Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Revolution]

I guess convertors get compared quite often but I am trying to ask this question more specificaly.

I have a PT HD system with 192 i/o and have never used other convertors to compare quality wise side by side.

So my question is. Is anyone out there with PT HD using a different brand of convertor ( other than digi 192 i/o )and noticing a difference an improved quality in there overall mix.

If so what are you using?

[Ashermusic]

Revolution wrote on Tue, 03 January 2006 02:42

I guess convertors get compared quite often but I am trying to ask this question more specificaly. I have a PT HD system with 192 i/o and have never used other convertors to compare quality wise side by side. So my question is. Is anyone out there with PT HD using a different brand of convertor ( other than digi 192 i/o )and noticing a difference an improved quality in there overall mix. If so what are you using?

I tested the PT HD system with and without Lavry Blue A/D/A. The Lavry Blues significantly improved the sound quality. The HD sounded "cotton-y" by compatison.

[squeegybug]

I've not used the PT 192.  Here is a thread, including some comparison sample recordings alongside a UA 2192:

http://www.3daudioinc.com/3db/showthread.php?t=7288

The difference was pretty obvious to me...

Steve

[Revolution]

OK
So I guess the Lavry Blue may have better convertors.

BUT

Doesn't the quality of the wordclock (realy)improve the sound of the convertors.

Has anyone tried clocking a digi 192 with a better wordclock (Apogee big ben etc) and did this make an adiquite difference or is the wordclock on the 192 fine.

convertors or wordclock???????????or both.

[Ashermusic]

Revolution wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 02:43

OK So I guess the Lavry Blue may have better convertors. BUT Doesn't the quality of the wordclock (realy)improve the sound of the convertors. Has anyone tried clocking a digi 192 with a better wordclock (Apogee big ben etc) and did this make an adiquite difference or is the wordclock on the 192 fine. convertors or wordclock???????????or both.

According to Dan Lavry while a clock like the Big Ben certainly helps with multiple converters it is simply impossible for it tto better the jitter of a properly designed internal crystal of even a mediocre audio interface. I proved this to my satisfacction when I used the Lavry Blue's excellent clock to a RME Fireface. Alone the Lavry blew the Fireface out of the water but using it to clock the Fireface did not noticably improve the sound of the Fireface I also tried it with a PT HD rig. Same result.

[Revolution]

WOW
I've been doing some research on some forums reguarding the possibility on sonic improvements clocking my digi 192i/o with the Big Ben

It seems as though the experts are giving technical reasons why an external wordclock has no advantage apart from linking several clocks together.

While users are reporting differences ranging from subtle to obvious and hyped sound.

Well anyone else wish to add to my confusion (Audio files maybe)?

I don't have the opportunity to trial one and am rather happy with ther rest of my setup.

[bblackwood]

I think it's a good idea to remember that different does not always equal better...

[compasspnt]

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 08:02

I think it's a good idea to remember that different does not always equal better...

But it often makes one think they are getting better by just doing something...

[Fletcher]

Revolution wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 03:47

It seems as though the experts are giving technical reasons why an external wordclock has no advantage apart from linking several clocks together.

That depends on the converter... with an actual "high end" unit... it is far better to use the internal clock... with the majority of the Banjo Mart level crap that people will sometimes call converters... they will definitely be helped by something like a Big Ben or other high quality external clock.

Let's not forget that all that glitters is not gold!!!

[Ashermusic]

Fletcher wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 15:42

Revolution wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 03:47 It seems as though the experts are giving technical reasons why an external wordclock has no advantage apart from linking several clocks together. That depends on the converter... with an actual "high end" unit... it is far better to use the internal clock... with the majority of the Banjo Mart level crap that people will sometimes call converters... they will definitely be helped by something like a Big Ben or other high quality external clock. Let's not forget that all that glitters is not gold!!!

Well, according to Dan Lavry any decently designed internal crystal will do better than an external clock. And HD 192 certainly is decent.

But Dan and Fletcher have argued this before. Dan uses science to support his opinion. Flercher, who I respect and is very experienced with lots of diffent gear, and others argue basically that "I know what I hear." Is that a fair representation, Fletch?

For me, my admittedly unscientific testing convinced me that Dan was correct. IMHO spend your money on better converters like Lavry Blue rather than on a clock like the Big  Ben to upgrade your PT HD system.

[PookyNMR]

Ashermusic wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 09:12

Well, according to Dan Lavry any decently designed internal crystal will do better than an external clock. And HD 192 certainly is decent.

That's a pretty huge assumption that you're making on the quality of the HD192 converters.

