Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Recording Gear => Topic started by: sygdwm on August 13, 2007, 04:44:16 PM
-
Comparison: 722 vs. oade acm671 both pre and a/d are tested
derrick trucks band / oteil & the peacemakers
5.27.07
lake martin amp.
alexander city, al
source:
2 pair of akg461's & 2 oade m148's(only for 1 set)
fob, dfc, ~50ft from stage, stand @8ft, mics(din) ~1" from each other
all xlr's and interconnects were silver
transfer: 671>usb>wavelab5(resample,uv22hr/dither)>cdwav(tracking)>flac
722>HDD>Wavelab 5.01a(Re-Sample/UV22HR Dither)>CDWave>FLAC
notes: levels were run as close as possible.
answers are in the text file.
-
+T
-
i thought you were gonna say, "bout fucking time". :P
-
I am gonna have to get you to seed some of my sources since you are quick with your transfers :P nonetheless glad to see the comp is up and cant wait to see some of the responses...+T Drew
-
I am gonna have to get you to seed some of my sources since you are quick with your transfers :P nonetheless glad to see the comp is up and cant wait to see some of the responses...+T Drew
he is quick considering your standards :o
-
its only 105mb, so it should only take a minute to d/l. discuss.
-
:flipa: :guitarist: :happy:
-
:cheers:
-
+T for the torrented comp. I'm in.
Chris
-
+T for the torrented comp. I'm in.
Chris
backatcha. its as scientific as humanly possible.
-
I've always wandered what doing a scientific comp would be like...
Chris
-
i thought you were gonna say, "bout fucking time". :P
I'll say it.
I will also say that the 671 will win.
-
Thank you very much for the comp.
The difference of the soundstage is pretty noticeable between C & D.
I was expecting a difference but I did not expect it to be this dramatic.
-
since i didnt want to post a poll. just post your comments about each file assuming you all know the answers already.
just like this:
The difference of the soundstage is pretty noticeable between C & D.
I was expecting a difference but I did not expect it to be this dramatic.
-
I liked both c and d equally for each of their own reasons FWIW. One or the other didnt really jump out at me. in samples a and b, I like a batter. b had too much of a high-end presence for my tastes :)
-
I liked both c and d equally for each of their own reasons FWIW. One or the other didnt really jump out at me. in samples a and b, I like a batter. b had too much of a high-end presence for my tastes :)
keep 'em coming, this is good info for folks in the market for these boxes. also, posting your playback lineage wouldnt hurt fellas. :)
-
wow...i immediately noticed b & d as my favorites, soundstage and depth are fantastic.
playback=cheap cans+laptop and it's still a no brainer for me.
-
Good comp. Thanks. +T
I ran the Stock/JW mod 460's > M148 for a while & feel like I have a pretty good handle on how they sound. That being said, I liked 'A' & 'C'.
edit: to remove spoilers.
-
thanks for the response. again can we refrain from giving the answers for now. just refer to the files as a-d. there may be some that havent listened yet or havent read the text file. i will post which is which once more have given a listen. :)
-
Between C and D, I'm thinking I have a slight preference for D. Seems smoother -- but maybe that means extreme highs rolled off some. I also think they're more similar than they are different. Wasn't a blind test in my case, XMMS told me the ID out of the tags in each file.
-
Wasn't a blind test in my case, XMMS told me the ID out of the tags in each file.
thanks for your thoughts, but i have no idea how to prevent that.
-
Wasn't a blind test in my case, XMMS told me the ID out of the tags in each file.
thanks for your thoughts, but i have no idea how to prevent that.
ABX during playback. Many tools / plugins available depending on one's OS and/or playback s/w.
-
Wasn't a blind test in my case, XMMS told me the ID out of the tags in each file.
thanks for your thoughts, but i have no idea how to prevent that.
ABX during playback. Many tools / plugins available depending on one's OS and/or playback s/w.
interested in your thoughts, brian. :)
-
First off my playback isn't the greatest, same goes for my ears.
Random thoughts on A and B.
At first I liked B more, The vocals where more upfront and the sound-stage wider. After a few times back and forth I upped the levels on A about 6-7db, Seemed to equal the samples out.
With A played louder I liked A better, vocals sound more natural, something about B sounds off, not sure what. Also I like the piano/keys better in A. Still think B has slightly better sound-stage , the sound on A seems to be coming more from the left channel than the right, B is more centered.
Overall, I'd go with A.
