Sound Samples for DAW mic preamps? Where to find?

[DanielleOM]

I thought it would be easy to find sound samples on line for the
Focusrite Scarlett and Steinberg UR series DAW interface preamps.

Anyone know where I can find these?


Danielle

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

DanielleOM wrote:
>
> I thought it would be easy to find sound samples on line for the
> Focusrite Scarlett and Steinberg UR series DAW interface preamps.
>
> Anyone know where I can find these?
>
>
> Danielle
>
>
>

I did a 1KHz loopback test once with a Scarlett and it had two small
harmonic peaks very close to the noise floor. The noise itself was
ruler flat. You'd expect that because it's low-hanging fruit.

I'll try later to reproduce this and post a link to a picture.

Expect the usual Guitar Center class mic preamp performance. These
are not the legendary Focusrite electronics but I can't hear them
beyond that they're a little better than the ADA8000 for some things.
I doubt I could do a double-blind test and identify each.

There's nothing top keep you from using outboard preamps for critical
stuff and these for less critical stuff. It's the price of a television
set.

Or get a Cranesong Spider and hook it in ADAT :)

--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Les Cargill wrote:
> DanielleOM wrote:
>>
>> I thought it would be easy to find sound samples on line for the
>> Focusrite Scarlett and Steinberg UR series DAW interface preamps.
>>
>> Anyone know where I can find these?
>>
>>
>> Danielle
>>
>>
>>
>
> I did a 1KHz loopback test once with a Scarlett and it had two small
> harmonic peaks very close to the noise floor. The noise itself was
> ruler flat. You'd expect that because it's low-hanging fruit.
>
> I'll try later to reproduce this and post a link to a picture.
>

This is not exactly what you're looking for, but ....

It's a distortion estimate based on a 1/4" guitar cable from an output
to an input.

Here's CoolEdit's view of a 1000 KHz tone it generated:
http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/lcargill/screenshots/Before_zps4b842177.jpg

And here's the same tone after a trip through the Scarlett
http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/lcargill/screenshots/After_zps702d8604.jpg

I am pretty sure most of the error is me setting gains a wee bit off
plus added noise. I got pretty close.

If you put therm in adjacent tabs in a browser you can switch back and
forth.

We're well into -100 dB territory except for what I presume is 60 cycle
noise.

I have yet to get 96K working with everything - I use
old software for various reasons. My dominant work mode is 44.1 . I
imagine ( but can't prove ) that 96K would be even better.




> Expect the usual Guitar Center class mic preamp performance. These
> are not the legendary Focusrite electronics but I can't hear them
> beyond that they're a little better than the ADA8000 for some things.
> I doubt I could do a double-blind test and identify each.
>
> There's nothing top keep you from using outboard preamps for critical
> stuff and these for less critical stuff. It's the price of a television
> set.
>
> Or get a Cranesong Spider and hook it in ADAT :)
>

--
Les Cargill

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 5/24/2014 9:35 AM, DanielleOM wrote:

> I thought it would be easy to find sound samples on line for the
> Focusrite Scarlett and Steinberg UR series DAW interface preamps.
>
> Anyone know where I can find these?

There are likely to be some demo recordings on the manufacturers' web
pages, but honestly, what can you really tell from something like that?
It would probably be an MP3 file or a YouTube video and you'd be
listening to an unknown source through unspecified mics on your computer
speakers.

Why don't you just buy something that has a suitable number of inputs
and outputs for your needs, and the appropriate computer connection.
Don't buy the cheapest, give yourself a little more respect than that.
Try it out with a couple of typical projects. If you don't like it,
return it and try something else with about the same I/O capabilities,
from a different manufacturer, that costs twice as much.

