Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
|
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl...
If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl...
If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl...
If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl...
If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
Codifus wrote: There was mention of the Santa Cruz being more than adequate for recording vinyl. I have owned both the Santa Cruz and the Echo MIA. CoolEdit 2K is my software for both. The Echo MIA BLOWs the Santa cruz away for recording vinyl. Been there, done that I think it doesn't. I know it doesn't if you are reasonably careful with level setting. Read on! Why? Simple, with it's 24 bits of dynamic headroom, it is more able to capture ALL of the dynamics of analog recording. Sorry to burst your bubble but the Echo Mia doesn't have 24 bits worth of dynamic range. It actually has about 17 bits worth of dynamic range with 44 KHz sampling, worse at 96 KHz. In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. However, vinyl recordings only have about 12 bits worth of dynamic range. The Mia buys you more margin when it comes to setting levels for recording. However, with reasonable care, the TBSC is still an overkill solution for digitizing vinyl. Analog recordings don't have the corner on dynamics, particularly when we are talking about analog tape or analog vinyl. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. The Santa Cruz card is a 16 bit card with extra bits (18 recording, 20 playing, if memory serves) to make the 16 bits more accurate, but in the end, its only 16 bit. 16 bits gives you about 96 dB dynamic range, This is no less than 20 dB more dynamic range than any commercial recording ever made has, whether LP, analog tape, or CD. Vinyl recordings are hard pressed to demonstrate more than about 65 dB worth of dynamic range. Often they only have more like 50 dB dynamic range. Comparing the same vinyl recorded with the MIA vs the Cruz, the sound is more dynamic, and the frequency response is flatter, too. Either card has the capability to accurately reproduce the dynamics and timbre of a LP. The Mia has a tad better frequency response, but anybody who cares to listen properly (i.e., a level-matched, time-synchronized, blind listening test) can be reasonably be expected to report back that the two sound cards sound alike with music, provide the levels are optimized for each card. The Mia, being designed for audio production, has been optimized for higher signal levels. I think that it makes sense to prefer the Mia for digitizing vinyl, but we need not criticize the TBSC to explain that preference. The cruz tends to be a bit bass light and less dynamic. Only if you don't match it properly to the application. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. With the MIA, you record at its full depth, 24 bit, and even when the recording is below full scale (0 db) you still have more than 16 bits of dynamic range. Wrong, no way does the Mia or any other commercial audio interface current available have 24 bit resolution. A SOTA audio interface has more like 20-22 bits resolution, unwieghted, 20 KHz bandwidth. Remember, dynamic range and resolution are two different ways to express the same concept and the same physical event. Now, back to this discussion about the TerraTec vs Mia. Even though I've been mis-informed about how the phono-input works on the TerraTec card, I would still lean to the MIA. If you look at Terra's entire product line, then look at Echo's, you'd see what I mean. Echo is all about audio. Terratec is sorof of kindof like, dare I say it, CREATIVE. Since the issue does boil down to software equaliztion, then the only variable is the quality of the AD-DA in the soundcard. My vote still goes to the MIA I agree that Echo is audio production oriented, and that Terrratec is consumer oriented. They are both about audio, but different market segments within audio. Creative is about audio, too but historically it has been more oriented towards the gaming segment of consumer audio. Creative has been going through some changes because the market is changing. They're doing a big business with digital audio players, and that's a music listener's market. Audio interfaces are natural adjuncts to digital audio players. Technological progress relates as well. 5 years ago the dirt-cheap audio interfaces built into motherboards were junk if you were a critical listener. Today, the better on-board audio interfaces are climbing into the sound quality range of a TBSC. I use one to digitize cassettes, and I have no apologies for that. OK, OK. I know that The MIA won't get it's full 24 bits of dynamic range, but it's a 24 bit card, so it can capture more than the Santa Cruz, because the Cruz won't capture all 16 bits of its theoretical capability either. My point was simply that it's much easier to capture all the dynamics of vinyl when recording with 24 bits (but really 17 or so, I guess) of headroom rather than 16 (but really what? 12 bits or so?). I guess then my observations of better dynamics comparison involved other parts of the system as well, like the drivers. With the MIA, I use the PureWave drivers which bypass the Windows kernel mixer whereas the Cruz used the WDM drivers. Whatever the case may be, the MIA records the same vinyl with much better dynamics than the Cruz. It just does. I thought it was due to the cards capability, and I still think that has somethingto do with it, but perhaps there's other aspects that would contribute to the better recordings on the MIA. CD |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
Codifus wrote: There was mention of the Santa Cruz being more than adequate for recording vinyl. I have owned both the Santa Cruz and the Echo MIA. CoolEdit 2K is my software for both. The Echo MIA BLOWs the Santa cruz away for recording vinyl. Been there, done that I think it doesn't. I know it doesn't if you are reasonably careful with level setting. Read on! Why? Simple, with it's 24 bits of dynamic headroom, it is more able to capture ALL of the dynamics of analog recording. Sorry to burst your bubble but the Echo Mia doesn't have 24 bits worth of dynamic range. It actually has about 17 bits worth of dynamic range with 44 KHz sampling, worse at 96 KHz. In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. However, vinyl recordings only have about 12 bits worth of dynamic range. The Mia buys you more margin when it comes to setting levels for recording. However, with reasonable care, the TBSC is still an overkill solution for digitizing vinyl. Analog recordings don't have the corner on dynamics, particularly when we are talking about analog tape or analog vinyl. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. The Santa Cruz card is a 16 bit card with extra bits (18 recording, 20 playing, if memory serves) to make the 16 bits more accurate, but in the end, its only 16 bit. 16 bits gives you about 96 dB dynamic range, This is no less than 20 dB more dynamic range than any commercial recording ever made has, whether LP, analog tape, or CD. Vinyl recordings are hard pressed to demonstrate more than about 65 dB worth of dynamic range. Often they only have more like 50 dB dynamic range. Comparing the same vinyl recorded with the MIA vs the Cruz, the sound is more dynamic, and the frequency response is flatter, too. Either card has the capability to accurately reproduce the dynamics and timbre of a LP. The Mia has a tad better frequency response, but anybody who cares to listen properly (i.e., a level-matched, time-synchronized, blind listening test) can be reasonably be expected to report back that the two sound cards sound alike with music, provide the levels are optimized for each card. The Mia, being designed for audio production, has been optimized for higher signal levels. I think that it makes sense to prefer the Mia for digitizing vinyl, but we need not criticize the TBSC to explain that preference. The cruz tends to be a bit bass light and less dynamic. Only if you don't match it properly to the application. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. With the MIA, you record at its full depth, 24 bit, and even when the recording is below full scale (0 db) you still have more than 16 bits of dynamic range. Wrong, no way does the Mia or any other commercial audio interface current available have 24 bit resolution. A SOTA audio interface has more like 20-22 bits resolution, unwieghted, 20 KHz bandwidth. Remember, dynamic range and resolution are two different ways to express the same concept and the same physical event. Now, back to this discussion about the TerraTec vs Mia. Even though I've been mis-informed about how the phono-input works on the TerraTec card, I would still lean to the MIA. If you look at Terra's entire product line, then look at Echo's, you'd see what I mean. Echo is all about audio. Terratec is sorof of kindof like, dare I say it, CREATIVE. Since the issue does boil down to software equaliztion, then the only variable is the quality of the AD-DA in the soundcard. My vote still goes to the MIA I agree that Echo is audio production oriented, and that Terrratec is consumer oriented. They are both about audio, but different market segments within audio. Creative is about audio, too but historically it has been more oriented towards the gaming segment of consumer audio. Creative has been going through some changes because the market is changing. They're doing a big business with digital audio players, and that's a music listener's market. Audio interfaces are natural adjuncts to digital audio players. Technological progress relates as well. 5 years ago the dirt-cheap audio interfaces built into motherboards were junk if you were a critical listener. Today, the better on-board audio interfaces are climbing into the sound quality range of a TBSC. I use one to digitize cassettes, and I have no apologies for that. OK, OK. I know that The MIA won't get it's full 24 bits of dynamic range, but it's a 24 bit card, so it can capture more than the Santa Cruz, because the Cruz won't capture all 16 bits of its theoretical capability either. My point was simply that it's much easier to capture all the dynamics of vinyl when recording with 24 bits (but really 17 or so, I guess) of headroom rather than 16 (but really what? 12 bits or so?). I guess then my observations of better dynamics comparison involved other parts of the system as well, like the drivers. With the MIA, I use the PureWave drivers which bypass the Windows kernel mixer whereas the Cruz used the WDM drivers. Whatever the case may be, the MIA records the same vinyl with much better dynamics than the Cruz. It just does. I thought it was due to the cards capability, and I still think that has somethingto do with it, but perhaps there's other aspects that would contribute to the better recordings on the MIA. CD |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
Codifus wrote: There was mention of the Santa Cruz being more than adequate for recording vinyl. I have owned both the Santa Cruz and the Echo MIA. CoolEdit 2K is my software for both. The Echo MIA BLOWs the Santa cruz away for recording vinyl. Been there, done that I think it doesn't. I know it doesn't if you are reasonably careful with level setting. Read on! Why? Simple, with it's 24 bits of dynamic headroom, it is more able to capture ALL of the dynamics of analog recording. Sorry to burst your bubble but the Echo Mia doesn't have 24 bits worth of dynamic range. It actually has about 17 bits worth of dynamic range with 44 KHz sampling, worse at 96 KHz. In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. However, vinyl recordings only have about 12 bits worth of dynamic range. The Mia buys you more margin when it comes to setting levels for recording. However, with reasonable care, the TBSC is still an overkill solution for digitizing vinyl. Analog recordings don't have the corner on dynamics, particularly when we are talking about analog tape or analog vinyl. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. The Santa Cruz card is a 16 bit card with extra bits (18 recording, 20 playing, if memory serves) to make the 16 bits more accurate, but in the end, its only 16 bit. 16 bits gives you about 96 dB dynamic range, This is no less than 20 dB more dynamic range than any commercial recording ever made has, whether LP, analog tape, or CD. Vinyl recordings are hard pressed to demonstrate more than about 65 dB worth of dynamic range. Often they only have more like 50 dB dynamic range. Comparing the same vinyl recorded with the MIA vs the Cruz, the sound is more dynamic, and the frequency response is flatter, too. Either card has the capability to accurately reproduce the dynamics and timbre of a LP. The Mia has a tad better frequency response, but anybody who cares to listen properly (i.e., a level-matched, time-synchronized, blind listening test) can be reasonably be expected to report back that the two sound cards sound alike with music, provide the levels are optimized for each card. The Mia, being designed for audio production, has been optimized for higher signal levels. I think that it makes sense to prefer the Mia for digitizing vinyl, but we need not criticize the TBSC to explain that preference. The cruz tends to be a bit bass light and less dynamic. Only if you don't match it properly to the application. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. With the MIA, you record at its full depth, 24 bit, and even when the recording is below full scale (0 db) you still have more than 16 bits of dynamic range. Wrong, no way does the Mia or any other commercial audio interface current available have 24 bit resolution. A SOTA audio interface has more like 20-22 bits resolution, unwieghted, 20 KHz bandwidth. Remember, dynamic range and resolution are two different ways to express the same concept and the same physical event. Now, back to this discussion about the TerraTec vs Mia. Even though I've been mis-informed about how the phono-input works on the TerraTec card, I would still lean to the MIA. If you look at Terra's entire product line, then look at Echo's, you'd see what I mean. Echo is all about audio. Terratec is sorof of kindof like, dare I say it, CREATIVE. Since the issue does boil down to software equaliztion, then the only variable is the quality of the AD-DA in the soundcard. My vote still goes to the MIA I agree that Echo is audio production oriented, and that Terrratec is consumer oriented. They are both about audio, but different market segments within audio. Creative is about audio, too but historically it has been more oriented towards the gaming segment of consumer audio. Creative has been going through some changes because the market is changing. They're doing a big business with digital audio players, and that's a music listener's market. Audio interfaces are natural adjuncts to digital audio players. Technological progress relates as well. 5 years ago the dirt-cheap audio interfaces built into motherboards were junk if you were a critical listener. Today, the better on-board audio interfaces are climbing into the sound quality range of a TBSC. I use one to digitize cassettes, and I have no apologies for that. OK, OK. I know that The MIA won't get it's full 24 bits of dynamic range, but it's a 24 bit card, so it can capture more than the Santa Cruz, because the Cruz won't capture all 16 bits of its theoretical capability either. My point was simply that it's much easier to capture all the dynamics of vinyl when recording with 24 bits (but really 17 or so, I guess) of headroom rather than 16 (but really what? 12 bits or so?). I guess then my observations of better dynamics comparison involved other parts of the system as well, like the drivers. With the MIA, I use the PureWave drivers which bypass the Windows kernel mixer whereas the Cruz used the WDM drivers. Whatever the case may be, the MIA records the same vinyl with much better dynamics than the Cruz. It just does. I thought it was due to the cards capability, and I still think that has somethingto do with it, but perhaps there's other aspects that would contribute to the better recordings on the MIA. CD |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
