Converter test on gearslutz

woodsdenis

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/483563-sound-blaster-files-can-you-hear-difference.html

This is quite interesting. Without going into a huge debate on here go to gearslutz and read the threads. In a nutshell Kenny has used different converters for a mix he did. One was an expensive Lynx Aurora the other two were very cheap ones. Can you hear the difference? Dont post here pm Kenny with your answer.

Laserharp

Anyone try this? Scary thread.

Aridstarling

I gave it a go for a little while. My conclusions are my own but I was happy with them. As will be my wallet I reckon.

jtsuited

that is one epic thread and to save you all the hassle here is a summary.....

everybody's confused as to which one is the really expensive converter, and the soundblaster 'garbage' converter seems to not have ruined anything as was predicted.

Basically, the differences were completely negligible. The test was not perfect but when it was put forward initially none of the anti-ethan camp seemed to have too many complaints.

I think most of us who have experience with both high end stuff and cheap stuff know that the difference in reality these days is very very subtle. There are differences in every bit of gear - cheap and expensive - but it's normally a question of how good YOU are. Not the gear. I think this test proved just how important that point is.

The problem is (as Paul will tell you), the pro-audio industry can't sell you the talent and experience needed to make great recordings. But it can give you some fancy new stuff that costs 10 times the price and sounds about 2% better.

woodsdenis

jtsuited wrote: »

that is one epic thread and to save you all the hassle here is a summary.....

everybody's confused as to which one is the really expensive converter, and the soundblaster 'garbage' converter seems to not have ruined anything as was predicted.

Basically, the differences were completely negligible. The test was not perfect but when it was put forward initially none of the anti-ethan camp seemed to have too many complaints.

I think most of us who have experience with both high end stuff and cheap stuff know that the difference in reality these days is very very subtle. There are differences in every bit of gear - cheap and expensive - but it's normally a question of how good YOU are. Not the gear. I think this test proved just how important that point is.

The problem is (as Paul will tell you), the pro-audio industry can't sell you the talent and experience needed to make great recordings. But it can give you some fancy new stuff that costs 10 times the price and sounds about 2% better.

Well summed up JT. The vitriol from both sides on the thread is unreal. Two polar opposites not meeting in the middle. I downloaded the files and yes there is a difference. I dont know which one is which and none of them are terrible.

jtsuited

yeah but tbh, the whole mixerman thing is just laughable. a joke of a person imo, and a deluded egotistical bully to boot.

woodsdenis

jtsuited wrote: »

yeah but tbh, the whole mixerman thing is just laughable. a joke of a person imo, and a deluded egotistical bully to boot.

I think the really funny thing was Ethan Winer (the other guy) admitting that
he monitored all his critical listening through a cheap mackie desk, a DJ mixer and a set of PA speakers !!! FFS Nothing wrong with any of that gear but hardly sufficient to be pronouncing definitive judgements on hi end audio equipment. As usual the truth of all of this lies somewhere in the middle

MilanPan!c

woodsdenis wrote: »

I think the really funny thing was Ethan Winer (the other guy) admitting that
he monitored all his critical listening through a cheap mackie desk, a DJ mixer and a set of PA speakers !!! FFS Nothing wrong with any of that gear but hardly sufficient to be pronouncing definitive judgements on hi end audio equipment. As usual the truth of all of this lies somewhere in the middle

I would say that the VAST MAJORITY of music music released since the 80s won't sound astonishing on a true audiophiles setup.

This is one of the jokes about people arguing over this stuff.

In many cases, only the wildly rich will hear differences you can ONLY hear with wildly expensive gear.

And hey, if engineers and producers often can't hear the qualitive difference, do you think people will hear it once it's an MP3 on their iPod?

1,000,000€ speakers and convertors are cool, but they don't make bad engineers good and they can't make a crap mix sound good.

splitrmx

woodsdenis wrote: »

In a nutshell Kenny has used different converters for a mix he did. One was an expensive Lynx Aurora the other two were very cheap ones. Can you hear the difference? Dont post here pm Kenny with your answer.

Is it just me or does his test not make much sense? He isn't comparing how one converter records versus another. He recorded everything with the Aurora, and then took the files and put them through the Soundblaster and the Delta to see if they messed them up a bit more.

Surely if he wanted a proper comparison he'd have recorded the same source with the three different converters?

iquinn

splitrmx wrote: »

Is it just me or does his test not make much sense? He isn't comparing how one converter records versus another. He recorded everything with the Aurora, and then took the files and put them through the Soundblaster and the Delta to see if they messed them up a bit more.

Surely if he wanted a proper comparison he'd have recorded the same source with the three different converters?

I think it stemmed from an original converter argument that went along the lines of, "even passing a mix through a crap sound card will make a huge difference"

MilanPan!c

iquinn wrote: »

I think it stemmed from an original converter argument that went along the lines of, "even passing a mix through a crap sound card will make a huge difference"

Exactly, the logic is that the everything on the card makes a noticeable difference... so the DA/AD conversion (which has to happen even passing through most sound cards) should colour the sound, or degrade it...

Sending a signal through should change it as much as recording it should change it.

Still using the DA/AD conversion.

I PERSONALLY think that most of this extremely expensive gear is 1-2% stuff.

And if a good engineer could make a recording that we all still love 30 years ago, you don't have to have 10,000e converters to make a classic recording.