[Fletcher]

Ashermusic wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 11:12

Fletcher wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 15:42 That depends on the converter... with an actual "high end" unit... it is far better to use the internal clock... with the majority of the Banjo Mart level crap that people will sometimes call converters... they will definitely be helped by something like a Big Ben or other high quality external clock. Well, according to Dan Lavry any decently designed internal crystal will do better than an external clock. And HD 192 certainly is decent.

Key words in Dan's statement is "decently designed" which is exactly what I was saying... but there is so much crap out there that is designed like shit [see Focusrite for details] that those kinds of units will benefit greatly from an external clock.

My RADAR is actually hurt by external clocking... my Lavry's are hurt by external clocking... all the RME stuff I've ever heard has been greatly enhanced by external clocking.

In the words of either Kurt Vonnegut or Linda Ellerbee... "and so it goes"

[Ashermusic]

Fletcher wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 17:52

Ashermusic wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 11:12 Fletcher wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 15:42 That depends on the converter... with an actual "high end" unit... it is far better to use the internal clock... with the majority of the Banjo Mart level crap that people will sometimes call converters... they will definitely be helped by something like a Big Ben or other high quality external clock. Well, according to Dan Lavry any decently designed internal crystal will do better than an external clock. And HD 192 certainly is decent. Key words in Dan's statement is "decently designed" which is exactly what I was saying... but there is so much crap out there that is designed like shit [see Focusrite for details] that those kinds of units will benefit greatly from an external clock. My RADAR is actually hurt by external clocking... my Lavry's are hurt by external clocking... all the RME stuff I've ever heard has been greatly enhanced by external clocking. In the words of either Kurt Vonnegut or Linda Ellerbee... "and so it goes"

Well, to my ears when I tried clocking the RME Fireface both with the Big Ben and he Lavry Blue it did not improve the Fireface sound noticably. Nor did the Big Ben improve my Echo Layla 24 when I tried it.
YMMV.

[PookyNMR]

What are you monitoring through?  What is your room like?  What sources were you listening too?

[Fletcher]

I've heard most of the difference in the clarity of the lower mids and the size of the image field... are they night and day "did somebody just turn on the lights" kind of differences?  Not really.

But there is a palpable difference [that I've noticed... as you mentioned... YMMV].

[Ashermusic]

Fletcher wrote on Thu, 12 January 2006 15:57

I've heard most of the difference in the clarity of the lower mids and the size of the image field... are they night and day "did somebody just turn on the lights" kind of differences?  Not really. But there is a palpable difference [that I've noticed... as you mentioned... YMMV].

But Fletch, here is the bottom line:

1. Big Ben-$1200
2. Lavry Blue A/D- $1400. (or Mytek, Benchmak,)

Would ot not agree that the better A/D woll improve his sound quality far more than the the Big Ben?

After my testing there is no doubt in my mind that it would.

[Revolution]

Ah PRICE Difference
Now there's my problem
In Australia we seem to have rather inflated prices in audio gear.

Lavry blue $1400US  using currency convertor should be $1866AU
but no.Our store that sells them here (who is also the distributor under a different name)$1800 for frame with sync. and $1600 for AD card TOTAL $3400 ?????

I can get a BIg Ben for $2100 here or cheeper second hand.

Also assuming the Digi wordclock can be improved It should also inprove playback and pluginn's performance right??

[compasspnt]

Revolution wrote on Thu, 12 January 2006 20:09

Also assuming the Digi wordclock can be improved It should also inprove playback and pluginn's performance right??

Not necessarily.  The biggest improvement would come when clocking several disparate pieces with one good central clock.  Most modern well designed pieces by themselves will sound fine on their own, with little, if any, improvement from external clocking.

[PookyNMR]

Revolution wrote on Thu, 12 January 2006 18:09

Ah PRICE Difference Now there's my problem In Australia we seem to have rather inflated prices in audio gear. Lavry blue $1400US  using currency convertor should be $1866AU but no.Our store that sells them here (who is also the distributor under a different name)$1800 for frame with sync. and $1600 for AD card TOTAL $3400 ????? I can get a BIg Ben for $2100 here or cheeper second hand. Also assuming the Digi wordclock can be improved It should also inprove playback and pluginn's performance right??

Call up Lavry Engineering and see if they'll sell direct to you in AU.  

[nikko]

[PookyNMR]

I've had the Apogees and I have the Lavry.  The Lavry is the hands down winner.  Never heard the Benchmark ADC-1, so I can't comment on that.

