Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Since I have all of these things that I need, I don't keep very close
tabs on what's available and how they sound. So I need some experience here.

The project - to digitize a zillion tapes. No, I'm not doing it, someone
else is (hee, hee, hee) and he's gathering equipment. He'll probably get
paid, so it's OK. He has a Nakamichi Dragon for the cassettes and an
Otari MX-5050 for the reel-to-reel tapes, so he's OK there.

He would prefer to use a Mac for his working computer, and I don't have
any Mac experience (and he doesn't have a lot of hair left) so we're
trying to find something that will work straight off without having to
wait for "the next driver" to get it to work click-free. Since his Mac
doesn't have a PCI slot, he's looking for a Firewire or USB connection
to the computer. His budget is $350 (from the organization he's doing
the job for) but that can be stretched if it makes sense.

Requirements (this is ultimately going to the LIbrary of Congress) are
for 24-bit 96 kHz - just about everything does that. Copying, once a
reel is loaded, level set, and started playing, will be pretty much
unattended. The tapes span about 40 years, recorded by several different
people on several different machines. Quality is random, but he won't be
doing anything to clean them up, just making digital archive-ready
copies. He will be learning how to deal with all the associated problems
with tape so don't waste your time telling me/him about head alignment
and sticky shed if you don't have an interface to recommend.

I'm thinking that something with better than garden variety noise
performance would be an advantage so he can be safely conservative with
record level. I was a bit surprised to find that useful specs for line
inputs were conspicuous by their absence (or nonsense) on a number of
interfaces that I looked at. It would be nice if the line inputs had
enough input headroom (or padding ahead of the first active stage) so
that he can use the full output level from the Otari tape deck, which
would allow him to get full use of its VU meters. But it also needs
enough gain on the line inputs to record from the Nakamichi Dragon which
I assume, since it's a consumer deck, has the typical -10 dBV unbalanced
outputs. Mic preamps, I guess, are unavoidable, but are of no consequence.

My first suggestion, based on the manufacturer's reputation and the fact
that it's Mac-only so it's bound to work out of the box, was the Apogee
Duet, but as far as I can tell, the not-mic inputs are high impedance
for instrument pickups, which makes me a bit suspicious. What I'm
leaning toward now is the M-Audio ProFire 610 if he can get an extra $50
to spend, or PreSonus Firebox if he can't, and in a pinch, a TASCAM
US-122L. The M-Audio, at least on paper, looks like it has nearly 10 dB
less quiescent noise. Sort of in-the-running is the Edirol FA-66, but
I've read some (not necessarily qualified) poor on-line reports about
its Mac compatibility and noise level.

Any thoughts, preferably based on personal experience? Maybe the newer
t.c. or Focusrite stuff? I'd love to see him get into an RME Fireface
400 or Metric Halo ULN-2 but they're too far off budget.






--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Mike
I suggest the Metric Halo ULN 2, it has a lot going for it. 96/24 and
there is a preset in the dsp eq for the riaa equalization for
phonograph and you can plug most phono cartridges right into the
analogue in's as it has the correct impedance for such interfacing.
with metric halo's resent release of the uln8 and their 2d expansion,
you can find older dsp legacy boxes at good prices.
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
hank alrich hank alrich is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,736
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Mike Rivers wrote:

I'm thinking that something with better than garden variety noise
performance would be an advantage so he can be safely conservative with
record level.


I would look for a used Metric Halo ULN-2, legacy model. I've seen those
go for around $500, but last I watched was a couple of years ago.
Perhaps one could now be had for closer to his budget.

That would give terrific conversion and reliability. They are Mac only.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar
  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
hank alrich hank alrich is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,736
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:

Mike
I suggest the Metric Halo ULN 2, it has a lot going for it. 96/24 and
there is a preset in the dsp eq for the riaa equalization for
phonograph and you can plug most phono cartridges right into the
analogue in's as it has the correct impedance for such interfacing.
with metric halo's resent release of the uln8 and their 2d expansion,
you can find older dsp legacy boxes at good prices.


