question about A/D/A converters again

[Rupturemetal]

Dont know what happened to my last thread,anyway my question is what kind of diifference will I notice with better converters. Im using a firepod now,if I step up to an RME or focusrite.

 

[jesterroot4]

welll, you would be recording at a higher sample rate which is always good. lol

 

[musickey]

welll, you would be recording at a higher sample rate which is always good. lol

lol James try to resist.

 

[Matt Crooks]

Dont know what happened to my last thread,anyway my question is what kind of diifference will I notice with better converters. Im using a firepod now,if I step up to an RME or focusrite.

I don't know what you'll notice, and I don't know that the RME/focusrite is that much better than the firepod.

When I upgraded from the stock converters in a Mackie digital board (d8b) to an Appogee Rosetta 800 I noticed a few things:

• The stereo image was much wider. The drum overheads seemed like they had been moved a few feet wider.
• The drums were sharper - meaning there was more snap to the stick/beater attack. The drums were also less muddy in the low end.
• Bass guitars had more definition, not just some flabby mess.
• Electric guitars had a more defined pick attack and better low mids.
• Vocals and acoustic instruments sounded more "real"

For me the new converters were night and day better. I don't know if you'll notice the same thing or not.

Also, I was (and still am) doing the recording at 44.1/24 bit. Anything higher, IMO, is a waste of disc space/money.

 

[Vuts]

how is this better connected to a simple PC/soundcard set-up?

 

[greyskull]

I don't know what you'll notice, and I don't know that the RME/focusrite is that much better than the firepod.

When I upgraded from the stock converters in a Mackie digital board (d8b) to an Appogee Rosetta 800 I noticed a few things:

• The stereo image was much wider. The drum overheads seemed like they had been moved a few feet wider.
• The drums were sharper - meaning there was more snap to the stick/beater attack. The drums were also less muddy in the low end.
• Bass guitars had more definition, not just some flabby mess.
• Electric guitars had a more defined pick attack and better low mids.
• Vocals and acoustic instruments sounded more "real"

For me the new converters were night and day better. I don't know if you'll notice the same thing or not.

Also, I was (and still am) doing the recording at 44.1/24 bit. Anything higher, IMO, is a waste of disc space/money.

exactly.
+1 on all of what you said.

i think tracking to 24/44.1 gives you a much better idea as to how the sounds will translate to cd too. If you start going crazy with the sample rate, once you dither it down and change sample rates, all that extra top end etc you had is gonna vanish and you'll be left thinking:Smug: damn im sure my mix sounded good

 

[Loren Littlejohn]

I mix at 44.1 24.

I have done the 88.2 sample rate and when it came to the final product I didn't notice a difference so I thought it was a waste as well.