Back when I worked for Ardent, they would BRAG about their SSL Boards... those boards are now essentially out dated, as far as audiophiles are concerned, but tell that to bands like REM (Who recorded Green on them) or even Big Star.

There's no doubt their is a difference, but it a justifiable difference?

I also think that people that spend thousands PER CHANNEL have to feel they didn't waste their dosh... and a LOT of these arguments start out there.

woodsdenis

This is wothwhile visiting again. More drama.
As it turns out the original test was botched. Whether
on purpose or not, you decide. Unbelievable stuff

madtheory

Yes, it's better than Eastenders! I think it's clear that he made a mistake. He just confused a lot of people by joking about it :eek:. What I have learned is:
1. There are a lot of strange people on GS.
2. Bias is hard to avoid, i.e. the ear is easily "fooled" see here
3. I need new headphones.
4. There are some very, very funny people on GS.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

looks like the SB -X-FI is the future classic converter of tomorrow :D

woodsdenis

madtheory wrote: »

Yes, it's better than Eastenders! I think it's clear that he made a mistake. He just confused a lot of people by joking about it :eek:. What I have learned is:
1. There are a lot of strange people on GS.
2. Bias is hard to avoid, i.e. the ear is easily "fooled" see here
3. I need new headphones.
4. There are some very, very funny people on GS.

Totally agree. I started reading it this morning and an iPhone battery later they were still going on about it. I would love to see the video if they ever do it.:D As I said before, the truth lies somewhere in the middle of all of this. If you have a day to spare go read the latest audio soap opera:eek:.

madtheory

DaDumTish wrote: »

looks like the SB -X-FI is the future classic converter of tomorrow :D

LOL! Did you see the post by the guy wanting to know how to make a 16 channel SB system, because he thought it did well in the test? :eek::P

jtsuited

I've said it all along. Gearlutz brings out the weirdos.

Neurojazz

It's a crazy thread, but from the more lucid posts i've been convinced to start looking around for a decent FW soundcard to replace my old one with something quality next time I upgrade - (I have no card slots spare as they are filled with FW and UAD)

Does anyone know if there's a FW box that doesn't have too many outputs/inputs? that has a decent D/A? (Windows based system)

'Money no object'

MilanPan!c

Neurojazz wrote: »

It's a crazy thread, but from the more lucid posts i've been convinced to start looking around for a decent FW soundcard to replace my old one with something quality next time I upgrade - (I have no card slots spare as they are filled with FW and UAD)

Does anyone know if there's a FW box that doesn't have too many outputs/inputs? that has a decent D/A? (Windows based system)

'Money no object'

There def are!

The two best small FW boxes I've heard are from Focusrite and TC Electronics.

Bots are VERY well reviewed and I think it'd be a prefrence thing.

I personally prefer the TCE box.


There's a lot of people in the game though... Have a look around.

madtheory

Neurojazz wrote: »

'Money no object'

http://www.thomann.de/ie/prismsound_orpheus.htm

Neurojazz

madtheory wrote: »

http://www.thomann.de/ie/prismsound_orpheus.htm

Cheers will look into that - i'll get my soundblaster out to compare it now....

MilanPan!c

madtheory wrote: »

http://www.thomann.de/ie/prismsound_orpheus.htm

This is true!

i57dwun4yb1pt8

i use the TC studio konnekt 48 and find it superb - if thats any help.

Neurojazz

DaDumTish wrote: »

i use the TC studio konnekt 48 and find it superb - if thats any help.

Looking really for something with no frills or many inputs/outputs - purely for headphones/computer/fun - something that's going to last for the next few years! - the orpheus thing looks like it only has 4 mic inputs... all the rest have *many*

madtheory

Neurojazz wrote: »

Cheers will look into that - i'll get my soundblaster out to compare it now....

O you will definitely prefer the soundblaster. In which case, I will dispose of the Orpheus for you, at no charge, because I am a generous soul.

MilanPan!c

Neurojazz wrote: »

Looking really for something with no frills or many inputs/outputs - purely for headphones/computer/fun - something that's going to last for the next few years! - the orpheus thing looks like it only has 4 mic inputs... all the rest have *many*

I'm telling you - TCE makes good stuff... The Konnekt 8 has two mic/line inputs, sounds great, has very well reviewed DACs (really it does) and won't break any bank, much less yours.

Go listen to it...

Neurojazz

MilanPan!c wrote: »

I'm telling you - TCE makes good stuff... The Konnekt 8 has two mic/line inputs, sounds great, has very well reviewed DACs (really it does) and won't break any bank, much less yours.

Go listen to it...

I might go check it out - just shy of the TC stuff as i've spent too much money on their gear already and about to sell my FW Powercore to get on and focus with writing more.

MilanPan!c

Neurojazz wrote: »

I might go check it out - just shy of the TC stuff as i've spent too much money on their gear already and about to sell my FW Powercore to get on and focus with writing more.

now the truth comes out!


:P

Neurojazz

MilanPan!c wrote: »

now the truth comes out!
:P

Haha, well it's been fun using their gear - but detracting from getting more music made - i've been stripping my whole setup down over last couple of years. Would be nice that Sylenth2 gets an update to keep me super happy

splitrmx

http://www.thomann.de/ie/apogee_duet.htm

jtsuited

isn't he on windows?

Neurojazz

jtsuited wrote: »

isn't he on windows?

Yeah windows based