Random Thoughts and C and D
Levels seem much closer on these samples. Vocals on D are more upfront. High end sounds better on C. Sound-stage is a little better on D.
Over all the sound-stage is a little better on B and D, but both B and D have something about them that is harder on the ears, not as smooth? Maybe its a little to much in the high end.
To me, A and C are easier to listen to.
Play back = Esi Juli@ sound card > Bluesky Prodesk 2.1 active monitors
I would be happy to bring any of these recordings home from a show, Thanks for the comp.
-
thanks for the excellent review. :) +t
fwiw, i did play w/ the masters to get the levels as even as software would let me, but in the end i used the unedited original files, and probably should have mentioned that. so, adjust accordingly w/ your playback or edit as you see fit.
-
foobar2000 allows for ABX comparisons. It adjust levels to make them equal so that the louder does not win as better. Louder always "seems" to sound better. If the levels are not equal it is not a true test.
-
I thought the midrange in source D was over-accentuated. It brought out more detail & separation within the sound stage (the drums in particular), but also made the higher frequencies more fatiguing. The extra midrange also affected the tonality of the recording. Source C, was less fatiguing and easier to listen to at louder volumes. It's frequency response was flatter, though its midrange was a little more veiled by comparison.
I thought sources A & B had the same corresponding issues as sources C & D (maybe to a slightly lesser degree). Source A was a little smoother and more balanced, but neither sounded good with the volume turned up.
For overall sound quality, I would rank the sources from first to last - source C / source D / source A / source B.
Thanks for comp. +T for your efforts.
Chris
playback system:
Sonneteer Byron cdp > Mastersound Compact 845 integrated > Sonist Concerto 2 speakers
-
26 d/l's and only 6 reviews?
-
q: where was the vocalist on a & b? as stated above the image between a & b is different. on a, i'm getting guitar and vocal left channel almost entirely. on b is center/right channel. this diff should not come from a diff in recorders... i'm just listening from songbird > mdr 7506.
edit: not getting the same diff from c/d. to this point i'm partial to b and d. tighter low end, more defined presence in the mids (noticable in the vocal) and highs. will move to stereo system later... these headphnes tend to accentuate mids.
-
Dre, you're doing good. I drove 2 hours to Portland to make my last cable comp, only to have 12 downloads and no replies.
Chris
q: where was the vocalist on a & b? as stated above the image between a & b is different. on a, i'm getting guitar and vocal left channel almost entirely. on b is center/right channel. this diff should not come from a diff in recorders... i'm just listening from songbird > mdr 7506.
I also noticed the sound stage in A & B leaning in different directions.
Chris
-
q: where was the vocalist on a & b? as stated above the image between a & b is different. on a, i'm getting guitar and vocal left channel almost entirely. on b is center/right channel. this diff should not come from a diff in recorders... i'm just listening from songbird > mdr 7506.
left. as i said before, there was no post processing so what was played, was what was recorded. either eq, balance, edit, or listen on speakers. :)
also, by no means were the 461's matched.
-
q: where was the vocalist on a & b? as stated above the image between a & b is different. on a, i'm getting guitar and vocal left channel almost entirely. on b is center/right channel. this diff should not come from a diff in recorders... i'm just listening from songbird > mdr 7506.
left. as i said before, there was no post processing so what was played, was what was recorded. either eq, balance, edit, or listen on speakers. :)
also, by no means were the 461's matched.
wow. then a is the only one that represented the soundstage accurately. the mics not being matched should not account for this.. also, this difference is not present on c/d.
-
soundstage, shmoundstage. which one do you prefer? a or b, c or d.
-
soundstage, shmoundstage. which one do you prefer? a or b, c or d.
whhhaaaaaaa haahahaha!! sorry i'm an imagecentric taper. but i said it in a prior post. so far (headphones only) i like b and d. but those placed the vocal on the other side...um, huh? but they sound better, but the image is off, sound.... image, sound.... image....does not compute. scanning...
so forgetting, somehow, that i know that the representation is off, just operating on the sonic quality... get ready... dunno. will burn a disc.
-
Good comp. Thanks. +T
I ran the Stock/JW mod 460's > M148 for a while & feel like I have a pretty good handle on how they sound. That being said, I liked 'A' & 'C'.
edit: to remove spoilers.
To elaborate:
'A' vs. 'B'
I didn't care for the sound of 'B' at all. It was my least favorite out of all four tracks. The vocals & highs are way too in your face (hyped) and seemed harsh compared to 'A'. Overall, the track seemed unnatural. I enjoyed the laid back sound of 'A' much more as it sounded more natural to my ears with a nice low end thump.