Not sure one could get a ULN-2+DSP for his budget. If so, though, I say
go for it.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar
  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Marko L. Spilberg Marko L. Spilberg is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 34
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

I would go with the Presonus firebox, I use one in my smaller studio, and it
performs flawlessly.

Marko.


www.spielbergaudio.com





"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...
Since I have all of these things that I need, I don't keep very close tabs
on what's available and how they sound. So I need some experience here.

The project - to digitize a zillion tapes. No, I'm not doing it, someone
else is (hee, hee, hee) and he's gathering equipment. He'll probably get
paid, so it's OK. He has a Nakamichi Dragon for the cassettes and an Otari
MX-5050 for the reel-to-reel tapes, so he's OK there.

He would prefer to use a Mac for his working computer, and I don't have
any Mac experience (and he doesn't have a lot of hair left) so we're
trying to find something that will work straight off without having to
wait for "the next driver" to get it to work click-free. Since his Mac
doesn't have a PCI slot, he's looking for a Firewire or USB connection to
the computer. His budget is $350 (from the organization he's doing the job
for) but that can be stretched if it makes sense.

Requirements (this is ultimately going to the LIbrary of Congress) are for
24-bit 96 kHz - just about everything does that. Copying, once a reel is
loaded, level set, and started playing, will be pretty much unattended.
The tapes span about 40 years, recorded by several different people on
several different machines. Quality is random, but he won't be doing
anything to clean them up, just making digital archive-ready copies. He
will be learning how to deal with all the associated problems with tape so
don't waste your time telling me/him about head alignment and sticky shed
if you don't have an interface to recommend.

I'm thinking that something with better than garden variety noise
performance would be an advantage so he can be safely conservative with
record level. I was a bit surprised to find that useful specs for line
inputs were conspicuous by their absence (or nonsense) on a number of
interfaces that I looked at. It would be nice if the line inputs had
enough input headroom (or padding ahead of the first active stage) so that
he can use the full output level from the Otari tape deck, which would
allow him to get full use of its VU meters. But it also needs enough gain
on the line inputs to record from the Nakamichi Dragon which I assume,
since it's a consumer deck, has the typical -10 dBV unbalanced outputs.
Mic preamps, I guess, are unavoidable, but are of no consequence.

My first suggestion, based on the manufacturer's reputation and the fact
that it's Mac-only so it's bound to work out of the box, was the Apogee
Duet, but as far as I can tell, the not-mic inputs are high impedance for
instrument pickups, which makes me a bit suspicious. What I'm leaning
toward now is the M-Audio ProFire 610 if he can get an extra $50 to spend,
or PreSonus Firebox if he can't, and in a pinch, a TASCAM US-122L. The
M-Audio, at least on paper, looks like it has nearly 10 dB less quiescent
noise. Sort of in-the-running is the Edirol FA-66, but I've read some (not
necessarily qualified) poor on-line reports about its Mac compatibility
and noise level.

Any thoughts, preferably based on personal experience? Maybe the newer
t.c. or Focusrite stuff? I'd love to see him get into an RME Fireface 400
or Metric Halo ULN-2 but they're too far off budget.






--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach me
he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)





  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Soundhaspriority wrote:

Mike, I am not a Mac user, but this is worth taking a look at:
Echo AudioFire2


Thanks for reminding me of Echo. They've been in the business for a long
time and have always made solid products. The AudioFire 2 seems to have
a fixed input sensitivity (stated as the usual "+4dBu/-10dBV"). Is there a
software control panel switch for basic gain/attenuation?


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:

I suggest the Metric Halo ULN 2


I guess you stopped reading my post before you got to the end. Too
expensive.


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message


Since I have all of these things that I need, I don't
keep very close tabs on what's available and how they sound. So I need
some experience here.


