Old 24th May 2006
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

File one-BIG BEN
File two-INTERNAL
File three-ROSETTA

To my ears I don't hear a huge difference in any of the three files. I will admit that tracking through the Rosetta does sound better than going straight thru the 002, but when it comes to clocking post-tracking I can't really tell.

I tracked thru the Rosetta which was synced to the Big Ben. I was demoing the Big Ben to see how much it improved the sound...but I really can't tell that it does. Especially not a $1350 difference.

But then again I think the quality of this recording sounds better than what I have been doing recently...it was the first time using the Rosetta synced to the Big Ben...but I was also using a new preamp and recording at 44.1 instead of 48k.

Vocals are mono bussed to a stereo track with Altiverb wooden room setting. What do you guys think the small popping in the vocals are? I can't tell if they're mouth noises or perhaps CLOCKING issues .
Old 24th May 2006
  #11
Lives for gear
 
nathanvacha's Avatar
 

So file 2 was rosetta into 002 with the 002 as the clock source? huh. Gues no one likes the results of the big ben!
Old 24th May 2006
  #12
Gon
Gear Head
 
Gon's Avatar
 

Since all the files cancel each other out in a null-test, I think it's pretty safe to assume that any differences people are hearing in these files can be contributed to psychology.

If not, please explain how it is possible to hear differences in the files, when inverting the phase and summing results in utter silence.
Old 24th May 2006
  #13
Lives for gear
 
Hope209's Avatar
 

Sorry for not being clearer. The file was tracked into the 002 thru the Rosetta which was synced up to the Big Ben.

These files simply show what a clocking source can "change" after it has been tracked. Track number two was clocked by the 002 internally
Old 24th May 2006
  #14
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope209
File one-BIG BEN
File two-INTERNAL
File three-ROSETTA

To my ears I don't hear a huge difference in any of the three files. I will admit that tracking through the Rosetta does sound better than going straight thru the 002, but when it comes to clocking post-tracking I can't really tell.

I tracked thru the Rosetta which was synced to the Big Ben. I was demoing the Big Ben to see how much it improved the sound...but I really can't tell that it does. Especially not a $1350 difference.

But then again I think the quality of this recording sounds better than what I have been doing recently...it was the first time using the Rosetta synced to the Big Ben...but I was also using a new preamp and recording at 44.1 instead of 48k.

Vocals are mono bussed to a stereo track with Altiverb wooden room setting. What do you guys think the small popping in the vocals are? I can't tell if they're mouth noises or perhaps CLOCKING issues .
Very suprising.
I wonder why the Big Ben track sounded worse than the others to most of us?
Old 24th May 2006
  #15
Lives for gear
 
synthoid's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope209
Sorry for not being clearer. The file was tracked into the 002 thru the Rosetta which was synced up to the Big Ben.

These files simply show what a clocking source can "change" after it has been tracked. Track number two was clocked by the 002 internally
Sorry, I still don't understand what is purportedly being tested. How can a clock change the sound of A/D conversion that happened earlier using a different clock? What was done to the tracks after tracking them?

-synthoid
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