IF-FW/DM MkII Converters - How do they stack up?

[median]

I own the DM4800 and have considered upgrading my converters to RME, Apogee, Focusrite Saffire Pro, etc. How are the Tascam converters when compared to these others? I was thinking of getting better converters but keeping the tascam as a control surface. Any advice?

 

[captdan]

" I only think you can get a real sonic difference with really expensive converters and that could be a psychological thing.."

Agreed.

CaptDan

 

[Gravity Jim]

When I start worrying about whether or not the Cool Guy Assesment of my digital audio components would be found favorable, I like to remind myself that "The Nightfly" was recorded with A/D convertors of far less quality than even those in a DM3200... and that convertors and signal quality of my DM are vastly superior to that of my old Yamaha 02/R.

If I don't make good recordings with this gear, expensive convertors aren't gonna help.

 

[captdan]

"Cool Guy Assesment"

Seems that guy luvs him some Apogee. Just about everywhere you look, Apogee is revered as if it were some mystical magic soma that can turn mundane, boring signal into pure gold.

And speaking of gold - Cool Guy really luvs him some gold connectors........

CaptDan

 

[Gravity Jim]

Oh, man... Gold connectors. Yeah. "I know not everybody can hear it, but...."

 

[captdan]

Oh, man... Gold connectors. Yeah. "I know not everybody can hear it, but...."

PS: For the record: Jim and I aren't dissing anybody personally on this forum. So please take no offense; none is meant. There's just a lot of internet discussion about converters, connectors, etc etc, that engineering skills and technical wood-shedding seem to take a back seat. So, that's where the fun is poked - not at anyone in particular..

CaptDan

 

[Gravity Jim]

Oh, man... Gold connectors. Yeah. "I know not everybody can hear it, but...."

PS: For the record: Jim and I aren't dissing anybody personally on this forum. So please take no offense; none is meant. There's just a lot of internet discussion about converters, connectors, etc etc, that engineering skills and technical wood-shedding seem to take a back seat. So, that's where the fun is poked - not at anyone in particular..

CaptDan

Exactly. I'm really not even poking fun at a group of people, but more just a line of voodoo discourse that happens online. It's just easy to lose sight of what the audio represents while fretting about how it gets recorded.

 

[captdan]

"It's just easy to lose sight of what the audio represents while fretting about how it gets recorded."

Well said.

CaptDan

 

[cmaffia]

I monitor and master through my Rosetta 200 and I do hear a very slight improvement. It's very subtle but in the end the Tascam converters are very good!

 

[Drumstruck]

I'd call most of those converters a crossgrade rather than an upgrade.....

When one gets to the stage of wanting better convertors than the DM I suspect one would also be at the stage where the rest of the studio gear is pretty flash.... ;-)

 

[waterstrum]

I agree.
The better the signal chain, the better the sound, assuming one knows how to use it.
Speaking of convertors....
Is anybody here running the DM at 88 or 96k?

 

[Gravity Jim]

I record at 96K/24 bit as my default... I only reboot the console to work in old projects.

 

[TascMan]

2cents....The converters in the DM are absolutely fine and are of the quality usable for creating money making records. I record at 88.2 by default and have been very happy. Everything Jim and Dan said is echoed here...honing actual skills is far more important than converter price (quality?). Above all, I have found that practicing the art has moved me along to better mixes far more than more expensive converters ever will. Worry not about your converters. Instead, sit behind your console and practice towards better sounds.

 

[captdan]

Quite a few discussions here about 88.1/96kz. Up until about a year ago, I'd done all my projects at 48kz, including two previous album projects on an older rig. Without repeating myself, I feel that 96kz offers some advantages to my workflow - among them - finer audio detail in certain ways which, I think, leads to better mixes.

However, I periodically master/mix material for others who track at 44.1, and those examples sound fine on the DM as well. Still, I wonder if those tracks would sound better at higher S/Rs.

CaptDan

 

[Gravity Jim]

CaptDan said it better than I could... I've been more happy with my work than I've ever been since buying the DM3200 and Firewire interface card, and I think the higher rates just make it easier to mix. But 44.1 sounds fine too... although nothing I recorded on my Yamaha sounds as good as anything tracked on the DM.

 

[median]

I appreciate these responses, and I actually love my DM-4800. I have just been second guessing myself b/c I had an 'assistant' engineer in here (a recent graduate of a recording school in LA) who kept saying I needed better converters/monitors in order to get a good mix. So he was recommending the Focusrite 18i20 and other monitors (Dynaudio mkii, Adams 7, etc) instead of my Yamaha HS80s.

 

[Drumstruck]

I also default to 96/24 - mainly because I prefer to start with the finest granularity and degrade it from there than to grind something down that's got bigger lumps ;-) ...

Perhaps "recent graduates" may be able to glibly quote a few names and numbers, but long term experience is hard to beat. If you know your monitors and are happy with the detail you hear there's no reason to change imo - my monitors are 35 years old, though I have upgrade the power amp a few times over that period.

An old football coach here said "if it's not broke then don't fix it"

 

[Gravity Jim]

Familiarity with ones' gear is more important than what the gear is, especially when it comes to monitors. Despite the A.D.A.M.s Cool Guy rep, many, many reviewers and users reporting that the midrange imaging on them is terrible and the mixes they did on them didn't translate well at all. So.... there ya go.

I'm with Drumstruck... The Recent Graduate Syndrome is anathema to good recording of music. Most important is the song and the arrangment. Next is the performers. Then, the room. Followed by mic placement. After that, mic choice. Then preamps. Etc., etc. And over ALL of that is your ears and tyur imagination. A/D convertors are pretty far down the list.

So, saying you can't make a decent mix without the new SuperDigiBlaster Harmonic Converage Linear MKII converters is nothing but bluster.

 

[captdan]

"SuperDigiBlaster Harmonic Converage Linear MKII"

Hey! I want THAT! (Jes' kiddin' )

Re: monitors: I've been using my Tannoy System 800s powered by a Haffler 250 for years. You won't find these Tannoys in a lot of places - mostly because they're no longer made. Although not perfect in all areas, they're quite transparent. In fact, they don't even sound THAT good, which is what I want. Sugar coated audio is essentially useless to me. In fact, I rely equally on my 3" 'HorrorTones." I don't sign off on any mix that doesn't sound right on those monitors - especially when I listen "down the hall.".

But that's just me.

CaptDan