Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Dat xfer (Sony LP setting) A/D question  (Read 5989 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

kirk97132

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Dat xfer (Sony LP setting) A/D question
« on: August 25, 2008, 02:11:15 PM »
I am trying to do a bunch of transfers of a friends dats.  We are talking about more than a few years of an artists earlier recordings.  Most are sbd's from 1998 thru 2003.  So starting with the initial transfer, I have tried every combination of gear I have to see what sounds better (to me anyway).  Here is the gear list:
Tascan Da-P1, Edirol R-44, Sound Devices MP-2, and Edirol BM2p+.  after listening to each xfer I think the P1>UA-5>R-44 sounds the best.  seems a little more detailed, instruments clearer, vocals stronger.  Question is:  Is there any reason NOT to do this.  It would seem as if the  D/A > A/D conversion would be bad but yet my ears say it is the best sound?  Any feed back?  any feedback on procedure?  Thanks, Kirk
« Last Edit: September 20, 2008, 04:25:12 PM by kirkd »

kskreider

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2008, 02:14:50 PM »
For archival purposes my opinion is to keep it in the digital domain.  If you want aurally pleasurable EQ/effects then add them in post via your editing program.

However, if you plan on just keeping everything to yourself then do whatever floats your boat.

kirk97132

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #2 on: August 25, 2008, 02:19:47 PM »
For archival purposes my opinion is to keep it in the digital domain.  If you want aurally pleasurable EQ/effects then add them in post via your editing program.

However, if you plan on just keeping everything to yourself then do whatever floats your boat.

Well it is an archive project sort of yet the pure digi xfer just doesn't seem to show the definition and clarity that the UA-5 xfer does.  The whole post process is another post subject. but I don't think I can add clarity in post.  This is not the result I expected when I listened to each xfer. I was sure that the pure digi would rule but now I'm scratching my head

easy jim

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #3 on: August 25, 2008, 02:20:47 PM »
Well, if your are transferring DATs, it is ideal in my book to at minimum get an unaltered and precise copy of the data exactly as it was laid down on the master DATs.  

So, while it may sound better to your ears, I would not use the UA-5 which resamples the digital input or goes through and extra D>A and A>D stage if you go analog instead out of the DA-P1 and into the UA-5.  What may sound better to you may even be signal degradation/distortion introduced during the resampling or extra D>A and A>D steps.

Keep it simple, and go digital out of the DA-P1 to a device with a bit-perfect (does not resample) digital input.  The R-44 does not resample and has a coax s/pdif input, right?

kirk97132

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #4 on: August 25, 2008, 02:23:14 PM »
Well, if your are transferring DATs, it is ideal in my book to at minimum get an unaltered and precise copy of the data exactly as it was laid down on the master DATs. 

So, while it may sound better to your ears, I would not use the UA-5 which resamples the digital input or goes through and extra D>A and A>D stage if you go analog instead out of the DA-P1 and into the UA-5.  What may sound better to you may even be signal degradation/distortion introduced during the resampling or extra D>A and A>D steps.

Keep it simple, and go digital out of the DA-P1 to a device with a bit-perfect (does not resample) digital input.  The R-44 does not resample and has a coax s/pdif input, right?

Right coax to coax.  But how does signal degradation lead to better clarity?  Oh and I guess I should add that I do listening with Sony MDR 7506 cans

kskreider

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2008, 02:28:21 PM »
There is no signal degradation, per se, but just a change in it.  That change may lead to the presumed beneficial effects that you are referring to above, but K.I.S.S. 

Do a pure clone, archive it, and then play with a second copy and add effects galore.  I bet you can easily come up with plugin chain that sounds even better than the UA-5 source.

Offline flipp

  • resident curmudgeon
  • Trade Count: (17)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4308
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2008, 02:49:41 PM »
I would also recommend listening on several different playback systems. What sounds good in headphones may not sound so good on a modest playback rig and may sound even worse on a highend system. If you have a good audio store near you (not BestBuy, CIrcuit City etc) take a clone of the original and copies of the various chains you used and see what sounds best on various systems. You may still prefer the UA5 in the chain but you also might prefer the D1>R44, or something else entirely. I wouldn't decide what chain to use based on one set of headphones. If you listen with other phones, you may prefer a differnet transfer. See what sounds best to you and the recordist before transferring the entire batch.

easy jim

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2008, 02:52:54 PM »
There is no signal degradation, per se, but just a change in it.  That change may lead to the presumed beneficial effects that you are referring to above, but K.I.S.S. 

Do a pure clone, archive it, and then play with a second copy and add effects galore.  I bet you can easily come up with plugin chain that sounds even better than the UA-5 source.

Yes.  You've put it better than I did Keith.  The BMP2+'s pre-amps are certainly flavoring your transfer, but I'm sure you could also affect the transfer postively after the fact as suggested with a little EQ, etc.

Offline Jhurlbs81

  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2663
  • Gender: Male
  • Reinvented, redefined, rearranged but not refined
    • My LMA collection
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #8 on: August 25, 2008, 03:00:19 PM »
Quote
Well, if your are transferring DATs, it is ideal in my book to at minimum get an unaltered and precise copy of the data exactly as it was laid down on the master DATs. 

agreed.

Offline DATBRAD

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2158
  • Gender: Male
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #9 on: August 25, 2008, 03:23:54 PM »
I remember in the early days of DAT, at least after my introduction to it with the first access to one in '91-'92, I knew this dude that would make only analog transfers of DATs, not digital clones. He said he liked to adjust the gain (which could not be done digitially at that point in time between such components) to make all the DATs he copied have the same playback volume. I know he also did this due to his decision not to invest in a Panasonic SV3700 (one of the few if only non SCMS affected decks available then) since with his pair of Sony ES decks, SCMS would stop him from making digital copies frequently.

Anyhow, here and there I have pulled out an old DAT that I copied from him back in the day that he had copied from someone using his analog method, and listening today on my current playback system, all I can think now is "I hope I run across the original DAT source one day, this one sucks! It did not seem to on the playback system I was listening to it on 15 years ago, but it sure sucks now".

OP, do yourself a favor and make digital clones of the DATs. You can make remasters like you are doing with the original source files, and still have the original data preserved for posterity and future playback situations where the tweaked versions through the BMP2 are found not to have "aged well".
AKG C460B w/CK61/CK63 or Beyerdynamic M201TG>Luminous Monarch XLRs>SD MP-1(x2)>Luminous Monarch XLRs>PMD661(Oade WMOD)

Offline sunjan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2003
  • Gender: Male
  • Taping since 1988, 28 years of fine recordings...
    • Just a handful of stuff I put on etree
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #10 on: August 26, 2008, 04:16:58 AM »
Agree with all of the above. Do the P1>R44 dump first.

If you prefer the UA-5 flavor, you can take the file, loop it thru the UA-5 in post and rerecord it for your personal listening. But then you will have a pure digital clone for archival, at least.
Mics: A-51s LE, CK 930, Line Audo CM3, AT853Rx (hc,c,sc),  ECM 121, ECM 909A
Pres: Tinybox, CA-9100, UA5 wmod
Recorders: M10, H116 (CF mod), H340, NJB3
Gearbag: High Sierra Corkscrew
Photo rig: Nikon D70, 18-70mm/3.5-4.5, SB-800
MD transfers: MZ-RH1

kirk97132

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #11 on: August 26, 2008, 09:01:42 PM »
Thanx all pure digi copy it is!



T's all round

Offline indietaperwloo

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 125
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #12 on: August 27, 2008, 03:17:45 PM »
For my DAT transfers, I use this:

Fostex D-5 > (TOSLINK S/PDIF) > Radio Shack TOSLINK to coax format converter > (Coax S/PDIF) > M-Audio Audiophile Delta 2496 (via S/PDIF/MIDI dongle to DB9 port)

Sample rate and bit depth are matched to source via the driver and in Wavelab 4.
Portable 2 track:
Sennheiser MKE2 (HRTF) > Edirol R-09
AT822 > Edirol R-09
Studio Projects C4 (ORTF/XY) > Presonus Firepod > Edirol R-09

4 Track Open Rig:
Studio Projects C4 (ORTF)/FOH Feed > Edirol R4

FOH:
Mackie 1604 VLZ Pro > dbx 215 Graphic EQ > Behringer PMX2000 (Power Amp Section) > Behringer B1220 Mains

Multitrack:
Mackie 1604 VLZ Pro > Tascam DA-38 w/Burr Brown Op-amps

Out:
M-Audio Fast Track Pro > Mackie 1604 VLZ Pro > ESI nEar05 nearfields OR AKG K99 Headphones

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2566
  • Gender: Male
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2008, 08:14:32 AM »
Sorry to arrive late to the party. DATBRAD hit it right on the head as far as I'm concerned.

An altered copy of a recording can certainly have more clarity, more fullness, or more anything else (or conversely, less of whatever's bad) than the original recording. There's a whole profession of "sound restoration" and "mastering" that specializes in making this happen, and it can sometimes happen by accident as well. Naturally the better the recording you start with, the better the result will still sound.

The people who are really good at this have the best tools available, including their monitoring systems, and they do this every day of their working lives and have done so for decades. They've developed a way of listening to sound that is extremely acute. It's a specialty that takes much development and practice. Not every professional audio engineer is good at it.

Regrets can definitely set in later, though, just from the passage of time and the normal, continued growth in your perceptual abilities through experience. Usually the regret is, "I wish what I did back then wasn't so obvious now." You can always do more of something later, but you can't very well put things back the way they were and do it over from there, unless you have the straight, unaltered original on the shelf.

--best regards
« Last Edit: September 17, 2008, 09:10:55 PM by DSatz »
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline mc1620

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Dat xfer A/D question
« Reply #14 on: September 07, 2008, 07:30:07 PM »
For my DAT transfers, I use this:

Fostex D-5 > (TOSLINK S/PDIF) > Radio Shack TOSLINK to coax format converter > (Coax S/PDIF) > M-Audio Audiophile Delta 2496 (via S/PDIF/MIDI dongle to DB9 port)

Does the conversion from TOSLINK to coax cause any issues?

I have a D-5 that is sitting idle and have always liked that deck over my Sony PCM-R500 which I currently have running to my M-Audio 2496 because it has coax outs. I may pick up a converter though if there are no issues. Im just getting back into things and trying to archive my DATs. Any help appreciated. Thanks!

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.193 seconds with 43 queries.
© 2002-2018 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF