[davey]

Hi.

I've been looking into getting the Lynx Aurora 8 Channel AD-DA for my
Mac. It would be a huge upgrade from my Lexicon Omega obviously. I
am trying to make great acoustic guitar and vocal recordings, with
occassional electric bass, drum overdubs and Midi ins. For mic pre's
I have a 2 - channel FMR RNP, a Blue Mousse, and a Beyerdynamic Ribbon
mic. My main question is: If I put $2000 into my converters, will the
RNP sound tons better (assuming the performance is good : ) , or
should I be thinking about upgrading the Mic Pre's first? I'm using
Cubase LE now, but will be using Logic Studio soon.

Thanks!

David

[Peter Larsen[_2_]]

davey wrote:

I've been looking into getting the Lynx Aurora 8 Channel AD-DA for my
Mac. It would be a huge upgrade from my Lexicon Omega obviously.

Taking your word as fact, don't know the device, can't comment on its
properties. But read on ...

I am trying to make great acoustic guitar and vocal recordings,

You then need great microphones.

with occassional electric bass, drum overdubs and Midi ins.

OK.

For mic pre's I have a 2 - channel FMR RNP

From recent traffic it is one of the better choices and a highly
cost-efficient one.

a Blue Mousse,

You must mean Blue Mouse? - seems to me to be a specialist mic, rather than
a GP mic.

and a Beyerdynamic Ribbon mic.

Can't comment on it, the actual model might matter to those that can.

My main question is: If I put $2000 into my converters, will the
RNP sound tons better (assuming the performance is good : )

To evaluate the RNP: apply signal at input, listen to output. Converter does
not apply in that evaluation nor does it change it.

should I be thinking about upgrading the Mic Pre's first?

The limiting factor is almost always the transducers. I do not understand
your recording concept, I would want an ambience pair in case I should put
the ribbon on the guitar and the mouse on vox. I would definitely want to
have a good pair for a drumkit, some of the time + a kick drum suitable mic.

I'm using Cubase LE now, but will be using Logic Studio soon.

I don't subscribe to the notion that different software sounds identical, to
me different software gives differently sounding results. So this probably
matters.

As for your question, it gets to be one of sequence ... good pair, two more
mic pre channels, more conversion channels. You can't really benefit from
the pair without having more converter channels and there is some wisdom in
having more of the same mic pre, so yes .... I think you should have started
with getting a good pair first and learning to record stereo with it rather
than starting with panpot mono, but in the context of the strategy and as
long term choice you might as well get aa good 8 channel converter now.

As for whether the suggested one is the best choice and the most efficient
use of your money ... I just don't know, all I know about Lynx is that it
gets mentioned in a positive way around here occasionally. The choice of
adding conversion channels now seems proper. Can you listen to the lynx and
an alternative choice? - as seen from a long term perspective a poor quality
converter could be a quality bottleneck.

David


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Laurence Payne]

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 23:54:19 -0800 (PST), davey
wrote:

Hi.

I've been looking into getting the Lynx Aurora 8 Channel AD-DA for my
Mac. It would be a huge upgrade from my Lexicon Omega obviously.

It will certainly be a lot more expensive!

I
am trying to make great acoustic guitar and vocal recordings, with
occassional electric bass, drum overdubs and Midi ins. For mic pre's
I have a 2 - channel FMR RNP, a Blue Mousse, and a Beyerdynamic Ribbon
mic. My main question is: If I put $2000 into my converters, will the
RNP sound tons better (assuming the performance is good : ) , or
should I be thinking about upgrading the Mic Pre's first? I'm using
Cubase LE now, but will be using Logic Studio soon.

The Lexicon may well do a perfectly competent job of taking a LIne In
and digitising it. If you've got $2000 burning a hole in your pocket
you might find the Lynx makes a slight audible difference. A
different preamp would make more difference. A wider choice of
microphones much more again.

Note I said "difference" not "improvement". What do you feel is
lacking in your present recordings?

[Mike Rivers]

On Dec 29, 2:54 am, davey wrote:
Hi.