'C' vs. 'D'
As for 'C' vs. 'D', I liked them both, but I preferred the sound of 'C'. That being said, the combo of 'D' sounds great to my ears as well, but I find 'C' more natural with a defined low end thump. 'D' is a bit grating in the highs and more smeared in the low end, while still exhibiting the "hyped" sense (though not nearly as much so as 'B'). Again, 'C' feels more laid back & natural to my ears.
-
thanks for the elaboration. fwiw, these werent the most ideal taping circumstances. its not far from the realm of possibility that i could get all this gear together again for a panic show this fall.
-
Dre,
Have you ever done a comp between your stock 671 and the oade ACM 671?
Chris
-
no but i am pretty sure the stock pres suck. hence the mod. i always run a pre in front of the stock one.
-
Doug has some samples with and without the mod on his web site.
http://www.oade.com/digital_recorders/hard_disc_recorders/PMD-671MODS.html
I prefered B over A the difference was minimal.
With C & D I thought the difference was greater and like D much better.
Cary Cd-303 > McIntosh C41 Pre > MC352 amp > Egglestonworks Andra II speakers.
-
with that playback get up, i think this here ends it. +t
/and i concur
-
Good comp. Thanks. +T
I ran the Stock/JW mod 460's > M148 for a while & feel like I have a pretty good handle on how they sound. That being said, I liked 'A' & 'C'.
edit: to remove spoilers.
To elaborate:
'A' vs. 'B'
I didn't care for the sound of 'B' at all. It was my least favorite out of all four tracks. The vocals & highs are way too in your face (hyped) and seemed harsh compared to 'A'. Overall, the track seemed unnatural. I enjoyed the laid back sound of 'A' much more as it sounded more natural to my ears with a nice low end thump.
'C' vs. 'D'
As for 'C' vs. 'D', I liked them both, but I preferred the sound of 'C'. That being said, the combo of 'D' sounds great to my ears as well, but I find 'C' more natural with a defined low end thump. 'D' is a bit grating in the highs and more smeared in the low end, while still exhibiting the "hyped" sense (though not nearly as much so as 'B'). Again, 'C' feels more laid back & natural to my ears.
this is exactly the way I felt too Matt, but I couldnt word it nearly that well :) I didnt even know which source was which until I listened to them a few times and finally looked at the text file. I am honestly not being biased because i own one recorder over another, but the highs were WAY TOO grating in samples b and d, but especially b. I think sample b was def more in-your-face, but thats expected because there is so much more highend, and at the expense of the high-end being fatiguing. in that case, id rather have a more laid back soundstage that isnt as in your face and more rounded over the spectrum. a and c were DEF more natural sounding to me overall and much more pleasing and had the PERFECT low-end thump that I really crave for. samples b and d were too fatiguing in the high end, and it was ALOT more prevelant and almost scratching high-end on b and d. Kind of like fingernails on a chalkboard. sounded more unnatural to me as did the soundstage of the two(b+d). And once again, the sound of sample d had a TAD too much high-end for my liking and not quite enough low-end thump for my tastes. I like a more laid back and natural sound and soundstage and I think a and c captured this quite well :)
That being said, I would be happy to come home with either samples of c and d, but if I had to consistently come home with samples like b all the time, I would change my setup rather quickly because the high end would get to me VERY quickly. The sound on sample d just wasnt rounded enough and PHAT enough for me. the lowend thump needed to be a bit more present on this one. Once again, sample c was PERFECT in the lowend thump and overall had a nicer and smoother sound throughout the spectrum. Very well rounded IMO. and the highs in sample c were also perfect. not too fatiguing but JUST RIGHT. Like I said, overall, sample c was just more rounded and musical IMO. This is all after listening to the samples back and forth for about 20-30 mins after work today.
