AD/DA "Audiophile" Question

[sigbergaudio]

Not disputing your claims, but out of curiosity: Is it several chains of AD/DA in a typical mixing and mastering process? Without thinking too much about it I would have assumed it's recorded digitally and then modified in the digital domain? But that's perhaps not the case?

 

[Ponyboy]

Well keeping in mind I've always been indie, home studio, but on the mastering side, if vinyl is the destination, I will engage the services of a professional. I am often trying to make things a bit dirtier or coloured, but typically for me:

1. Electronic gear goes in through an interface to DAW.
2. I will often send recordings back out to external hardware (EQ/Comp/FX/Tape/Old Allen & Heath or Ramsa console). Sometimes I am sending virtual synths or recorded audio out to the audio input of my hardware synth to make use of the analog filters, then back into the DAW.
3. May or may not send my final DAW mix out through external gear for my "mastering" pass and back into the computer to create my final digital version for upload to Bandcamp/Spotify, or to send off to a mastering engineer.
4. The mastering process would then utilize external hardware for processing, sometimes multiple AD/DA through the chain (EQ/comp/FX), then back into their computer for the final final masters.
5. For vinyl or tape I suppose there is also another DA when printing to an analog format.

 

[sergeauckland]

It's called freedom of speech.

Also referred to as license to be stupid

Not disputing your claims, but out of curiosity: Is it several chains of AD/DA in a typical mixing and mastering process? Without thinking too much about it I would have assumed it's recorded digitally and then modified in the digital domain? But that's perhaps not the case?

Varies quite a bit. A lot of 'outboard' equipment, especially some of the prestigious vintage equalisers and compressor/limiters only have analogue I/O, so although the main mixer may be all digital, even the DAW, there's an amount of ADC/DAC going on. Monitoring will also involve a DAC, as amplifiers and 'speakers are still ultimately analogue.

For smaller studios, audio will mostly stay digital except for monitoring and all effects/mixing etc done digitally. More ambitious studios will have more analogue, some even using analogue tape for all that lovely third harmonic distortion and treble squashing....

S.

 

[maverickronin]

Some will argue that better measurements below the level of audibility are indicators of engineering quality, but I think that's just rationalization for measurbating.

Nothing wrong with measurbating in the privacy of your own home.

 

[mcdonalk]

I suggest that you pose this question to audiophiles on an actual audiophile forum. Audiophiles are usually the butt of ridicule here, so not many are likely see your question here to reply.

 

[Colonel Bogey]

I have the same.

Although it's a love/hate relationship.

Well, I guess one would have to be a German engineer to really love the user interface

 

[JoachimStrobel]

Hi Everyone,

I'm a music maker. I've been making electronic music for over 20 years. My first priority was usually musical instruments, outboard FX, audio interfaces and powered monitors. Over the years I've focused more on investing in gear that is used to listen to music rather than make it.

I have a general question after I watched a few review videos of an RME ADI-2 DAC FS which I just bought). One of these videos said that the ADI-2 wasn't quite as good as another DAC. He lost me when he started talking about interconnects and measuring sine waves. But it got me thinking again about a fundamental question that has popped into my head now and again.

Considering that the AD/DA devices that have made the music, and mastered the music, could very well have been RME, Lynx, Apogee, Metric, how can anyone claim that a consumer DAC can somehow resolve things above and beyond what was printed through the AD/DA mastering stage? I can understand that a DAC could be revealing less than a source, but if pro audio, and the music makers have used RME, how could another DAC be somehow better?

I use this guy sometimes to master my music. There's a Weiss DS1, EQ1, RME, and other top shelf pro audio gear. If you mastered through an RME UCX, then bought the RME ADI-2 Pro FS R BE and claimed the DAC is better - that may be true, but you're not going to hear anything above and beyond what the (inferior) mastering DAC did... nor are you going to hear much between top tier consumer DACs, or am I missing something?

Isn't the "best" DAC, the flattest with no audible distortion? To claim this DAC or that DAC is better, as a listener, seems to be nothing but subjective preference. Can you get flatter than a straight line? Apparently so..

View attachment 84839

Video is here

Two speakers can simply not reproduce a real band, certainly not an acoustic one. So anything and everything that one introduces like cables, humidifier, DACs will change the sound somehow, one would think somehow closer to the source whose soundfield will never be reproduced faithfully with 2 speaker.

 

[Ponyboy]

Two speakers can simply not reproduce a real band, certainly not an acoustic one. So anything and everything that one introduces like cables, humidifier, DACs will change the sound somehow, one would think somehow closer to the source whose soundfield will never be reproduced faithfully with 2 speaker.

Agree with some of this, (with cables being somewhat suspect, again back to the question of source, if I'm recording on cheap Amazon 1/4" TS, how are your silver interconnects giving you more on playback?).

A lot of music production doesn't cross through an acoustic environment or involve a band, rather going straight from an electronic instrument > audio interface > digital or analog recording format (usually a DAW), or originates in the digital environment entirely (VSTi), which seems perfectly suited to the possibility of faithful reproduction from an ADI-2 and others.

 

[pozz]

Thanks for all the comments and for validating that I'm not too crazy. The pro-audio and hi-fi world feels quite different, as there always seemed to be this disconnect between what we are utilizing on the production side, vs what some of the hi-fi products claimed to be resolving. There are times when I purposefully use "worse" gear for effect (printing drums to a Tascam 234 Syncaset for example, or going through an old Ramsa mixer then back in through the Rosetta).

I won't plug myself as I'm a terrible salesman, but you can check out the label(s) here. Bandcamp streams should be available for most.

www.endemikmusic.com
https://store.hellola-hellola.com/

I've been following this board for a while, and appreciate the matter-of-fact approach to gear. Not having to sort through the rudeness of other forums is a treat. Would love to see the testing expanded to include more pro audio stuff. It's tiresome to hear the marketing of the latest and greatest audio interface. RTL, noise, distortion, clocks and conversion are of great interest on the production side.

Deadly Stare? I have Reverse Alchemy / Death Watch Beetle

Back on topic, we have this listening test put together by @Blumlein 88: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-choose-the-8th-generation-digital-copy.6827/

 

[Ponyboy]

Deadly Stare? I have Reverse Alchemy / Death Watch Beetle

Back on topic, we have this listening test put together by @Blumlein 88: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-choose-the-8th-generation-digital-copy.6827/

Ha! That's Scott. I'm Maki. I will check out that thread. I'm going to guess I will fail .