I've been looking into getting the Lynx Aurora 8 Channel AD-DA for my
Mac. For mic pre's
I have a 2 - channel FMR RNP, a Blue Mousse, and a Beyerdynamic Ribbon
mic. My main question is: If I put $2000 into my converters, will the
RNP sound tons better (assuming the performance is good : )

Nothing ever makes "tons" of difference unless you're replacing
something broken with something that works correctly. I believe that
things should be pretty well matched in quality and applicability all
along the line - mics, preamps, converters, monitors, and room
acoustics. Upgrading one thing will rarely make a huge difference
other than in your pride or bank balance.

While I expect that you may not be able to afford a major upgrade (or
even a batch of minor upgrades) in one shot, you shouldn't expect that
any signle upgrade will make a lot of difference immediately. But you
have to start somewhere. That being said, you might get more bang for
your buck by getting a different mic or two. Get yourself a Schoeps,
high grade Sennheiser, DPA or Neumann mic. And maybe a new set of
guitar strings.

[Ethan Winer]

David,

I've been looking into getting the Lynx Aurora 8 Channel AD-DA for my Mac.
It would be a huge upgrade from my Lexicon Omega obviously.

Why do you believe that? Because the Lynx costs more? Here's a tip I hope
you'll pay attention to:

Most gear these days is audibly transparent regardless of price, unless it's
designed specifically to add color. In my experience, swapping out one
perfectly competent sound card or mic pre etc for another offers little if
any benefit. The weakest link in every audio setup is the loudspeakers and
the room(s) you record and mix in. Speakers are never flat, and they all
have relatively high distortion compared to gear. Rooms vary as much as 30
dB or even more - this is not only common but typical.

If your goal is to improve the quality of your productions, THAT is where
you should be looking.

--Ethan

[Richard Crowley]

"Ethan Winer" wrote ...
Most gear these days is audibly transparent regardless of price,
unless it's designed specifically to add color. In my experience,
swapping out one perfectly competent sound card or mic pre etc for
another offers little if any benefit. The weakest link in every audio
setup is the loudspeakers

Don't forget the transducers at the other end of the chain,
the microphone(s). IMHO, you'd get MUCH more audible
difference with a few more mics than with any change in
the electronics.

[Sean Conolly]

"Richard Crowley" wrote in message
...
"Ethan Winer" wrote ...
Most gear these days is audibly transparent regardless of price, unless
it's designed specifically to add color. In my experience, swapping out
one perfectly competent sound card or mic pre etc for another offers
little if any benefit. The weakest link in every audio setup is the
loudspeakers

Don't forget the transducers at the other end of the chain,
the microphone(s). IMHO, you'd get MUCH more audible
difference with a few more mics than with any change in
the electronics.

But to second what Ethan said, improving the recording environment has the
biggest improvement on the recording quality, followed by mics, preamps, and
then converters. I know I've also lusted after the Lynx, but realistically
it seems that the money would be better spent in other areas.

Sean

[Richard Crowley]

"Sean Conolly" wrote ...
"Richard Crowley" wrote in...
"Ethan Winer" wrote ...
Most gear these days is audibly transparent regardless of price,
unless it's designed specifically to add color. In my experience,
swapping out one perfectly competent sound card or mic pre etc for
another offers little if any benefit. The weakest link in every
audio setup is the loudspeakers

Don't forget the transducers at the other end of the chain,
the microphone(s). IMHO, you'd get MUCH more audible
difference with a few more mics than with any change in
the electronics.

But to second what Ethan said, improving the recording environment has
the biggest improvement on the recording quality,

I fully appreciate that Mr. Winer has been concentrating on
acoustic treatment professionally for a long time, so I would
expect no less than his having a strong opinion about that. :-)

followed by mics,

Maybe. But one could observe that a telephone doesn't
sound any better in an acoustically perfect room. As someone
who does all his recording on location, I rarely have the
luxury of doing anything about the acoustics, so I find that
having a selection of microphones is of greatest benefit.
And perhaps equally as imporant as having a diverse mic
closet is having the time and freedom to place the mics in
the optimal position for the situation (performers and their
acoustic space). Of course, this is frequently limited in
live performance situations (vs. location recording sessions)

I know I've also lusted after the Lynx, but realistically it seems
that the money would be better spent in other areas.

