NEW -> Pro Tools | Carbon Pre

[dominicperry]

Originally Posted by K Roche

here is the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7NO...ohnsStudioTalk

Thanks Kev.

Now I watch it, I have seen one of his videos before. I watched this one too, as I asked for it, but I have no intention of taking any notice of him.

Dominic

[eightamrock]

Originally Posted by JTC111

I got into it a bit with Barry in the comment section of that video and made this point about his price complaint:
As for the 8-channel Carbon Pre being $3k, that's what you'd pay for a 4-channel John Hardy pre. Is that more than, let's say, a Focusrite OctoPre, yes, but it's also a better quality preamp. You've heard those preamps so I'm pretty sure you know how good they are. Quality costs money, no? If I needed eight extra preamps, the Carbon Pre is actually a fairly economically friendly option compared to the boutique options on the market.

As I said to you over at AGF, I don't need the pres. What I really want to see is a 16 channel Avid AVB box without pres. I'm buying that the day it comes out and I have to think that's in the works if Avid is looking at UA as a direct competitor in this market.

This. They already have a blueprint for it with the mtrx studio. Just need to change the digi port to an AVB.

[LDS]

Originally Posted by eightamrock

This. They already have a blueprint for it with the mtrx studio. Just need to change the digi port to an AVB.

The MTRX Studio already has AoIP through Dante. It is quite superior to AVB. Lower latency, cross platform support, guaranteed interoperability between manufacturers, etc. There is a reason why other manufacturers like MOTU and Presonus keep offering thunderbolt on their interfaces. AVB just isn't very good.


The Carbon & S6L preamps are nothing more than THAT Corp 1580 Preamp ICs and THAT Corp 5173 digital gain controllers. About $12USD worth of ICs from mouser. THAT Corp make good chips... but they are designed to be cost effective. Most manufacturers advertising digitally controlled preamps in this day and age use them in basically the same design.

The Hardy M-1 on the other hand contains a $50 discrete 990C opamp, and a $199 Jensen JT-16-A input transformer and a $89 Jensen JT-11-BMQ output transformer. It is a totally different kettle of handmade fish. The kind that people were using 20 years ago, and will still be using in 20 years time after Avid have given the flick to Avid Carbon Preamps, their power supplies have terminally failed and Apple have left AVB support for dead.

I don't really know what a comparison between the Carbon Pre and Hardy preamps really serves, other than outlining that the M-1 is either comparatively cheap for what you get... or the Carbon Pre is overpriced.

[eightamrock]

Originally Posted by LDS

The MTRX Studio already has AoIP through Dante. It is quite superior to AVB. Lower latency, cross platform support, guaranteed interoperability between manufacturers, etc. There is a reason why other manufacturers like MOTU and Presonus keep offering thunderbolt on their interfaces. AVB just isn't very good.


The Carbon & S6L preamps are nothing more than THAT Corp 1580 Preamp ICs and THAT Corp 5173 digital gain controllers. About $12USD worth of ICs from mouser. THAT Corp make good chips... but they are designed to be cost effective. Most manufacturers advertising digitally controlled preamps in this day and age use them in basically the same design.

The Hardy M-1 on the other hand contains a $50 discrete 990C opamp, and a $199 Jensen JT-16-A input transformer and a $89 Jensen JT-11-BMQ output transformer. It is a totally different kettle of handmade fish. The kind that people were using 20 years ago, and will still be using in 20 years time after Avid have given the flick to Avid Carbon Preamps, their power supplies have terminally failed and Apple have left AVB support for dead.

I don't really know what a comparison between the Carbon Pre and Hardy preamps really serves, other than outlining that the M-1 is either comparatively cheap for what you get... or the Carbon Pre is overpriced.

But I want it.....

[Philthy]

I love the idea of the Carbon platform. I would love to see a unit with more ADC, for people with existing front end. I could do without the preamps. The Presonus Quantum 4848 shows what could be done here.

[dominicperry]

Originally Posted by Philthy

I love the idea of the Carbon platform. I would love to see a unit with more ADC, for people with existing front end. I could do without the preamps. The Presonus Quantum 4848 shows what could be done here.