I'll bet that your first choice will be fine.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Sean Conolly]

"Les Cargill" > wrote in message
...
> Les Cargill wrote:
>> DanielleOM wrote:
>>>
>>> I thought it would be easy to find sound samples on line for the
>>> Focusrite Scarlett and Steinberg UR series DAW interface preamps.
>>>
>>> Anyone know where I can find these?
>>>
>>>
>>> Danielle
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I did a 1KHz loopback test once with a Scarlett and it had two small
>> harmonic peaks very close to the noise floor. The noise itself was
>> ruler flat. You'd expect that because it's low-hanging fruit.
>>
>> I'll try later to reproduce this and post a link to a picture.
>>
>
> This is not exactly what you're looking for, but ....
>
> It's a distortion estimate based on a 1/4" guitar cable from an output
> to an input.
>
> Here's CoolEdit's view of a 1000 KHz tone it generated:
> http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/lcargill/screenshots/Before_zps4b842177.jpg
>
> And here's the same tone after a trip through the Scarlett
> http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/lcargill/screenshots/After_zps702d8604.jpg
>
> I am pretty sure most of the error is me setting gains a wee bit off
> plus added noise. I got pretty close.
>
> If you put therm in adjacent tabs in a browser you can switch back and
> forth.
>
> We're well into -100 dB territory except for what I presume is 60 cycle
> noise.

Well -100 is inaudible. Reduce the signal by 40 dB and the remaining -60 dB
noise floor is still pretty well inaudible in most listening situations.

It would be interesting to do the same test via a mic input. Some mic/line
inputs like my Crest use the same preamp stage for both mic and line
inputs - they simply pad the line level down to mic level. The noise floor
you're seeing could be resistor noise on the line input.

> I have yet to get 96K working with everything - I use
> old software for various reasons. My dominant work mode is 44.1 . I
> imagine ( but can't prove ) that 96K would be even better.

I refuse to record at frequencies above the range of most speakers, if not
most ears. Not to mention that every distribution method available to me
will low pass the signal anyway.

But I do use the higher rates when I'm running tests on gear - especially my
own circuits.

Sean

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Sean Conolly wrote:
> "Les Cargill" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Les Cargill wrote:
>>> DanielleOM wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I thought it would be easy to find sound samples on line for the
>>>> Focusrite Scarlett and Steinberg UR series DAW interface preamps.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone know where I can find these?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Danielle
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I did a 1KHz loopback test once with a Scarlett and it had two small
>>> harmonic peaks very close to the noise floor. The noise itself was
>>> ruler flat. You'd expect that because it's low-hanging fruit.
>>>
>>> I'll try later to reproduce this and post a link to a picture.
>>>
>>
>> This is not exactly what you're looking for, but ....
>>
>> It's a distortion estimate based on a 1/4" guitar cable from an output
>> to an input.
>>
>> Here's CoolEdit's view of a 1000 KHz tone it generated:
>> http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/lcargill/screenshots/Before_zps4b842177.jpg
>>
>> And here's the same tone after a trip through the Scarlett
>> http://i1000.photobucket.com/albums/af129/lcargill/screenshots/After_zps702d8604.jpg
>>
>> I am pretty sure most of the error is me setting gains a wee bit off
>> plus added noise. I got pretty close.
>>
>> If you put therm in adjacent tabs in a browser you can switch back and
>> forth.
>>
>> We're well into -100 dB territory except for what I presume is 60 cycle
>> noise.
>
> Well -100 is inaudible. Reduce the signal by 40 dB and the remaining -60 dB
> noise floor is still pretty well inaudible in most listening situations.
>
> It would be interesting to do the same test via a mic input.

It would be. But the outputs are all 1/4" line level and adding a DI box
means you're testing the D.I. box. That's worse. Especially with the
only D.I. box I have handy.

Since these are bi-modal (CombiXLR) inputs ( meaning it's the same basic
input but with XLR and 1/4" connectors and some sort of switching) I
figure this is about as good as it gets.

Update: I actually went and looked at the spec sheet; turns out these
are 1/4" TRS, so if I had the proper cabling I could maybe make
something work - although I remain unsure of any impedance matching
issues. I figure the XLR are still voltage coupled, so it should be fine
but I'd rather have a good setup.

This is not intended to be a defensible test; it's just a rough order of
magnitude thing. I don't work for Focusrite and do not intent to
represent this as a serious test - again, just a rough guess sort of thing.


