I was wondering if I can use external AD converter with field recorder
like the FR2 or the new Tascam with no problems.

The time code is on the recorder but the actual convertion happens on
the external convertor.
Will that give me any troubles other then the AD latency wich I know
exacly how much will be?


Best Regards

Rado Stefano wrote:
I was wondering if I can use external AD converter with field recorder
like the FR2 or the new Tascam with no problems.

If the recorder has an external digital input, the only problems you'll
have are getting the matching connections (you can't connect an optical
output to a coaxial input or vice versa) and finding the right buttons
to press.

The time code is on the recorder but the actual convertion happens on
the external convertor.
Will that give me any troubles other then the AD latency wich I know
exacly how much will be?

No, you don't know how much the latency will be (until you test it) but
it doesn't matter. A/D conversion latency will never be more than one
frame and that's as much resolution as you have with the time code.





Best Regards

Mike Rivers wrote:
Rado Stefano wrote:
I was wondering if I can use external AD converter with field recorder
like the FR2 or the new Tascam with no problems.

If the recorder has an external digital input, the only problems you'll
have are getting the matching connections (you can't connect an optical
output to a coaxial input or vice versa) and finding the right buttons
to press.

I think this is a PRO AUDIO FORUM.What kind of advice are you giving
me. I am not your 11 years old son.

The time code is on the recorder but the actual convertion happens on
the external convertor.
Will that give me any troubles other then the AD latency wich I know
exacly how much will be?

No, you don't know how much the latency will be (until you test it) but
it doesn't matter. A/D conversion latency will never be more than one
frame and that's as much resolution as you have with the time code.


YES I do Know the latency.




Best Regards

Rado Stefano wrote:

I think this is a PRO AUDIO FORUM.What kind of advice are you giving
me. I am not your 11 years old son.

Then why didn't you ask a more specific question? Some people buy one
device with an optical input and one with a coax output (or vice versa)
and want to know what else they need to connect them.

YES I do Know the latency.

Then just what is your question? And how do you know the latency? What
latency do you know? What other sources of delay are there?

You're whining like an 11 year old now. Ask what you want to know or go
back to the sandbox.

Read my first post and think about it.
I DID ASK ask a more specific question?
It was a sync question.
Go talk to somebody else about pluging RCA into Optic SPDIF/ADAT.
You are funny.
Leave my post.

Rado Stefano wrote:
Read my first post and think about it.
I DID ASK ask a more specific question?
It was a sync question.

You asked:

I was wondering if I can use external AD converter with field recorder
like the FR2 or the new Tascam with no problems.

The time code is on the recorder but the actual convertion happens on
the external convertor. Will that give me any troubles other then the AD
latency wich I know exacly how much will be?

I answered your "wondering" by reminding you that there are different
physical interfaces. Since you apparently don't already have and hadn't
already tried this setup and might have to buy something, and since I
didn't know anything about your CV, you might just not realize that
until you had an optical connector in one hand and a coax connector in
the other and wondered what to do next. That actually happens more
often than you think.

As far as your "troubles," the time code displayed on the recorder has
nothing to do with the external A/D converter other than that it's
derived from the data clock. Generally, for a single S/PDIF input, the
receiver derives word clock from the incoming data stream rather than
running on its own word clock.

There are some variations, however. Some devices always run on their
internal word clock and re-clock the incoming data stream. It's also
possible, if your external A/D converter has a word clock input and the
recorder has a word clock output, to use the recorder's word clock as a
master.

In any case, the only reason why the displayed time code would differ
from real time in playback is if the sample rate was different when
recording than when playing back. For instance, if your A/D converter
was running at 44.0 kHz instead of 44.1 kHz and you were using that as
the recorder's clock source, when you played back the recording using
the recorder's internal 44.1 kHz clock, not only would it be a little
fast and a little higher in pitch, but the displayed time code would be
running fast, and your hour would be over sooner.

As far as latency, every A/D converter has a certain amount of latency.
Sometimes it's specified and you therefore know it. Other times it is
not, and you have to test it, but it's difficult to test without
specialized test equipment. There is also some throughput latency
between the digital input of a recorder and the actual time that data
is written. That's almost never specified. You can test the total
latency of the SYSTEM without too much difficulty, but not the latency
of the individual components. Hence my assumption that you didn't
really know the latency exactly.

However, as I said, the latency is rarely greater than the resolution
of the time code display, so you'll never see it.

Now, what's your real question or perceived problem?

What is this general education?
You spend so much time to explain me how to not:
use optical in a coixial
missmuch resolution.