The Quantum is an entirely different prospect. It's intended to be super-low latency for native use. The Carbon is nothing like it in either intention or implementation. Latency from computer to interface is high but internal DSP keeps latency low for tracking regardless of how much stress the computer is under. Different concept, different realisation.

Dominic

[Philthy]

Originally Posted by dominicperry

The Quantum is an entirely different prospect. It's intended to be super-low latency for native use. The Carbon is nothing like it in either intention or implementation. Latency from computer to interface is high but internal DSP keeps latency low for tracking regardless of how much stress the computer is under. Different concept, different realisation.

Dominic

Native vs DSP has nothing to do with flexible I/O configurations and I'm not sure why you brought it up. Maybe my use of ADC as analog digital conversion was confusing... I'm not talking about delay compensation.

The Quantum line has had 3 models so far that have targeted different I/O configs. This is a model Avid has used for multiple gens of hardware, e.g. 192 Analog vs 192 Digital, ADAT bridges, HD I/O... many ways to customize system I/O. But so far, we get no inputs for existing front end, without adding our own conversion, or passing through limited channels with unneeded interface preamps.

The Quantum 4848 shows what kind of A/D input is doable in an affordable 1 rack unit. I'm certainly not the only one with existing analog front end and no need for 8 onboard preamps. I could really use a Carbon system with 24 channels of A/D conversion, so I can use my existing analog front end without adding the cost & complexity of ADAT conversion, and without 8 channels of onboard preamps, that while I'm certain are totally good, are still not quite boutique analog preamps.

Avid often offers flexible I/O configurations. I hope they continue to build on the Carbon line to meet more users' needs. A base unit with a bunch of A/D conversion would be ideal for people with existing front end gear.

[massivekerry]

Originally Posted by Philthy

Native vs DSP has nothing to do with flexible I/O configurations and I'm not sure why you brought it up. Maybe my use of ADC as analog digital conversion was confusing... I'm not talking about delay compensation.

The Quantum line has had 3 models so far that have targeted different I/O configs. This is a model Avid has used for multiple gens of hardware, e.g. 192 Analog vs 192 Digital, ADAT bridges, HD I/O... many ways to customize system I/O. But so far, we get no inputs for existing front end, without adding our own conversion, or passing through limited channels with unneeded interface preamps.

The Quantum 4848 shows what kind of A/D input is doable in an affordable 1 rack unit. I'm certainly not the only one with existing analog front end and no need for 8 onboard preamps. I could really use a Carbon system with 24 channels of A/D conversion, so I can use my existing analog front end without adding the cost & complexity of ADAT conversion, and without 8 channels of onboard preamps, that while I'm certain are totally good, are still not quite boutique analog preamps.

Avid often offers flexible I/O configurations. I hope they continue to build on the Carbon line to meet more users' needs. A base unit with a bunch of A/D conversion would be ideal for people with existing front end gear.

Yes, a Carbon without the Monitor section, based around just the Line In/Out and converters, with no preamps, except for the instrument-level (Multi-Z) inputs on the front would be great! I'm sure the Carbon's preamps are wonderfully clear, but I'm looking at the rack of pre-amps I bought to go into my 192/HD-IO over here...

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by Philthy

Native vs DSP has nothing to do with flexible I/O configurations and I'm not sure why you brought it up. Maybe my use of ADC as analog digital conversion was confusing... I'm not talking about delay compensation.

The Quantum line has had 3 models so far that have targeted different I/O configs. This is a model Avid has used for multiple gens of hardware, e.g. 192 Analog vs 192 Digital, ADAT bridges, HD I/O... many ways to customize system I/O. But so far, we get no inputs for existing front end, without adding our own conversion, or passing through limited channels with unneeded interface preamps.

The Quantum 4848 shows what kind of A/D input is doable in an affordable 1 rack unit. I'm certainly not the only one with existing analog front end and no need for 8 onboard preamps. I could really use a Carbon system with 24 channels of A/D conversion, so I can use my existing analog front end without adding the cost & complexity of ADAT conversion, and without 8 channels of onboard preamps, that while I'm certain are totally good, are still not quite boutique analog preamps.

