[Nono]

I recently purchased an used Waves L2 hardware limiter, which I
haven't received yet, and I'm wondering if the A-D converters of the
L2 are better than those on my DA-30 mkII DAT recorder.
Should that be the case, then I would go from the L2 to the Da-30 mkII
in the digital domain.
Thanks in advance for your reply.

[Laurence Payne]

On 28 Apr 2007 09:30:26 -0700, Nono wrote:

I recently purchased an used Waves L2 hardware limiter, which I
haven't received yet, and I'm wondering if the A-D converters of the
L2 are better than those on my DA-30 mkII DAT recorder.
Should that be the case, then I would go from the L2 to the Da-30 mkII
in the digital domain.
Thanks in advance for your reply.

When it arrives, try. If one sounds better than the other, use it.

[Scott Dorsey]

Nono wrote:
I recently purchased an used Waves L2 hardware limiter, which I
haven't received yet, and I'm wondering if the A-D converters of the
L2 are better than those on my DA-30 mkII DAT recorder.

Yes.

Should that be the case, then I would go from the L2 to the Da-30 mkII
in the digital domain.
Thanks in advance for your reply.

Listen for yourself. Don't listen to us. And make sure you set the
dither on the L2 properly so it produces a 16-bit output... if you
give a 20 bit output to the D-30 it will just truncate it.

But the DA-30 converters... they aren't very good... better than the
SV3700.... but not very good... I mean, they're really bad.

Be sure to use an external D/A for playback as well.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers]

On Apr 28, 12:30 pm, Nono wrote:
I recently purchased an used Waves L2 hardware limiter, which I
haven't received yet, and I'm wondering if the A-D converters of the
L2 are better than those on my DA-30 mkII DAT recorder.

Why not wait until it arrives and try it yourself? At the time that
the L2 came out, it was praised for its high quality converters, while
the DA-30 was just a serviceable DAT recorder. So I would expect that
at least in theory the L2 should do a better job than the analog input
of the DA-30, but there may not be enough difference to worry about.

I know that you're probably tempted to put it in the front end anyway
to use it as a limiter so you won't overload. This may be more
important with a 16-bit system than a DAT than a modern 24-bit system,
but be careful not to overuse it. You can't un-limit once the
recording is made.

[Nono]

Thanks Scott and Mike for your feedback and for taking my question
seriously.
Of course I'll try it out for myself, but one also learn a lot by
listening to more experienced folks like you.

Normally I do not listen to my mixes through the post tape returns
from the DAT, but directly through the master mix.
Only occasionally I playback a song from DAT, so I don't use the DA
very much.
Still, better yet affordable DA convertors are now next on my wish
list.
Any suggestions Scott?

[Scott Dorsey]

Nono wrote:
Normally I do not listen to my mixes through the post tape returns
from the DAT, but directly through the master mix.
Only occasionally I playback a song from DAT, so I don't use the DA
very much.
Still, better yet affordable DA convertors are now next on my wish
list.
Any suggestions Scott?

Benchmark makes a good one.

To be honest, the $400 one that Monster Cable was selling for a couple
years is actually pretty good, and they show up used for next to nothing
now. You can do better, but I think you'll be amazed at how much of a
step up it is from the ones in the box.

Because of the whole 96 ksamp/sec thing, there is a huge glut of expensive
audiophile converters on the used market that can only handle lower rates.
These are fine for DAT machines and can be picked up for pennies on the
dollar.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers]

On Apr 28, 3:43 pm, Nono wrote:

Normally I do not listen to my mixes through the post tape returns
from the DAT, but directly through the master mix.
Only occasionally I playback a song from DAT

Well, you probably should, if for no other reason than to be sure that
all the sound stuck to the tape. ADAT is one of those formats that
doesn't have any right to work as well as it does, but it depends on
cleanliness and good mechanical and electrical alignment (just as any
tape-based system) to not suffer from dropouts.

Still, better yet affordable DA convertors are now next on my wish
list.

Well, there are only a few that are better than what's built in, but
they're almost certainly going to be noticeably better. Benchmark is
kind of the name on everyone's fingertips, and Lavry makes one that's
similar in functions, features, and price, but with some different
design principles used in the converter. There's about a grand, maybe
a little less.

The nice thing about having a "master" (in the sense of primary, not
CD mastering) D/A converter is that you can listen to anything digital
in the house through the same converter. That way you don't have to
worry about differences between the D/A converter in your CD player,
your DAT, your DAW, etc.

[Nono]

Thanks again guys,
I'm like a sponge here.
Best regards.

[hank alrich]

Nono wrote:

I recently purchased an used Waves L2 hardware limiter, which I
haven't received yet, and I'm wondering if the A-D converters of the
L2 are better than those on my DA-30 mkII DAT recorder.
Should that be the case, then I would go from the L2 to the Da-30 mkII
in the digital domain.
Thanks in advance for your reply.

The L2's convertors are, IMO, several orders of magnitude better than
those in the DA-30. Definitely use it for ADC into the DA-30.

Heck, I think the Symetrix 620AD is much better than the DA-30.

--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Nono wrote:
Normally I do not listen to my mixes through the post tape returns
from the DAT, but directly through the master mix.
Only occasionally I playback a song from DAT, so I don't use the DA
very much.
Still, better yet affordable DA convertors are now next on my wish
list.
Any suggestions Scott?

Benchmark makes a good one.

To be honest, the $400 one that Monster Cable was selling for a couple
years is actually pretty good, and they show up used for next to nothing
now. You can do better, but I think you'll be amazed at how much of a
step up it is from the ones in the box.

The DAC in the L2 is better than that that of the DA-30.

Because of the whole 96 ksamp/sec thing, there is a huge glut of expensive
audiophile converters on the used market that can only handle lower rates.
These are fine for DAT machines and can be picked up for pennies on the
dollar.
--scott

He could just start by making the L2 the analog interface for his DAT
deck.

--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam

[Scott Fraser]

Heck, I think the Symetrix 620AD is much better than the DA-30.

Heck, I do too, & since I don't use either one anymore I have a
Symetrix 620AD available for sale to anyone who would like to prove to
themselves how much better it is.

Scott Fraser

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich wrote:

The L2's convertors are, IMO, several orders of magnitude better than
those in the DA-30. Definitely use it for ADC into the DA-30.

Heck, I think the Symetrix 620AD is much better than the DA-30.

The 620AD isn't bad at all if you are careful to feed it with a balanced
source. I'm surprised at how well it holds up against newer converters.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Nono]

He could just start by making the L2 the analog interface for his DAT
deck.

I think that's what I'm going to do while looking for a decent D/A
converter as recommended.

Benchmark makes a good one.

So far I've encountered the Benchmark DAC-1; is this the right one?

Regards.

[david correia]

I'm a fan of the A/D of the L2. It will stomp the crap out of any Dat
deck.




David Correia
www.Celebrationsound.com