I'll preface this by saying that I'm not a pro, just a songwriter with a
project studio. My quest is to find the best sound I can get using gear
that I don't have to mortgage my great grandchildren's futures to buy.
(Although I'll secretly admit that I just COVET all that tasty, high dollar
big name pro gear the big boys love so much. That stuff has a good rep for
a reason, but that's not the subject matter of this post.)

I have recently purchased a Digi002 rack after much deliberation and on-line
research. After reading on line opinions until my eyes hurt, I was
convinced that one of two alternatives was true:

#1 This thing would be my sonic salvation, or

#2 It's just a prosumer level playtoy and part of a vast digidesign
conspiracy to trick me into spending 80 large or so on a full blown PT
system, so there. (You DO want surround sound and playlists, don't you?
Hmmmmmmmm?)

When I got it and integrated it into my setup, I concluded that neither
statement was true. It was a vast sonic improvement over my existing
interface (an old Layla 20bit + Sonar), but it didn't come included with a
chorus of angels proclaiming my assured entry into recording heaven, either.
As John Constantine said, "Welcome to my life."

I noted that my mixes no longer sounded like congealed oatmeal, I had a
much easier time placing each instrument in its own space. Over all, I was
pretty happy with the improvement in my sound, the clarity and definition of
the sound, etc.

But this isn't a review of the Digi002r, that's been done and it's pluses
and limitations have been explored enough, already.

I began to hunger for that intangible something, that extra step up of audio
quality that says, "Hi, this was recorded on equipment that doesn't suck."

More research.

I concluded that I could improve over the converters in the Digi (which
ain't bad at all, I should stress, at least to my ears) by using an outboard
AD converter into the ADAT lightpipe input.

But which one to buy? I found a lot of good things said about the Swissonic
AD24, but alas they're out of production and pretty scarce even on eBay. I
finally chucked that idea.

Then I asked for and received some advice on this group; try the venerable
Frontier Tango 24. The kind gentleman (or lady if I got the gender wrong)
even linked me to an auction for one.

After more online opinion research (It *sucks*/No, it *doesn't* suck) I
scored that mofo for the modest sum of $250.00.

Got it. Racked it. Plugged it in.

So far I've tracked a bass and a set of male vocals with it.

And my observations:

Bass: I ran the bass (An OLP 5-string Stingray type with a passive double
coil PU) through a Joe Meek VC1Qcs and then direct into the Tango. I
noticed the difference immediately. First of all, that chunky low B string,
when plucked, was now identifiable as a "B" note instead of a blurry
ball-jarring WHUMP that you take to be a "B" note just because your
electronic tuner says it is.

Clarity and detail. It's a subtle but very real improvement. Furthermore I
determined that the noise floor (yes, there was one) was the output hiss
from the preamp. The Tango itself was dead, dead quiet. If it has its own
operating noise, it's below my ability to hear it, even with the gain
cranked.

Vocals: I recorded a male vocal using a Studio Projects C1 into a Studio
Projects VTb1 (Now there's a whole 'nother debate. I like 'em. Some don't.
Different strokes, brothers and sisters.)

Oh man. Now here's a difference. For the first time in my dubious
recording endeavors, I have tracked a vocal that sounds like a natural human
voice singing in the room, instead of someone with a sinus condition singing
in a refrigerator carton. Oh I'm so happy. The signal is clear and flat as
a pancake being raped by a steamroller. I can honestly say that if I use
any EQ in the mix on these vocals, it ain't gonna be much, maybe just a tiny
bump in the high end some where for presence; then again, maybe not.

The signal is detailed and clean. I guess the best way I can describe
the improvement is not by what it adds to the sound, but by what this
converter doesn't add to the sound. It lets you hear the true character of
what's going into the computer in a way largely unaffected by any coloration
or distortion that I can detect.

Ok, that's my opinion on how it sounds, which is pretty damn good. Now a
few words about its features:

Aesthetics: Ok, it looks a little cheezy with silk screened graphics on the
front 1U panel somewhat reminiscent of an early '90 A.R.T. product. If you
run a "real" studio, it's not going to impress clients who amuse themselves
by scanning your racks for names like Apogee, UA and Drawmer. IMHO, though,
if you buy gear strictly on how it looks you probably bought one of those
gaudy purple over-friggin'-priced vacuums that never lose suction, too.
Sucker.

Features: Pretty simple. You can select 44.1 or 48 sampling rates (that's
a limitation of ADAT lightpipe, no 96 in this specification) and you can
clock the unit internally, via wordclock or by the embedded clock in the
optical ADAT signal. There are eight 1/4" TRS analog inputs and a like
number of outputs. Optical in out an through. It's powered by a big chunky
wall wart power supply.

Gripes: No on and off switch. (I plugged mine into the same power strip
that supplies my preamps and so far it hasn't been a problem.) Likewise, no
96 sampling rate. (I don't care personally since I do all my tracking at
24/44.1. These might be deal killers for you though.) There's a three
segment (Green, Yellow, Red) clip indicator for each of the 8 ADAT channels.
Switchable for input/output readings. They sure look purty but I doubt
they'll replace a real meter bridge. Good to know you're not clipping your
converter, though.

