R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: For those with passive monitor attenuators..  (Read 15865 times)

Viitalahde

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1069
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #30 on: July 20, 2009, 12:24:02 pm »

Been thinking, and I just might try the level-matched approach after all.

This is what I would do. DAW -> HEDD192 D/A -> analog processors -> HEDD192 A/D ..My current processing loop.

I'd buy a Lavry DA10 and split the AES/EBU signal from the A/D side of the HEDD192 and bring it to a separate monitoring position in my console for level-matched post-A/D comparisons.

So, while processing, I'd be monitoring off the Lavry and while editing I'd be on the HEDD192 D/A (which I need to upgrade to the latest ones!).

I suppose you could also take an S/PDIF output from my Lynx Two card and take it to the Lavry if you wanted to have an alternate D/A for monitoring while editing. But I was actually thinking of having a combination of HEDD & Lynx D/A's for this purpose - and the Lynxes set to 16bit, dithered.

Somehow this makes perfect sense in my workflow. One twist from a monitor source selector, some level-adjustment from the Lavry and you got a pre/post comparison on your hands. And no software routing hassle.

If all this failed and I got lost in the woods, I could still hook up the DA10 like normal people do and go back to loopback monitoring from the DAW.
Logged
Jaakko Viitalähde
Virtalähde Mastering, Kuhmoinen/Finland
http://www.virtalahde.com
   http://www.facebook.com/pages/Helsinki-Finland/Virtalahde-Ma stering/278311633180

Peter Beckmann

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 434
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #31 on: July 20, 2009, 12:53:52 pm »

mcsnare wrote on Mon, 20 July 2009 15:15



I know it sounds stupid, but having a very close level match between source and processed available with just a button made a huge diiference to me. I did the switch + volume knob for a long time and it's just not the same IMO.

Dave


I totally agree.

I do the level match by running a duplicate track in Protools HD of the source material and routing it to different AES output. Then I have that connected to one of the other digital inputs on my Avocet. Bingo, instant switch between source and processed. I level match either in the Avocet, or since I have a Command 8 in front of me I can just push a fader up to match the level. Big plus for me is I'm monitoring it all thru the same D/A

Peter
Logged
Peter Beckmann
Technologyworks
http://www.technologyworks.co.uk

Peter Beckmann

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 434
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #32 on: July 20, 2009, 12:53:53 pm »

mcsnare wrote on Mon, 20 July 2009 15:15



I know it sounds stupid, but having a very close level match between source and processed available with just a button made a huge diiference to me. I did the switch + volume knob for a long time and it's just not the same IMO.

Dave


I totally agree.

I do the level match by running a duplicate track in Protools HD of the source material and routing it to different AES output. Then I have that connected to one of the other digital inputs on my Avocet. Bingo, instant switch between source and processed. I level match either in the Avocet, or since I have a Command 8 in front of me I can just push a fader up to match the level. Big plus for me is I'm monitoring it all thru the same D/A

Peter
Logged
Peter Beckmann
Technologyworks
http://www.technologyworks.co.uk

SafeandSound

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 82
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #33 on: August 04, 2009, 04:19:46 pm »

I use SM Pro Audio Nanopatch, simple, smooth, transparent.

Completely satisfied.
Logged
UK's No.1 Online Mastering studio, free previews :

http://www.masteringmastering.co.uk/
online mastering

Ben F

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 368
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #34 on: August 04, 2009, 11:14:23 pm »

Viitalahde wrote on Sun, 19 July 2009 23:42

Still thinking of level-matched (or at least a close matched!) comparison between the signals.




I think it is really important to make valid comparisons. This becomes really apparent when testing gear- 0.5dB difference and you go 'wow, sounds great'. Level matched you go 'meh'. It's very good for testing gear/chains in your spare time.

The Crookwood is great for this. I generally make level matched comparisons for the first few tracks to get the sound of the album, then match the rest of the tracks up to the ones already mastered rather than doing more level matched comparisons. It's all done with a flick of the pre/post switch, in 0.5dB relay steps. Where I used to work I had to adjust the volume and it drove me nuts.
Logged

Bob Olhsson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3968
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #35 on: August 05, 2009, 12:49:39 am »

mcsnare wrote on Mon, 20 July 2009 09:15

...having a very close level match between source and processed available with just a button made a huge diiference to me. I did the switch + volume knob for a long time and it's just not the same
Same here. It's stupid easy to hype yourself with volume.

