Topic: Fr-2 Vs. SD 722

[sygdwm]

backatcha. the difference in space vs. audible sound is not worth it to me.

[wbrisette]

the space required is just HUGE with 96 and 192 sample rates. I'm blowing through HDD space right now with 16/44.1 flac's... I can't imagine how much I'll use when I go to 24 bit

You have to off-load using DVDs.

I usually have 2 DVDs when I finish a show. One DVD contains the raw multitrack files, a 24-bit edited file, while the other contains 16/44.1 versions of the show. I find storage space a huge problem. When I finish the dresser for my daughter's birthday, I'm going to build some additional shelving to help out.

Wayne

[Lil Kim Jong-Il]

24/96 = great crowd conversations

So are you of the opinion that 24/48 is fine for our purposes?

i am. i resample all 24/96 sources to 24/48 for my own personal use to fit on one disk and i cant tell the difference.

I burn 24/96 DVD for use at home.  But honestly I don't know why.  When we had this discussion a while back, wayne sent me samples of 24/48 vs 24/96 and I could not pick out the 96k recording from the 48k.  There were differences which I attributed to it being different nights and not the sampling rate.  Maybe better ears could find a difference, but I couldn't.

[fozzy]

thanks

+T

I'm interested in hearing where this debate is at now that more people are rolling at 24bit... the space required is just HUGE with 96 and 192 sample rates. I'm blowing through HDD space right now with 16/44.1 flac's... I can't imagine how much I'll use when I go to 24 bit

QFT,  good thing harddrives are so big/cheap now

we need a large/cheap removeable medium  DVD doesn't cut it

[wbrisette]

we need a large/cheap removeable medium  DVD doesn't cut it

.... thus the birth of Blue-Ray. Now, if only Sony would cut the crap and figure out how to make a license that folks could actually use...

Wayne

[Daryan]

OK, comments pertaining to the fr-2.  I will not comment about the 722/744 but will say I like the lights.

The fr-2...

In my opinion, it is the solution I had always wanted when I first jumped into laptop taping.  I wanted one box, removable media, top notch build, and MOST importantly, I wanted world class sound.  I believe I have the 2nd FR-2 that Doug ever modded fwiw.  There really is no plus to the plus mod in the fr-2 unless you want to use the DAC's, which in that case Doug changes out the caps and possibly the op amps in the DAC path which feeds the RCA outs.  I do not use the analog outs, never have, never will, so it was of very little consequence to me.

I tape at 24/96 exclusively and run my gefell's directly, mic-in, to the "t-mod" preamps and internal a/d of the fr-2.  The sound, to me, is absolutely the best I will ever attain.  After running some direct comparisions by set with the fr-2 modded, Eric Folske's V3, and my own Mini-MP, I pretty much was able to sell quite a bit of gear because the outboard gear was just not as good to my ears.  The t-mod fr-2 is the most transparent, detailed, dynamic sounding box I have ever used.  The air around instruments is mind blowing.  I get enough of so-called warmth (to me, lack of detail ), with the gefells alone, specifically the m20 caps. 

Enough about the sound...

The rest.

The cpcmcia cards are great for outdoor shows.   With the air blwoing around and not stuck in some ungodly hot bar, the pcmcia drives work fantatically at ANY sample rate I have thrown at them.  I recorded exclusively at moe.down and all summer long for that matter outdoors at 24/96 and occassionally 192.  The media kept up like a champ.  However, take those drives indoors in stale stank nasty air that pretty much every concert bar type venue I have been around is, and they will fail.  It will take a while, but eventually you will get a disc error and that's all she wrote.  CF cards, even the crappy 2.2gb cards that are dirt cheap work just fine at every sample rate.

As for not being able to hear the difference between 24/48 and the rest, I would beg to differ and would surmise (falsely?) that it may be due to lack or resolution on your playback system.  I hear lots more in the top, better dynamics, bigger soundstage, greater depth, etc at 24/96 than I do at 24/48.  I imagine some systems may not be able to take advantage of the greater resolution, but mine does fwiw and at least to my ears.  Please PM if you have specific questions on anything I have said above.

