Repro-5

[nevernamed]

Agreed with Klinik. I'm not doing any mastering here, I don't need such mastering grade equipment, I don't have monitors (nor do I want to) that cost a kidney a piece. Economies of scale are totally not there for the regular home studio hobbyst, surely you agree with that?

Also RME still rocks, and countless mixes have been done on RME equipment, so yeah.

Yeah but play a track through something like the aforementioned and you'll want to demote your RME rather quickly. Some of these converters are primarily musical, for all the detail they offer as well as transparency they are not unpleasant, and are a joy to simply sit back and listen to. I didn't disagree with you about the RME but it's just not on the same level. That was my point.

Sure I agree that this is beyond reach of a home studio hobbyist but that said the Cranesong Solaris is actually priced rather sensibly. I think ultimately you and I play on a different level. I've moved on from RME a while ago and as much as I respect the company and think they do brilliant work I think there are even greater heights.

[EvilDragon]

Nope, I don't want to demote my RME anytime soon, I just got it a few months ago. Plus I don't think I can hear any of the stuff you mentioned anywhere here in Croatia. Nevermind, funds saved for the little one, which I think is much more important than some astronomically priced DACs that won't do the same number of channels my UFX+ can (and yes, I need that MADI in there to work with my Ferrofish A32 so I can connect all my rack synths into it) with the same ASIO driver quality, anyways!

Your point is taken, but what you mention simply isn't gear that everyone can afford. And yes, a lot of people wouldn't hear the difference. Certainly not justifiable by the difference in price.


(€2200 for only two channels? Fuggetaboutit!)

[zerocrossing]

I think today cpu doesn't matter too much anymore, and it's more about getting a good dac that can run low latency and has good drivers. As long as it's i7 2600k or newer, should be fine.

I've got an i7 3770 running at 3.4, RME Fireface 400 and david.beholder muted, so I'm good.

Fireface 400 is not a great DAC though. This is a great DAC: http://www.cranesong.com/SOLARIS.html

Or something from Burl, maybe the Bomber. Playing the Repro through those is quite the experience.

Luckily, my degrading biology (as well as my developing progeny, they cost a ton to maintain!) would prevent me from experiencing that level of quality. I should have had that when I was 17. Oh right, we didn't have home computer audio recording when I was 17!

[pdxindy]

Agreed with Klinik. I'm not doing any mastering here, I don't need such mastering grade equipment, I don't have monitors (nor do I want to) that cost a kidney a piece. Economies of scale are totally not there for the regular home studio hobbyst, surely you agree with that?

Also RME still rocks, and countless mixes have been done on RME equipment, so yeah.

Yeah but play a track through something like the aforementioned and you'll want to demote your RME rather quickly. Some of these converters are primarily musical, for all the detail they offer as well as transparency they are not unpleasant, and are a joy to simply sit back and listen to. I didn't disagree with you about the RME but it's just not on the same level. That was my point.

Sure I agree that this is beyond reach of a home studio hobbyist but that said the Cranesong Solaris is actually priced rather sensibly. I think ultimately you and I play on a different level. I've moved on from RME a while ago and as much as I respect the company and think they do brilliant work I think there are even greater heights.

RME is good enough for me too... at that point, the difference is meaningless (to me) compared to the other factors like the music itself.

It is the exact same argument that has gone on for decades among audiophiles and which pre-amp, turntable, etc etc is the best, most musical etc. It becomes an end in itself. If that interests someone, fine, but it is just not necessary to make and thoroughly enjoy music.

[nevernamed]

Nope, I don't want to demote my RME anytime soon, I just got it a few months ago. Plus I don't think I can hear any of the stuff you mentioned anywhere here in Croatia. Nevermind, funds saved for the little one, which I think is much more important than some astronomically priced DACs that won't do the same number of channels my UFX+ can (and yes, I need that MADI in there to work with my Ferrofish A32 so I can connect all my rack synths into it) with the same ASIO driver quality, anyways!

Your point is taken, but what you mention simply isn't gear that everyone can afford. And yes, a lot of people wouldn't hear the difference. Certainly not justifiable by the difference in price.


(€2200 for only two channels? Fuggetaboutit!)

Yeah and that's fine. If you need the channel count you need the channel count. It is most certainly justifiable in price. For me. I'm interested in the sound quality first and everything else is secondary. To say that it's a 1% difference is simply not true. Even on average speakers you'll hear the difference. But there is a cost and like you said it's not something most can contemplate let alone afford. It's hard to qualify the difference though. When you stand in front of a pair of amazing monitors that are powered by something like the aforementioned DACs it is quite enchanting. There is a level of photorealism and detail that you get from maybe something like a Studer tape machine. I didn't get the same experience with RME at all and I say that with a lot of respect for what they do.

