Interesting converter shootout on Gearslutz

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-shoot-outs-sound-file-comparisons-audio-tests/660499-ultimate-converter-da-ad-loopback-shootout-thread.html

Not a whole lot of converters included in the test so far, but still interesting. My own unit (MOTU 828MkII) is included, so it's nice to see that it performs well.

It also seems to confirm my suspicion that the Black Lion mods rely more on expectation bias than actual electronic improvements to convince believers they've made a smart decision in paying hundreds of dollars for new capacitors and op amps.

You are right. Even a low-end Realtek interface is better than the first-generation ADCs from the 60's. And yet, some excellent digital recordings were made back then (although most were pretty bad).

Which is not to say that converter quality is completely unimportant, only that it's way, way down on the long list of things that determine the final quality of the product.

Here's an example of why I dig these forums... Great discussions on technical subjects, knowledge w/o all the elitism.

I recently saw a newbie ask for audio interface recommendations on another forum I visit. He mentioned M-Audio but was advised to avoid them due to their poor quality converters and told to get an Apogee instead. In fact, those fellows are pretty much swearing by Apogee.

One of the guys even mentioned that the difference was so obvious that he heard the difference even when listening to MP3s, which sounded much more "open".

One of the guys even mentioned that the difference was so obvious that he heard the difference even when listening to MP3s, which sounded much more "open".

Placebo effect.

Listeners can identify equipment with 100% accuracy only as long as the brand name is clearly visible. In a blind test, maybe 1 person in 100 could reliably distinguish an Apogee from an M-Audio interface, and even then it would likely be program-dependent and/or due to flaws in the test.

Where you are most likely to distinguish interfaces is in their analog components. Danny talks about a guitar sounding better through a Realtek than his "good" interfaces. This may be due to distortion and compression in the analog portion of the interface. The Realtek does not have as much headroom, has higher distortion, noise and channel crosstalk, and poorer transient response. Such shortcomings do not necessarily make audio sound bad, just a little different.

That's why I added the caveat about program dependency above. If you wanted to demonstrate the superiority of a Prism over a Realtek, it would be easy: you'd only have to choose test audio that emphasized the Realtek's limitations. You'd have a much harder time demonstrating audible differences between Apogee and M-Audio, or M-Audio versus Roland, or MOTU versus RME.

I haven't had time enough to compare yet - but the guitar tones you developed are fantastic in all the tracks. 

Geno: Thanks brother!

Starise: that's a good way to look at it. To be honest....I really think it's WHAT we record as well as HOW we record it that makes a difference. For example, you'll definitely hear a difference in quality when you mic something...especially if it's something clean. Like...distorted guitars are pretty much always going to sound like distorted guitars no matter what we do. But a clean guitar...or an acoustic or even a voice...is going to show different results because the sound isn't so loaded with artifacts, saturation and distortion.

The other side of the coin (and I sincerely believe this) when someone knows what they are doing with sound, do you really think converters etc will make that huge of a difference in the over-all, end of the day project? I mean, sure, I know there will be subtle differences, but do you think the end results would be "not listenable because he used a Realtek" or a "Soundblaster?" See, that's where I think the hype of this stuff goes a bit too far.

For example, I don't use any mic pre's at all other than the one's included on my Mackie 32x8 and my Tascam DM 4800. And honest when I tell you....I barely use them if at all and it's even rare for me to touch any eq on my consoles pre-print. I do my best to get the mics sounding as best as I can without touching anything because I like to be able to color the stuff ITB so I'm not stuck with stuff that may have sounded good during the printing stage that made me excited. I'm sure you can attest to that "wow" feeling. You think you have this really great sound going on and for the time it IS a great sound...then when you try to mix it and work with it...you smack yourself for over-doing it a bit too much? :)

But I really believe that if someone knows what they are doing, has a good DAW with some good tools and the right monitor environment, that all the stuff people buy into as hype is pretty much obsolete. You either know what sounds good or you don't...converters, mic-pre's and all the other bells and whistles people spend money on won't be that drastic of a difference.

I've had so many mic pre's etc...and still have a few, but I don't use them anymore. Why? Well, because I get the same exact results once I have my sounds in Sonar. It just didn't make sense to me to process pre-print when I can get the same results other than some of the coloration some of those outboard devices give you. I mean seriously...some make things warmer, some makes things a bit more bright...some saturate in a good way if needed....but with the tools we have today, we can come so close to that stuff, to me it just doesn't justify a 5k purchase for some dumb mic pre. It's not like they are making the sound any bigger or improving the fidelity...they just color things in a "different" way. The whole thing with converters etc...to me, it will always be a load of hype until someone can really show me a difference that makes a difference.

