A/D Converters

[adam79]

Is it pointless to buy a quality Mic Pre if you don't have an A/D
converter of equal quality?

[Rebecca Taylor]

On May 19, 11:46 pm, adam79 <ada...@toast.net> wrote:
> Is it pointless to buy a quality Mic Pre if you don't have an A/D
> converter of equal quality?

They're apples and oranges. In general, a system is commonly held to
be as weak as its weakest link. From an information theory point of
view, a system is weaker than its weakest link. Degradation (noise,
distortion) is typically cumulative. That has suggested to some that
improvements are most useful at the front end of a signal chain, a
position that may or may not be applicable in any given situation.

Returning to your question, unless your A/D converter is egregiously
awful (like the converters built into many motherboards), your
system's performance will benefit from an upgrade. Probably.

So let's get down to brass tacks. What are you using for a preamp and
A/D now, and what are you thinking of getting?

Peace,
Paul

[Mike Rivers]

On 5/20/2012 12:46 AM, adam79 wrote:
> Is it pointless to buy a quality Mic Pre if you don't have an A/D
> converter of equal quality?

It depends on what you're using the mic preamp for. And also, nobody
knows what "quality" really means relative to those two different
products. But it's true that chains can have weak links, but whther this
matters or not depends on how hard you're yanking the chain.



--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio" - John Watkinson

Drop by http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com now and then

[Scott Dorsey]

adam79 <ada...@toast.net> wrote:
>Is it pointless to buy a quality Mic Pre if you don't have an A/D
>converter of equal quality?

No, because later on you can buy a quality A/D converter.

In the end, the room is apt to be the real limiting factor in the recording
chain and it's the most expensive part to buy too.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[eth...@ethanwiner.com]

On Sunday, May 20, 2012 11:07:10 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In the end, the room is apt to be the real limiting factor in the recording
> chain and it's the most expensive part to buy too.

No kidding. High quality gear is a commodity these days, and it doesn't have to cost a fortune. A lousy preamp or sound card / converter might be down a dB or two at the frequency extremes, with a worst-case distortion of 0.1 percent. Compare that to a typical untreated room with peak / null spans of 30 dB or more, ringing that lasts for half a second at half a dozen frequencies, and early reflections almost as loud as the direct sound that seriously cloud the sound.

--Ethan

[Arny Krueger]

"adam79" <ada...@toast.net> wrote in message
news:AOSdnd3gxrSU6iXS...@posted.toastnet...

> Is it pointless to buy a quality Mic Pre if you don't have an A/D
> converter of equal quality?

Define equal quality.

Remember, you're comparing apples to oranges, digital to analog.

First off we must forget that our skills, studios, performance spaces, and
microphones pose the most significant audible limitations to sound quality,
as opposed to mic preamps and converters with reasonable quality.
Experienced people have been pleasing many of us for over a decade with
recordings made with the relatively inexpensive mic preamps in
mid-low-priced consoles and similarly priced converters.

Converters with dynamic range around 100 dB generally suffice, and they are
now being sold for scary low prices. The converters in your tablet, laptop
or desktop are probably no more than 10 dB worse. Hand held digital
recorders selling for under $200 have them.

I would say that a set of converters whose performance was good enough so
that you could discern the frequency response, noise and distortion errors
of the mic preamp in the digital domain would be its functional equal. IOW
if the converter was good enough so that the mic preamp's errors dominated
the colorations mic preamp -> converter part of your recording system, then
the converter was easily its equal.

One not-so-hidden agenda is the continuously improving price/performance of
digital <->analog converters.

If you wanted a pair of 24/96 converters with 115 dB dynamic range in the
year 2000, you were probably writing a check for about $1k per channel for
either ADCs *or* DACs . A decade before that you might be looking for
unobtanium.

Within 5 years the LynxTwo provided 4 channels of ADCs and 4 channels of
DACs, a PCI SPDIF/AES/EBU computer interface and operation up to 24/192 for
well under $1K.

About 5 years after that, the spec was the pretty much the same, but the
price was around $200.

[bob]

On Sun, 20 May 2012 00:46:00 -0400, adam79 <ada...@toast.net> wrote:

>Is it pointless to buy a quality Mic Pre if you don't have an A/D
>converter of equal quality?

poking my very amateur nose in here, i have a yamaha n12 firewire
recording board that supposedly has "great preamps and converters." i
went for it and i'm having a lot of fun with it, but i borrowed a
chandler tg2 preamp and i could not believe how much better everything
sounded, even breathing and scratching my beard sounded amazing. the
bass DI was maybe the most beautiful thing i've ever heard. it was
really like the proverbial blanket had been lifted off the mics. all
that said leads me to believe that the converters on the yamaha (which
were still being used after the chandler) are not the weakest link. i
would feel really good about things with a couple of better preamps
but continuing to use the yamaha converters until a future upgrade,
after i've figured out more stuff and get even more addicted... and
then of course now i'm curious how much different/"better" more pricy
converters would sound too, which is the scary banking thought for
today... good luck!

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 20 May 2012 00:46:00 -0400, adam79 wrote
(in article <AOSdnd3gxrSU6iXS...@posted.toastnet>):

> Is it pointless to buy a quality Mic Pre if you don't have an A/D
> converter of equal quality?

No. It's a case of "weakest link." The mic and mic pre can do wonders. A
great A/D can do more wonders.

I'm thinking, though, and anyone is welcome to argue, that circuits are
getting pretty good sounding these days. I have a Focusrite Saffire Pro 40
here now and it's sounding pretty nice up against my GML Pres and RME A/D
gear.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Try my new blog; http://tyfordaudiovideo.blogspot.com/
Try my audio sample archive: http://tinyurl.com/796z25d
Try my gear reviews: http://tinyurl.com/79q797r

[Trevor]

"Scott Dorsey" <klu...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:jpb1au$kae$1...@panix2.panix.com...