[nevernamed]

Agreed with Klinik. I'm not doing any mastering here, I don't need such mastering grade equipment, I don't have monitors (nor do I want to) that cost a kidney a piece. Economies of scale are totally not there for the regular home studio hobbyst, surely you agree with that?

Also RME still rocks, and countless mixes have been done on RME equipment, so yeah.

Yeah but play a track through something like the aforementioned and you'll want to demote your RME rather quickly. Some of these converters are primarily musical, for all the detail they offer as well as transparency they are not unpleasant, and are a joy to simply sit back and listen to. I didn't disagree with you about the RME but it's just not on the same level. That was my point.

Sure I agree that this is beyond reach of a home studio hobbyist but that said the Cranesong Solaris is actually priced rather sensibly. I think ultimately you and I play on a different level. I've moved on from RME a while ago and as much as I respect the company and think they do brilliant work I think there are even greater heights.

RME is good enough for me too... at that point, the difference is meaningless (to me) compared to the other factors like the music itself.

It is the exact same argument that has gone on for decades among audiophiles and which pre-amp, turntable, etc etc is the best, most musical etc. It becomes an end in itself. If that interests someone, fine, but it is just not necessary to make and thoroughly enjoy music.

It's actually not the same argument. Spend a bit of time with either of the converters I mentioned and you'll disagree with your own comment. The human ear can adapt and learn just like any other part of you. Listening is an acquired skill. If you ever take composition classes at uni you'll find there is a class aimed at just listening. After a year or two of just critical listening you'll find that your ears have improved manifold. My end is to be immersed in the music I make and listen. And that's quite an end I would argue. And quite necessary to enjoy music even if it isn't strictly necessary to make it.

[EvilDragon]

Well... I don't need that experience either if the person listening my music can't have that same experience on his/her iPod via earbuds and compressed audio stream. And that's where it all boils down to, in the end!

[ghettosynth]

It's actually not the same argument.

Sure it is. All of those mentioned things can make a difference as well.

Spend a bit of time with either of the converters I mentioned and you'll disagree with your own comment. The human ear can adapt and learn just like any other part of you. Listening is an acquired skill. If you ever take composition classes at uni you'll find there is a class aimed at just listening. After a year or two of just critical listening you'll find that your ears have improved manifold. My end is to be immersed in the music I make and listen. And that's quite an end I would argue. And quite necessary to enjoy music even if it isn't strictly necessary to make it.

Whether or not this is actually true for you, and if it is then you shouldn't have any difficulty picking out the better converter in a blind test, is beside the point. The thing about differences between synths is that they can be heard on virtually anything, club systems, earbuds, youtube videos. Once the can't, once we've falling beneath the threshold of hearing using ordinary playback, then those differences are meaningless from a practical point of view.

The problem with debating about DACs is that there is little that you can do about the dacs that everyone else will listen to your music on.

The entire premise of "mastering grade" is simply that the DACs will not color the material in a way that the DAC coloration gets in the way of your mastering process. If you aren't using them with analog processing gear or printing to tape, then the sound of the DAC never makes it onto the final mix.

All that aside, nobody is immune from bias and we have to take precautions to make sure that our perceptions aren't just biases. Moreover, I don't think that anyone here has any data whatsoever that supports any sort of quantitative measurement of differences between DACs that maps appropriately to human perception. What does X% better actually mean?

Once we're at this point in a conversation, Hitler cannot be far behind.

[nevernamed]

No not necessarily. Buy yourself some vinyl for example and you'll already have a much more immersive experience. If you stream try Tidal. But also think about it in terms of what's to come. All those records that were recorded in analogue (to tape) etc. They'll be released as 24/96 wav file at some stage or similar. That's coming. Whatever the audience listens to doesn't have to limit you and no I don't strictly agree that this is what it boils down to. But hey look each to his own. I respect your point. You're content with your current experience and that's commendable. I came from the RME fireface series and I loved them.

[nevernamed]

It's actually not the same argument.

Sure it is. All of those mentioned things can make a difference as well.

Spend a bit of time with either of the converters I mentioned and you'll disagree with your own comment. The human ear can adapt and learn just like any other part of you. Listening is an acquired skill. If you ever take composition classes at uni you'll find there is a class aimed at just listening. After a year or two of just critical listening you'll find that your ears have improved manifold. My end is to be immersed in the music I make and listen. And that's quite an end I would argue. And quite necessary to enjoy music even if it isn't strictly necessary to make it.

