I got the SM Pro M-Patch2 passive one. It's the new one with printed db scales round the knobs. Definitely more transparent than the Big Knob. I kept the Big Knob too, which receives now another analog out from the second Scope Pro, the Classic I/O's one, while the M-Patch2 gets the balanced outs from the first Scope Pro. The Big Knob feeds now the Aux input of the M-Patch2, this way I can switch to it when i want to listen to the other stuff also together with the Scope sound and I always have at 2 + 1 headphone outs.
The M-Patch2 alone would be a little limited for my needs, but it seems a quite good device for me. All the cool Big Knob functions are still present, but I'm happy to have a good quality passive path for mixing and mastering.
I've seen it in a shop at 125 € and after 5 mins. was mine.
What a relief! I emailed Thomann a couple of days ago and today they replied that I can return my unused Big Knob and get something else instead!
After lots of thoughts, I decided I'd go for the Central Station. It is more expensive but it seems to sound very transparent.
SPL could have been good too, but I forgot that it's active and lacks several inputs. M-patch 2 seems to be a good choice too but..
The Central Station has got digital inputs which I'm going to use. I don't have a plus board (balanced) so the soundquality should be better in theory with my digital outputs than Scope's unbalanced Line Out.
So I could use Scope's mixers controlroom output to SPDIF out. Behind the convertors the signal will be controlled by the passive volumeknob. A lot better than trimming the output level within Scope digitally. This way it should sound great! I'm returning the Big Knob tomorrow!
I use SMPro's Patch2 and its is very good, more transparent than my the Big Knob it replaced. Another Aux would be good though. My mate uses a Presonus and that has everything you could possibly wish for (including a tidy remote).
I A/B them and there's not much at any volume, well not for the £300+ difference you have to pay. If you want the best then it's gotta be Presonus, if ya want good and affordalble it's SMPro. Haven't heard the SPL.
darkrezin wrote:Big Knob is definitely not passive, I would return it.
The problem with the passive Nanopatch/MPatch is that the volume pot is quite poor, and cannot keep the same response for both channels at very low settings.
I've heard the same complaint from users of almost every sort of external volume controller including the Big Knob and the PreSonus unit. What is it with these things? Why should this be a problem?
Because really good pots are expensive. Expensive volume pots tend to be seen as 'audiophile snake oil' type items, so it would be hard to justify the extra cost because the market would probably cry bullshit. The big knob and central station are packed with lots of mostly irrelevant features which is why they are so expensive. It's strangely difficult these days for most people to justify buying a product that does just ONE thing really well.
darkrezin wrote:Because really good pots are expensive. Expensive volume pots tend to be seen as 'audiophile snake oil' type items, so it would be hard to justify the extra cost because the market would probably cry bullshit. The big knob and central station are packed with lots of mostly irrelevant features which is why they are so expensive. It's strangely difficult these days for most people to justify buying a product that does just ONE thing really well.
I disagree on the central station statement.I know plenty of users that are asking for even more functions/routing.
And for that price..its a really good deal imo.
maybe i don't need external mixer after Xite-1. the headphone out will go direct to vocalist, analog out to my nearfield monior and will use line/mic in as talkback.
so if anyone don't use 2 pair of different monitor do he or she need big knob/monitor station? isn't it waste of money?
but you still have the problem that you don't want to reduce the volume digitally because of the dynamic loss in the signal as described earlier in this thread, so you'll still need a monitor controller at least...
firubbi wrote:maybe i don't need external mixer after Xite-1. the headphone out will go direct to vocalist, analog out to my nearfield monior and will use line/mic in as talkback.
so if anyone don't use 2 pair of different monitor do he or she need big knob/monitor station? isn't it waste of money?
I use one pair of nearfield monitors (and send to the headphone amp from them), and I control the volume with a SPL Volume 2.
Just thought I'd chime in: I gave up on the Monitor station (not passive) and the Central station (too expensive for me), and went for the SM Pro M Patch 2. I have to say I'm getting much better quality audio on my monitors now than before (I was using a Vestax dj mixer which was more than a little bit noisy). The SMPro is noise free, looks and feels good, with a solid and generously sized volume knob, and wasn't that expensive at all. For the extra funcionalities (Mono summing, headphone amp, dual inputs and outputs) I'd go for that instead of the TC.
A note on the decreased bit depth from attenuating in digital: A bonus function is, that the analog circuit in the D/A will have more headroom. I don't know, if this is audible. But I do know, that many people - even with converters the price of a full Scope pro - record at maybe -10dB og -14dB (peak), becuase it strains the analog curcuit less and thus transients are reproduces more precisely.
Information for new readers: A forum member named Braincell is known for spreading lies and malicious information without even knowing the basics of, what he is talking about. If noone responds to him, it is because he is ignored.
In theory everything could be accomplished in Scope, but the simple idea of one of those noisy crashes with violent bursts or white noise to the poor fully powered active speakers is frightening.
The high-quality 2Control speaker volume potentiometer and active circuits correspond with the high demands in professional audio applications regarding sound quality and usability. In contrast to passive circuits, the 2Control’s active designs do not influence impedances when levels change. Altering impedances would again have effects on the frequency response, so the 2Control’s active design guarantees linearity.
i dont' get this much.. is this will work fine with any Active Monitor?
Passive units are essentially adjustable resistors. Resistance is one side of the coin for Impedance, the other side being Reactance (like a capacitor).
You're reading marketing kerfluffle again imo, although it's not baseless. Seems to me that they're trying to say is that there are tradeoffs even for passive control, and they've chosen a different set of tradeoffs which they imagine counterpoint some of the drawbacks of a passive volume control when used with an active load on the other side (the output of your soundcard etc). Then they state that when you can power a gain control, that gives you amplification as well as attenuation (passive controls can only attenuate).
As to the first part, my understanding of the electrical theory of Impedance, is that a pure theoretical 'resistor' would NOT impart any phase shift. Since real-world components are not theoretical, even with a passive controller the quality of your choice of components are going to affect to what degree the signal is altered, even with just resistance. Hence ChampionSound's statement in the first post that he had heard that the M-Patch 2 showed some phase shift at very low levels, and further comments about the device below that.
Note that adding capacitors, I think while they are not actually "active" they will change the phase response of the signal, and still allow the marketing of a product as 'passive' since it's 'unpowered' (lacking transformers and the requirement for self-power).
So I imagine that one side of this discussion (the passive volume maker) will say that using only a variable resistor (or a stepped series of resistors) insures the least amount of components in the path, and thus the purest signal. SPL's side of the discussion here is that they think they've balanced the additional components (active components such as transformers) with a design again to minimize the distorting effects of the circuitry (using distortion in its technical sense of any change at all, not in the 'musical' sense of clipping). They list the added benefits that not only can you now not only have positive gain again, but also have a circuit that gives a more even load to the source that's feeding it across input voltages.
In my opinion--whether or not a unit is passive or active--a designer that balances careful selection of components / use of high quality part specifications with attention to overall design (and imo a MUSICAL EAR) and manufacture, will determine the quality of the unit to the buyer. Comparing the Mackie Big Knob to this SPL unit, one might imagine they're using less of a 'cookie cutter' approach to assembly (where parts are binned together by wider tolerances) and a design that focuses as much on musicality (if not more) as it does ease of assembly/cost. Of course if one uses cost and marketing alone to determine the quality of a unit, one might wind up buying very expensive wooden knobs & "shakti stones".
As usual I typed a ton of caffeine fueled text, I hope my answer was intelligible in that block of text?