[Logichead]

Ashermusic wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 04:23

Revolution wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 02:43 OK So I guess the Lavry Blue may have better convertors. BUT Doesn't the quality of the wordclock (realy)improve the sound of the convertors. Has anyone tried clocking a digi 192 with a better wordclock (Apogee big ben etc) and did this make an adiquite difference or is the wordclock on the 192 fine. convertors or wordclock???????????or both. According to Dan Lavry while a clock like the Big Ben certainly helps with multiple converters it is simply impossible for it tto better the jitter of a properly designed internal crystal of even a mediocre audio interface. I proved this to my satisfacction when I used the Lavry Blue's excellent clock to a RME Fireface. Alone the Lavry blew the Fireface out of the water but using it to clock the Fireface did not noticably improve the sound of the Fireface I also tried it with a PT HD rig. Same result.

I think all this shows is that the Lavry clock is older technology than the Big Ben. I have heard the Big Ben improve EVERY device I connect to it, from PTHD interfaces to the Motu Traveler I just got for a live recording gig (didn't want to take my HD rig out). Even playing iTunes, I heard a noticeable difference when locking to the Big Ben.

Dan has said many times that it is "impossible" for Big Ben to improve another device. He (and you) should try it sometime! Hint: use your ears, not what you "know".

Also, FWIW, I have used Lavry's and Apogees, and the Apogees won "hands down". Hopefully this means nothing to you! Listen for yourself and decide.

Best....H

[Ashermusic]

Logichead wrote on Tue, 17 January 2006 17:17

Ashermusic wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 04:23 Revolution wrote on Fri, 06 January 2006 02:43 OK So I guess the Lavry Blue may have better convertors. BUT Doesn't the quality of the wordclock (realy)improve the sound of the convertors. Has anyone tried clocking a digi 192 with a better wordclock (Apogee big ben etc) and did this make an adiquite difference or is the wordclock on the 192 fine. convertors or wordclock???????????or both. According to Dan Lavry while a clock like the Big Ben certainly helps with multiple converters it is simply impossible for it tto better the jitter of a properly designed internal crystal of even a mediocre audio interface. I proved this to my satisfacction when I used the Lavry Blue's excellent clock to a RME Fireface. Alone the Lavry blew the Fireface out of the water but using it to clock the Fireface did not noticably improve the sound of the Fireface I also tried it with a PT HD rig. Same result. I think all this shows is that the Lavry clock is older technology than the Big Ben. I have heard the Big Ben improve EVERY device I connect to it, from PTHD interfaces to the Motu Traveler I just got for a live recording gig (didn't want to take my HD rig out). Even playing iTunes, I heard a noticeable difference when locking to the Big Ben. Dan has said many times that it is "impossible" for Big Ben to improve another device. He (and you) should try it sometime! Hint: use your ears, not what you "know". Also, FWIW, I have used Lavry's and Apogees, and the Apogees won "hands down". Hopefully this means nothing to you! Listen for yourself and decide. Best....H

I did test the Big Ben clocking an RME Fireface. There was no improvement in the sound, even a slight degradation, because apprently the Fireface's internal crystal is properly designed.

I have listened to the Apogees on many occasions. They are very good. I prefer the Lavry's. Other prefer Mytek or Prism to either. Ths is highly subjective. People hear what they hear sometines and hear what they think they are going to hear other times. Either way, the laws of physics still apply. And Dan Lavry has explained the physics so that even a layman like myself can understand it.

My advice is still if you are dealing with a single rather than multiple devices, spend your money on better converters, not a Big Ben.

[PookyNMR]

Logichead wrote on Tue, 17 January 2006 10:17

Dan has said many times that it is "impossible" for Big Ben to improve another device. He (and you) should try it sometime! Hint: use your ears, not what you "know".

You are mis-qouting Dan and you are clearly not understanding the argument that he and Bob Katz put forth.

The argument was that an external clock can not improve the performance of a properly designed and implemented internal clock.  It is scientifically impossible.

IF the external clock does improve the performance then the internal clock in NOT properly designed and implemented.

Notice that I used the word "performance" rather than "sound" as 'performance' relies on scientific measurments of things like jitter, input vs. output, etc, and 'sound' is completely subjective and is nothing more than an individual opinion.

Logichead wrote on Tue, 17 January 2006 10:17

I have heard the Big Ben improve EVERY device I connect to it, from PTHD interfaces to the Motu Traveler I just got for a live recording gig (didn't want to take my HD rig out). Even playing iTunes, I heard a noticeable difference when locking to the Big Ben.

Once again, a completely subjective test that reveals nothing more than an opinion.  

Some people prefer the sound of more jitter, more aliasing, more distortion.  And hey they can like whatever they wish, but that does not make the device of their preference 'better.'

Try this test and you will begin to get an idea of the true tranparency of your converters.  Take a one minute snip of simple song (like an acoustic type mix).  Send it out your DA and back into your AD and record it.  Repeat the processs until you loop it through your converters for 30 conversions back and forth.  Now compare your different converter sets...

[Logichead]

Has anyone even considered the possibility that Apogee is doing something unprecedented with Big Ben?

Every so often this subject comes up and treads down the same path. It's "impossible", that's just a "subjective opinion" etc.

It used to be "impossible" to fly.

Let's eliminate all of the subjective opinions. From the entire forum. It would save everyone a lot of time.

FWIW, I had no trouble identifying playback that was locked to the Big Ben. In some cases (with Rosetta 800s for example), the improvement was slight. With others it was more noticeable.

The only opinion that matters is yours - listen to everything and decide for yourself. Nothing will be settled here.

Best...H

[PookyNMR]

Logichead wrote on Tue, 17 January 2006 13:30

Has anyone even considered the possibility that Apogee is doing something unprecedented with Big Ben?

In another thread in was revealed that the Big Ben deals with jitter differently than a lot of the common methods, hence it's different sound.  Apogee still won't reveal their jitter specs on the device, however.

Logichead wrote on Tue, 17 January 2006 13:30

Every so often this subject comes up and treads down the same path. It's "impossible", that's just a "subjective opinion" etc.

The people who say things like that are the ones who bother to try and understand the science.  Sometimes impossible really is impossible.  You can't fly, cause you're too heavy and don't have wings.  Doesn't matter how many drugs you take to convince you that you can fly.  Jump off the roof of your car and gravity is going to take over.  

The jitter tolerance for a good internal crystal clock is much smaller than that of a PLL circut that is needed for external clocks.  Adding the PLL circut will make the jitter number worse, not better.

Try the test I mentioned in the other post.  The results will be revealing if you are interested in a good performing, transparent converter (or if you're interested in a jittery distortion box).

[chap]

As I understand it, Apogee has eliminated PLL's from their
new clocks.  The fact that they won't reveal what makes Big Ben and the X series clocks sound great does not change the fact that they sound great.
The Bob Katz and Dan Lavry pronouncements about internal clocks become irrelevant in most pro studios where multiple digital devices need to be clocked to a single source in order to function correctly.  That doesn't mean that a single converter won't function better on it's internal clock 'when properly designed'.
It does mean that in multiple converter setups, the sound is improved by using Big Ben, same length cables at the proper impedence and correct termination.  This configuration will beat any daisy chaining scheme where the last few items in the chain suffer from propagation delay.  That actually happened here and was eliminated by Big Ben.

chap

[Revolution]

I have conducted a little search over various forums on the subject od weather Big Ben will inprove the digi192 interface performance.

Well there a many threads but out of those threads I only came accross 5 people who had actualy tried this and the rest were just theorys.

4 noticed improvements and 1 no difference.

I also noticed that people who had not done the test (maybe tested other combinations)and had an oppinion mostly were negative or bought up the (Lavry/Katz) theory.

Very interesting.

Some wave files would be interesting.

[Ashermusic]

Logichead wrote on Tue, 17 January 2006 20:30

H The only opinion that matters is yours - listen to everything and decide for yourself. Nothing will be settled here. Best...H

If you really believe that the only opinion that matters is your own then why are you in a forum like this?

I come to share opinions with other knowledgable experienced people who may know more than I do about some things, perhaps less about others .Call me crazy but personally I value educated scientific opinions more than I value uneducated subjetcive opinions. They wont always be right but I like the odds.

Plus, as I said, my own listening test results led me to conclusions that were consistent with what Dan and Bob have said.

[Revolution]

I value all opinions expecialy those I disagree with.
If we all agreed we wouldn't learn anything.

[michal @ mytek]

Ashermusic wrote on Wed, 11 January 2006 16:12

Well, according to Dan Lavry any decently designed internal crystal will do better than an external clock. And HD 192 certainly is decent.

No it's not well implemented. The crystal is alright except that it's followed by 2 foot of ribbon cable.  This whole issue is about implementation not about some magical atomic clocks that turn poop into gold.

We have a lot of people using for example Stereo96ADC as both better converter on an important stereo pair as well as the source of good clock for remaining Protools ADC and DAC channels.

Michal www.mytekdigital.com

[Revolution]

Now there's some gold.
Thanxs Michal.

So I guess instead of a Big Ben ($2100) I should be looking for a pair of scizzors ($1).

Before we go opening up our Digi 192's to shorten that cable i'm guessing it's that long for a reason right.