Whether or not this is actually true for you, and if it is then you shouldn't have any difficulty picking out the better converter in a blind test, is beside the point. The thing about differences between synths is that they can be heard on virtually anything, club systems, earbuds, youtube videos. Once the can't, once we've falling beneath the threshold of hearing using ordinary playback, then those differences are meaningless from a practical point of view.

The problem with debating about DACs is that there is little that you can do about the dacs that everyone else will listen to your music on.

The entire premise of "mastering grade" is simply that the DACs will not color the material in a way that the DAC coloration gets in the way of your mastering process. If you aren't using them with analog processing gear or printing to tape, then the sound of the DAC never makes it onto the final mix.

All that aside, nobody is immune from bias and we have to take precautions to make sure that our perceptions aren't just biases. Moreover, I don't think that anyone here has any data whatsoever that supports any sort of quantitative measurement of differences between DACs that maps appropriately to human perception. What does X% better actually mean?

Once we're at this point in a conversation, Hitler cannot be far behind.

Which is precisely why I suggest you book yourself into a studio or rent some of this equipment and do your own listening.

That might be the premise of mastering grade but that's hard to do. Most every DAC has a sound. You can't present data you have to get in front of the thing and listen to it. There is a world of difference between Mytek and the RME FF400 was my original point and there is. Get in front of them both and see if you don't agree.

There isn't anything you can do about how others listen to music or on what system. But that's hardly the point is it? You want to simply limit yourself to a pair of iphone earphones then? Probably not right?

Making music for other people isn't what works for me. I make it primarily for me. And no I don't at all agree that you have to limit yourself according to what others would do (some kind of lowest common denominator).

[ghettosynth]

Making music for other people isn't what works for me. I make it primarily for me. And no I don't at all agree that you have to limit yourself according to what others would do (some kind of lowest common denominator).

We're talking about differences that matter. I'm not convinced that your perception is anything but bias at this point. Saying "get in front of them" isn't really anything, I may also experience bias, it's a natural human thing. If you haven't done blind tests, then I don't really care. My own experience with blind tests in environments that I actually use is that DAC differences fall below the noise floor.

My point with respect to data, however, is that if you don't have any, then you have no grounds to start talking about quantifying the differences.

Other differences, e.g., differences in synth design can be heard on every system.

Once you start talking about listening to your own music in your pristine environment we are in the realm of audiophile arguments. My point with respect to "mastering quality DACs" is that I can at least see that argument as having some merit and worthy of discussion. But, once you're just talking about it being how you listen to your synth being played then we are in the realm of silliness as far as discussions of synth differences is concerned.

[nevernamed]

Making music for other people isn't what works for me. I make it primarily for me. And no I don't at all agree that you have to limit yourself according to what others would do (some kind of lowest common denominator).

We're talking about differences that matter. I'm not convinced that your perception is anything but bias at this point. Saying "get in front of them" isn't really anything, I may also experience bias, it's a natural human thing. If you haven't done blind tests, then I don't really care. My own experience with blind tests in environments that I actually use is that DAC differences fall below the noise floor.

My point with respect to data, however, is that if you don't have any, then you have no grounds to start talking about quantifying the differences.

Other differences, e.g., differences in synth design can be heard on every system.

Once you start talking about listening to your own music in your pristine environment we are in the realm of audiophile arguments. My point with respect to "mastering quality DACs" is that I can at least see that argument as having some merit and worthy of discussion. But, once you're just talking about it being how you listen to your synth being played then we are in the realm of silliness as far as discussions of synth differences is concerned.

You're not convinced that my perception is anything but bias? Talk about sanctimonious and condescending! Wow!

You have access my mind? How do you present data about a reality that is accessible only to me? No matter how many graphs I draw for you there is no guarantee that you will hear what I'm hearing. You are insisting on quantifying something that is not quantifiable mate.

The only way for you to see if you agree with my assertion that there is a world of difference between the FF400 and something like the Mytek or Burl or Cranesong is for you to listen to them all. To say that this suggestion "isn't really anything" is quite stupid mate. Think about it what else is there? How will you evaluate this problem?

You won't need a blind test in order to find a discernible difference in the case mentioned. In the case of the Mytek it is more detailed, it has more clarity in the low end, as well as more definition, it's akin to hearing things on good vinyl or tape, the stereo imaging is pin sharp, there is no smearing in the lower mids, there is three dimensionality that the FF400 doesn't have, there is no ambiguity anywhere on the frequency spectrum, there is no fuzziness etc etc... you see where I'm going with this? One is akin to a great photograph while the other is being there. Words are futile devices and this is why I'm hesitant to try to quantify this for you. They are worlds apart. SAme goes for the Burl and the Cranesong. But there is no data in the known universe that can convey this for you. I'm sorry that you find listening "silly" but it's the only method you have.

