Who uses the analog outs for monitoring here?

[Mike Goodwin]

I am guessing that most people here do but I just thought I would ask. For the last three years I have been syncing my scope Pulsar2 to my Presonus Firestudio as it has much newer converters and a great clock. But now I am coming to realize that I do not need about 90% of what it has to offer, mic pre's and so on. I have just switched my setup today am going to do some listening to see what I think.

I am just looking for general feedback as to what others here think of the converters and internal clock stability. In the end if I like the sound enough I will be looking for a Pro card pretty soon I figure.

Thanks for any input

P.s. what is a fair price for a pro card?

[Neutron]

i just use one of the outputs on the a16 ultra > analog potentiometer > powered monitors.

the analog potentiometer is good so you can get all of the bit depth of the converters even when you are not listening at loud levels.

[Mike Goodwin]

I would need either a passive routing box for my headphones and a couple pairs of moniters at least. I know there is a cheap one from SM audio that is completly passive, that is the one I would most likley go for. I might just build one as well if it is cheaper.

Hey where in the up here in the great white are ya?

[Shroomz~>]

We monitor using the Scope card's analogue outs here. Our main monitoring hub is an O1V mixer.

Scope system 1 > O1V 1 via analague
Scope system 1 > O1V 2 via ADAT
Scope system 2 > O1V 1 via analogue
O1V 1 > Scope system 1 via ADAT
O1V 2 > Scope system 1 via ADAT

There's a host of various external analogue & digital gear plugged into both O1V's & a Luna 24/96 box which is connected to Scope system 2.

The reason we work this way is that it's extremely flexible. We can monitor either Scope system without the other being switched on if we want & we can also monitor our external hardware without having either of the Scope systems switched on if we want. In other words, as I said, our main monitoring hub is an O1V mixer. At some point we'll upgrade the O1V's to nicer mixers, but they work well for us atm. The system as a whole works very well for our 2 man workflow with the sdk development & electronic music we do.

Mark

[iSiStOy]

Hi Mike,

Same here.
Personally I used the analogue outputs of a pulsar II before but after I burnt the board with my sticky fingers ( ), I was "forced" to search for another card and bought a TC Konnekt 24 as a temporary solution. At that time, I didn't know where to go and wanted to try something else to compare.
I must say now that I went back buying me 2 other Pro cards, that the converters and the clock on the S|C cards are not as good as those of the Konnekt.
Since then, Konnekt is plugged via ADAT in stand-alone mode with one scope and it is my monitor and not only that (analog volume control as well ).
I also used my sampler a while ago as a master monitor and it's giving a really special color to the sound. Now it's "only" used as a sampler (ADAT connected) and sometimes for mixing tracks together.

Connexions:
Scope 1 -> Konnekt (ADAT)
Scope 1 -> A16 Ultra (ZLink)
Scope 2 -> E4 (ADAT)

Good thing that you give it a try. I dunno what you use in scope but I mostly found diff when mixing synths.

Please tell us what you think, I'm interested in knowing your opinion.

iSiS

[Mike Goodwin]

I would say that the converters on Firestudio are about the same as on the Konnekt. And I think they both use the DiceII clock with JetPLL. A VERY tight clock. Hmmm interesting idea to use the konnekt as a converter/analog volume control. That unit has four outs as well no? If so would there be a way do monitor switching with it?

How would you describe the difference. Just general clarity and definition? A very quick listen today left me thinking that the card sounded pretty good. At the very least good enough to hold me off for several months.

[iSiStOy]

see below

iSiS

[iSiStOy]

Well yes! you have the switch choice on the device, one button push away:



ooops, I think it is for inputs. Dunno about the outputs for sure but you still have straight stand alone setup recall in which you can setup the sand alone master output:



you can get details for other features here, like dual headphone and auto speaker muting on one of them.

The only thing I'm not happy with is the lack of routing capabilities for internal effects through ADAT: I didn't manage to make it work as an external fx rack and it's quite a shame as it has a really nice reverb plug as well as a channel strip.

Concerning sound quality, sound clarity mainly but also the over representation of bass frequencies of projects made with the pulsar.
But that's my opinion. I found more precision in using the konnekt as a monitor when cutting frequencies.

iSiS

[Mike Goodwin]

Just listened to three mixes that I know very well through the pulsarII on my Adam a7's from about 2.5 feet away and have a very basic review...

The first thing that hit me was that the bass seemed big and round. It also a little out of control in the lower and. Lets say in the 50-100Hz area. Stereo image is quite good but it is not as wide or well defined as with the firestudio. Adams tweeters are extremely good at showing this type of thing up as there ability to present sound stage is very impressive. I feel that the mids sounded about the same to my ears, very nice. The high end felt a little edgy or rough for lack of better descriptive works. I felt that there may have been more distortion in the 8-10khz area. But my hearing is not the best in that range anymore, particularly at 8khz. above that sheeze very hard to say with out being able to a\b them quickly.

The difference is enough that I am not sure that I would want to get used to it. More thinking.