Jerry Tubb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2761
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #36 on: December 11, 2009, 02:01:24 am »

Cass Anawaty wrote on Sat, 07 March 2009 14:53

I use the Goldpoint SA1X.  Very happy with it.


tom eaton wrote on Tue, 28 October 2008 21:03

Both of the prefabbed balanced Goldpoint boxes are less than $600 and are as clean and high end as you will ever need.


My Goldpoint SA4 arrived today, I'll be hooking it up this weekend.

(yes, for now I still run my monitor path unbalanced)

http://www.goldpt.com/sa4.html

Arn Roatcap was very quick with the customer service.

My trusty old McIntosh C32 preamp's switches are wearing out, with no direct replacements that I know of,

so I'm gonna give the Goldpoint a run, at least till we build a custom box with Shallco switches.

Comments?

Cheers - JT
Logged
Terra Nova Mastering
Celebrating 20 years of Mastering!

lowland

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #37 on: December 11, 2009, 02:17:13 am »

Jerry Tubb wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 07:01

Cass Anawaty wrote on Sat, 07 March 2009 14:53

I use the Goldpoint SA1X.  Very happy with it.
My Goldpoint SA4 arrived today, I'll be hooking it up this weekend.



Please let us know how you get on, Jerry. It's likely to be an SA1X or the dual-output equivalent for me at some point.
Logged
Nigel Palmer
Lowland Masters
Essex, UK
www.lowlandmasters.com

fuse

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #38 on: December 11, 2009, 10:35:39 am »

SPL Volume8
Simple, transparent and can do 5.1(+1) or 2.2 with an Prism Orpheus hooked up to it.
Logged
Wouter Veltmaat
Eindhoven

jdg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 950
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #39 on: December 11, 2009, 11:46:56 am »

i love the gold point stuff. arn is so extremely helpful, and his switches/attenuators are so easy to work with from a DIY standpoint (all my switches/attenuators or from him)

Logged
john mcCaig
-Mothery Earworks Clarifold Audipure

subvertbeats

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #40 on: December 11, 2009, 12:34:05 pm »

Peter Beckmann wrote on Mon, 20 July 2009 17:53

mcsnare wrote on Mon, 20 July 2009 15:15



I know it sounds stupid, but having a very close level match between source and processed available with just a button made a huge diiference to me. I did the switch + volume knob for a long time and it's just not the same IMO.

Dave


I totally agree.

I do the level match by running a duplicate track in Protools HD of the source material and routing it to different AES output. Then I have that connected to one of the other digital inputs on my Avocet. Bingo, instant switch between source and processed. I level match either in the Avocet, or since I have a Command 8 in front of me I can just push a fader up to match the level. Big plus for me is I'm monitoring it all thru the same D/A

Peter



Hi Peter

Surely that equates to switch + volume knob?

Theres have been a few replies to Daves post, agreeing with him, but unless Im missing something (quite likely Smile ), the responses havent provided the same solution.

Dave, does this 'single button' solution have some kind of AGC going on?

Im trying to understand how this could work.

What I feel impedes my workflow (not in a major way, but still something Id like to avoid) is having to continually adjust the level compensation throughout the mastering process, as Im incrementally adding devices to the chain, as Im switching devices in and out etc.

Its the way Ive always worked, and I dont know a better way so happy to see this being discussed.

BTW I was going to buy a Goldpoint SA2X-I a few weeks back, running two stereo outputs from the Orpheus into it - the first being the clean unprocessed signal, the second being the master chain, and assign the Orpheus volume knob to adjust the post DA level of the master chain.
I havent proceeded yet as I dont think the granularity of level control from that Orpheus front panel knob is fine enough.
Ive put an enhancement request into Prism to optionally adjust the scale of that knob.

I enjoy these threads, always insightful to hear about others workflows.

Jerry Tubb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2761
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #41 on: December 11, 2009, 01:08:40 pm »

fuse wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 09:35

SPL Volume8
Simple, transparent and can do 5.1(+1) or 2.2 with an Prism Orpheus hooked up to it.


I've got the SPL Surround Monitor Controller SMC 2489, it's a really good unit.

After a few years the knob and switches have started getting a little noisy. time for a disassemble & cleaning job.

afaik the switches on the Goldpoint are superior.

JT
Logged
Terra Nova Mastering
Celebrating 20 years of Mastering!

cass anawaty

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 390
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #42 on: December 11, 2009, 01:25:26 pm »

Jerry Tubb wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 18:08

fuse wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 09:35

SPL Volume8
Simple, transparent and can do 5.1(+1) or 2.2 with an Prism Orpheus hooked up to it.


