Music Player Network
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 16 of 16 1 2 14 15 16
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,032
Platinum Member
Offline
Platinum Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,032
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee Flier:
and thanks to Lynn for your offer to send me the CD's, I'm very much looking forward to it and I WILL give them an unbiased listen. Honestly and truly, I don't care what medium I use if it sounds good to me, period.
Let me know when they show. They went out on Thursday.


Lynn Fuston
3D Audio Inc
Home of 3dB
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,032
Platinum Member
Offline
Platinum Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,032
Quote:
Originally posted by gm:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lee Flier:
[...] I've been asking the following questions in this thread and so far no one has answered:

1) How can "objective" tests be developed that will compare PT to other digital environments, which will take real world factors into account? If such a test can be developed, I would love to participate.

I think Lynn and other have proposed such a test...Lynn?

My thought would be to generalize the digital mixing (ProTools or anyone) environment to it's mathematical basics: technology (float vs fixed), word width in the multiply/accumulator and in the path to plug-ins being the main two, and do listening eval tests on these.

In fact there's alot of listening work going on with dither and it's place in a mixing architecture.
Quote:
[qb]
Maybe it's time for another blind test. Same song mixed in PT, DP, Nuendo, Logic, an O2R, d8b, maybe an Oxford. Line 'em all up and let the listeners decide which is which. Make it so you can't find out the answers until you've posted your opinion. Maybe we could all learn something.

I love making people listen with their ears instead of their eyes.

In truth, there are things going on with digital that we haven't even defined the terminology to describe them. No one had ever heard of jitter back in 1982 when the CD came out. I think we've got a lot more research to do just to find out what we're hearing and why. Then we can start trying to fix it. But until we've defined the problem, it's really hard to try to fix it.

I discovered something last night that I've never seen or heard before in PT. A one time anomaly or a systemic problem? I'll have to do more research before I say anything.

I think we'll get to the bottom of these issues. Just don't hold your breath. Analog recording wasn't perfected overnight either.


Lynn Fuston
3D Audio Inc
Home of 3dB
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 22
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 22
I'm afraid I was misunderstood about the PT-Neve test
I stated in my earlier post

But at least take the time to arm yourself with some valid reasoning and examples concerning your agnst with protools and stop blabbering about how
"somebody should run a mix out of the Protools mix bus and then run the same tracks individually with the levels matched as close as they can get them into a Neve and see which one sounds the best"


I wasn't validating this kind of test, I was stating that it can not work. Of course GM stated it much more clearly than I:

Originally from GM

Just to make my opinion clear, and YMMV.
The reason that this will never be an objective test is that the 'analog' path will usually be identifiable. My opinion is that if one is able to identify that path, one will - because of 1> the emotional component, 2> peer pressure (very few care to admit in public what they hear and what they don't hear), & 3> the politics of ProTools/digital vs warm-and-cuddly-and-traditional analog-anything - always be able to choose what serves one's argument.
George


Lynn, I like the idea of some solid listening tests comparing various DAW rigs. If I can be of any assistance with my HD3 setup please let me know. I also wanted to let you know that I mixed some tracks that you cut in Nashville and the recordings were great! I believe it was tracked into RADAR. Great job! It sure makes mixing easier when the sounds on tape/disk are good.

To personalize this I'll tell you that this is Chad from Gaither's. So write or call and let me know if I can help with the test. Plus, how the heck are you? It sounds like you are doing well.

Lee Flier, sorry about the rant earlier I did come across as a total topic basher. You and many others seem informed about this discussion and open to listening to solid tests before making judgement.

Gee, I got in so late. I hate to see this thread come to an end after only four hundered something posts.


"Would you buy furniture from unpainted Huffheims?"
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,032
Platinum Member
Offline
Platinum Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,032
Chad,

Glad you liked the tracks.

I'll say this much. Using the RADAR as the substitute I/O for a PT system solves about 80% of the problems I have using PT for recording in the studio. I did vocals in PT just the other day at the producer's request (ease of flying, instant autotune, etc.) and other than the awkward mousing, it did a fine job. Clocked it all with the Lucid GenX-96 and what's not to love? Unity gain in and out. It works like a recorder. I can see George's point.


Lynn Fuston
3D Audio Inc
Home of 3dB
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 362
P
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
P
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 362
Quote:
Originally posted by gm:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lee Flier:
[qb][...]

Nothing's wrong with loving what you've got. Nothing's wrong with knowing that you're going to get better results from your gear if you know it and love it than if you distrust it.



But another thing comes to mind. You know what the really subjective test is, Lee? Pass your ear (and heart) over a lifetime of your recording work; preferably wait for 20 years on any given work to let the negative experiences with that work to be forgotten. And just listen.
[QUOTE][qb]

IMHO both these statements are so very true :-)

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 22
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 22
Lynn,
I've been thinking of a master clock for my set up-

*PTHD3
*with (1)192 and (1) 888/24 which is used only for AES in/out of my TC System 6000
*Beta SP video deck

Have you been happy using the Lucid GenX-96?

Currently the rig is slaved to Blackburst due to the fact that I am mixing for DVD releases to picture. I was considering giving an external clock a listen. Maybe one that would receive black and output word to my interface and 6K and output/thru the black to the BetaSP.

I can't say that I am unhappy at all with the 192 but I am curious about the possible benefits of a high quality clock source that would eliminate the TC 6K from being clocked via the AES connections. Again, the system is working fine as is but I would like your opinion on this matter as you have recorded with a protools setup and eliminated the digi clock entirely from the scenario.

Thanks, Chad


"Would you buy furniture from unpainted Huffheims?"
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,032
Platinum Member
Offline
Platinum Member
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,032
Quote:
Originally posted by mixdude:
Have you been happy using the Lucid GenX-96?

Currently the rig is slaved to Blackburst due to the fact that I am mixing for DVD releases to picture. I was considering giving an external clock a listen. Maybe one that would receive black and output word to my interface and 6K and output/thru the black to the BetaSP.

I can't say that I am unhappy at all with the 192 but I am curious about the possible benefits of a high quality clock source that would eliminate the TC 6K from being clocked via the AES connections. Again, the system is working fine as is but I would like your opinion on this matter as you have recorded with a protools setup and eliminated the digi clock entirely from the scenario.
Extremely happy. The unit you want is the SSG-192. It'll do pull up/pull down, sync to black burst and just about anything else you need. Check it out. Have someone send you one on approval. I think Sweetwater carries them and they're close to you. You'll know as soon as you plug it in if it helps sonically or not. Let me know what you think.


Lynn Fuston
3D Audio Inc
Home of 3dB
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 315
R
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
R
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 315
Quote:
Originally posted by Henchman:
[QB]It's not that simple though is it. Which DAW, and it's also how things are summed togetehr.

I would take a very well recorded 2" recording. Transfer it to each individual DAW directly from 2". Use something that sounds great without verb.

Set all levels and pans the same on all systems.

Then listen to the end result.
/QB]
You'll be comparing more than summing, which may be fine, but it's not what Lynn was intending. To compare summing you need to eliminate all the other variables, such as converters or differing pan laws.
-R

Page 16 of 16 1 2 14 15 16

Moderated by  gm 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5