Long-standing consensus from reading this newsgroup seems
to agree that the transducers (mics & speakers) can make far
bigger bang-for-the-buck differences than electronics. Where
you put ambience and acoustics in that hierarchy depends on
many things specific to your situation.

[davey]

On Dec 29, 10:07*am, "Richard Crowley" wrote:
"Sean Conolly" *wrote ...

"Richard Crowley" *wrote in...
"Ethan Winer" *wrote ...
Most gear these days is audibly transparent regardless of price,
unless it's designed specifically to add color. In my experience,
swapping out one perfectly competent sound card or mic pre etc for
another offers little if any benefit. The weakest link in every
audio setup is the loudspeakers

Don't forget the transducers at the other end of the chain,
the microphone(s). *IMHO, you'd get MUCH more audible
difference with a few more mics than with any change in
the electronics.

But to second what Ethan said, improving the recording environment has
the biggest improvement on the recording quality,

I fully appreciate that Mr. Winer has been concentrating on
acoustic treatment professionally for a long time, so I would
expect no less than his having a strong opinion about that. *:-)

followed by mics,

Maybe. But one could observe that a telephone doesn't
sound any better in an acoustically perfect room. *As someone
who does all his recording on location, I rarely have the
luxury of doing anything about the acoustics, so I find that
having a selection of microphones is of greatest benefit.
And perhaps equally as imporant as having a diverse mic
closet is having the time and freedom to place the mics in
the optimal position for the situation (performers and their
acoustic space). *Of course, this is frequently limited in
live performance situations (vs. location recording sessions)

I know I've also lusted after the Lynx, but realistically it seems
that the money would be better spent in other areas.

Long-standing consensus from reading this newsgroup seems
to agree that the transducers (mics & speakers) can make far
bigger bang-for-the-buck differences than electronics. Where
you put ambience and acoustics in that hierarchy depends on
many things specific to your situation.


Thank you for your suggestions everyone...

David

[Ethan Winer]

Richard,

I fully appreciate that Mr. Winer has been concentrating on
acoustic treatment professionally for a long time, so I would
expect no less than his having a strong opinion about that. :-)

No kidding. But to be perfectly clear, I sell acoustic treatment because I
believe in it - not the other way around! :-)

Even though I'm in the biz, I still maintain my Acoustics FAQ with its DIY
advice, and I still help people whether thay plan to buy treatment from me
or not. I'd much rather someone DIY or even buy from a competitor than go
without. That's how strongly I feel about this.

--Ethan

[Fran Guidry]

On Dec 30, 8:15 am, "Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com
wrote:
Richard,

I fully appreciate that Mr. Winer has been concentrating on
acoustic treatment professionally for a long time, so I would
expect no less than his having a strong opinion about that. :-)

No kidding. But to be perfectly clear, I sell acoustic treatment because I
believe in it - not the other way around! :-)

Even though I'm in the biz, I still maintain my Acoustics FAQ with its DIY
advice, and I still help people whether thay plan to buy treatment from me
or not. I'd much rather someone DIY or even buy from a competitor than go
without. That's how strongly I feel about this.

--Ethan

And you also call "bull****" every now and then on some of the more
absurd anti-technical "technical" discussions at various groups/forums/
boards. I sure do 'preciate it.

And in my experience, recording in my little space, the $200 I spent
on OC703 following Ethan's free advice made a _lot_ more difference in
my recordings than the multiple kilobucks I spent on converters,
preamps, and yes, mics.

Fran

[Richard Crowley]

"Fran Guidry" wrote ...
And in my experience, recording in my little space, the $200 I spent
on OC703 following Ethan's free advice made a _lot_ more difference in
my recordings than the multiple kilobucks I spent on converters,
preamps, and yes, mics.

Indeed. There is no question that some situations need acoustic
help more than better (or different) microphones (or any other
part of the signal chain). But I was trying to make the point that
one should work on the more audible problems before going
after the less (or non-) audible ones. In some cases, that will
certainly be acoustics, in others it will be mics, in others it may
be preamps or converters, etc. But regardless of acoustics,
you will virtually always bet more audible difference from
microphones than you will from ADC.

[Richard Crowley]

"Ethan Winer" wrote...
Richard,

I fully appreciate that Mr. Winer has been concentrating on
acoustic treatment professionally for a long time, so I would
expect no less than his having a strong opinion about that. :-)

No kidding. But to be perfectly clear, I sell acoustic treatment
because I believe in it - not the other way around! :-)

My apologies if I seemed to imply otherwise.

Even though I'm in the biz, I still maintain my Acoustics FAQ with its
DIY advice, and I still help people whether thay plan to buy treatment
from me or not. I'd much rather someone DIY or even buy from a
competitor than go without. That's how strongly I feel about this.

And you have my (our) respect for that. Thank you.

I was speaking from my perspective in doing exclusively
location recording where I can frequently deal with an
acoustical situation with microphone selection and location
(and sometimes post-production adjustments & effects).
But OTOH, I'm not sure you can improve a lousy mic
by correcting the acoustics in your recording space, at
least to an equivelent degree.

I will revise my summary of the perceived consensus here
that transducers AND ACOUSTICS make far more audible
difference in recorded sound than electronics does.

[Greg Boboski]

No one likes to be told that maybe they just have to play better or
that they can save money by not buying into the ad hype , so true
you can make some diffussors yourself and i don't think Ethan sells
speakers , and then there is always practice

But if you simply need more inputs , then a little more research & shopping
may save you some money .

I once worked for a studio that did well , pasrtially becuase they would
NEVER upgrade
just because it was better , but WOULD spend money on gear if it would bring
in more
revenue , there's a business model





"Ethan Winer" ethanw at ethanwiner dot com wrote in message
...
Richard,

I fully appreciate that Mr. Winer has been concentrating on
acoustic treatment professionally for a long time, so I would
expect no less than his having a strong opinion about that. :-)

No kidding. But to be perfectly clear, I sell acoustic treatment because I
believe in it - not the other way around! :-)

Even though I'm in the biz, I still maintain my Acoustics FAQ with its DIY
advice, and I still help people whether thay plan to buy treatment from me
or not. I'd much rather someone DIY or even buy from a competitor than go
without. That's how strongly I feel about this.

--Ethan

[Ethan Winer]

Richard,

I'm not sure you can improve a lousy mic by correcting the acoustics in
your recording space, at least to an equivelent degree.

There was a fabulous quote a few years ago in Mix magazine by Leslie Ann
Jones, chief engineer for Skywalker sound. I don't recall the exact words,
but they were close to this:

I can get a good recording using pretty much any microphone,
dynamic or condenser. It's all in the room and the players.

I don't disagree that microphones matter! And I agree that a directional
microphone can help to reduce the influence of bad acoustics.

--Ethan

[Richard Crowley]

"Ethan Winer" wrote...
There was a fabulous quote a few years ago in Mix magazine by Leslie
Ann Jones, chief engineer for Skywalker sound. I don't recall the
exact words, but they were close to this:

I can get a good recording using pretty much any microphone,
dynamic or condenser. It's all in the room and the players.

I don't disagree that microphones matter! And I agree that a
directional microphone can help to reduce the influence of bad
acoustics.

I suspect that "pretty much any microphone" has a different meaning
at Skywalker Sound than it does in the Real World. :-))

[Mike Rivers]

On Dec 31, 1:30 pm, "Richard Crowley" wrote:

I suspect that "pretty much any microphone" has a different meaning
at Skywalker Sound than it does in the Real World. :-))

Oh, I dunno. There have been many experiments over the years where
people have made perfectly acceptable recordings using only SM57s
(including one in which I participated). Not to say that it might not
have been better with other microphones, but it was good enough to
fool most of the people all of the time (speaking of great quotes,
almost).

Let's face it. The average listener doesn't ask what mics were used
before he drops his $0.99 for an MP3 download.