Conclusion: If you already own a rack of Apogees, I just wasted your time.
Sorry. If you're looking for an outboard converter to improve the sound of
your lightpipe capable project studio level soundcard, I think you'll be
deliriously happy with a Tango 24.

malachi

"Malachi" wrote:

It's powered by a big chunky wall wart power supply.

Wall wart or line lump? They used to use the latter.



no 96 sampling rate. (I don't care personally since I do all my
tracking at 24/44.1. These might be deal killers for you though.)

Well, that tells you how much *I* care about higher sample rates -- it
never even crossed my mind that it doesn't do 96K. I'm with you -- I
don't care either.



Thanks for the entertaining read. Well written!

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)

"Lorin David Schultz" wrote in message
news:3ssIe.158716$HI.33766@edtnps84...
"Malachi" wrote:

It's powered by a big chunky wall wart power supply.

Wall wart or line lump? They used to use the latter.

Line lump, not wall wart. My mistake.





Thanks for the entertaining read. Well written!

Thanks!

malachi

In article 3ssIe.158716$HI.33766@edtnps84 writes:

It's powered by a big chunky wall wart power supply.

Wall wart or line lump? They used to use the latter.

Carpet carbuncle? If it's big and chunky, it must be a line lump. You
can make a wall wart only so big or else it will fall off the wall.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Malachi wrote:

So far I've tracked a bass and a set of male vocals with it.

Will all due respect for you thoughtful and detailed reports of your
experiences, It would be interesting to hear thoughts after having
tracked alot more and varied sources through the box (horns and drums
for example).

I guess the best way I can describe
the improvement is not by what it adds to the sound, but by what this
converter doesn't add to the sound. It lets you hear the true character of
what's going into the computer in a way largely unaffected by any coloration
or distortion that I can detect.

I am a bit skeptical. The Tango is an aging design and at its price
point I would expect its AD to be of the same caliber as the 002R or
maybe very slightly better (if you're listening in a very accurate
monitoring environment). Don't get me wrong - I'd love for this to be
a good box for the application. I also have an 002R and am looking for
an 8 channel AD box. But I have a few questions:

Did you do anything scientific in your testing? Such as recording the
same signal from a console bussed to both the 002's line in and the
Tango's line in. That is the only way you could really compare the two
fairly. It's amazing how our ears (and brains) steer us when a) you're
hearing 2 different takes, and b) you "want" the new box to sound
better.
Also, when making your judgements were you listening to the tracks you
recorded through the Tango's DA or the 002's DA. It would be useful to
compare both AD and DA separately in a controlled way and see if you
are still hearing the same sorts of things.
Lastly, if you really wanted to be thorough you might get a friend to
man the controls (out of sight) while you are listening. This takes
any preconceived notions out of the picture.

Please excuse me doubting your methods. I've been duped myself by
non-scientific listening tests in the past. If in fact you have taken
these types of measures then congratulations and maybe i'll consider
trying one out too!

Dan Fox

Daniel,

My methods are admittedly unscientific. I'm just going by what my ears tell
me.

I have compared the sound of tracks I've layed down with the 002's internal
converters with ones I've done with the Tango.

I think I hear a big improvement in clarity and detail especially with
vocals. At this price point, I'm really happy with what I'm hearing.

I just posted the track I was recording when I wrote this review on
Soundclick; listen for yourself.

Here's a link to my music page, the song is first on the page and is called
"I'm Not Just A Man's Best Friend":

http://www.soundclick.com/artist/8/j...ntes_music.htm

malachi


"Daniel Fox" wrote in message
oups.com...

Malachi wrote:

So far I've tracked a bass and a set of male vocals with it.

Will all due respect for you thoughtful and detailed reports of your
experiences, It would be interesting to hear thoughts after having
tracked alot more and varied sources through the box (horns and drums
for example).

I guess the best way I can describe
the improvement is not by what it adds to the sound, but by what this
converter doesn't add to the sound. It lets you hear the true character
of
what's going into the computer in a way largely unaffected by any
coloration
or distortion that I can detect.

I am a bit skeptical. The Tango is an aging design and at its price
point I would expect its AD to be of the same caliber as the 002R or
maybe very slightly better (if you're listening in a very accurate
monitoring environment). Don't get me wrong - I'd love for this to be
a good box for the application. I also have an 002R and am looking for
an 8 channel AD box. But I have a few questions:

Did you do anything scientific in your testing? Such as recording the
same signal from a console bussed to both the 002's line in and the
Tango's line in. That is the only way you could really compare the two
fairly. It's amazing how our ears (and brains) steer us when a) you're
hearing 2 different takes, and b) you "want" the new box to sound
better.
Also, when making your judgements were you listening to the tracks you
recorded through the Tango's DA or the 002's DA. It would be useful to
compare both AD and DA separately in a controlled way and see if you
are still hearing the same sorts of things.
Lastly, if you really wanted to be thorough you might get a friend to
man the controls (out of sight) while you are listening. This takes
any preconceived notions out of the picture.

Please excuse me doubting your methods. I've been duped myself by
non-scientific listening tests in the past. If in fact you have taken
these types of measures then congratulations and maybe i'll consider
trying one out too!

Dan Fox