Why spend time explaining about latency which I already know.
By the way there is no AD or DA with only 1 frame latency.
Please Leave me alone.

Rado Stefano wrote:
Why spend time explaining about latency which I already know.
By the way there is no AD or DA with only 1 frame latency.

Huh? A frame is a 4.2 milliseconds over here in the film world. That's
a whole lot of time.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Rado Stefano wrote:
Why spend time explaining about latency which I already know.
By the way there is no AD or DA with only 1 frame latency.
Please Leave me alone.

It's in my blood. I want to help reduce stupidity in the audio field.
You still haven't asked a meaningful question though since you made an
intial post and continue to respond, you must have something on your
mind.

So, again I aske, what's your real question or problem or reservation?
Ask something that can be answered and you might get an answer. Telling
us that you already know doesn't help.

Rado Stefano wrote:
Why spend time explaining about latency which I already know.
By the way there is no AD or DA with only 1 frame latency.
Please Leave me alone.

It's in my blood. I want to help reduce stupidity in the audio field.
You still haven't asked a meaningful question though since you made an
intial post and continue to respond, you must have something on your
mind.

So, again I aske, what's your real question or problem or reservation?
Ask something that can be answered and you might get an answer. Telling
us that you already know doesn't help.

By the way, this isn't a private school. Ther eare others reading this
newsgroup who might actually get some benefit from the answers that you
seem to already know.

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message

Rado Stefano wrote:
Why spend time explaining about latency which I already
know.
By the way there is no AD or DA with only 1 frame
latency.

Huh? A frame is a 4.2 milliseconds over here in the film
world. That's a whole lot of time.

Am I missing something or is that off by a factor of about
10? I get 24 fps = 41.6 msec per frame.

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message

Rado Stefano wrote:
Why spend time explaining about latency which I already
know.
By the way there is no AD or DA with only 1 frame
latency.

Huh? A frame is a 4.2 milliseconds over here in the film
world. That's a whole lot of time.

Am I missing something or is that off by a factor of about
10? I get 24 fps = 41.6 msec per frame.

Sorry, I meant 42. 4.2 is actually not a lot of time.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

I meant sample...
It is not frame accuracy that interest me but samples.

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Sorry, I meant 42. 4.2 is actually not a lot of time.

When it comes to phase cancellation, it's plenty of time. But
typically, a
44.1 kHz A/D/A conversion chain eats up somewhere between 64 and 128
samples (in digital round numbers), which is 1.5 to 3 ms.

I do not want your answers.
I need somebody who have used FIeld recorder with external AD and a
TIMECODE input.

I do know that if using LTC to WORD converter like WIF2 I will be ok
but I want to know If there will be any problem in SPDIF in + TC in on
the same unit.

Rado Stefano wrote:
I do not want your answers.
I need somebody who have used FIeld recorder with external AD and a
TIMECODE input.

Sure, I do this with the HHB Portadat now and then.

I do know that if using LTC to WORD converter like WIF2 I will be ok
but I want to know If there will be any problem in SPDIF in + TC in on
the same unit.

Who cares? TC isn't even close to sample accurate anyway. As long as
it's within a frame, you're good to go. The latency within the old Prism
converters I'm using is still far less than a frame.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Rado Stefano wrote:
I do not want your answers.

In that case, ignore my answers. Perhaps someone else can learn from
them, however.

I do know that if using LTC to WORD converter like WIF2 I will be ok
but I want to know If there will be any problem in SPDIF in + TC in on
the same unit.

Depends on the unit and what you're doing with the time code. If you
resolve word clock to time code and feed that word clock to the A/D
converter, the S/PDIF output of the converter will vary as the time
code varies (if at all). If you set up the recorder to use the S/PDIF
input for the data clock, everything will be OK. If you feed the
resolved word clock to both the A/D converter and the recorder and set
the recorder to use the external word clock input, you'll be OK.

If, on the other hand, you use word clock resolved to time code to feed
the recorder but not the A/D converter, or vice versa, you're likely to
get clicks in your recording since the recorder's clock and the
incoming S/PDIF data will be independent and therefore are almost
assured of getting out of sync some time.

Should have started with that answer.....

Rado Stefano wrote:
Should have started with that answer.....

I would have, if I knew that was what you were trying to ask about.
When you're not communicating with someone in your own native language,
you have to be pretty careful that you give all the clues in the
language you're writing. It's easy to leave something out. This wasn't
a simple question, as I trust you recognize from the detailed answer.