Can you trust the DA (sound) of your digi001?

[Baked Goods Records]

Well said durado.

There is no magic to make things better. But a well seasoned mixer can definately use a better d/a to his/her advantage.

I just bought the DAC-1 today! It will be here tommorow.. I am looking foward checking it our!

-James

[pk_hat]

All is good James, I see what you're saying about the above comments. Congrats on your DAC-1, let us know how it works out for you!

Manu Janko,

which to choose, AD or DA? Well, both of course, but if you could only buy one now, myself, I would go DA, but that's truly dependant on everyone's different recording styles and techniques. I do record live bass and guitars from time to time, but the core of my music is sample and synth based, where the AD converter is less important. I also track everything through a Penta, for which I had bought the AD card. Problem is, I'm still going through the 001's DA to hear what I'm doing, which could be a reason why the Penta's converters sounded no different than the 001's when I a->b'd them a few months ago.

So, for someone like me, a Benchmark DAC-1 would make a dramatic difference in my monitoring, resulting in a more accurate and overall better sounding mix. The ADC-1 will be out within a few months, and that will be on the list eventually.

[ISedlacek]

Originally posted by Manu Janko:
IHey, Isedlacek, what about your brand new mini-DAC?
I can't wait...Is it an improvement as great as the mini-ME? [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">It is still on the way over the ocean ... I will let you know as soon as it arrives. Those who already listened, claim that it is still a class better then DAC-1.
BTW - what do you term as "mix bus" ? Sorry for maybe stupid question but I don´t know ...

[Gabriel Roth]

my understanding is that the 'mix bus' is the part of the system that sums together all the tracks. (if that's inexact or incorrect, i'm sure some smarter person will correct me.)

there's an interesting article in the current issue of Tape Op in which someone sets up the exact same mix using Pro Tools HD, a Dangerous Music 2-BUS, and two analog consoles. he says:

"My conclusion? Everything has its own sound. The PT mix was just fine sounding. It was a very good representation of my tracks. The SSL and Neve consoles have their own colors that they added to the tracks. The Dangerous 2-BUS is fast and open, has lots of stereo width, and is super-high fidelity."

bear in mind that this is PTHD he's referring to. i'd like to see the same experiment repeated with PTLE -- i suspect the result might be different.

it's not online yet or i'd post a link, but if you're not subscribing to Tape Op, what are you waiting for? it's awesome and free. get it here.

[valvebrother]

The original question was:

"Can you TRUST the DA (sound) of your digi001." To me, this means is the sound of the DA outputs in the 001 accurate or truthful to the source material being reproduced.

The answer is no. The DA chips and the analog signal path after them do not provide an accurate representation of the material you have recorded.

Can you still mix with these DA's?

Of course!

But, you have to get used to the accuracy and skew of the playback, accept that some details are missing entirely and other characteristics are over-emphasized, and translate your mix decisions accordingly.

This is often okay as long as you’re only using the DA to feed your monitors. Not great, but, if you’re used to the sound of the DA’s, then you can squeak by.

If you’re using the DA to feed signal processing in the analog world; then you’re really in another situation altogether.

D

[valvebrother]

Originally posted by Gabriel Roth:
i'd like to see the same experiment repeated with PTLE -- i suspect the result might be different.URL]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Someone already has:

http://www.3daudioinc.com/cgi-bin/ul...ubb=forum&f=19

This experiment and CD is all about comparing the affect of the mixbuss on identical source material.

I have no problems whatsoever producing a professional mix using the mixbuss in LE, TDM, PTHD or any other modern system. The key is headroom, mix accumen, and an accurate monitoring environment.

[zer0to]

Hi everyone!
Didn’t expect to go that far, but…great.
sins the only thing I am trying to get is
“one on one”
I am going for external CD Burner. the HHB CDR850.
like that I get a good DA (hopefully) and I know that what I am listening to is what it is!
later, if I will like to get some other DA I can always connect it to the HHB.
that is my conclusion.

Well?

Thank you.
zer0to

[froyo]

So would there be any advantage to adding a DA before you add a AD to your base 001 setup?
Or will the so-so 001 converters wash out the DA's advantage(s)? Can you trust the DA (sound) of your digi001?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Hello. If these have truly become issues for anyone, I believe the only way to answer that question is to do some sort A/B/C/D sort of testing. As was alluded by several people, each individual's situation is different. Some people record acoustic instruments, some people synths, some people have great rooms, some don't, some people have great monitor's, etc. David from Benchamrk said 'take entire stock of your situation'. I would take that literally.

So if this is truly an issue, set up a situation where you can evaluate each phase, and then act accordingly. First record to your 001, nothing added (A). Then put in the third party A/D (B). Then take away the A/D, and put in the third party D/A (C). Then put in third party A/D and D/A (D). Evaluate and act accordingly. Otherwise, we could be here another 1000 pages with advice from every single person on earth and still be at the exact same place we are right now. Only your ears and your opinions can answer these questions.

[soundboy69]

Hey, Duardo...what do mean by "That's not a fact.", in response to a statement made about tracking/ mixing at 192kHz.

All of the engineers that I know personally, and most musicians (I do mostly classical, on location, or jazz work, but some rock- some quite heavy, and sound design also...) can hear an immense, palpable difference in the representation of the timbre of the source instrument(s), and even more so for the surrounding environment (the room, etc...) at higher sample rates (esp. 192kHz). It also seems to really bring out the width and depth of the stereo soundstage of everything, don't you agree? Of course we're still talking about HD PCM audio...I think as you get so high into the sampling rate w/ PCM audio, it's a case of diminishing returns. Whereas w/ jumps to different methods of digitizing audio (like SACD), the benefits are more evident.

[bluhouse]

Froyo,
Good input, but I do not have access to said third party equipment, but have access to $$ to purchase a piece for myself. I personally understand that I am soliciting subjective opinions, and am ready and willing accept any bad (or good) decisions made from them. However, I have been able to rule out some equipment based on the opinions (and $$), and some facts, of actual users in this forum. Again, thanks for the input.

David,
Let's assume the acoustics have been taken care of. If I understand things correctly, by simply adding a better clock source (let's assume we could connect a GENx6 directly to the 001), to the 001, I will get better AD and DA performance from the 001, correct?
If this is truly the case, then wouldn't I get the best bang for the buck, by adding an AD with a better clock source than the 001 (and have some higher quaility ADs added)? I understand that it may not be to the level of putting a DAC-1 out there, but would you not agree. I am calling on your technical experience.