Holy crap this thing is awesome
-
- dead but not forgotten
- Posts: 2105
- Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 11:04 am
- Location: phoenix
- Marc Alan Goodman
- george martin
- Posts: 1399
- Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 7:57 pm
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
Analog has it's own limitations as well, they're just a different set of limitations. At this point i think it's impossible to compare them other than by your own personal taste, and your own decisions about what would be appropriate for any given project.
As far as your question 8th Note, clock has a serious effect on the sound every time you make a conversion from Analog to Digital or vice versa. So if it's improving the signal while tracking, and then again when it's running out of the box to go through all the outboard gear, and AGAIN when the two track comes back into the computer it should have a HUGE effect on the CD at the end, even if the CD isn't being played back with a crazy clock. There was just so much less loss on the way there.
However if you were for instance taking pre-tracked material that was already in a digital format and mixing it / bouncing it / entirely in the box the clock would do absolutely nothing except make you feel better about yourself while you were listening (or, arguably, allow you to do slightly better mixes since you could hear what's going on so much better).
When we demoed the clock, we only listened to one conversion, although it was across a number of tracks. We listened to a mix we were working on coming out of the box, and then through the console and to the speakers. If it made that much of a difference during only one of our conversions I can only imagine what will happen when it's applied to the three that we usually make while working on a project.
I hope that clears things up!
-marc alan goodman
As far as your question 8th Note, clock has a serious effect on the sound every time you make a conversion from Analog to Digital or vice versa. So if it's improving the signal while tracking, and then again when it's running out of the box to go through all the outboard gear, and AGAIN when the two track comes back into the computer it should have a HUGE effect on the CD at the end, even if the CD isn't being played back with a crazy clock. There was just so much less loss on the way there.
However if you were for instance taking pre-tracked material that was already in a digital format and mixing it / bouncing it / entirely in the box the clock would do absolutely nothing except make you feel better about yourself while you were listening (or, arguably, allow you to do slightly better mixes since you could hear what's going on so much better).
When we demoed the clock, we only listened to one conversion, although it was across a number of tracks. We listened to a mix we were working on coming out of the box, and then through the console and to the speakers. If it made that much of a difference during only one of our conversions I can only imagine what will happen when it's applied to the three that we usually make while working on a project.
I hope that clears things up!
-marc alan goodman
-
- steve albini likes it
- Posts: 354
- Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 5:01 pm
- Location: Makin' it in MA
- Contact:
Re: Holy crap this thing is awesome
Rats.joel hamilton wrote:The Antelope OCXV with the 10M atomic clock source. WOW.
I read that first sentence and thought that Joel was parodying himself. Come to find that's really the name of something.
Well, congratulations on getting more awesomer. [plugs in new-used 57]
yes.Electricide wrote:psssht, $6000 in weed will make your stuff sound 80% better.
-mad
We wanted to play traditional jazz in the worst way...and we did!
-Dave Van Ronk
-Dave Van Ronk
-
- gettin' sounds
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:25 am
Joel H and Marcocet, when we are on the subject of clocks, do you know from own experience or other trustful friends that something like the Black Lion Audio Micro Clock can improve an Echo Layla3G? Black Lion Audio themselves replied to me and said that it will make quite big improvements but I would like to hear your thoughts.
The Echo Layla3G sounds good on its own but who doesn't want even better sound? I clocked it using ADAT and SPDIF from an RME ADI-2 but I didn't notice any difference. Does that mean that an WORD clock won't help either?
Best Regards
The Echo Layla3G sounds good on its own but who doesn't want even better sound? I clocked it using ADAT and SPDIF from an RME ADI-2 but I didn't notice any difference. Does that mean that an WORD clock won't help either?
Best Regards
-
- zen recordist
- Posts: 8876
- Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 12:10 pm
- Location: NYC/Brooklyn
- Contact:
The numbers are just relative, sake-of-argument- type of nmbers. I dunno about percentages just thrown around arbitrarily. Lets say that I personally think tape [my Studer A827] sounds 40% better than PTHD with my aardsync II clocking it. with that number now established "against tape" then lets say that Tape is less than 25% "better" than my PTHD rig with the 10M clocking it. The rest of your question I dont know. I am not doing this as an experiment, or to sell anything, or to prove anything. I just heard a massive improvement in my existing setup using this clock source.burn wrote:As a digital recording novice, there is something I don't get, when you said whith this clock everything get 15% better, does that mean that if you record/mix stricktly on an analog setup (2" to neve, no computer involved) the result will be sooo much better than with the computer without a really expensive clock?
Now as for this one:
If you recorded something with garageband, and made a CD, do you think you could tell the difference between that and a recording you did at a studio with a nice 24 track and a nice console and then burned a CD?8th_note wrote:If the thing makes that much improvement I could see how it would be worth the money. The question I have, however, is if the difference will translate into a better sound of a mixed and mastered CD - or even the raw tracks for that matter.
If you recorded tracks with your standard clock and another set of similar tracks with the Antelope, mixed them down to 44.1/16, and played them on your CD player, does the dramatic difference still hold up?
