Print

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

[lucey]

Riccardo wrote on Fri, 17 June 2005 01:51

Quote:  A LOT of gear shortcomings turn out to be interface issues and a lot of us frequently pick the wrong culprit when the problem is really a particular combination of things that work perfectly well in a different context. wise words

very ... and further support that things in once chain result in different sounds than they might in another

i'm convinced that many eq preferences, for example, are as much about DA and AD artifacts than anything else

[Bob Olhsson]

bblackwood wrote on Fri, 17 June 2005 08:43

...just wondering why you wouldn't try a passive attenuator that would load it properly, thus having repeatable levels that match from channel to channel...

It's on my list. The upper half of the control tracks within 2 tenths and the bottom half is 0.8 off at the worst.

[Bob Olhsson]

 

[Garrett H]

You could also get a really good clock and make your MOTU slave to that.   It's surprising how much of an improvement you'll hear in your MOTU with a better clock.  You'll also get the benefit of having improvements in all of the i/o on the MOTU.

Just another option.

GH

PS: Me say Benchmark good.

[Luke Fellingham]

I already use the clock from my apogee ad16 to clock the motu. I know it's clock isn't the best available but it is definately a noticable improvement over the motu's own!
I still assume that either the benchmark or mytek will sound better than the motu however it's clocked.

[Yannick Willox]

I calibrated the Benchmark so that when going out at -6dBFS I get my standard (classical music) monitoring level (as described by the K-system standard).

This way I can still boost playback volume, I can switch to K14 in a moment, and at normal levels playback is 23 bit.

I prefer this tradeoff to the impact the volume pot has on stage width and depth. I go straight into a 3BSST and Link K50 speakers, when I switch in the passive pot the image just shrinks by 30%.

IMO if the Bench sounds loose in the bass, or veiled in the highs, that means the recording or playback chain is. In our setup it sounds tight, quick, open, very listenable (before we got the DAC1 it was hard to really keep listening during long days), and it will pass on any little detail or change in the recording. It will NOT throw it at you, as it doesn't hype anything.

[Riccardo]

Bob Olhsson wrote on Sat, 18 June 2005 03:04

bblackwood wrote on Fri, 17 June 2005 08:43 ...just wondering why you wouldn't try a passive attenuator that would load it properly, thus having repeatable levels that match from channel to channel... It's on my list. The upper half of the control tracks within 2 tenths and the bottom half is 0.8 off at the worst.

let us know if you find one!

[Garrett H]

Luke Fellingham wrote on Sat, 18 June 2005 01:15

I already use the clock from my apogee ad16 to clock the motu. I know it's clock isn't the best available but it is definately a noticable improvement over the motu's own! I still assume that either the benchmark or mytek will sound better than the motu however it's clocked.

Yes, I had a 2408 (version 1) and when I got an external clock the quality of the A/D and D/A jumped a whole lot.

Remember (and I'm no expert in this) there are only a few sources for the actual converters - much of the sound comes from the implementation of the clock and the filters.  It's possible that the MOTU has the same converter chips as other companies, but to hit their price point there is probably no way they can do the same clocking and sound as a Mytek or Lavry.  

As with all of this stuff.  See if you can A/B your existing set up vs. something new.  I'll tell you, only 50% of the time is gear as good as people say on the web boards. (However, the other 50% of the time it's BETTER than they say).  You simply have to hear for yourself.

Best,
GH

[zetterstroem]

Yannick Willox wrote on Sat, 18 June 2005 08:54

I calibrated the Benchmark so that when going out at -6dBFS I get my standard (classical music) monitoring level (as described by the K-system standard). This way I can still boost playback volume, I can switch to K14 in a moment, and at normal levels playback is 23 bit. I prefer this tradeoff to the impact the volume pot has on stage width and depth. I go straight into a 3BSST and Link K50 speakers, when I switch in the passive pot the image just shrinks by 30%. IMO if the Bench sounds loose in the bass, or veiled in the highs, that means the recording or playback chain is. In our setup it sounds tight, quick, open, very listenable (before we got the DAC1 it was hard to really keep listening during long days), and it will pass on any little detail or change in the recording. It will NOT throw it at you, as it doesn't hype anything.

i listened to it as a part of two different setups..... one of them my own.... so i know it's not the playback chain.....

[genericperson]

as an "X" factor here:  i sent Mytek a SASE priority mail envelope to get their "converter comparison cd".  It never arrived, despite several e-mails and phone calls.  They were in the middle of moving, but even months later with repeated contacts, they still never sent it.

I bought from another company, and i'm delighted with it.  So I swore off Mytek forever on that one.  They might have thought it was too much bother to take the 10 minutes to get the cd to me (i sent them the SASE envelope).  Then why advertise they will do this service on their website?  They should have ripped it down from their website until they could deliver on what they said they would do.

[bblackwood]

Garrett H wrote on Sat, 18 June 2005 04:56

Remember (and I'm no expert in this) there are only a few sources for the actual converters - much of the sound comes from the implementation of the clock and the filters.

Don't forget the analog stage and overall board layout...

[atticus]

genericperson wrote on Sun, 19 June 2005 15:37

as an "X" factor here:  i sent Mytek a SASE priority mail envelope to get their "converter comparison cd".  It never arrived, despite several e-mails and phone calls.  They were in the middle of moving, but even months later with repeated contacts, they still never sent it. I bought from another company, and i'm delighted with it.  So I swore off Mytek forever on that one.  They might have thought it was too much bother to take the 10 minutes to get the cd to me (i sent them the SASE envelope).  Then why advertise they will do this service on their website?  They should have ripped it down from their website until they could deliver on what they said they would do.

That is all about to change...

[TotalSonic]

atticus wrote on Mon, 20 June 2005 01:54

genericperson wrote on Sun, 19 June 2005 15:37 as an "X" factor here:  i sent Mytek a SASE priority mail envelope to get their "converter comparison cd".  It never arrived, despite several e-mails and phone calls.  They were in the middle of moving, but even months later with repeated contacts, they still never sent it. I bought from another company, and i'm delighted with it.  So I swore off Mytek forever on that one.  They might have thought it was too much bother to take the 10 minutes to get the cd to me (i sent them the SASE envelope).  Then why advertise they will do this service on their website?  They should have ripped it down from their website until they could deliver on what they said they would do. That is all about to change...

David -
Can you elaborate on what you mean by this?  Is Michal hiring customer service staff for instance?

Also - do you know if his stereo DSD converter is going to be available soon?

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Luke Fellingham]

Thanks for all the responses. As I said in my original post I did hear a diference between the Mytek and the Benchmark. However due to all the glowing recomendations and having found a very reasonable price, I have now ordered the Benchmark. I look forward to  trying it out.

[Nathan Eldred]

Benchmark vs Mytek vs Lavry


http://forums.mackie.com/scripts/forum/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=ge t_topic&f=1&t=006000