> Some mic/line
> inputs like my Crest use the same preamp stage for both mic and line
> inputs - they simply pad the line level down to mic level. The noise floor
> you're seeing could be resistor noise on the line input.
>

Easily. It's still pretty minimal.

>> I have yet to get 96K working with everything - I use
>> old software for various reasons. My dominant work mode is 44.1 . I
>> imagine ( but can't prove ) that 96K would be even better.
>
> I refuse to record at frequencies above the range of most speakers, if not
> most ears. Not to mention that every distribution method available to me
> will low pass the signal anyway.
>

Yep.

> But I do use the higher rates when I'm running tests on gear - especially my
> own circuits.
>

I am sure it can be done, but every time I've tried it, I end up not
using 96k. I should try that with Reaper. Maybe later; not now. The
problem is that when I change sample rate on various things, other
things latch up and it gets pretty onerous.


> Sean
>
>

--
Les Cargill

[DanielleOM]

On 5/24/2014 3:11 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
> DanielleOM wrote:
>>
>> I thought it would be easy to find sound samples on line for the
>> Focusrite Scarlett and Steinberg UR series DAW interface preamps.
>>
>> Anyone know where I can find these?
>>
>>
>> Danielle
>>
>>
>>
>
> I did a 1KHz loopback test once with a Scarlett and it had two small
> harmonic peaks very close to the noise floor. The noise itself was
> ruler flat. You'd expect that because it's low-hanging fruit.
>
> I'll try later to reproduce this and post a link to a picture.
>
> Expect the usual Guitar Center class mic preamp performance. These
> are not the legendary Focusrite electronics but I can't hear them
> beyond that they're a little better than the ADA8000 for some things.
> I doubt I could do a double-blind test and identify each.
>
> There's nothing top keep you from using outboard preamps for critical
> stuff and these for less critical stuff. It's the price of a television
> set.
>
> Or get a Cranesong Spider and hook it in ADAT :)
>


I see the differences in the curves and I gather there's response, slew
rate differences. Having not looked at other comparisons, I am not sure
how meaningful this is. Thanks for researching and posting.


Danielle

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

DanielleOM wrote:
> On 5/24/2014 3:11 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
>> DanielleOM wrote:
>>>
>>> I thought it would be easy to find sound samples on line for the
>>> Focusrite Scarlett and Steinberg UR series DAW interface preamps.
>>>
>>> Anyone know where I can find these?
>>>
>>>
>>> Danielle
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I did a 1KHz loopback test once with a Scarlett and it had two small
>> harmonic peaks very close to the noise floor. The noise itself was
>> ruler flat. You'd expect that because it's low-hanging fruit.
>>
>> I'll try later to reproduce this and post a link to a picture.
>>
>> Expect the usual Guitar Center class mic preamp performance. These
>> are not the legendary Focusrite electronics but I can't hear them
>> beyond that they're a little better than the ADA8000 for some things.
>> I doubt I could do a double-blind test and identify each.
>>
>> There's nothing top keep you from using outboard preamps for critical
>> stuff and these for less critical stuff. It's the price of a television
>> set.
>>
>> Or get a Cranesong Spider and hook it in ADAT :)
>>
>
>
> I see the differences in the curves and I gather there's response, slew
> rate differences.

I just see noise modulation differences and not much of that. "Slew rate
differences" are a pretty unlikely explanation; slew rate hasn't been
a serious problem in electronics for a long time now. This is
Focusrite we're talking about; they know how this stuff works.

> Having not looked at other comparisons, I am not sure
> how meaningful this is.

Nor do I. I could not defend the methodology on a bet. Just throwing it
out there.

Any difference at all is hovering around -100dB. So I'd just say this
indicates the spec sheet as published is credible - if it indicates
anything at all.

I just felt a tiny bit bad saying I'd done this test and hadn't shown
the results.

> Thanks for researching and posting.
>
>
> Danielle
>
>
>
--
Les Cargill