Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: A/D Comp: Sound Devices USBPre 2 vs Edirol R44  (Read 5240 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline page

  • Trade Count: (25)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8392
  • Gender: Male
  • #TeamRetired
Re: A/D Comp: Sound Devices USBPre 2 vs Edirol R44
« Reply #15 on: January 25, 2011, 09:50:54 AM »
Ok, I'll bite, who can point point a section (say, a bass hit or something) where they were like "ah HA! that's the difference"

First another note of explanation to set the stage for how I do listening comps...whenever I do comps like this, I load the samples into Audition and then lay the tracks side-by-side so that I can listen immediately without any time delay whatsoever between the two listening samples.  I go back and forth from one to the other and back again listening to the very same passage over and over.  Then I'll mentally isolate all different types of sounds...I concentrate separately on lows, then mids, highs, vocals, guitars, drums, etc.

For me, these samples weren't necessarily an 'AHA there's the difference'.  However, I did notice a clear winner when I selected Source Y in my blind listening test. 

I was right there with you until you picked one.  :)

At least I don't have something horribly wrong with my process.

Through my phones, Source Y has an overall better shimmery sound that is pleasing and sounds more realistic to me, like it sounds when you're listening live.  That was my 'aha' difference that made Source Y for me the winner.

If I'd have to choose a specific 'aha', the biggest technical difference I heard was on the drum kit.  I'm not a drummer, but I think it's called the snare drum that I focused's the drum that's the most treble-y in the kit.  The sound of the drum hit happens and then there's a momentary decaying of the sound of the drum hit.  On source Y, that decay sustains clearer and with better resonance.  In comparison, on Source X the sound is more thud-like with less pronounced decay.

Part of my problem is if I cant say "listen to the first three snare hits, now listen to the cymbol decay on the third one and compare the length and crunch effect mid-decay" then I generally don't mark something down as a difference. If I can't attribute a sensation to a repeatable and defined difference, it's not a difference to me that escapes an ABX effort. I remember listening to that shimmer on the 722/M10 comp and falling in love with one of the sources, but I could never pinpoint why, so to me that's psychological. It wasn't until I sat and listened to a few specific bass notes that I started to really hear differences I could repeatedly pick out. I'll go back and listen to the drums specifically tonight and see if I can find an isolated hit to compare. Thanks for the notes.
"This is a common practice we have on the bus; debating facts that we could easily find through printed material. It's like, how far is it today? I think it's four hours, and someone else comes in at 11 hours, and well, then we'll... just... talk about it..." - Jeb Puryear

"Nostalgia ain't what it used to be." - Jim Williams


RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.068 seconds with 42 queries.
© 2002-2020
Powered by SMF