[Julian]

I read a recent posts where there was discussion about black face
ADAT's and how they didn't sound so good. I assume that meant the
original model which had a black face as opposed to later models with
a gray face and the issue is converters? Please elaborate.

Julian

[Mike Rivers]

Julian wrote:
I read a recent posts where there was discussion about black face
ADAT's and how they didn't sound so good. I assume that meant the
original model which had a black face as opposed to later models with
a gray face and the issue is converters? Please elaborate.

That's bout as elaborate as it gets. The only ADAT with a better
transport was the M20, The original "blackface" model inverted the
polarity of the data written on tape and straightened it out again on
playback. This was transparent for tapes recorded and played on an
original ADAT, but if you play a "blackface" tape on a newer model, the
audio polarity will be inverted.

[Predrag Trpkov]

"Julian" wrote in message
news
I read a recent posts where there was discussion about black face
ADAT's and how they didn't sound so good. I assume that meant the
original model which had a black face as opposed to later models with
a gray face and the issue is converters? Please elaborate.

Julian


While the ADATs seemed to be a hit-and-miss affair as far as reliability
goes, the sonic issues are somewhat easier to explain.

It's true that the converters weren't exactly state-of-the-art. It was the
result of cutting corners - the ADAT was a revolution in terms of price,
first and foremost. Add to that the cheap electronics in the balancing
circuit (balanced analog I/O through the 56-pin Elco connector) and no
wonder that the most of the professional users were disappointed with the
sound compared to the big DASH and Pro Digi machines.

On the other hand, ADAT was designed for the semi-pro market. It sounded
slightly better through the unbalanced I/O due to the shorter signal path
and most of the semi-pro analogue equipment it replaced was sonically
compromised anyway.

I remember blackface ADATs sounding noticeably better than any of the
narrow-track analogue formats I had used before, from Tascam 8-track
cassette to the Fostex 1/2" 16-track machines. Even today I quite like the
recordings I did back then on a couple of ADATs and the Mackie 1604. It
wasn't until I purchased then brand new and obscenely expensive Pro Tools
III expanded TDM system in early 1995. that I learned what it really means
to sound like ****.

Predrag

[Carey Carlan]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in news:1154607455.528314.126640
@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:


Julian wrote:
I read a recent posts where there was discussion about black face
ADAT's and how they didn't sound so good. I assume that meant the
original model which had a black face as opposed to later models with
a gray face and the issue is converters? Please elaborate.

That's bout as elaborate as it gets. The only ADAT with a better
transport was the M20, The original "blackface" model inverted the
polarity of the data written on tape and straightened it out again on
playback. This was transparent for tapes recorded and played on an
original ADAT, but if you play a "blackface" tape on a newer model, the
audio polarity will be inverted.

Is this also true if recording/playing through the lightpipes?

It will soon be time to start moving all my ADAT tapes to a newer medium.
Do I have to invert everything after transfer?

[Scott Dorsey]

Carey Carlan wrote:

Is this also true if recording/playing through the lightpipes?

Yes

It will soon be time to start moving all my ADAT tapes to a newer medium.
Do I have to invert everything after transfer?

Well, were they correct polarity to begin with in the first place? And
what IS correct polarity anyway?

As long as you don't mix and match machines (so that some channels have
polarity swapped and some don't), you should be fine.
--scott


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

[Preben Friis]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
Carey Carlan wrote:

Is this also true if recording/playing through the lightpipes?

Yes

"The original ADAT inverted the analog signal before conversion to digital,
and inverted the analog signal again after conversion back from digital." -
Roger Nicols

If the above is true, then it should not invert when recording and playing
back through lightpipe, since this is purely digital. The answer is then
"No"

/Preben Friis

[Julian]

On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 16:14:47 +0200, "Predrag Trpkov"
wrote:


It wasn't until I purchased then brand new and obscenely
expensive Pro Tools
III expanded TDM system in early 1995. that I learned what it really means
to sound like ****.

Predrag

funny!

[Doc Weaver]

Predrag Trpkov wrote:
"Julian" wrote in message
news
I read a recent posts where there was discussion about black face
ADAT's and how they didn't sound so good. I assume that meant the
original model which had a black face as opposed to later models with
a gray face and the issue is converters? Please elaborate.

Julian


While the ADATs seemed to be a hit-and-miss affair as far as reliability
goes, the sonic issues are somewhat easier to explain.

It's true that the converters weren't exactly state-of-the-art. It was the
result of cutting corners - the ADAT was a revolution in terms of price,
first and foremost. Add to that the cheap electronics in the balancing
circuit (balanced analog I/O through the 56-pin Elco connector) and no
wonder that the most of the professional users were disappointed with the
sound compared to the big DASH and Pro Digi machines.