Avid often offers flexible I/O configurations. I hope they continue to build on the Carbon line to meet more users' needs. A base unit with a bunch of A/D conversion would be ideal for people with existing front end gear.

You are certainly not alone JTC11 has stated he would buy a non pre amp Carbon AVB 16 channel Extension unit for his existing Carbon In a heart beat. For his outboard pres and FX units Hopefully such a unit is next on list of expansion options

[audiolex1]

Originally Posted by K Roche

Barry does offer some good info BUT
Barry gets so spun out in his prejudicial distain for Avid that he "broke it all down" with an inaccurate statement and some prejudicial false equivalencies
Regardless of his claim,, he seems to be more highly subjective and only marginally objective

First (inaccurate claim) Exactly like the RME Fireface UFX + ,,, Carbon has TWO (not one ) ADAT banks No. 1 and No. 2 for a total 16 channels which is the number of ADAT channels RME has (which he later states about the RME)

Second (false equivalency #1) the RME Fireface UFX + Has 4 mic preamps the Carbon has 8.. So that fact alone is an objective reason the Carbon is $1000 more than the RME . Objectively $250 per channel for top quality mic's pres and conversion is not at all unreasonable .
Then he goes on to use the word play -- The Carbon has top of line "interface" quality mic pres" while implying --but not as quality as top dedicated pre's--- which is a totally subjective (not objective) assessment and highly debatable

Third (false equivalency #2) "the interface alone" ? No there is no $2700 to $3000 dollar interface (that I know of ) that has 8 high end mic pre's and converters that has integrated seamless DSP available using a single layer of software Most of the better $2700 - $3500 interface that offer some kind of DSP are 4 preamps and require dual layers of software,, and by the time you ad four more high quality mic pre's with high end conversion you will be at $4k or more So No you are not paying $1000 to $1300 more for only DSP

The Carbon and Carbon pre microphone preamps are as good as almost any mic pre on the market period ,, interface or dedicated standalone mic pre. And the same can said of the converters
And as far as the price of the Carbon Pre. ? ) Objectively $375 per channel for top tier mic pre's and conversion is also not out of line. ( you will likely pay double that for a 1 channel of 500 format mic pre ) Not to mention being able to seamlessly integrate the Carbon and Carbon Pre for DSP usage, in a single layer of software .....

I like Barry but I would view his video/s with a grain of salt ... Now saying he thinks there are better bargains out there is a perfectly valid totally subjective personal opinion... But saying anyone who buys a Carbon Pre is "out of their mind" is total personal agenda driven hype and BS
I would not buy a Carbon Pre because I don't need more than the 8 mic pre's I have on my Carbon ,,,, BUT if I did, I would give it serious consideration and certainly not dismiss out of hand based on the objectively questionable assessment of someone butt hurt about Avid


here is the link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7NO...ohnsStudioTalk

Honestly, I kind of wondered about it because I know he has moved off from PT so I felt there could be some bias.

I thought the carbon offered something unique, but there are times I use different software for things and just don't know enough about Carbon to really be able to comment so thank you to those to are giving some real world feedback.

DSP is nice and I know AVID doesn't cheap out so much when they are building the hardware. When it was announce, I was like 3k. I'm in what does it do.
Unfortunately I don't know if it will work with my current system. 5,1 on Mojave. I'm waiting for Apple Mac Pro/Mini announcements which didn't come as the transition is going to be pricey.

I have plenty of pres and an Apollo but setting up headphone mixes can be a bit cumbersome with the latency. It like my days on PC back in XP. I spent so much time configuring to work, but never worked. Bought a Mac and then I worked.

There has been an idea to go Dante. Or MADI with a pair of Euphonix converters.

So it might be a reserve in the future. I really need to look into the additional added benefits in the PT world. It seems like AVID has really stepped up their game in the updates department and that is making the software more appealing again.