Check out the eMu catalog. I just picked up a 0202 USB interface by them
from GC for about $80 (refurb). It has balanced line inputs, goes up to
24/192, has about 100 dB dynamic range, analog input level controls, and a
headphone jack with output level control. The driver disk in the box worked
(with XP). Mac use is supported by the vendor.

http://www.emu.com/products/product....roduct=1 5186


  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Arny Krueger wrote:

Check out the eMu catalog. I just picked up a 0202 USB interface by them
from GC for about $80 (refurb). It has balanced line inputs


Since the two line inputs are physically different (one part of a
Combo-XLR,
the other a TRS jack marked "Hi-Z/Line" I'm wondering how well matched
electrically they are. Also, since the maximum input level is just under
+10 dBu,
it might need some padding to work with a real nominal +4 dBu source. Do the
input level controls come ahead of the electronics?


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

On Aug 4, 8:06 am, Mike Rivers wrote:
Dale A. Francis wrote:
I suggest the Metric Halo ULN 2


I guess you stopped reading my post before you got to the end. Too
expensive.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)


Mike
I read it, I did say "used" legacy model!


  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message

Arny Krueger wrote:

Check out the eMu catalog. I just picked up a 0202 USB
interface by them from GC for about $80 (refurb). It has
balanced line inputs


Since the two line inputs are physically different (one
part of a Combo-XLR,
the other a TRS jack marked "Hi-Z/Line" I'm wondering how
well matched electrically they are.


They are. Besides, there are separate level controls for both channels. Max
CW on both, matches levels within a small fraction of a dB.

Also, since the maximum input level is just under +10 dBu,
it might need some padding to work with a real nominal +4
dBu source.


Yes, but that is true for virtually every audio interface I've ever used.
The lowest sensitivity I've ever seen on a +4 input netted out to be less
than 7 volts. I've seen other +4 inputs that clipped at about +4. The old
time +4 outputs could go up to +22, or more.


Do the input level controls come ahead of the electronics?


So it seems. No schematics possible.


  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:

I read it, I did say "used" legacy model!


But that means having to find one, and buying it from someone who will
guarantee
it, and as Hank pointed out, the current asking price is still over the
budget. But if
you have one you'd like to let go for $350 and will cheerfully take it
back and give
a refund if there's a problem, I'll be happy to pass along your contact
information
for him to consider.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Steve King Steve King is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 558
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...
| Dale A. Francis wrote:
|
| I read it, I did say "used" legacy model!
|
| But that means having to find one, and buying it from someone who will
| guarantee
| it, and as Hank pointed out, the current asking price is still over the
| budget. But if
| you have one you'd like to let go for $350 and will cheerfully take it
| back and give
| a refund if there's a problem, I'll be happy to pass along your contact
| information
| for him to consider.

Why am I reminded of, "You want it good; you want it fast; you want it
cheap--- pick two."

Steve King


  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

if they are doing this for the library of congress, why cheat the
process by buying a low-end convertors? If they are using a nak
dragon, which will be a used expensive machine with no warranty, why
browbeat a suggestion for some comparable quality?

  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
PStamler PStamler is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 882
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

I'd go for a CardDeluxe. Simple, clean, and should be available for
about the specified price. (If not, get a used one like I did.)

Peace,
Paul


  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:
if they are doing this for the library of congress, why cheat the
process by buying a low-end convertors?


Why do you think that a $300 interface has "low end" converters?
What's the problem? If there's anything "low end" it would more likely
be the analog circuitry.

I'm realistic about this. The tapes are only so good and there just isn't
all that much more than can be preserved with the greatest converters
in the world.

Honestly, the skill and care with which the transfers will be done is the
weakest link in this project. One might say "why cheat the process by
not hiring a professional tape archivist?"

If they are using a nak
dragon, which will be a used expensive machine with no warranty, why
browbeat a suggestion for some comparable quality?


The Dragon has already been purchased, It's in remarkably good shape, but
it's on the way to Stephen Sank for a checkout and tuneup. I don't know
about the origin
or condition of the MX-5050 other than that it came from a known and
reputable
seller.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #17   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

PStamler wrote:
I'd go for a CardDeluxe. Simple, clean, and should be available for
about the specified price. (If not, get a used one like I did.)