Codifus wrote: There was mention of the Santa Cruz being more than adequate for recording vinyl. I have owned both the Santa Cruz and the Echo MIA. CoolEdit 2K is my software for both. The Echo MIA BLOWs the Santa cruz away for recording vinyl. Been there, done that I think it doesn't. I know it doesn't if you are reasonably careful with level setting. Read on! Why? Simple, with it's 24 bits of dynamic headroom, it is more able to capture ALL of the dynamics of analog recording. Sorry to burst your bubble but the Echo Mia doesn't have 24 bits worth of dynamic range. It actually has about 17 bits worth of dynamic range with 44 KHz sampling, worse at 96 KHz. In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. However, vinyl recordings only have about 12 bits worth of dynamic range. The Mia buys you more margin when it comes to setting levels for recording. However, with reasonable care, the TBSC is still an overkill solution for digitizing vinyl. Analog recordings don't have the corner on dynamics, particularly when we are talking about analog tape or analog vinyl. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. The Santa Cruz card is a 16 bit card with extra bits (18 recording, 20 playing, if memory serves) to make the 16 bits more accurate, but in the end, its only 16 bit. 16 bits gives you about 96 dB dynamic range, This is no less than 20 dB more dynamic range than any commercial recording ever made has, whether LP, analog tape, or CD. Vinyl recordings are hard pressed to demonstrate more than about 65 dB worth of dynamic range. Often they only have more like 50 dB dynamic range. Comparing the same vinyl recorded with the MIA vs the Cruz, the sound is more dynamic, and the frequency response is flatter, too. Either card has the capability to accurately reproduce the dynamics and timbre of a LP. The Mia has a tad better frequency response, but anybody who cares to listen properly (i.e., a level-matched, time-synchronized, blind listening test) can be reasonably be expected to report back that the two sound cards sound alike with music, provide the levels are optimized for each card. The Mia, being designed for audio production, has been optimized for higher signal levels. I think that it makes sense to prefer the Mia for digitizing vinyl, but we need not criticize the TBSC to explain that preference. The cruz tends to be a bit bass light and less dynamic. Only if you don't match it properly to the application. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. With the MIA, you record at its full depth, 24 bit, and even when the recording is below full scale (0 db) you still have more than 16 bits of dynamic range. Wrong, no way does the Mia or any other commercial audio interface current available have 24 bit resolution. A SOTA audio interface has more like 20-22 bits resolution, unwieghted, 20 KHz bandwidth. Remember, dynamic range and resolution are two different ways to express the same concept and the same physical event. Now, back to this discussion about the TerraTec vs Mia. Even though I've been mis-informed about how the phono-input works on the TerraTec card, I would still lean to the MIA. If you look at Terra's entire product line, then look at Echo's, you'd see what I mean. Echo is all about audio. Terratec is sorof of kindof like, dare I say it, CREATIVE. Since the issue does boil down to software equaliztion, then the only variable is the quality of the AD-DA in the soundcard. My vote still goes to the MIA I agree that Echo is audio production oriented, and that Terrratec is consumer oriented. They are both about audio, but different market segments within audio. Creative is about audio, too but historically it has been more oriented towards the gaming segment of consumer audio. Creative has been going through some changes because the market is changing. They're doing a big business with digital audio players, and that's a music listener's market. Audio interfaces are natural adjuncts to digital audio players. Technological progress relates as well. 5 years ago the dirt-cheap audio interfaces built into motherboards were junk if you were a critical listener. Today, the better on-board audio interfaces are climbing into the sound quality range of a TBSC. I use one to digitize cassettes, and I have no apologies for that. OK, OK. I know that The MIA won't get it's full 24 bits of dynamic range, but it's a 24 bit card, so it can capture more than the Santa Cruz, because the Cruz won't capture all 16 bits of its theoretical capability either. My point was simply that it's much easier to capture all the dynamics of vinyl when recording with 24 bits (but really 17 or so, I guess) of headroom rather than 16 (but really what? 12 bits or so?). I guess then my observations of better dynamics comparison involved other parts of the system as well, like the drivers. With the MIA, I use the PureWave drivers which bypass the Windows kernel mixer whereas the Cruz used the WDM drivers. Whatever the case may be, the MIA records the same vinyl with much better dynamics than the Cruz. It just does. I thought it was due to the cards capability, and I still think that has somethingto do with it, but perhaps there's other aspects that would contribute to the better recordings on the MIA. CD |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Codifus wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Codifus wrote: There was mention of the Santa Cruz being more than adequate for recording vinyl. I have owned both the Santa Cruz and the Echo MIA. CoolEdit 2K is my software for both. The Echo MIA BLOWs the Santa cruz away for recording vinyl. Been there, done that I think it doesn't. I know it doesn't if you are reasonably careful with level setting. Read on! Why? Simple, with it's 24 bits of dynamic headroom, it is more able to capture ALL of the dynamics of analog recording. Sorry to burst your bubble but the Echo Mia doesn't have 24 bits worth of dynamic range. It actually has about 17 bits worth of dynamic range with 44 KHz sampling, worse at 96 KHz. In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. However, vinyl recordings only have about 12 bits worth of dynamic range. The Mia buys you more margin when it comes to setting levels for recording. However, with reasonable care, the TBSC is still an overkill solution for digitizing vinyl. Analog recordings don't have the corner on dynamics, particularly when we are talking about analog tape or analog vinyl. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. The Santa Cruz card is a 16 bit card with extra bits (18 recording, 20 playing, if memory serves) to make the 16 bits more accurate, but in the end, its only 16 bit. 16 bits gives you about 96 dB dynamic range, This is no less than 20 dB more dynamic range than any commercial recording ever made has, whether LP, analog tape, or CD. Vinyl recordings are hard pressed to demonstrate more than about 65 dB worth of dynamic range. Often they only have more like 50 dB dynamic range. Comparing the same vinyl recorded with the MIA vs the Cruz, the sound is more dynamic, and the frequency response is flatter, too. Either card has the capability to accurately reproduce the dynamics and timbre of a LP. The Mia has a tad better frequency response, but anybody who cares to listen properly (i.e., a level-matched, time-synchronized, blind listening test) can be reasonably be expected to report back that the two sound cards sound alike with music, provide the levels are optimized for each card. The Mia, being designed for audio production, has been optimized for higher signal levels. I think that it makes sense to prefer the Mia for digitizing vinyl, but we need not criticize the TBSC to explain that preference. The cruz tends to be a bit bass light and less dynamic. Only if you don't match it properly to the application. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. With the MIA, you record at its full depth, 24 bit, and even when the recording is below full scale (0 db) you still have more than 16 bits of dynamic range. Wrong, no way does the Mia or any other commercial audio interface current available have 24 bit resolution. A SOTA audio interface has more like 20-22 bits resolution, unwieghted, 20 KHz bandwidth. Remember, dynamic range and resolution are two different ways to express the same concept and the same physical event. Now, back to this discussion about the TerraTec vs Mia. Even though I've been mis-informed about how the phono-input works on the TerraTec card, I would still lean to the MIA. If you look at Terra's entire product line, then look at Echo's, you'd see what I mean. Echo is all about audio. Terratec is sorof of kindof like, dare I say it, CREATIVE. Since the issue does boil down to software equaliztion, then the only variable is the quality of the AD-DA in the soundcard. My vote still goes to the MIA I agree that Echo is audio production oriented, and that Terrratec is consumer oriented. They are both about audio, but different market segments within audio. Creative is about audio, too but historically it has been more oriented towards the gaming segment of consumer audio. Creative has been going through some changes because the market is changing. They're doing a big business with digital audio players, and that's a music listener's market. Audio interfaces are natural adjuncts to digital audio players. Technological progress relates as well. 5 years ago the dirt-cheap audio interfaces built into motherboards were junk if you were a critical listener. Today, the better on-board audio interfaces are climbing into the sound quality range of a TBSC. I use one to digitize cassettes, and I have no apologies for that. OK, OK. I know that The MIA won't get it's full 24 bits of dynamic range, but it's a 24 bit card, so it can capture more than the Santa Cruz, because the Cruz won't capture all 16 bits of its theoretical capability either. That's what I said. My point was simply that it's much easier to capture all the dynamics of vinyl when recording with 24 bits (but really 17 or so, I guess) of headroom rather than 16 (but really what? 12 bits or so?). It's easirer to work with the wider dynamic range card, but setting levels right isn't that hard. I guess then my observations of better dynamics comparison involved other parts of the system as well, like the drivers. Hard to tell. With the MIA, I use the PureWave drivers which bypass the Windows kernel mixer whereas the Cruz used the WDM drivers. Whatever the case may be, the MIA records the same vinyl with much better dynamics than the Cruz. Ever try a level-matched, time-synched, bias controlled listening test? Just record the same disc with each card, do a nice job of editing the starts and stops, match the levels of the two files carefully, and then use one of the comparators you can download for free from www.pcabx.com . It just does. I question that, for the stated reasons. I thought it was due to the cards capability, and I still think that has something do with it, but perhaps there's other aspects that would contribute to the better recordings on the MIA. You might want to try a really tight listening test, and see what you find. |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Codifus wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Codifus wrote: There was mention of the Santa Cruz being more than adequate for recording vinyl. I have owned both the Santa Cruz and the Echo MIA. CoolEdit 2K is my software for both. The Echo MIA BLOWs the Santa cruz away for recording vinyl. Been there, done that I think it doesn't. I know it doesn't if you are reasonably careful with level setting. Read on! Why? Simple, with it's 24 bits of dynamic headroom, it is more able to capture ALL of the dynamics of analog recording. Sorry to burst your bubble but the Echo Mia doesn't have 24 bits worth of dynamic range. It actually has about 17 bits worth of dynamic range with 44 KHz sampling, worse at 96 KHz. In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. However, vinyl recordings only have about 12 bits worth of dynamic range. The Mia buys you more margin when it comes to setting levels for recording. However, with reasonable care, the TBSC is still an overkill solution for digitizing vinyl. Analog recordings don't have the corner on dynamics, particularly when we are talking about analog tape or analog vinyl. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. The Santa Cruz card is a 16 bit card with extra bits (18 recording, 20 playing, if memory serves) to make the 16 bits more accurate, but in the end, its only 16 bit. 16 bits gives you about 96 dB dynamic range, This is no less than 20 dB more dynamic range than any commercial recording ever made has, whether LP, analog tape, or CD. Vinyl recordings are hard pressed to demonstrate more than about 65 dB worth of dynamic range. Often they only have more like 50 dB dynamic range. Comparing the same vinyl recorded with the MIA vs the Cruz, the sound is more dynamic, and the frequency response is flatter, too. Either card has the capability to accurately reproduce the dynamics and timbre of a LP. The Mia has a tad better frequency response, but anybody who cares to listen properly (i.e., a level-matched, time-synchronized, blind listening test) can be reasonably be expected to report back that the two sound cards sound alike with music, provide the levels are optimized for each card. The Mia, being designed for audio production, has been optimized for higher signal levels. I think that it makes sense to prefer the Mia for digitizing vinyl, but we need not criticize the TBSC to explain that preference. The cruz tends to be a bit bass light and less dynamic. Only if you don't match it properly to the application. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. With the MIA, you record at its full depth, 24 bit, and even when the recording is below full scale (0 db) you still have more than 16 bits of dynamic range. Wrong, no way does the Mia or any other commercial audio interface current available have 24 bit resolution. A SOTA audio interface has more like 20-22 bits resolution, unwieghted, 20 KHz bandwidth. Remember, dynamic range and resolution are two different ways to express the same concept and the same physical event. Now, back to this discussion about the TerraTec vs Mia. Even though I've been mis-informed about how the phono-input works on the TerraTec card, I would still lean to the MIA. If you look at Terra's entire product line, then look at Echo's, you'd see what I mean. Echo is all about audio. Terratec is sorof of kindof like, dare I say it, CREATIVE. Since the issue does boil down to software equaliztion, then the only variable is the quality of the AD-DA in the soundcard. My vote still goes to the MIA I agree that Echo is audio production oriented, and that Terrratec is consumer oriented. They are both about audio, but different market segments within audio. Creative is about audio, too but historically it has been more oriented towards the gaming segment of consumer audio. Creative has been going through some changes because the market is changing. They're doing a big business with digital audio players, and that's a music listener's market. Audio interfaces