Granted...if you have a studio in shambles...and your percentage over-all is 0%, having good converters and mic pre's will improve your quality to about what...10% if you're lucky? Is it worth the price really? It depends but that still won't help you mix or record any better if you don't have that part down, ya know? For a guy like me that sort of has a clue, that 10% difference doesn't make enough of a difference to me. I need something that makes me go "wow...I soo can't live without this thing!" Kinda like my thoughts on ARC. I've tried so many things and owned so many things....the best thing I ever did was say "use what you got, master it, get good results and if you feel the need to expand, do it once you know what you're doing."

Once I knew what I was doing...I bought the pricey stuff and scratched my head as to why people brag about it. Yeah...it made a slight difference...but that's the thing we have to keep in mind. Is "different" the same as "better"? To me...it wasn't better, just different. Another quick example...

I had a client come to me for a video mix of his song. When he sent me his version, I felt what he did was so good, I really didn't want to take his money and do a full blown video. What he would have gotten back from me would have only been "different" not necessarily "better" because he did such a good job on his own. This is where I think people are getting so lost with this stuff. We can't allow "different" to justify "better" because that is always going to be in the ears of the beholder and we all hear differently...so what's the point, ya know what I mean? Sure there are some tools we can't do without...but some of these others that people are going through the pains of hell to brag about....just kinda make me shake my head. I bought into the hype too...and the day I sold the hype boxes was the day I understood it's all about what you know and how you go about it that matters. :)

-Danny

Starise


 Hi Danny,

Thanks for your comments. I'm sure you have heard the comments like genius is about 1%  inspiration and 99% perspiration. I really believe that accomplishment is based on effort over obstacles. One of my friends came over and picked up my Yamaha acoustic electric and made it sound like a million bucks.  A guy who knows what he is doing can pull off a lot with what he knows and a guy who knows a little can still pull it off with a lot of persistence. Same applies to recording gear and the use of it.

Probably the best thing anybody not really good at the mixing recording thing yet could do is to track basic and take the stuff to someone else who does know a little bit,because the more they play with it the worse they can make things in the end.No reverbs,no plugs to mention just the bare tracks....

I work similar to the way you do in how I track. I have a Mackie 12 channel board that goes directly into the line inputs on my interface and I seldom play with the EQs on the board. If I'm tracking guitar I will use the two better inputs on my Firestudio which both have a limiter and an 80hz low freq. cut. I don't play around much with midi although I was playing with some the other day and can do that if I want to. Most of my stuff is played right in and seldom do I edit much of anything. With all my other responsibilities mixing takes a back seat to most other things I do, I'm gradually getting there though and for me its fun trying to get things right.....but yeah......even now I try to keep the ability to have the rough tracks at my disposal in case I muck something up or in case a second opinion make changes necessary.

As far as interfaces go, if I were giving advice to someone new just starting out, I would say, buy a decent " middle of the road" interface and then see how that goes. Personally, I have always tried to make my interface a pretty big consideration when I bought one. I could never afford the Apogee stuff, but the one I have now works just fine. I don't think I could advise someone to go buy the cheapest stuff you can because to me recording with a bottom end interface is asking for more trouble. Not that it wouldn't work but if they trusted me to give a good recommendation,I want to live with that recommendation and be pretty confident that they have a good start in recording.

I agree man, there is a lot of hype out there and sometimes it can be expensive to find out the truth lol.

Totally agree there...especially about the interface recommendation. I didn't mean to make it sound like I'd tell someone "ah, just use the built-in sound...don't go buy an M-Audio!" LOL!!! We definitely need decent cards for recording with the inputs and other connections...that's for sure. But in my opinion....anything "decent" will work when you know what you're doing.
 
Hahah you do a lot of the same stuff as me eh? Too funny! Yeah, I know my way of doing things makes people cringe at times...but I've always tried to get the most pure signal possible while making it as close to the sound source as possible. With all the stuff we have now, it's pretty easy to manipulate something to sound like whatever you need it to sound like once you have it in. Then like you said, we can always revert back to the original stuff. I just really feel great when doing things in that manner even if some guru mixing engineer said "well, it's wrong to do it that way and here's why." Of course I'd listen and try what he offered to me....but in this field....what works for one doesn't always work for another even if you have the same gear. I like the trial and error lab work I do. It throws you out there without a life preserver and makes you deliver the goods. LOL!
 