He actually had a Lynx L22 on his list of possibilities figuring that he
could get $600 approved, but since his Mac doesn't have a slot for it,
he'd have to put together an Intel-based computer (or get an older
Mac) which would be an additional expense.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #18   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Arny Krueger Arny Krueger is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17,262
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

"PStamler" wrote in message

I'd go for a CardDeluxe. Simple, clean, and should be
available for about the specified price. (If not, get a
used one like I did.)


The scary part would be that here maybe 6 years later the EMu 0202
outperforms and outfunctions it, for as little as $80 at Music123.

http://www.music123.com/E-MU-0202-US...72061.Music123

It works on both PCs and Macs, and you don't have to open the PC case to
install it.


  #19   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Fred[_8_] Fred[_8_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 53
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread


"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message ...

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message ...
Soundhaspriority wrote:

Mike, I am not a Mac user, but this is worth taking a look at:
Echo AudioFire2


Thanks for reminding me of Echo. They've been in the business for a long
time and have always made solid products. The AudioFire 2 seems to have
a fixed input sensitivity (stated as the usual "+4dBu/-10dBV"). Is there a
software control panel switch for basic gain/attenuation?

No, sorry, I misunderstood. For that, the Audiofire4 would be required, which has two universal inputs:
http://echoaudio.com/Products/FireWi...ire4/specs.php


$300 at B&H:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...terfac e.html

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511


From the
AudioFire 2 Specs on the Echo site:

a.. Nominal Input Level: +4dBu or -10dBV (software configurable)

- Fred


  #20   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Fred wrote:

From the
AudioFire 2 Specs on the Echo site:

a.. Nominal Input Level: +4dBu or -10dBV (software configurable)


Yes, I saw that, but I wasn't sure what it actually meant in practice. I
suppose there's
some sort of software control panel or "console" that has a switch on
it. But since it
has no input level knobs, I'd like to know if it can accept a signal at,
say, +18 dBu
without clipping, either the analog input circuitry or the A/D
converter. Easy to
measure if you have one, hard to guess from the specs on the web.


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)


  #21   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Steve King Steve King is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 558
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

"PStamler" wrote in message
...
| I'd go for a CardDeluxe. Simple, clean, and should be available for
| about the specified price. (If not, get a used one like I did.)
|
| Peace,
| Paul

I second the CardDeluxe. I've got one that is now in its third computer.
Still sounds great.

Steve King


  #22   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

On Aug 4, 7:06 pm, Mike Rivers wrote:
Dale A. Francis wrote:
if they are doing this for the library of congress, why cheat the
process by buying a low-end convertors?


Why do you think that a $300 interface has "low end" converters?
What's the problem? If there's anything "low end" it would more likely
be the analog circuitry.

I'm realistic about this. The tapes are only so good and there just isn't
all that much more than can be preserved with the greatest converters
in the world.

The Dragon has already been purchased, It's in remarkably good shape, but
it's on the way to Stephen Sank for a checkout and tuneup. I don't know
about the origin
or condition of the MX-5050 other than that it came from a known and
reputable
seller.


the less expensive convertors have to have compromised the quality of
the analogue and digital circuits! I was not recommending the greatest
because 10 grand is beyond the scope of your request.
  #23   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:

the less expensive convertors have to have compromised the quality of
the analogue and digital circuits! I was not recommending the greatest
because 10 grand is beyond the scope of your request.


You don't need to tell me that better is better. Are you using "Library
of Congress"
as being an indicator that this should be a no-compromise transfer? It's
sufficient
that it be better than the tape, and honestly I think that most any
ordinary computer
sound from the past few years card can do that. My conscience won't let
me stoop
that low, but I don't find that there's too much difference in surface
quality between
a $100 interface and a $500 one, and only a small difference between a
$1000 one.

What I was looking for was recommendations or cautions based on
compatibility,
reliability, inputs and outputs, and price. My assumption is that there
will be no
significant difference in quality of the digital recording between one
and another
in this price range unless there's a real ringer or a real dud.