I've got the SPL Surround Monitor Controller SMC 2489, it's a really good unit.

After a few years the knob and switches have started getting a little noisy. time for a disassemble & cleaning job.

afaik the switches on the Goldpoint are superior.

JT

I've got one of those as well.  The image shift at low volume levels drives me insane--does yours do that?
Logged
Cass Anawaty, Chief Engineer
Sunbreak Music, LLC
High Resolution Stereo Mastering
www.sunbreakmusic.com

Andrew Hamilton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 573
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #43 on: December 11, 2009, 01:35:04 pm »

I do love the Elma selector switches that Arn sells.

For level match (in SSHD), I latch M/1 to M/2 and pull them down, as a linked pair, for digital attenuation of the monitor DAC - post DAW-reinput, and leave M3/M4 at Unity. At double-precise 24 bit integer, it's no twin-SHARC bus, like UltraInteractive uses, but at least, this way, the eq/comp improvement has to stand up to added quantization distortion (however subtle and/or canceled out by temporarily-inserted 16 bit dither).  Shocked

I like the purity of passive attenuation, but for trimming, unless you use amps for buffering, which can add coloration, you need to be very careful about the parallel addition of impedance.


When calculating the desired net impedance, I believe that one needs to take into account the input Z of each passive device in circuit, including that of the power amp. Also, one needs to put a numerary "1" above the series of reciprocal values of Z.

_______1_________

1/Za + 1/Zb + 1/Zc


Find out what the optimal load is for your DAC and tune the chain to match. It can be daunting to derive a combination of impedances that will work together, without changing the response, while you are trimming the voltage swings. In the days of power matching (in the studio), the impedances were all symmetrical, but the build up of transformer distortions was one of the price tags for ease of interconnection. Again, using amps, be they transistor-based, or valve, or IC, can add color that might possibly skew the level-matched comparisons, since, once the trimming is back out of circuit, the level is restored to master Unity, but whatever (masking or skewing) coloration had been added is also now eliminated.

How transparent are the amps in the Crookwood? Probably very much so. But, if a Charter Oak falls in the Crookwood, and it is level-matched to source, will anyone really hear what's happened? Or is it yet another perspective?


The source, when cranked up, is always going to have some extra kind of live-ness that limiting will detract somewhat from. So, if the source is too quiet for the client, start lifting... and maybe don't look back?



Andrew
Logged
www.serifsound.com
premastering for CD and DVD-A.  Featuring FTP load in and delivery as well as analog tape transfers.

Jerry Tubb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2761
Re: For those with passive monitor attenuators..
« Reply #44 on: December 11, 2009, 09:45:07 pm »

lowland wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 01:17

Jerry Tubb wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 07:01

Cass Anawaty wrote on Sat, 07 March 2009 14:53

I use the Goldpoint SA1X.  Very happy with it.
My Goldpoint SA4 arrived today, I'll be hooking it up this weekend.



Please let us know how you get on, Jerry. It's likely to be an SA1X or the dual-output equivalent for me at some point.


Hooked the Goldpoint unit up today, it simply sounds great! Highly recommended.

If your thinking about one of the units, go for it, you won't regret it... wish I'd done it years ago.

The Mode Switch functions I lost from replacing the C32 are easily duplicated in my DAWs by using the free BX-Solo plug-in.

Looks like I'll be relegating my McIntosh C32 to our listening room, and perhaps occasional use as a phono preamp.

Cass Anawaty wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 12:25

Jerry Tubb wrote on Fri, 11 December 2009 18:08

I've got the SPL Surround Monitor Controller SMC 2489, it's a really good unit.

After a few years the knob and switches have started getting a little noisy. time for a disassemble & cleaning job.

afaik the switches on the Goldpoint are superior.

JT

I've got one of those as well.  The image shift at low volume levels drives me insane--does yours do that?


Yo Cap'n Cass!

Yeah at low levels it gets a little wiggly, but I rarely listen that low!

For the price it's hard to beat. I've been using my SPL only for 5.1 surround, had it for about 5 years.
So a little scratchiness after many ACL 5.1 projects is no biggie.
Time for a little explorative deconstruction & cleaning.

Cheers - JT
Logged
Terra Nova Mastering
Celebrating 20 years of Mastering!
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up