On the other hand, ADAT was designed for the semi-pro market. It sounded
slightly better through the unbalanced I/O due to the shorter signal path
and most of the semi-pro analogue equipment it replaced was sonically
compromised anyway.

I remember blackface ADATs sounding noticeably better than any of the
narrow-track analogue formats I had used before, from Tascam 8-track
cassette to the Fostex 1/2" 16-track machines. Even today I quite like the
recordings I did back then on a couple of ADATs and the Mackie 1604. It
wasn't until I purchased then brand new and obscenely expensive Pro Tools
III expanded TDM system in early 1995. that I learned what it really means
to sound like ****.

Predrag

I would respectfully have to dissagree about the ADATs comparison to
the prosumer analog units. I hated the ADAT sound and fought having to
buy them. The only problem was that I was so isolated that I couldn't
trade tapes with any other studios, and had to buy them. I still have
one TASCAM 238 and one ADAT XT, and if I had to go back in time I would
grab the TASCAM first.

I never owned a blackface, but I do remember some people claiming they
had a better sound. That doesn't make sense to me, but I really can't
comment being that I never used one.

One Man's Opinion,
Doc Weaver

[Predrag Trpkov]

"Doc Weaver" wrote in message
oups.com...

Predrag Trpkov wrote:

I remember blackface ADATs sounding noticeably better than any of the
narrow-track analogue formats I had used before, from Tascam 8-track
cassette to the Fostex 1/2" 16-track machines. Even today I quite like
the
recordings I did back then on a couple of ADATs and the Mackie 1604. It
wasn't until I purchased then brand new and obscenely expensive Pro
Tools
III expanded TDM system in early 1995. that I learned what it really
means
to sound like ****.

Predrag

I would respectfully have to dissagree about the ADATs comparison to
the prosumer analog units. I hated the ADAT sound and fought having to
buy them. The only problem was that I was so isolated that I couldn't
trade tapes with any other studios, and had to buy them. I still have
one TASCAM 238 and one ADAT XT, and if I had to go back in time I would
grab the TASCAM first.


I liked the 8-track cassette for various reasons and owned the Tascam 688,
238 and 238S, one after the other. At one point around 1993. I had both the
Tascam 238S and blackface ADAT, synchronized when necessary via a Tascam
transport synchronizer. I had one hourly rate for the 238S, another for the
ADAT and yet another for both of them together (14 tracks!). However, I
remember clearly how thin and weak drums sounded coming off cassette tape,
compared to what was coming off the ADAT. Of course, YMMV.


I never owned a blackface, but I do remember some people claiming they
had a better sound. That doesn't make sense to me, but I really can't
comment being that I never used one.


The XT had better converters.

In a rather comprehensive D/A converter shootout organized by Studio Sound
magazine back in mid-90s, involving a top U.K. studio, a panel of golden
ears from different segments of the industry and double-blind testing
procedure, the ADAT XT, surprisingly enough, ended up as the overall winner.
Most of the participants found it sounding as good or better than other
digital recorders of the era, including Sony 3348.

Predrag

[Predrag Trpkov]

"Thomas Thiele" wrote in message
oups.com...
Julian schrieb:

I read a recent posts where there was discussion about black face
ADAT's and how they didn't sound so good. I assume that meant the
original model which had a black face as opposed to later models with
a gray face and the issue is converters? Please elaborate.

I have a black face ADAT. Today I only use it as an 8x meter. But some
years ago before I had some other converters I used it as 8xA/D. And
some years earlier I recorded some demo of my own band on ADAT.

Comparing to a Fostex R8 tapemachine it was a big improvement in sound
and handling.
The Converters are not worser than the old digidesign 882, in my
opinon.


Definitely. But then everything was better than the Digidesign 882, the
worst criminal piece of garbage ever sold on the pro audio market.

Predrag

[[email protected]]

Julian wrote:
I read a recent posts where there was discussion about black face
ADAT's and how they didn't sound so good. I assume that meant the
original model which had a black face as opposed to later models with
a gray face and the issue is converters? Please elaborate.

Julian

I had the black face models and did heavy mods on them. They recorded
wonderfully. They didn't play back so well, but did encode well. The
Crystal 16 bit converters are the best 16 bit converter chips made. I
like them better than the cheaper 20 bit AKM's used in the XT's.

I used large coupling caps to prevent that thin low end and replaced
all the opamps with LT1359's. I cut all the voltage follower loops to
create closed loops to eliminate that nagging clock leakage you hear.
Cleaned up, they smoked the XT's.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades