Comments for 1313

Comment on DIY – RM-5 Ribbon Mic Build by Eric

Eric — Thu, 03 May 2012 17:56:41 +0000

Very detailed, & playing with ribbons proximity effect is always key.

Comment on DIY – RM-5 Ribbon Mic Build by Peterson

Peterson — Thu, 03 May 2012 04:38:42 +0000

Hey Eric, glad it worked out for you. Mine keeps growing on me more and more. So detailed and “unhyped.”

Comment on Digital EQ Fact & Myth. by madbrain

madbrain — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:27:26 +0000

Found this post where this dude tested UAD EQ for nonlinearity:

http://studionu.com/uadforums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=13038&start=15#p105522

Result: UAD is linear.
Corollary: Probably sounds the same as Sonitus EQ or ReaEQ if you match the response well.

Comment on Digital EQ Fact & Myth. by madbrain

madbrain — Mon, 23 Apr 2012 15:07:43 +0000

Most cheap EQs use the RBJ formulas:

http://www.musicdsp.org/files/Audio-EQ-Cookbook.txt

In fact I bet that at least Sonitus EQ and ReaEQ are straight up implementations of this. But the results of this test go deeper than that. What they’re saying is that even when you’re trying to emulate analog gear or add in various things, you’re still going to end up with essentially the same behaviour as the RBJ EQ… essentially, when you’ve got -6db at 1khz and +6db at 1.2khz, you’re going to have the same ringing characteristics no matter what. Some EQs display phase (like reaEQ) and if you look at that, you’ll see that essentially the phase displacement is equal to the slope of the EQ curve (unless you add in allpasses… which just mess up the phase even more), so for parametric EQs using the 2 pole filters (RBJ etc), you’re going to get the same phase response no matter how you calculate your EQ (except for linear phase EQs). Even linear phase EQs ring just as much anyways (they basically ring both forwards and backwards instead of just forwards). If your EQ is linear, you’ll get the same ringing no matter what you do – basically the ring is a mathematical consequence of the fact that you have -6db at 1khz and +6db at 1.2khz.

So I guess the expensive EQs basically use complicated stuff… that ends up getting you exactly the same results as RBJ anyways, because you can’t really cheat math. If not, either it’s nonlinearity (ie saturation typically), or it’s basically lying about the Q (using a smaller boost with a wider Q instead of what you dialed in).

Comment on Digital EQ Fact & Myth. by Digital EQ: Fact & Myth. | emiliano | caballero

Digital EQ: Fact & Myth. | emiliano | caballero — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 06:17:16 +0000

[...] may make certain applications sound better. If you want to read the full article, click here: http://rhythminmind.net/1313/?p=361 e|c Share this:TwitterFacebookEmailLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. This entry was [...]

Comment on Digital EQ Fact & Myth. by emilianocaballero

emilianocaballero — Sat, 21 Apr 2012 13:00:03 +0000

Great post! really interesting BTW:

I made a review out of it, check it out

http://emilianocaballero.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/digital-eq-fact-myth/

cheers!

Emiliano
http://www.emilianocaballero.com/

Comment on A/D Conversion, can you hear the difference? by Eric

Eric — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 21:58:49 +0000

I would guess the analog components of the 02r are of better quality. Being a 16bit device optimum levels while tracking is important. 16bit audio gives you 96dB of dynamic range, still greater then most sources you would be recording. With that in mind as long as you have your gain correct & record nice hot/full signals you should be able to get better results from the 02r.

Comment on A/D Conversion, can you hear the difference? by tim

tim — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 16:07:48 +0000

thanks for the efford, this was revealing. i voted for a, but that might just psychological since it was the “first” example. in reality i think i didnt hear the difference.
would you say the yamaha 02r preamps and converters (16 bit model) play in the quality range of, say, the m-box?

Comment on A/D Conversion, can you hear the difference? by Eric

Eric — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:55:13 +0000

Proper gain matching with identical signals/takes is crucial.

Comment on A/D Conversion, can you hear the difference? by Dan

Dan — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:31:48 +0000

I’m constantly confused by the converter shootouts. At first, I listened to several of these types of shootouts and got the same results; very little difference. Any actual difference could not be legitimately separated from ear/brain bias.
On my own I recently went from using a Focusrite Sapphire to an Apogee Symphony I/O, and the difference was absolute mind-blowing! Immediately noticeable! But, I tested with an acoustic guitar recording, two separate takes where I played the same riff, same mic location etc… Just swapped USB/FW cables. The difference in the takes and distance from the mic was WELL within the constraints of the quality in sound I heard.
Same thing seems to happen with mic preamps. You listen to these shootouts and one test shows a 1073 to sound exactly like a VLZ3. But then you buy one and do it yourself and it’s a whole different story.
Anyway… I’m left confused.

Comment on A/D Conversion, can you hear the difference? by Saulius Matas

Saulius Matas — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 02:53:21 +0000

I listened and compared using my monitors (KRK VXT8) and headphones (AKG k240), and could not hear much of a difference.

Comment on 480L or LX 480 by Wintersun Project

Wintersun Project — Sun, 01 Apr 2012 12:30:37 +0000

B is the hardware, didnt need an A+B key but i would reckon only someone who has worked with the 480L would know straight off.
the density of the bass reflection is deeper on the 480, and the modulations are more watery and thick. the plugin is terrific though.

Comment on Evil toy piano shootout by Eric

Eric — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 19:53:50 +0000

I’ve been contemplating sampling this guy myself.