Digital Audio Console..

[dbuckley]

The other thing that reduces the knobbage, button and fader count is recall. For some types of applications, example, theatre shows, one can sometimes get through a show with nary a touch-up here and there.

[Shez]

For some types of applications, example, theatre shows, one can sometimes get through a show with nary a touch-up here and there.

Very true for longer running shows where it's possible to program everything. For short runs though where that isn't an option, the more knobs & faders the better!

Having said that, every west end scale show I've ever seen has used a desk with the full complement of knobs & faders. Touring shows of that ilk tend to go for slightly smaller desks for logistical reasons but I've yet to see a "small" desk on that job, even if completely automated.

[bwse]

Looks interesting and I could see a product like this having it's applications.

 

As an aside though, are you looking into higher bit rates than the ones quoted too?

 

A lot of the large companies in our industry claim 48kHz 24 bit as 'good enough'. Which to say it bluntly, is BS.

 

I have am currently doing a tour running everything at 96kHz 24 bit and the difference is immense. The mixers pre amps have a bad reputation and for all track inputs and system outputs we bypassed them by using AES multi pin cards and for the quality of the mic signal we have chosen to clock the desk externally, which also helps.

 

For instance, a few companies now started to venture into 192kHz territory and it is a very positive development. While Merging have their Pyramix running at 384kHz, which is truly amazing and in my belief, the point where we will trull see the discussion analog vs. digital stop.

 

I'd love to test this system though!

[martiaudio]

A Pro2c only has 19 faders total. 8 Input (expandable over 16) 8 Output and 3 "others".

 

Josh

 

 

exactly.. the smallest sd digico has a big screen only 10 or 12 fader if I remember..

 

 

[timd]

A lot of the large companies in our industry claim 48kHz 24 bit as 'good enough'. Which to say it bluntly, is BS.

 

Do you think you can hear anything above 24kHz? Nyquist tells us that you only need to sample at twice the maximum frequency you're interested in. Therefore, 48kHz, done correctly, will be utterly indistinguishable from anything higher on the same preamp.

[paulears]

I started using a mac, and mid project started using it to record additional tracks using the same mics and interface. I completed the project and discovered I'd not checked and had used the same mics, interface and software - BUT the mac recordings were at 96/24 instead of 44.1/16 that I started with. The finished CD has a lot of very short grand piano pieces in a different order to that recorded. I know my top end is down to about 15K, but the 'quality' difference is simply missing to me. I know I should be able to hear it, and if I listen blind I can't - if I have a quick peek at the stats, then press play, I can hear it - but that's just because I know the higher settings must be better.

[J Pearce]

Most perceivable differences could likely be due to the lack of a phase change/disturbance below the nyquist frequency due to the very steep low pass cut off filter required to avoid aliasing.

That's my opinion, not yet scientifically proved as far as I know.

[mackerr]

Most perceivable differences could likely be due to the lack of a phase change/disturbance below the nyquist frequency due to the very steep low pass cut off filter required to avoid aliasing.

That's my opinion, not yet scientifically proved as far as I know.

 

Almost all modern convertors oversample in the MHz range, so the antialiasing filter should be a non-issue. In the bad old days ringing from a steep filter was the primary reason digital didn't sound as good as analog, today, a 48kHz recording that is oversampled 24x (128x is common) puts the sample rate over 1MHz. It is pretty easy to have a low order antialiasing filter at those frequencies.

 

There are still differences in convertor technology that can show up as an audible difference, but very high sample rates aren't the answer.

 

Mac

[nb705]

I've found the best reason for upping the sample rate is the reduction in latency in ad/da conversions. Which is essential for a modern monitor board

[mervaka]

I've found the best reason for upping the sample rate is the reduction in latency in ad/da conversions. Which is essential for a modern monitor board

In a live situation, that's probably the only reason. However, if that ever was a problem, wouldn't we already be doing that?

[bwse]

A lot of the large companies in our industry claim 48kHz 24 bit as 'good enough'. Which to say it bluntly, is BS.

 

Do you think you can hear anything above 24kHz? Nyquist tells us that you only need to sample at twice the maximum frequency you're interested in. Therefore, 48kHz, done correctly, will be utterly indistinguishable from anything higher on the same preamp.

 

 

I am aware of that yes but when we started in production we started off at 48kHz, then when all measures were in place we switched to 96kHz and the day of the switch it was very clear that the highs were sounding much cleaner.

 

I have compared 192 to 96 as well as it is also a possibility here but found that difference to be almost unnoticeable and not worth the aggro. But when I heard the 384kHz system last year I was convinced that if they can make this work at a large scale for live shows, the analog vs. digital discussion could end?!

 

 

 

[timd]

Switching sample rate within the same console leads to meaningful conclusions about the effects of switching sample rate, listening to one console at 48kHz and another at 384kHz can't lead to any conclusions about 48 vs 384, only about the two consoles, which probably have different analogue domain circuitry, different DAC and ADCs and different processing. It's comparing apples to oranges again.