I get quite a few students in here from time to time that went to those pricey recording schools. They learn more with me in one weekend than they learn in an entire semester at those places. I mean seriously...what good does it do you to learn on an SSL, NEVE or D-Control when you come home to Sonar and Tranzport as your interface without all the pricey front end stuff....you got cheaper mics, you got no pre's or one pre...you got a crap room....you got one set of monitors with no sub...no room correction...and you just spent 30k or more to go to this recording school. LOL! That's where guys like me can really make a difference. Cut to the chase...use techniques you'll use in the real world using some pricey gear as well as gear we common folks can afford so you see and learn the differences and how to compensate...and you learn how to make good sounds happen while in the trenches and you only have to rely on 2 things...you and your ears. :) Good talking shop with you Starise! :)
 
-Danny

Hi i know I'm a bit late to the party on this one but a friend told me about a this thread on GS and said it was a real eye-opener and that the MOTU traveller had won. However he couldn't remember the details of what was said and it seems to have been CENSORED on GS which makes me even more interested. So although I don't use cakewalk i signed up just to find out what was said, what brands were involved, how they ranked.
 
Thanks

Thanks. 11 pages? Could I get a 1 paragraph summary? :)

mike_mccue
 
I use MOTU?
 
That's all I got.

Haha, which model of MOTU did it recommend? The Traveller mk3? How reliable are the drivers - does it use core audio? Does the Ultralite use all the same components just slightly different features (less preamps)?

Damn censorship. Thanks 

Bummer … didn’t get to read it and I am gearing up to replace my Delta 1010 ... from the little bit I can glean from what you guys wrote here, it sounds like the mid-level gear is solid.  I’ve been tossing around the idea of replacing my Delta 1010 (8 line level inputs / PCI) with either a pricier equivalent or more line level channels.  I am NOT interested in an interface with mic-preamps and I want to stay with the older PCI or PCIe technology.
 
For example:
 
The RME Multiface II and the accociated PCIe card (you need to buy both) would run $1498 and would be a direct replacement for my Delta 1010 (8 line level inputs).
 
Alternatively, the MOTU 24I/O Core PCIe would run $1420 and would give me a total of 24 line level inputs.
 
On a per channel basis the RME is $187.25 versus $59.17 for the MOTU.
 
So, from what you are saying about the results of the shoot-out is that I should feel confident investing in the MOTU at 1/3 the price on a per channel basis and go with infinitely more useful 24 channels.

Batsbrew- love the graphic! Thanks for the chuckle.

For the record.....I'm mostly neutral on the discussion. I've had to make changes to my converters over time, and as my income increased, the cost of my converters has increased too. I don't have Lynx or Apogee, but a pair of RME converters. What I have noticed is that the more expensive converters generally offer more channels of AD/DA, options and are easily expandable to add more and more channels. For example, I could add another 16 channels and record all 32 simultaneously while holding up and keeping latency down.
 
For comparison, all I can do is listen to my older recording versus my newer ones. Honestly, there's things about the older recordings that I like better, and there are things that I like better on the new gear. I think that the more layered and multi-channeled the work, the more noticeable the differences are. Most of the stuff I recorded earlier on was simpler, and now there is more going into the recordings (literally), thus I like the RMEs better on work that has larger track count.
 
Last, don't forget that Apogee, Lynx, etc. are really designed to be pro-grade converters that live between large consoles and the DAW with the ability to record 48+ analog sources at once, powered on and in use 24 x 7. Most of us don't have these requirements, thus we don't need to spend the bucks on them.
 
It's no different than the exact same discussions about cameras. Does an artist need a $5000 DSLR body? No. Does a pro that will lug it around all the time, drop it, and depend on it for her/his living? It's not because it takes that much better pictures, but because it gives a professional the tools they need to make their living without cause for concern. The camera built into an iPhone can take a picture of the same quality as a $5k DSLR (for the most part) and certainly when in the hands of a regular person. Thus, the $5K DSLR is not intended for me, but the manufacturer wouldn't mind one bit if I could afford one.

So what you have proven, Bat.....is that performance trumps converters. :-)