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #24   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

my assumption was that this project has invested significant cash into
the analogue tape machines! the cost of a used dragon or the otari and
the servicing that is being done is not low end. What is the weakest
link in this audio chain ... the d/a conversion!
why cut corners to a lower grade digital link after doing all the work
to get the a higher quality analogue?
Just because the low end boys believe that there is no difference,
there is!
They are not going to have another chance to do this digital
conversion!
I got that ringer for you, ... a used Metric Halo uln 2.
a chain is only as good as its weakest link.
Hank offered the same advice from the same scenario.
  #25   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

On Aug 5, 3:06 pm, "Soundhaspriority" wrote:
"Mike Rivers" wrote in message

...

Dale A. Francis wrote:
if they are doing this for the library of congress, why cheat the
process by buying a low-end convertors?


Why do you think that a $300 interface has "low end" converters?
What's the problem? If there's anything "low end" it would more likely
be the analog circuitry.


I'm realistic about this. The tapes are only so good and there just isn't
all that much more than can be preserved with the greatest converters
in the world.


Honestly, the skill and care with which the transfers will be done is the
weakest link in this project. One might say "why cheat the process by
not hiring a professional tape archivist?"


The converters and analog circuitry in many of these cheap units are superb.
I am sure Echo Audio is not alone in this.

The world has changed!

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511


yes it sure has
why digital is said to sound bad to the analogue purist
it is because of compromises on the converters used in the recording
not the playback medium.
the changes are that the newer quality products have gotten much
better.
and yet low end is still low end.


  #26   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Geoff Geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,562
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:
my assumption was that this project has invested significant cash into
the analogue tape machines! the cost of a used dragon or the otari and
the servicing that is being done is not low end. What is the weakest
link in this audio chain ... the d/a conversion!
why cut corners to a lower grade digital link after doing all the work
to get the a higher quality analogue?
Just because the low end boys believe that there is no difference,
there is!
They are not going to have another chance to do this digital
conversion!
I got that ringer for you, ... a used Metric Halo uln 2.
a chain is only as good as its weakest link.
Hank offered the same advice from the same scenario.


I would suggest that apart from the cheapest and nastiest interfaces
(interfii ?), the weakest link is stll likely to be the analogue gear, and
the source media.

geoff


  #27   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:
my assumption was that this project has invested significant cash into
the analogue tape machines! the cost of a used dragon or the otari and
the servicing that is being done is not low end. What is the weakest
link in this audio chain ... the d/a conversion!


Nope, it's still the tape decks, the operator, and the original recordings.

why cut corners to a lower grade digital link after doing all the work
to get the a higher quality analogue?


If it was an ATR-100 and the tapes were recorded with great care, then
it would be worth spending more money. But given the finite budget and
the point beyond which the quality of the digital copy will never improve,
I don't see a "lower grade" A/D converter to be a problem. I think it's more
important, given the return on investment, to put more money into the
tape decks, which really make a big difference, than the converters, which
have very small differences from one to another.

Just because the low end boys believe that there is no difference,
there is!


Sure there is. But how will that affect the outcome?

I got that ringer for you, ... a used Metric Halo uln 2.


How much do you want for it? If it's within the budget, I'll pass it on.

a chain is only as good as its weakest link.
Hank offered the same advice from the same scenario.


And Hand is also a very practical guy. Given the choice of spending
money on a better tape deck or a better interface, he'd go for the better
tape deck too.


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #28   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

geoff wrote:

I would suggest that apart from the cheapest and nastiest interfaces
(interfii ?), the weakest link is stll likely to be the analogue gear, and
the source media.


Exactly. This is why I was asking for advice. It's more important to get
something that will work without a lot of fooling around, will interface
properly to the analog sources, and that won't die prematurely due to
poor construction or quality control.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #29   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

On Aug 6, 7:31 am, Mike Rivers wrote:
he point beyond which the quality of the digital copy will never
improve,
I don't see a "lower grade" A/D converter to be a problem. I think it's more
important, given the return on investment, to put more money into the
tape decks, which really make a big difference, than the converters, which
have very small differences from one to another.

Just because the low end boys believe that there is no difference,
there is!