Regards

Daryan

[Nick's Picks]

24/96 = great crowd conversations

I've heard you say this before too, but my experience has been that there is virtually no difference between 48K and 96K when it comes to crowd noise (and almost none when it comes to recordings at venues). There isn't any scientific reason I can think of either that would endorse your theory. I would understand a 16 to 24-bit argument, since you get around 126 dB in dynamic range at 24-bits. However, increasing the sampling rate doesn't equate to better crowd noise/conversations.

I haven't yet experienced this with my testing, so I'm wondering why you continue to state this as a fact?

Wayne

Wayne...I dont state anything as a fact...just opinion, and in this case..opinions of my own recordings.
Whenever I run 24/96 in small venue/bar situations, I end up with too much detail in the conversations..It becomes annoying as I can actualy hear what people are talking about.  I can hear spatial depth of people around the mics in say...a 10' radius (at times).

Its probably more the 24bit factor.  But I can say that in these situations, my dithered redbook versions are the ones I listen to.

In general, I like 2496 if you are close up and can actualy make use of it.  Otherwise, for ease of burning 2448 sounds fucking A good.
When my microtracker arrives, I'll probably start mastering everything at 2441 from here out. 

[Lil Kim Jong-Il]

... would surmise (falsely?) that it may be due to lack or resolution on your playback system.

Yeah, I'm sure that's the problem.

Nick, when you ran your tests 24/96 vs redbook, did you compare 24/48 vs 24/96?

Wayne, what system do you listen on?  You predicted my results.

[Tim]

Yeah, I'm sure that's the problem.

I was wondering how long it would take for you to respond to that

[nickgregory]

... would surmise (falsely?) that it may be due to lack or resolution on your playback system.

having listened to shows on Michaels playback system, I can tell you that is not the brightest of statements...considering his playback system is something I would kill to have...just have to get the wife to buy into the VR4Jrs...which I am working on!

[wbrisette]

Wayne, what system do you listen on?  You predicted my results.

Too many years in the studio. ;-)

I have two playback systems, one is the DVD-A, Yamaha, Bose combo. The other is my monitoring rig Alesis amp and Alesis monitors (one of these days, I'm going to buy a set of those Earthworks Sigma monitors! Man, those things are awesome!).

I don't think either of those can be attributed to not hearing the difference. I truly think it's a matter of there not being a difference in the sampling rate at those higher levels. Several years back there was a very interesting thread on the Logic (pre-Apple buyout) list where several of the Logic engineers talked about samping rates. They gave some pretty detailed (i.e. mathematical and scientific) reasons why higher sampling rates you gained very little in the audible range (yes, Nyquist was involved too).

Anyhow, if Nick thinks he can hear a difference, more power to him, but I'll remain a skeptic until I can truly hear it.

Wayne

[Lil Kim Jong-Il]

Anyhow, if Nick thinks he can hear a difference, more power to him, but I'll remain a skeptic until I can truly hear it.

That was Daryan who hears the difference.  I was refering to Nick's tests of redbook (edit: http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=31721.0) and an upsampling DAC to 24/96 recordings in which he determined that the upsampling was so close to 24/96 that the latter wasn't worth the extra cost and post production effort.  I was wondering if he also tried a straight up 48k vs 96k test. 

BTW, I can offer those test disks that Wayne sent to me if anyone is interested.

[Nick's Picks]

no...I have not done 48k vs 96k tests.

I have also since dumped all of my upsampling playback gear since 2496 became so turn key w/the R4 and Discwelder.
There was another post I made somewhere in the playback forum where I flippflopped on my upsampling (sort of).  I still feel a good upsampling system does wonders, but raw 24bit sounds soo good.

for that matter...I cant remember the last time I was disapointed w/a great redbook disc either.  fickle ...I am!

Wayne..you just think i'm full of shit eh?

[wbrisette]

Wayne..you just think i'm full of shit eh?

I just don't buy the 48k vs. 96k theory you're tossing out. I really think this has more to do with 16- vs 24-bit, rather than sampling rate. However, do what you think works for you.

Wayne

[Nick's Picks]

hmmmm...
I dont recall ever saying anything about 48k vs 96k specifaly.  could you point that out for me?