As for the konnekt, I owned one for a few days but the drivers at that time where crappy. I do not know if they have gotten better but they basically did not work with Ableton Live at all. It became a known bug in the Ableton forum. I was very disappointed as otherwise it was exactly what I wanted. Small, good sound quality, very decent pre-amps, good build quality and I personally liked the reverb right away. I can get one of them quite cheap around here so it is a consideration.

Are you able to comment on the drivers? Have they improved?

EDIT.... Sorry to repeat myself but is there a basic going rate that is reasonable for a Pro card?

[Shroomz~>]

EDIT.... Sorry to repeat myself but is there a basic going rate that is reasonable for a Pro card?

It depends on the type of pro card on offer. If it's type 1 as opposed to type 2, it's normally worth less. Then there's the Scope Pro with I/O or the cheaper SRB option, which is simply a dsp booster card. In short, you're looking at anywhere from 250 - 1500 euro depending on whether you buy second hand (allowing for the various parameters above) or brand new (various parameters above are irrelevant other than the cheaper SRB option).

Mark

[Mike Goodwin]

Sorry Shroomz I could have been much clearer. The ideal board would be a pro second generation with a plus I/O plate. But the Classic Plate would also be good. Like you said looking in the marketplace the prices are all over the place.

[garyb]

$6-800 on average, but $1000 isn't out of line....

btw-i use the analog outs.

i doubt there's a disadvantage.

[Mike Goodwin]

$6-800 on average, but $1000 isn't out of line....

btw-i use the analog outs.

i doubt there's a disadvantage.

Thanks Garyb for the pricing info, that makes things much clearer.
As for the converters there is a pretty clear difference. It is not to surprising seeing that the converters on these boards are about 6 years old. Things have come a long way in six years. Apogee duet for example.$550 bucks. That would have cost thousands six years ago. It is just the same with anything that is built with chips. The Xite is a perfect example. Ten times the power for just over twice the price. That is just the way it goes. A quad core intel for 275. That would have been a 8-10 computer dsp farm 6 years ago. The sound quality on my pulsarII stands as a testament to the quality of the card. For how old it is it sounds fantastic.

[siriusbliss]

analog outs being used for extra back-room monitors and quasi-surround testing via 01V96V2.

Greg

[garyb]

Mike, your converter logic is not logical. if you think that you are losing quality and you won't possibly be able to monitor well enough to mix the latest grammy contender using the converters on the card, then by all means, use what you like!

i should let you know that some of the oldest 1bit dacs are still considered to be some of the nicest sounding. i DO think that these things have generally improved, and i'd prefer a newer design over an older one in general, and i'm not arguing your preferences, but the age is not a measure of quality.

just because the card is in the computer's case is a reason for the sound quality to be inferior to an exterior box. there's a lot of electromagnetic noise and heat in there. if you really want to be picky, then a Lavry or Prism or Weiss or Cranesong box connected to aes/ebu would be the choice....

[Mike Goodwin]

Do not put words in my mouth Garyb.

I never said that the converters on this board would prevent a good mix. I clearly posted what I heard. To my ears the converters on the Pulsar are clearly not as accurate as my Firestudio.

[Fluxpod]

My Setup looks like this.I have a second pc for scope.

Pulsar2 adat>Rme Multiface Analog out>Sm Nano Patch>Monitors.

[astroman]

Gary referred to the 'conclusion' from your sententence ...It is not to surprising seeing that the converters on these boards are about 6 years old. Things have come a long way in six years..., not to your listening experience

for sure a lot of converters that pretend an increased amount of detail sound extremely poor in musical context.
It's like the (in)famous bathtub eq curve making a bass sound great in a shop
(deep and high frequencies up, mids down)
play it in a band (or on a track) and it doesn't fit the mix anymore or even gets completely 'lost'
A lot of VST devices have this 'tendency', too.

Unfortunately time did not deliver the superbe units from the past as cheapos to consumers
in fact those old 16bit devices like the Philips CD960 or the Revox 226 are heavily sought on eBay, rarely going for less than 400 bucks...

of course it's also a matter of personal taste and hearing preferences, but obviously most suppliers added (ridicuously) high spec figures, but more or less ignored 'sound'.
It may not apply to your setup at all, but imho it's a general trend - otherwise they wouldn't sell stuff on iTunes...

ps: actually there's a strange experience that leaves me kind of clueless in this context
good emulations from the analog world (guitar amps, cabinets, the moog etc) always seem to have tight and present low mids, which lack (as mentioned above) in the 'weak' attempts.
The 'precision' of these frequencies seems to part the boys from the men...

From a 'logical' point of view I would expect 'problems' at the extremes of the spectrum, but not in the lower middle part (300-800 hz)
Scope is representing this fairly natural, imho... that's what I like about it

[wayne]

I used the analog outs for years, but for the last year i've been monitoring through my old A16 for a change. No difference in quality to me, apart from the music i played through it

Swapped back a couple of days ago when the mercury hit 41.7C - no airconditioning here, A16 was heating me up!

[Mike Goodwin]

Anyone know if the converters on the boards are the same as the converters on the A16?