are natural adjuncts to digital audio players. Technological progress relates as well. 5 years ago the dirt-cheap audio interfaces built into motherboards were junk if you were a critical listener. Today, the better on-board audio interfaces are climbing into the sound quality range of a TBSC. I use one to digitize cassettes, and I have no apologies for that. OK, OK. I know that The MIA won't get it's full 24 bits of dynamic range, but it's a 24 bit card, so it can capture more than the Santa Cruz, because the Cruz won't capture all 16 bits of its theoretical capability either. That's what I said. My point was simply that it's much easier to capture all the dynamics of vinyl when recording with 24 bits (but really 17 or so, I guess) of headroom rather than 16 (but really what? 12 bits or so?). It's easirer to work with the wider dynamic range card, but setting levels right isn't that hard. I guess then my observations of better dynamics comparison involved other parts of the system as well, like the drivers. Hard to tell. With the MIA, I use the PureWave drivers which bypass the Windows kernel mixer whereas the Cruz used the WDM drivers. Whatever the case may be, the MIA records the same vinyl with much better dynamics than the Cruz. Ever try a level-matched, time-synched, bias controlled listening test? Just record the same disc with each card, do a nice job of editing the starts and stops, match the levels of the two files carefully, and then use one of the comparators you can download for free from www.pcabx.com . It just does. I question that, for the stated reasons. I thought it was due to the cards capability, and I still think that has something do with it, but perhaps there's other aspects that would contribute to the better recordings on the MIA. You might want to try a really tight listening test, and see what you find. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Codifus wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Codifus wrote: There was mention of the Santa Cruz being more than adequate for recording vinyl. I have owned both the Santa Cruz and the Echo MIA. CoolEdit 2K is my software for both. The Echo MIA BLOWs the Santa cruz away for recording vinyl. Been there, done that I think it doesn't. I know it doesn't if you are reasonably careful with level setting. Read on! Why? Simple, with it's 24 bits of dynamic headroom, it is more able to capture ALL of the dynamics of analog recording. Sorry to burst your bubble but the Echo Mia doesn't have 24 bits worth of dynamic range. It actually has about 17 bits worth of dynamic range with 44 KHz sampling, worse at 96 KHz. In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. However, vinyl recordings only have about 12 bits worth of dynamic range. The Mia buys you more margin when it comes to setting levels for recording. However, with reasonable care, the TBSC is still an overkill solution for digitizing vinyl. Analog recordings don't have the corner on dynamics, particularly when we are talking about analog tape or analog vinyl. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. The Santa Cruz card is a 16 bit card with extra bits (18 recording, 20 playing, if memory serves) to make the 16 bits more accurate, but in the end, its only 16 bit. 16 bits gives you about 96 dB dynamic range, This is no less than 20 dB more dynamic range than any commercial recording ever made has, whether LP, analog tape, or CD. Vinyl recordings are hard pressed to demonstrate more than about 65 dB worth of dynamic range. Often they only have more like 50 dB dynamic range. Comparing the same vinyl recorded with the MIA vs the Cruz, the sound is more dynamic, and the frequency response is flatter, too. Either card has the capability to accurately reproduce the dynamics and timbre of a LP. The Mia has a tad better frequency response, but anybody who cares to listen properly (i.e., a level-matched, time-synchronized, blind listening test) can be reasonably be expected to report back that the two sound cards sound alike with music, provide the levels are optimized for each card. The Mia, being designed for audio production, has been optimized for higher signal levels. I think that it makes sense to prefer the Mia for digitizing vinyl, but we need not criticize the TBSC to explain that preference. The cruz tends to be a bit bass light and less dynamic. Only if you don't match it properly to the application. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. With the MIA, you record at its full depth, 24 bit, and even when the recording is below full scale (0 db) you still have more than 16 bits of dynamic range. Wrong, no way does the Mia or any other commercial audio interface current available have 24 bit resolution. A SOTA audio interface has more like 20-22 bits resolution, unwieghted, 20 KHz bandwidth. Remember, dynamic range and resolution are two different ways to express the same concept and the same physical event. Now, back to this discussion about the TerraTec vs Mia. Even though I've been mis-informed about how the phono-input works on the TerraTec card, I would still lean to the MIA. If you look at Terra's entire product line, then look at Echo's, you'd see what I mean. Echo is all about audio. Terratec is sorof of kindof like, dare I say it, CREATIVE. Since the issue does boil down to software equaliztion, then the only variable is the quality of the AD-DA in the soundcard. My vote still goes to the MIA I agree that Echo is audio production oriented, and that Terrratec is consumer oriented. They are both about audio, but different market segments within audio. Creative is about audio, too but historically it has been more oriented towards the gaming segment of consumer audio. Creative has been going through some changes because the market is changing. They're doing a big business with digital audio players, and that's a music listener's market. Audio interfaces are natural adjuncts to digital audio players. Technological progress relates as well. 5 years ago the dirt-cheap audio interfaces built into motherboards were junk if you were a critical listener. Today, the better on-board audio interfaces are climbing into the sound quality range of a TBSC. I use one to digitize cassettes, and I have no apologies for that. OK, OK. I know that The MIA won't get it's full 24 bits of dynamic range, but it's a 24 bit card, so it can capture more than the Santa Cruz, because the Cruz won't capture all 16 bits of its theoretical capability either. That's what I said. My point was simply that it's much easier to capture all the dynamics of vinyl when recording with 24 bits (but really 17 or so, I guess) of headroom rather than 16 (but really what? 12 bits or so?). It's easirer to work with the wider dynamic range card, but setting levels right isn't that hard. I guess then my observations of better dynamics comparison involved other parts of the system as well, like the drivers. Hard to tell. With the MIA, I use the PureWave drivers which bypass the Windows kernel mixer whereas the Cruz used the WDM drivers. Whatever the case may be, the MIA records the same vinyl with much better dynamics than the Cruz. Ever try a level-matched, time-synched, bias controlled listening test? Just record the same disc with each card, do a nice job of editing the starts and stops, match the levels of the two files carefully, and then use one of the comparators you can download for free from www.pcabx.com . It just does. I question that, for the stated reasons. I thought it was due to the cards capability, and I still think that has something do with it, but perhaps there's other aspects that would contribute to the better recordings on the MIA. You might want to try a really tight listening test, and see what you find. |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Codifus wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Codifus wrote: There was mention of the Santa Cruz being more than adequate for recording vinyl. I have owned both the Santa Cruz and the Echo MIA. CoolEdit 2K is my software for both. The Echo MIA BLOWs the Santa cruz away for recording vinyl. Been there, done that I think it doesn't. I know it doesn't if you are reasonably careful with level setting. Read on! Why? Simple, with it's 24 bits of dynamic headroom, it is more able to capture ALL of the dynamics of analog recording. Sorry to burst your bubble but the Echo Mia doesn't have 24 bits worth of dynamic range. It actually has about 17 bits worth of dynamic range with 44 KHz sampling, worse at 96 KHz. In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. However, vinyl recordings only have about 12 bits worth of dynamic range. The Mia buys you more margin when it comes to setting levels for recording. However, with reasonable care, the TBSC is still an overkill solution for digitizing vinyl. Analog recordings don't have the corner on dynamics, particularly when we are talking about analog tape or analog vinyl. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. The Santa Cruz card is a 16 bit card with extra bits (18 recording, 20 playing, if memory serves) to make the 16 bits more accurate, but in the end, its only 16 bit. 16 bits gives you about 96 dB dynamic range, This is no less than 20 dB more dynamic range than any commercial recording ever made has, whether LP, analog tape, or CD. Vinyl recordings are hard pressed to demonstrate more than about 65 dB worth of dynamic range. Often they only have more like 50 dB dynamic range. Comparing the same vinyl recorded with the MIA vs the Cruz, the sound is more dynamic, and the frequency response is flatter, too. Either card has the capability to accurately reproduce the dynamics and timbre of a LP. The Mia has a tad better frequency response, but anybody who cares to listen properly (i.e., a level-matched, time-synchronized, blind listening test) can be reasonably be expected to report back that the two sound cards sound alike with music, provide the levels are optimized for each card. The Mia, being designed for audio production, has been optimized for higher signal levels. I think that it makes sense to prefer the Mia for digitizing vinyl, but we need not criticize the TBSC to explain that preference. The cruz tends to be a bit bass light and less dynamic. Only if you don't match it properly to the application. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. With the MIA, you record at its full depth, 24 bit, and even when the recording is below full scale (0 db) you still have more than 16 bits of dynamic range. Wrong, no way does the Mia or any other commercial audio interface current available have 24 bit resolution. A SOTA audio interface has more like 20-22 bits resolution, unwieghted, 20 KHz bandwidth. Remember, dynamic range and resolution are two different ways to express the same concept and the same physical event. Now, back to this discussion about the TerraTec vs Mia. Even though I've been mis-informed about how the phono-input works on the TerraTec card, I would still lean to the MIA. If you look at Terra's entire product line, then look at Echo's, you'd see what I mean. Echo is all about audio. Terratec is sorof of kindof like, dare I say it, CREATIVE. Since the issue does boil down to software equaliztion, then the only variable is the quality of the AD-DA in the soundcard. My vote still goes to the MIA I agree that Echo is audio production oriented, and that Terrratec is consumer oriented. They are both about audio, but different market segments within audio. Creative is about audio, too but historically it has been more oriented towards the gaming segment of consumer audio. Creative has been going through some changes because the market is changing. They're doing a big business with digital audio players, and that's a music listener's market. Audio interfaces are natural adjuncts to digital audio players. Technological progress relates as well. 5 years ago the dirt-cheap audio interfaces built into motherboards were junk if you were a critical listener. Today, the better on-board audio interfaces are climbing into the sound quality range of a TBSC. I use one to digitize cassettes, and I have no apologies for that. OK, OK. I know that The MIA won't get it's full 24 bits of dynamic range, but it's a 24 bit card, so it can capture more than the Santa Cruz, because the Cruz won't capture all 16 bits of its theoretical capability either. That's what I said. My point was simply that it's much easier to capture all the dynamics of vinyl when recording with 24 bits (but really 17 or so, I guess) of headroom rather than 16 (but really what? 12 bits or so?). It's easirer to work with the wider dynamic range card, but setting levels right isn't that hard. I guess then my observations of better dynamics comparison involved other parts of the system as well, like the drivers. Hard to tell. With the MIA, I use the PureWave drivers which bypass the Windows kernel mixer whereas the Cruz used the WDM drivers. Whatever the case may be, the MIA records the same vinyl with much better dynamics than the Cruz. Ever try a level-matched, time-synched, bias controlled listening test? Just record the same disc with each card, do a nice job of editing the starts and stops, match the levels of the two files carefully, and then use one of the comparators you can download for free from www.pcabx.com . It just does. I question that, for the stated reasons. I thought it was due to the cards capability, and I still think that has something do with it, but perhaps there's other aspects that would contribute to the better recordings on the MIA. You might want to try a really tight listening test, and see what you find. |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Jimmy The Clam wrote:
While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl... If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...E_Sou nd_Card |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Jimmy The Clam wrote:
While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl... If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...E_Sou nd_Card |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Jimmy The Clam wrote:
While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl... If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...E_Sou nd_Card |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Jimmy The Clam wrote:
While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl... If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...E_Sou nd_Card |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
When I say they are the same price, I mean I can get them for about the same
price. While I apperciate your throughness Arny, I can buy the DMX6 all day long on EBay for $199 and the PP-2 for $99 and the MiaMIDI for between $75 and $100. So, now that we are back to the solutions being about the same price, any thoughts between the two? Thanks. "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Jimmy The Clam wrote: While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl... If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...E_Sou nd_Card |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
When I say they are the same price, I mean I can get them for about the same
price. While I apperciate your throughness Arny, I can buy the DMX6 all day long on EBay for $199 and the PP-2 for $99 and the MiaMIDI for between $75 and $100. So, now that we are back to the solutions being about the same price, any thoughts between the two? Thanks. "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Jimmy The Clam wrote: While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl... If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...E_Sou nd_Card |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