 

The really interesting thing to do would be to do your switching on the same console blind. Once you know which is which, you invalidate the result; as Paul alluded to above.

 

Tim

[martiaudio]

Looks interesting and I could see a product like this having it's applications.

 

As an aside though, are you looking into higher bit rates than the ones quoted too?

 

A lot of the large companies in our industry claim 48kHz 24 bit as 'good enough'. Which to say it bluntly, is BS.

 

I have am currently doing a tour running everything at 96kHz 24 bit and the difference is immense. The mixers pre amps have a bad reputation and for all track inputs and system outputs we bypassed them by using AES multi pin cards and for the quality of the mic signal we have chosen to clock the desk externally, which also helps.

 

For instance, a few companies now started to venture into 192kHz territory and it is a very positive development. While Merging have their Pyramix running at 384kHz, which is truly amazing and in my belief, the point where we will trull see the discussion analog vs. digital stop.

 

I'd love to test this system though!

 

I think you just opened a new discussion in itself.. not quite about my thread.. but that is what it is all about.. and it gives me an opportunity to tell everyone what I think of the subject as a great analog lover. see my myspace.com/martiaudio and the equipment that I own, use and make.

 

 

I will be very honnest with you.

MY SYSTEM uses behringer converter/preamps ADA8000 in current process of MODIFICATION @ 48KHz 24bits ADAT. and so far even before mods. that is well above what drives A LS9 and I suspect M7 but I need concrete tests to claim that.

 

I really like your line of thought but you are getting carried away a little bit.. because higher everything is a mass production argument to sell, along with technology development..

 

I am a sound guy that has great experience in HIFI domestic, very unorthodox audio approach and audio electronic instinct..all in analog more than digital and I come to what follows:

 

Concider this.. it is possible to modify or/and use an external converter on a CD player 44.1Khz/16.. That converter unlike the trend for upclocking to 192Khz/24bits can absolutely sound as good as a vinyl @ 44.1/16 in its original size.

 

To do that you use best components and vintage best converter implemented properly ( better that few years back..). You will hand up with a cd player that sounds like a vinyl.. and I prefer that to chirurgically clean sound. ( like a boarder line baddly set up line array PA with a M7 sounding with ever so aggressive mid highs awful in fact and out of phase bass)

 

I believe in QUALITY INPUT AND OUTPUT TRANSFORMERS, DISCRETE AUDIO ELECTRONICS, VINTAGE CONVERTER CLOCK, HIGH RANGE COMPONENTS AND HIGH QUALITY POWER SUPPLIES.

the higher the sample rate has very little to do with audio from a practical point of view.

 

it is in the quality of distortion that you find the magic.. and you compromise on budget and topology design to achieve that in a digital console with so many ins/outs.

 

My conclusion: quality is subjective but to me it is achieved with power supply type, quality of components even in a classic 44.1/16bits and classic preamp like Neve 1073 or API/quadeight opamp derivatives..

and BTW with a little imagination it is found that the preamp stage in a ADA8000 behringer converter looks like a Neve 1073 structure, the same structure with ic chips found in SSL consoles..possibly with the same chip even and thousands of renouned audio equipment in the lass 35 years.

Based on a good structure like this it is possible to re-design.

For exemple you can add transformer inputs, passive and active components replacement, but you can't use discrete opamp electronic there.. so it is all compromise.

 

Classic converter and discrete preamp or tube preamp goes along very well indeed as a good recipe for digital audio.

 

Yet my Martiaudio Digital Audio Console can be set up for 96Khz/24bits.. Not that I would use that set up that takes twice to process so it has to be justified in the FOH and monitor PA for live.

 

Lastly the only argument against my belief in quality of distortion is that one can claim that quality audio is all about quality of silences. The latter going in favour of higher definition and processing admittedly.

 

To an extend if it was possible to gate in real time silences in the signal and retain sweetness and quality in the signal distortion, all at the same time, then you'll have a best of both world and a sound that would be as sweet and dynamic as analog but precise on phase and clean as real digital.

[martiaudio]

http://www.youtube.c...dtqHoDGs4k&hd=1 Hello There, This is my Final version presenting,

an alternative solution for Digital Audio Console with a controller prototype

using 3 softwares to achieve Live or Studio Live audio mix

remote

simultaneous MultiTracks Recording playback soundcheck

and more..

 

Just use the LINK, read through on HD with full screen if you wish..

 

If you have any suggestions, leave some comments or send me an email.

 

I believe the system I am proposing is Accessible Affordable Good quality Audio and Easy to use.

 

Many thanks

King Regards

MArtialhttp://myspace.com/martiaudio

[brainwave-generator]

My only comment is that this forum is supposed to be a community for technical professionals, not a free electronic billboard for people to advertise their products.

 

Looking at your post history the only thing you have ever contributed to this community, is generally failed attempts to convince professionals that you know something they don't, and that your beer crate with a touch screen and a BCF2000 bolted inside is somehow better than industry standard consoles when it clearly isn't.

 

I am not acting as the internet police but I really think if you are going to use forums to push your products you should at least contribute to them.