My playback is nothing near great, but its:
Foobar 2000 (FLACS) > M-Audio Audiophile 24/96 > Coax > JVC RX-6000V receiver > 5 Bose Cube Speakers with dual 8" woofer sub cabinet
So my playback is def nothing great, but after listening on this setup for many years now, I have a great feel for how a source sounds on it and the characteristics of each source :) I also listened to these on my Sennheiser HD-280 Pro cans and had the same results as I did with the speakers on playback. My cans setup is:
Foobar 2000 (FLACS) > M-Audiophile 24/96 > Coax > JVC RX-6000V Receiver > Sennheiser HD-280 Pro Headphones :)
Like I said, I would be pretty damn happy coming home with either of the samples of c and d, but sample c is what I crave for in a recording. Nice and phat and well rounded throughout the spectrum :)
Now I want to hear a Busman Modded Fostex FR2-LE compared to the 722 comp :)
sorry for my buzzed up rambling. Im sure my post is going to be hard to comprehend, and Im sorry for that. but I gave these extensive listening tests to see if I got ripped off spending an extra 1k. I felt confident on my decision/purchase prior to these comps because of the many kick-ass recordings I have made over the past 1.5 years, but especially after hearing this comp :)
Oh and thanks alot for putting this comp together :) Once I get a Busman Modded FR2-LE, I will DEF put together a 483>722/Busman fr2-le comp and an MBHO Hypers/Cards>722/Busman fr2-le comp. I just dont know how Im gonna do it yet ??? Maybe I'll just run 483>722 for set one and 483>busman fr2le for set 2. tho thats not an ideal comp, still gives you an idea of how the diff all-in-ones sound. I am sure with Steve Toney(tonedeaf) and myself both owning 483's, we could put something together sometime this fall!
Thanks again, I know alot of work went into this ;)
+T
-
fwiw, as soon as the busman fr2le vintage mod is ready. ill have another comp to do. 8)
-
fwiw, as soon as the busman fr2le vintage mod is ready. ill have another comp to do. 8)
Awesome, and I consider the 722 pre's as being 'vintage' IMO. They are both transparent and in-your-face as well as being warm and rich and smooth like older tube/tube-like preamps are/were. Thats a great achievement IMO in manufacturing and crafting a preamps sound and im sure is no easy feat. Im sure its much easier to have a preamp be one or the other(transparent or warm) but to have the best of both worlds in a preamp is truly great research/maunfacturing IMO. thats why I LOVE my 722, because it has the best of both worlds. I honestly think the 722 suffers when running a preamp in front of it for most mics, at least with my 480's and my MBHO's anyway. Once you add a pre infront of the 722, it looses its in-your-face sound and just doesnt jump out as much at you.....it still retains the warmth a bit in th ADC section, but the transparency and in-your-face sound is lost IMO. Thats why I sold all of my other preamps and strictly run the 722 as an all-in-one, as it was supposed to be :)
-
its only 105mb, so it should only take a minute to d/l. discuss.
an hour and 12 minutes at 23k on my pc. >:D
-
I agree with most that A & C are superior. B & D aren't bad, but it was not a real close call either. Especially C versus D, just sounds more real, natural, relaxed, and there, versus kinda processed or squeezed or forced. Makes me want the equipment I want even worse :'(
FWIW, I normalized all the files in Adobe Audition so I didn't have to guess on comparable levels with the volume knob, and my playback chain was: flac from Audition>M-Audio Delta 410>DIY PiMeta headphone amp>Grado sr60 phones. Might check again on Fostex active monitors when it won't disturb the household.
Thanks for doing this dre, it's very informative!
Peace,
Sanaka
-
thanks for your input. so the question begs to be asked, do a & c sound $1k better?
-
do a & c sound $1k better?
If you've got an extra $1k around, then they sure do :bigsmile:
-
i like B & D
-
I would say that C sounds $1k better than B. I didn't hear the value of the m148 in this comp or the last time I compared sources involving an m148.
Chris
-
wow...i immediately noticed b & d as my favorites, soundstage and depth are fantastic.
playback=cheap cans+laptop and it's still a no brainer for me.
I finally got a chance to give this a listen and I have to say I agree with Dennis. The guitar was too distant sounding on A and the vocals had too much presence. On B it sounded more balanced. Between C and D, D sounded much more musical and full in the midrange. I'd like to give this a listen w/better playback gear.
-
Looks like I have a game to play tonight!!
I'll see ya soon.
-
Anyone have this to seed? Would love to check it out.
Thanks,
Ben
-
Anyone have this to seed? Would love to check it out.
Thanks,
Ben
I've got it open.
-
Anyone have this to seed? Would love to check it out.
Thanks,
Ben
I've got it open.
On it... Thanks! +T
-
helping seed now too :)
-
helping seed now too :)
Thanks!
I've got it downloaded. I just installed a remote PC connection on my PDA so that I can access my desktop from my listening chair. This will make switching back and forth much easier in the prime listening position and make for a better comparison. Now can I turn off the games long enough to really listen...