When I say they are the same price, I mean I can get them for about the same
price. While I apperciate your throughness Arny, I can buy the DMX6 all day long on EBay for $199 and the PP-2 for $99 and the MiaMIDI for between $75 and $100. So, now that we are back to the solutions being about the same price, any thoughts between the two? Thanks. "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Jimmy The Clam wrote: While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl... If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...E_Sou nd_Card |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
When I say they are the same price, I mean I can get them for about the same
price. While I apperciate your throughness Arny, I can buy the DMX6 all day long on EBay for $199 and the PP-2 for $99 and the MiaMIDI for between $75 and $100. So, now that we are back to the solutions being about the same price, any thoughts between the two? Thanks. "Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Jimmy The Clam wrote: While we are on the subject of the dynamic range of vinyl... If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...E_Sou nd_Card |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... That was a responce to TonyP's statement. "I think you will find the software approach fine above a couple of hundred hertz, but seriously inferior below 100 Hz." Yep S/N will be inferior not frequency response. As Arny already pointed out, you lose 40 dB dynamic range going the software route, mostly at the low end. The best soundcards available have around 100dB S/N, and the best Phono pre-amps have more than 80dB. You do the math. Of course your records will probably be the limiting factor in any case. I'd use a good pre-amp with your TB SC, which already has superior performance to any vinyl record available. (except over 24 kHz maybe, but you are going to CD right?) Use any extra money for a top notch cartridge which will make *FAR* more difference than the soundcard. TonyP. |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... That was a responce to TonyP's statement. "I think you will find the software approach fine above a couple of hundred hertz, but seriously inferior below 100 Hz." Yep S/N will be inferior not frequency response. As Arny already pointed out, you lose 40 dB dynamic range going the software route, mostly at the low end. The best soundcards available have around 100dB S/N, and the best Phono pre-amps have more than 80dB. You do the math. Of course your records will probably be the limiting factor in any case. I'd use a good pre-amp with your TB SC, which already has superior performance to any vinyl record available. (except over 24 kHz maybe, but you are going to CD right?) Use any extra money for a top notch cartridge which will make *FAR* more difference than the soundcard. TonyP. |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... That was a responce to TonyP's statement. "I think you will find the software approach fine above a couple of hundred hertz, but seriously inferior below 100 Hz." Yep S/N will be inferior not frequency response. As Arny already pointed out, you lose 40 dB dynamic range going the software route, mostly at the low end. The best soundcards available have around 100dB S/N, and the best Phono pre-amps have more than 80dB. You do the math. Of course your records will probably be the limiting factor in any case. I'd use a good pre-amp with your TB SC, which already has superior performance to any vinyl record available. (except over 24 kHz maybe, but you are going to CD right?) Use any extra money for a top notch cartridge which will make *FAR* more difference than the soundcard. TonyP. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... That was a responce to TonyP's statement. "I think you will find the software approach fine above a couple of hundred hertz, but seriously inferior below 100 Hz." Yep S/N will be inferior not frequency response. As Arny already pointed out, you lose 40 dB dynamic range going the software route, mostly at the low end. The best soundcards available have around 100dB S/N, and the best Phono pre-amps have more than 80dB. You do the math. Of course your records will probably be the limiting factor in any case. I'd use a good pre-amp with your TB SC, which already has superior performance to any vinyl record available. (except over 24 kHz maybe, but you are going to CD right?) Use any extra money for a top notch cartridge which will make *FAR* more difference than the soundcard. TonyP. |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Thank you very much TonyP!
That is very helpful. The trouble with all of this is trying to decide where to spend the money where you notice the difference. JTC "TonyP" wrote in message . .. "Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... That was a responce to TonyP's statement. "I think you will find the software approach fine above a couple of hundred hertz, but seriously inferior below 100 Hz." Yep S/N will be inferior not frequency response. As Arny already pointed out, you lose 40 dB dynamic range going the software route, mostly at the low end. The best soundcards available have around 100dB S/N, and the best Phono pre-amps have more than 80dB. You do the math. Of course your records will probably be the limiting factor in any case. I'd use a good pre-amp with your TB SC, which already has superior performance to any vinyl record available. (except over 24 kHz maybe, but you are going to CD right?) Use any extra money for a top notch cartridge which will make *FAR* more difference than the soundcard. TonyP. |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Thank you very much TonyP!
That is very helpful. The trouble with all of this is trying to decide where to spend the money where you notice the difference. JTC "TonyP" wrote in message . .. "Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... That was a responce to TonyP's statement. "I think you will find the software approach fine above a couple of hundred hertz, but seriously inferior below 100 Hz." Yep S/N will be inferior not frequency response. As Arny already pointed out, you lose 40 dB dynamic range going the software route, mostly at the low end. The best soundcards available have around 100dB S/N, and the best Phono pre-amps have more than 80dB. You do the math. Of course your records will probably be the limiting factor in any case. I'd use a good pre-amp with your TB SC, which already has superior performance to any vinyl record available. (except over 24 kHz maybe, but you are going to CD right?) Use any extra money for a top notch cartridge which will make *FAR* more difference than the soundcard. TonyP. |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Thank you very much TonyP!
That is very helpful. The trouble with all of this is trying to decide where to spend the money where you notice the difference. JTC "TonyP" wrote in message . .. "Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... That was a responce to TonyP's statement. "I think you will find the software approach fine above a couple of hundred hertz, but seriously inferior below 100 Hz." Yep S/N will be inferior not frequency response. As Arny already pointed out, you lose 40 dB dynamic range going the software route, mostly at the low end. The best soundcards available have around 100dB S/N, and the best Phono pre-amps have more than 80dB. You do the math. Of course your records will probably be the limiting factor in any case. I'd use a good pre-amp with your TB SC, which already has superior performance to any vinyl record available. (except over 24 kHz maybe, but you are going to CD right?) Use any extra money for a top notch cartridge which will make *FAR* more difference than the soundcard. TonyP. |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
Thank you very much TonyP!