Sure there is. But how will that affect the outcome?


the library will not have the best digital resolution for their
archives and post production.


Hank offered the same advice from the same scenario.


And Hand is also a very practical guy. Given the choice of spending
money on a better tape deck or a better interface, he'd go for the better
tape deck too.


Hank sold his tape deck and use Metric Halo for his I/O's
  #30   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread


Exactly. This is why I was asking for advice. It's more important to get
something that will work without a lot of fooling around, will interface
properly to the analog sources, and that won't die prematurely due to
poor construction or quality control.


Which is exactly why I recommend Metric Halo for his Mac


  #31   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
hank alrich hank alrich is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,736
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:

my assumption was that this project has invested significant cash into
the analogue tape machines! the cost of a used dragon or the otari and
the servicing that is being done is not low end. What is the weakest
link in this audio chain ... the d/a conversion!
why cut corners to a lower grade digital link after doing all the work
to get the a higher quality analogue?
Just because the low end boys believe that there is no difference,
there is!
They are not going to have another chance to do this digital
conversion!
I got that ringer for you, ... a used Metric Halo uln 2.
a chain is only as good as its weakest link.
Hank offered the same advice from the same scenario.


Yet the job may not pay enough to jusitfy the cost of a ULN-2, if one
must also buy food and stuff.

It is true that every aspect of the MH box, from quality of conversion
to ruggedness of build stands above the competition at its price point,
nevemind cheaper stuff. And it satisfies the Firewire need, as it will
work with a broad range of Mac OS's. I can run my 2882+DSP in OS9 if I
want to, and since I still use the original v. of Waveburner pro for
premastering assembly, I do that regularly.

The problem is that such quality holds its resale value rather well.
Still, if one was diligent and had the luxury of some time in which to
look for a used ULN-2, one might get a hell of a deal at very close to
the specified budget.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar
  #32   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
hank alrich hank alrich is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,736
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Mike Rivers wrote:

Dale A. Francis wrote:
my assumption was that this project has invested significant cash into
the analogue tape machines! the cost of a used dragon or the otari and
the servicing that is being done is not low end. What is the weakest
link in this audio chain ... the d/a conversion!


Nope, it's still the tape decks, the operator, and the original recordings.

why cut corners to a lower grade digital link after doing all the work
to get the a higher quality analogue?


If it was an ATR-100 and the tapes were recorded with great care, then
it would be worth spending more money. But given the finite budget and
the point beyond which the quality of the digital copy will never improve,
I don't see a "lower grade" A/D converter to be a problem. I think it's more
important, given the return on investment, to put more money into the
tape decks, which really make a big difference, than the converters, which
have very small differences from one to another.

Just because the low end boys believe that there is no difference,
there is!


Sure there is. But how will that affect the outcome?

I got that ringer for you, ... a used Metric Halo uln 2.


How much do you want for it? If it's within the budget, I'll pass it on.

a chain is only as good as its weakest link.
Hank offered the same advice from the same scenario.


And Hand is also a very practical guy. Given the choice of spending
money on a better tape deck or a better interface, he'd go for the better
tape deck too.


Oh, yeah, even if I did sell the old A80 8-track last spring for about
what a used ULN-2 costs. g

Still have the B-67. It's useful for many things, beyond playing back
old mixes. Slapback, yumm...

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar
  #33   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
hank alrich hank alrich is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,736
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:

On Aug 6, 7:31 am, Mike Rivers wrote:
he point beyond which the quality of the digital copy will never
improve,
I don't see a "lower grade" A/D converter to be a problem. I think it's more
important, given the return on investment, to put more money into the
tape decks, which really make a big difference, than the converters, which
have very small differences from one to another.

Just because the low end boys believe that there is no difference,
there is!


Sure there is. But how will that affect the outcome?


the library will not have the best digital resolution for their
archives and post production.


Hank offered the same advice from the same scenario.


And Hand is also a very practical guy. Given the choice of spending
money on a better tape deck or a better interface, he'd go for the better
tape deck too.


Hank sold his tape deck and use Metric Halo for his I/O's


If people were willing to buy tape I'd have kept it. If I didn't need to
carry a Studer-8-track-equivalent-in-a-box, I'd have kept it. Getting on
a plane in Reno and stepping off in Austin with a "studio" in a carry-on
is not doable with the A80! g

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar
  #34   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

On Aug 6, 11:07 am, (hank alrich) wrote:

Yet the job may not pay enough to jusitfy the cost of a ULN-2, if one
must also buy food and stuff.


if it didn't pay enough for the uln 2, how did it pay for a nak
dragon?
will they never again use the equipment?
are they going to sell all the audio equipment off after this project?

The problem is that such quality holds its resale value rather well.
Still, if one was diligent and had the luxury of some time in which to
look for a used ULN-2, one might get a hell of a deal at very close to
the specified budget.


with the intro of the uln 8, this is very likely.


  #35   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:

the library will not have the best digital resolution for their
archives and post production.


The Library will have 24-bit 96 kHz files. That's their standard.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)


  #36   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:

if it didn't pay enough for the uln 2, how did it pay for a nak
dragon?
will they never again use the equipment?
are they going to sell all the audio equipment off after this project?


I'm tired of arguing with you. This is none of your business. I accept
your recommendation of a ULN-2. How much do you want for yours?


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #37   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
hank alrich hank alrich is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,736
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

Dale A. Francis wrote:

On Aug 6, 11:07 am, (hank alrich) wrote:

Yet the job may not pay enough to jusitfy the cost of a ULN-2, if one
must also buy food and stuff.


if it didn't pay enough for the uln 2, how did it pay for a nak
dragon?
will they never again use the equipment?
are they going to sell all the audio equipment off after this project?

The problem is that such quality holds its resale value rather well.
Still, if one was diligent and had the luxury of some time in which to
look for a used ULN-2, one might get a hell of a deal at very close to
the specified budget.


with the intro of the uln 8, this is very likely.


The ULN-8 is sufficiently more costly and requires enough more computer
horsepower that in spite of a relative flood of "legacy" MIO's on the
market, prices have held up rather well.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar
  #38   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers Mike Rivers is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,744
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

hank alrich wrote:

The ULN-8 is sufficiently more costly and requires enough more computer
horsepower that in spite of a relative flood of "legacy" MIO's on the
market, prices have held up rather well.


From a sample of one ULN-2 currently on eBay:
Starting bid - $800
Shipping - $12
Returns - No returns accepted

I wonder what part of "Budget around $300" the MH fans don't understand.

I think you'll agree with me, though, that had he bought a MH interface
first,
even a used one, blew the budget on that, and had to settle for thrift store
TEAC or Sony tape decks, the end result wouldn't have been as good as
with a $300 interface and a Nakamichi Dragon.

Maybe "It will be transferred before the end of this century" isn't such
a bad
deal after all.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)
  #39   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

On Aug 6, 1:12 pm, Mike Rivers wrote:

I'm tired of arguing with you.

then why did you??
This is none of your business. I accept your recommendation of a

ULN-2.
You posted and asked in a public forum!
You did not attack Hank for his suggestion,
why did you choose to go on the offensive with mine?
How much do you want for yours?

why would I sell mine, I researched and bought just the product you
were asking for.
  #40   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Dale A. Francis Dale A. Francis is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default Yet Another "Recommend an Audio Interface" Thread

On Aug 6, 2:43 pm, Mike Rivers wrote:

From a sample of one ULN-2 currently on eBay:
Starting bid - $800
Shipping - $12
Returns - No returns accepted


try gearslutz
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Please recommend flat "airy" speakers (budget: $1K-$2K/pair) RemotePortal High End Audio 6 June 3rd 08 01:32 PM
Does Laura Bush Recommend Jenna Preserve "Daintiness" Lysol Way? BretLudwig Audio Opinions 1 May 11th 08 05:39 PM
Why should I choose an "M-Audio" interface over a "Pro-Tools" interface??? yish313 Pro Audio 10 January 21st 05 01:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:10 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"