The only evidence that's even remotely empirical (it isn't obviously) that I can give you is that pretty much every high end studio is running something other than the FF400. In America it's usually Burl or Avid or Cranesong. In the UK it's those and perhaps Prism. Strike a note on Diva's Minimoog and render it with something like the aforementioned converters and you'll immediately see what I'm talking about.

[ghettosynth]

You're not convinced that my perception is anything but bias? Talk about sanctimonious and condescending! Wow!

I'm not, bias is extremely powerful and you have yet to discuss any blind tests. I'm assuming that you haven't done them? Labeling my position as sanctimonious, however, is exactly the kind of invalid argument that I would expect from someone making such claims. Maybe you could point to blind tests that other people have done? In fact, without such blind tests that document that the differences are statistically significant to human hearing, then there's nothing really to validate or invalidate. You can't really demonstrate this in any sort of recording, because, of course we will all have to listen to your recording on our substandard systems. That's not even considering that the recording process itself will change the sound.

You won't need a blind test in order to find a discernible difference in the case mentioned. In the case of the Mytek it is more detailed, it has more clarity in the low end, as well as more definition, it's akin to hearing things on good vinyl or tape, the stereo imaging is pin sharp, there is no smearing in the lower mids, there is three dimensionality that the FF400 doesn't have, there is no ambiguity anywhere on the frequency spectrum, there is no fuzziness etc etc... you see where I'm going with this?

Yes, you've described a bunch of subjective responses that very well may be bias. I've heard these arguments for years from audiophiles. +1 for not using the word soundstage. That's exactly why, no, you absolutely do need a blind test. Without one, you have no idea whether or not simply the knowledge of what you're listening to is impacting what you're hearing.

The only evidence that's even remotely empirical (it isn't obviously) that I can give you is that pretty much every high end studio is running something other than the FF400.

As I said, there is at least one valid argument for this, and a few invalid ones.

If you like your stuff, good for you. I'm just not convinced by your arguments that it will actually make this huge impact of which you speak for most users listening to most synthesizers most of the time. I doubt most people could hear the difference in any sort of blind test.

[nevernamed]

You should limit yourself to speaking only about yourself and your own perception. In this forum, which is informal to say the least, there isn't any possibility at all of presenting a case study. But conversely I'm not selling you anything either. The point was simply try and see for yourself. Maybe my ears are much better than yours and maybe they are not. I don't have to present an empirical study to you however and this kind of forum can't facilitate that anyway. If you're inclined to disagree just ignore mate.

Yeah but you see even in a blind test there is no getting away from listening! That is the only method.

Yes they're a bunch of adjectives sure and this is exactly why I said I'm hesitant to put anything into words ("words are futile devices" etc). But you complained because I wouldn't articulate so there you go. Now your'e complaining that I have articulated. I initially urged you to listen and to that you said what? "that isn't really anything" But at the same time you want to advocate for blind testing; which requires listening by the way.

Just out of curiosity have you tried any of the converters that I've mentioned? I've lived with the FF800 for about six years and I've worked with every single one of the converters I mentioned here for at least 4 years.

As for your other point about differences that matter well being immersed in a level of detail that's quite akin to something like good tape or vinyl would matter. From a digital device.

[pdxindy]

RME is good enough for me too... at that point, the difference is meaningless (to me) compared to the other factors like the music itself.

It is the exact same argument that has gone on for decades among audiophiles and which pre-amp, turntable, etc etc is the best, most musical etc. It becomes an end in itself. If that interests someone, fine, but it is just not necessary to make and thoroughly enjoy music.

It's actually not the same argument. Spend a bit of time with either of the converters I mentioned and you'll disagree with your own comment. The human ear can adapt and learn just like any other part of you. Listening is an acquired skill. If you ever take composition classes at uni you'll find there is a class aimed at just listening. After a year or two of just critical listening you'll find that your ears have improved manifold. My end is to be immersed in the music I make and listen. And that's quite an end I would argue. And quite necessary to enjoy music even if it isn't strictly necessary to make it.

You are free to enjoy and focus on whatever you want. Truly. There is plenty of room for difference in the world. But please do not assume just because someone else measures value/interest differently than you it must be because they have not learned to listen well yet.