That is very helpful. The trouble with all of this is trying to decide where to spend the money where you notice the difference. JTC "TonyP" wrote in message . .. "Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... That was a responce to TonyP's statement. "I think you will find the software approach fine above a couple of hundred hertz, but seriously inferior below 100 Hz." Yep S/N will be inferior not frequency response. As Arny already pointed out, you lose 40 dB dynamic range going the software route, mostly at the low end. The best soundcards available have around 100dB S/N, and the best Phono pre-amps have more than 80dB. You do the math. Of course your records will probably be the limiting factor in any case. I'd use a good pre-amp with your TB SC, which already has superior performance to any vinyl record available. (except over 24 kHz maybe, but you are going to CD right?) Use any extra money for a top notch cartridge which will make *FAR* more difference than the soundcard. TonyP. |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. Close to 15 but yes, about 2 or 3 less than the Mia. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. Telarc may disagree, but even then, their 1812 on vinyl had less than that. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. And it's not hard to get very close when you can easily redo it if you are not. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. Please provide details of *ANY* TT/cartridge/pre-amp combination that will give more than 90dB with the stylus up? *VERY* few will give as much as the TB SC, and only for a few orders of magnitude more in price. As for the records, FORGET it. TonyP. |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. Close to 15 but yes, about 2 or 3 less than the Mia. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. Telarc may disagree, but even then, their 1812 on vinyl had less than that. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. And it's not hard to get very close when you can easily redo it if you are not. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. Please provide details of *ANY* TT/cartridge/pre-amp combination that will give more than 90dB with the stylus up? *VERY* few will give as much as the TB SC, and only for a few orders of magnitude more in price. As for the records, FORGET it. TonyP. |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. Close to 15 but yes, about 2 or 3 less than the Mia. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. Telarc may disagree, but even then, their 1812 on vinyl had less than that. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. And it's not hard to get very close when you can easily redo it if you are not. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. Please provide details of *ANY* TT/cartridge/pre-amp combination that will give more than 90dB with the stylus up? *VERY* few will give as much as the TB SC, and only for a few orders of magnitude more in price. As for the records, FORGET it. TonyP. |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... In contrast the TBSC has about 14 bits worth of dynamic range. Close to 15 but yes, about 2 or 3 less than the Mia. The best commercial recordings made have about 13 bits worth of dynamic range no matter which format they are distributed in. Telarc may disagree, but even then, their 1812 on vinyl had less than that. Think about this: with the santa cruz, when recording vinyl, you have to watch the meters for the peaks. At most, at full scale, you're getting 16 bits of dynamic range, but usually less because the recording level is not always at 0 db. And it's not hard to get very close when you can easily redo it if you are not. Wrong and wrong. No way does the TBSC have 16 bits worth of dynamic range. But, when you;'re recording vinyl, you don't have 16 bits worth of dynamic range either. Vinyl can't do 96 dB dynamic range. Even with the stylus off the record, you're hard pressed to have 96 dB dynamic range. Please provide details of *ANY* TT/cartridge/pre-amp combination that will give more than 90dB with the stylus up? *VERY* few will give as much as the TB SC, and only for a few orders of magnitude more in price. As for the records, FORGET it. TonyP. |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Jimmy The Clam wrote: If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...io_DMX6FIRE_So und_Card Since he already has a TBSC, I put my money on the TBSC/NAD beating, or equal to the DMX6. Extra cost $129 Vs $222. Both the above implementations will require better level settings than the Mia/NAD combination by a few dB. TonyP. |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Jimmy The Clam wrote: If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...io_DMX6FIRE_So und_Card Since he already has a TBSC, I put my money on the TBSC/NAD beating, or equal to the DMX6. Extra cost $129 Vs $222. Both the above implementations will require better level settings than the Mia/NAD combination by a few dB. TonyP. |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Jimmy The Clam wrote: If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...io_DMX6FIRE_So und_Card Since he already has a TBSC, I put my money on the TBSC/NAD beating, or equal to the DMX6. Extra cost $129 Vs $222. Both the above implementations will require better level settings than the Mia/NAD combination by a few dB. TonyP. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... Jimmy The Clam wrote: If I pare up a MiaMIDI (I was thinking that the older non-MIDI Mias were not true 24bit) with an NAD PP-2 do you think the results would be the same or better (or worse) than the DMX 6Fire? Both options are about the same price. http://www.nadelectronics.com/hifi_a...p2_framset.htm $129 per http://www.yawaonline.com/nadpp1phonpr.html http://www.echoaudio.com/Products/MiaMIDI/index.php $179 http://www.cdbm.com/shop/detail.cgi?id=100230 Total: $308 DMX 6fire $222.04 per http://www.epinions.com/pr-TerraTec_...io_DMX6FIRE_So und_Card Since he already has a TBSC, I put my money on the TBSC/NAD beating, or equal to the DMX6. Extra cost $129 Vs $222. Both the above implementations will require better level settings than the Mia/NAD combination by a few dB. TonyP. |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... When I say they are the same price, I mean I can get them for about the same price. While I apperciate your throughness Arny, I can buy the DMX6 all day long on EBay for $199 and the PP-2 for $99 and the MiaMIDI for between $75 and $100. So, now that we are back to the solutions being about the same price, any thoughts between the two? Yep, if YOUR cost is the same, then it's a no brainer. TonyP. |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... When I say they are the same price, I mean I can get them for about the same price. While I apperciate your throughness Arny, I can buy the DMX6 all day long on EBay for $199 and the PP-2 for $99 and the MiaMIDI for between $75 and $100. So, now that we are back to the solutions being about the same price, any thoughts between the two? Yep, if YOUR cost is the same, then it's a no brainer. TonyP. |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Echo Mia-MIDI with a Phono PreAmp or TerraTec DMX 6FIRE 24/96 With Software RIAA?
"Jimmy The Clam" wrote in message ... When I say they are the same price, I mean I can get them for about the same price. While I apperciate your throughness Arny, I can buy the DMX6 all day long on EBay for $199 and the PP-2 for $99 and the MiaMIDI for between $75 and $100. So, now that we are back to the solutions being about the same price, any thoughts between the two? Yep, if YOUR cost is the same, then it's a no brainer. TonyP. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Terratec DMX 6Fi best card for both making music + playing games?! | Pro Audio | |||
WTB: PHONO PREAMP MM/MC; MOVING COIL; PHONO PREAMP OR PRE PREAMP) | Marketplace |