> adam79 <ada...@toast.net> wrote:
>>Is it pointless to buy a quality Mic Pre if you don't have an A/D
>>converter of equal quality?
>
> No, because later on you can buy a quality A/D converter.

Or vice versa, so replace whatever is the biggest limitation first. No point
replacing a mic pre-amp first for instance if you need more A-D channels
anyway, or vice versa.

> In the end, the room is apt to be the real limiting factor in the
> recording
> chain and it's the most expensive part to buy too.

That's very true, but only if you are providing the recording space.

Trevor.

[PStamler]

So...repeating the question to Adam79, what are you using, and what
are you considering upgrading to?

Peace,
Paul

[adam79]

On 5/20/12 11:07 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> >
>> adam79<ada...@toast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Is it pointless to buy a quality Mic Pre if you don't have an A/D
>> converter of equal quality?
>
> No, because later on you can buy a quality A/D converter.
>
> In the end, the room is apt to be the real limiting factor in the recording
> chain and it's the most expensive part to buy too.
>

I definitely agree with you about the room being a major factor. Right
now I'm at a crossroad with my DAW. I'm running PT 7.4 LE w/ a MBox 2 on
an older MacBook Pro. I bought it when Leopard was the top OS. I was
about to buy the newer Snow Leopard OS until I realized that my version
of PT isn't compatible. Not to mention that all of my PT plug-ins
stopped being compatible w/ PT once version 8 came out. I really only
have two choices at this point.. stay with what I've got, or shell out a
bunch of cash to upgrade PT, as well as my OS. My computer should have
no problem handling the new software, I have a 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
w/ 4GB of RAM. If I decide to upgrade to PT 10, I'd also want to buy a
new interface.. this is where my question stems from.. I only need 2 to
4 inputs, so I figured that I would buy a nice Preamp, which leaves me
needing an interface with a good A/D convertor to compliment the Preamp.

-Adam

[Nate Najar]

Just get a sound devices usbpre2

[PStamler]

On May 27, 5:00 pm, adam79 <ada...@toast.net> wrote:

If I decide to upgrade to PT 10, I'd also want to buy a
> new interface.. this is where my question stems from.. I only need 2 to
> 4 inputs, so I figured that I would buy a nice Preamp, which leaves me
> needing an interface with a good A/D convertor to compliment the Preamp.

Particularly since the MBox's line input just pads the signal down and
runs it through their not-so-good mic preamp.

Peace,
Paul

[adam79]

Oh, really? The signal gets passed through the mic pre even when set to
line? I always thought the line input bypassed the mic pre.. and I'd
assume that the A/D converter in the MBox 2 is also "not-so-good."

Also, I do alot of direct connection recording with things like the POD
XT and V-Drums. These have built in DI circuitry, right? I'm just trying
to figure out the best way to hook these up when recording.

If I could get some suggestions on a 2 to 4 input signal chain, whether
it be an all in one interface, or a separate mic pre connected to an
interface w/ good A/D conversion.

Thanks,
-Adam

[hank alrich]

Metric Halo ULN-2 has two good pres, and fine conversion.

http://mhsecure.com/metric_halo/products/hardware.html

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[Mike Rivers]

On 5/29/2012 11:35 PM, adam79 wrote:

> The signal gets passed through the mic pre even
> when set to line? I always thought the line input bypassed
> the mic pre.. and I'd assume that the A/D converter in the
> MBox 2 is also "not-so-good."

The attenuated mic input for a line input is pretty much
universal in low to medium priced equipment. It's also the
most "shocking" thing to newbies who try to get a little
technical, but in reality it's a pretty good approach
assuming the mic preamp isn't horrible. And with today's
ICs, it's hard to make a very bad preamp even using
"application note" designs, and not too hard to make a
better one with a little effort. You get a low noise
differential line input for just pennies more once you have
a decent mic preamp.

> Also, I do alot of direct connection recording with things
> like the POD XT and V-Drums. These have built in DI
> circuitry, right?

Some have mic level outputs, some only have line level
outputs. Both work fine when used correctly.

> If I could get some suggestions on a 2 to 4 input signal
> chain, whether it be an all in one interface, or a separate
> mic pre connected to an interface w/ good A/D conversion.

Many of today's small computer audio interfaces have decent
mic preamps which double as line inputs, but also have one
or two independent high impedance "DI" inputs to match
instrument pickups. I have reviews of a couple by Focusrite
and PreSonus on my web site. But if you're running Pro Tools
earlier than Version 9, you're limited to compatible
hardware to make the program run. Any other DAW program will
run with just about any other interface, including the M-Box.

For your POD or V-Drums, I'd connect line outputs to line
inputs.

--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be
operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although
it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge

of audio." - John Watkinson

http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and
interesting audio stuff

[hank alrich]

Mike Rivers <mri...@d-and-d.com> wrote:

> On 5/29/2012 11:35 PM, adam79 wrote:
>
> > The signal gets passed through the mic pre even
> > when set to line? I always thought the line input bypassed
> > the mic pre.. and I'd assume that the A/D converter in the
> > MBox 2 is also "not-so-good."
>
> The attenuated mic input for a line input is pretty much
> universal in low to medium priced equipment.

It's also how API does or did it back in the '70's for their consoles,
and I remember how surprised I was when I began examing their signal
flow diagrams and schematics and realized that. The line input button
hooked up to a different connector and a 30 dB pad.

[Nate Najar]

If I'm not mistaken the pod and the vsrums both have spdif I/O which means that, assuming we're using a compatible sample rate, he could connect them (not at the same time of course) digitally.