Of course you can hear the difference, man. Anything you do will affect the end result, just as anything you use in the process of recording will have a positive or negative [subjectively, or course] effect on the finished product. If this were not the case I would just use the cheapest possible things I could get my hands on, and call it a day. I would MUCH rather spend some time with my wife somewhere warm than toss a bazillion dollars at stuff that doesnt actually help me get better end products for people. Remember that in the end, this is not really for my benefit, it is so I can give people the utmost quality that I am capable of, with the best tools I can get at any given time. It is fun to use this stuff and everything, but if nobody wanted to record with me it would be pretty pointless, wouldnt it?
yeah, I just got the tweak head mod from BLA on the school's 002 rack. I hated the 002 rack previously and went DP with a Metric Halo 2882. The 2882 is great, but the tweak head mod seriously improved my monitoring by that 15% margin. i wish I could hear this thing Joel is talking about...but my two cents are that yes, better converters/clocking are a huge help...especially for me as a novice mixer.roscoenyc wrote:I remember my first outboard clock
all kidding aside I bet the Antelope sounds great.
there are a lot of clocks out there that will help peoples rigs from the Black Lion to the Antelope stuff. If your using a DAW it will sound better with an outboard clock.
-
- gettin' sounds
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:25 am
- JohnDavisNYC
- ghost haunting audio students
- Posts: 3035
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2003 2:43 pm
- Location: crooklyn, ny
- Contact:
i really want to hear this thing.... if it takes the suck out of DAWs, and finally gets the sonic performance into the realm of dedicated hardware like a Studer 2", or a Radar, or a Fairlight MFX, it will be revolutionary... granted, it isn't for everyone (DUH.), but for people who actually need DAWs to sound good (hardware good, not just acceptable good) it will be worth it.... i mean... a Fairlight is $50,000, a Studer was that much before they cost $10, and a full top of the line Radar rig is around $20,000...
just as those platforms are not for everyone, an atomic clock is not for everyone...
if it can make PT sound so much better, as Joel and Michael Brauer say, it is definitely worth the money for people working on that level... it sounds like it just makes PT actually sound like professional equipment, so it doesn't get in the way of getting good sounds, and allows the mics, preamps, and console to sound the way they really sound without a calculator in the signal path.
bla bla bla... i can't wait to hear it with my own two ears when Joel gets his installed.
John
just as those platforms are not for everyone, an atomic clock is not for everyone...
if it can make PT sound so much better, as Joel and Michael Brauer say, it is definitely worth the money for people working on that level... it sounds like it just makes PT actually sound like professional equipment, so it doesn't get in the way of getting good sounds, and allows the mics, preamps, and console to sound the way they really sound without a calculator in the signal path.
bla bla bla... i can't wait to hear it with my own two ears when Joel gets his installed.
John
-
- speech impediment
- Posts: 4270
- Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2003 5:31 pm
- Location: Norman, OK
- Contact:
I'll go out on a limb and suggest that if you're using an Echo interface, there are probably better ways for you to spend $6000. But, I'd also bet that a high end clock would probably improve your converters. But, I'd rather have high end converters on their internal clock than mid range stuff being clocked by a ridiculously high end clock.punkrockdude wrote:BUMP... Joel, pr anyone else? Regards
-
- gettin' sounds
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:25 am
No, no. I didn't mean that I wil spend 6000 to improve my Layla3G, but maybe 400 for the Black Lion Micro Clock. Regardssubatomic pieces wrote:I'll go out on a limb and suggest that if you're using an Echo interface, there are probably better ways for you to spend $6000...punkrockdude wrote:BUMP... Joel, pr anyone else? Regards
-
- zen recordist
- Posts: 8876
- Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 12:10 pm
- Location: NYC/Brooklyn
- Contact:
Clocking is crucial. That much we know about digital recording. Whether or not to spend a lot of money on a clock is entirely case by case, and only you can decide if it is "worth it" or if this is something you "need" right now. As with any upgrade, it has to be a part of a balanced upgrade approach to the whole studio/recording chain. Any of the great places I have worked in have always had a nice balanced system happening in their studios. The bunker, for example, has a great console, with a totally solid mic selection, coupled with some great outboard mic pre's, a RADAR and Logic, along with a nice old studer A80. couple those elements with the actual effort of the two owners, and their engineering skills and you have a very nice, balanced system happening. They dont have 14 U47's, but they have a perfect number of U87's: 2. along with the many, many other great microphones .punkrockdude wrote:No, no. I didn't mean that I wil spend 6000 to improve my Layla3G, but maybe 400 for the Black Lion Micro Clock. Regardssubatomic pieces wrote:I'll go out on a limb and suggest that if you're using an Echo interface, there are probably better ways for you to spend $6000...punkrockdude wrote:BUMP... Joel, pr anyone else? Regards
The mic pre selections are solid. My place is the same way, avatar is the same way, translator audio in dumbo, excelo, cowboy technical services... all of these places have balanced systems that work really, really well.
That being said, the very reason that I am so fired up about this clock, is because I can not think of any other thing I have purchased over the years (besides a nice vintage neve console) that sinply changed my day to day recording reality.
At what point you personally think it is "all bullshit" or "audiopphile snake oil crap logs" or whatever, is entirely up to you. Until I could hear the difference, anything that recorded sound in the 80's was my favorite way to record. Protools wasnt invented yet when I startd recording, so the idea of a "clock source" because I did not do any mixing for films or anything that required more than smpte was like up there with unicorns and elves for me.
But now, 10 days away from 2008, I am incredibly excited that this technology exists, because for me, with this clock, digital just got good.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 62 guests