The Chicago tests: Have you listened?

[johnnyv]

Hello all,

Sorry if someone has posted on this topic already on this forum.

As some of you know, there have been some claims made on the internet (mostly by the poster named Mixerman), that Pro Tools has some very obvious sonic problems. Most specifically, Mixerman has claimed that when transferring audio from a 2" analog into Pro Tools, the low end octave of the material doesn't seem to make it through the transfer process. Thus, the Pro Tools copy is severely bass-shy, according to Mixerman.

A month ago, a group of individuals decided to put these claims to the test by setting up a similar test in the Chicago area. Reknowned engineer Steve Albini brought a 2" 16-track tape that he had recorded for the transfers. Fletcher from Mercenary Audio brought along a Radar system, to prove the point that such low end loss doesn't happen to all digital formats. At Mixerman's and Fletcher's suggestion, files were transferred from the 2" to Pro Tools (using both internal sync and sync from a Sync I/O) and Radar at both 48k and 96k. The transfers were done, and then mixes of each format were loaded into Nuendo through Lavry convertors, and the resulting files posted on the internet. Upon the completion of the tests, Fletcher and Mixerman complained that there were too many files to compare, so the testers were good enough to post 3 simple files:

1) A mix made from the 2" into Nuendo through Lavry
2) A mix made from the Pro Tools copy at 48k into Nuendo through Lavry
3) A mix made from the Radar copy at 48k into Nuendo through Lavry

A poll has been set up where you can listen to the files and then vote if you'd like to (without knowing which file is which). The files are only 15 seconds each, so they download very quickly, and you might enjoy hearing the three files if you have any interest in comparing 2" files with copies made of those files in Pro Tools and Radar. Does either of the copies suffer from a severe lack of low end? Mixerman's claims have been that this loss of low end is so easy to hear that anyone can hear it. On Wednesday, they'll reveal which files are which. What do you think? If you're interested, check the link below...

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/ind...948bfa4ff6f87a

It's pretty interesting...if you decide to vote, VOTE HONESTLY.

J

[roberts]

All it did for me is prove that why I never record analog anymore. Even Fletcher (The King Protools Basher) even admitted it was all the same. I am just amazed at how much effort and time people put into A/B tests like that.
Waste of time IMO, but even I was suckered into listen for a few minutes it was just too bad the music recorded was not more relevant to a good listening test. I had a hard time finding suttle differences using a distorted guitar rock song.
If Protools sounded bad and Radar was great nobody would use Protools and this would be called the "RUC"
You don't need a A/B test if something really sounds bad.