[Revolution]

OK
Thanks for all the great advice I have just purchased the Lavry blue with one AD card for starters from a local dealer who did a very reasonable price.

Havn't put it through it's paces yet will have to wait till next week.

[trock]

always interested in these threads, since the RME fireface is mentioned i was wondering about something in my setup

right now i have my mic for vocals/acoustic guitar going into an API lunchbox with a 512c and a vintage 550eq, then into an RNC, after this since it is my mono track i send it to the RME fireface in port 1 on the back 1/4inch cable. then from there it is firewired into my PC

on stereo stuff like my triton jey board i run say 2 1/4 inch cables out and into the front of the RME to use its pre's etc.

while i am pretty happy with my sound i don;t know anything different and at some point i would like to try say a 2 channel lavry blue AD/DA or maybe an apogee 200.

1) i take it if i got one of those 2 i would still need my RME for the connection to the PC correct??

2) and if so, what is the proper way to cable this all together to use the AD and DA converters without re running them thru the RME's?? optical?

3) with this minimal amount of gear do i need to worry about clocking? if so what would do the clocking here?

i really don;t understand clocking since i have never needed to think about it, however if i start to add somethihg like this do i now?

sorry for all the questions but i def would like to improve the quality of my stuff at some point

thanks

[marcel]

trock wrote on Fri, 10 February 2006 06:21

always interested in these threads, since the RME fireface is mentioned i was wondering about something in my setup right now i have my mic for vocals/acoustic guitar going into an API lunchbox with a 512c and a vintage 550eq, then into an RNC, after this since it is my mono track i send it to the RME fireface in port 1 on the back 1/4inch cable. then from there it is firewired into my PC on stereo stuff like my triton jey board i run say 2 1/4 inch cables out and into the front of the RME to use its pre's etc. while i am pretty happy with my sound i don;t know anything different and at some point i would like to try say a 2 channel lavry blue AD/DA or maybe an apogee 200. 1) i take it if i got one of those 2 i would still need my RME for the connection to the PC correct?? 2) and if so, what is the proper way to cable this all together to use the AD and DA converters without re running them thru the RME's?? optical? 3) with this minimal amount of gear do i need to worry about clocking? if so what would do the clocking here? i really don;t understand clocking since i have never needed to think about it, however if i start to add somethihg like this do i now? sorry for all the questions but i def would like to improve the quality of my stuff at some point thanks

1.  You are correct, although Apogee offers an optional Firewire card for the Rosettas so you could go with this option, eliminating the RME altogether.

2.  Optical would work for the rosetta 200, this is what I use.  It seems to be slightly more latent than the two analogue inputs on the RME (I have a 9632) but this difference is so slight that I may be imagining it.  The Lavry converters have AES connections only, I believe (check on Fletcher's shop site to be sure), so you would need those nifty little balancing transformers to go from AES to SPDIF.

3.  What I do is just set the RME to 'Autosync' and then select the relevant preferred clock source (ADAT or SPDIF), all in the RME's little Preferences pane.  I know much of this thread has been about whether or not the quality of something like the RME will be improved by the external clock, but I don't think in this case there's any other logical way to do it.  The converters and the interface MUST be locked, and the external converters are doing the critical work, so why not clock everything else to them?  I think everyone can agree that both Apogee and Lavry's products produce a clock source that is (measurably) superior to RME's, so it's not going to sound any worse...

I would definitely encourage you to do this if and when you can afford it.  Sounds like you have spent some dosh on analogue signal path, and good converters (particularly on the AD side) are pretty essential to getting this quality to 'mean something' as far as better recordings.  I know you will like the difference - sorta subtle at first, but as you work, you will notice it more and more.  

Hope that helps, man.

Best, Marcel

[slikjmuzik]

Hey, what can you tell me about the Mytek Stereo96 ADC.  I'm using an m-audio interface, but it has spdf.  I don't have enough to buy like a 16-channel AES interface as of yet, but I'd like to implement a high end converter and clock into my setup somehow.  I originally wanted a Big Ben just to fix the stereo image and sort of deepen my mixes to a more 3d sound.  But in calling a friend of mine, he suggested I go with a Lavry Blue the comes with their Msync card, the shell and 2 channels AD for only like $300 more.  Lately I've been looking around and I hear that same quality is offered through Mytek in their 2channel version for under $1k, but I also hear that their customer service hasn't always been the best in the past.  I could probably go with the Mytek here pretty soon if I got some advice.  Going spidf in would be how I'd use it since I read that not only would it be a solid converter, but as well would clock on the way in through spidf.  Please advise

Julian