Please recommend an A/D converter.

[jsavisalo]

I've been looking for a decent preamp to be used between my Roland VS-1680 and a pair of AKG C3000B's. First I started to look at those low cost toob pres from Art, Presonus etc. but after reading through this and other forums, I thought maybe it's not the right way to go.

However, when I read through the VS-planet (Roland user forum) I read several recommendations that with VS-1680 you should have a preamp with digital out, to be able to completely bypass the on-board pres AND converters (which are only 20 bit and not high quality). Many users there recommend the Art DPS II.

Well, if I have understood right the DPS II is not great as a preamp, though the A/D converters are very usable. Now I'm also thinking about the possibility to buy a separate converter and a better pre, like DMP3 or RNP.

So, could you recommend me a good but not too expensive A/D converter. In fact the price should be considerably less than the price of DPS II, because otherwise I don't see any reason not to by the DPS, just for the converters (because you can bypass its preamp and use it only as a converter).

Thanks in advance!

(If someone is interested to listen how my music sounds recorded using only Roland's own pres, please visit http://www.mikseri.net/artists/juhasavisalo.34865.php )

[dwillis45]

Originally Posted by jsavisalo

So, could you recommend me a good but not too expensive A/D converter. In fact the price should be considerably less than the price of DPS II

Is there such a thing? The DPS2 costs about $250 and even the cheapest stand-alone converters (M-Audio Flying Cow, Behringer ADA 8000) are about the same cost.

It's hard to believe people are suggesting the ART DPS2 to improve conversion. I would guess, based solely on price and reputation, that those AD converters would be pretty similar to the stock converters on your Roland recorder. My sense is that to achieve any real or even perceived improvements, you would have to find a much better device at a somewhat higher cost. Many folks around here suggest the Kurzweil Rumor ($499) for it's converters. If you have more to spend, there is also the Lucid 9624 which is about $850.

[apl]

There are no cheap stand-alone A-Ds. For $300, you can have two very nice mic pres plus two line level ins and satisfactory A/D with the Presonus Firepod. The RME ADI-8 is as good as you'll ever need, but it ain't cheap.

[jsavisalo]

Thanks for your comments. Now that I've looked more the prices of stand-alone converters, I very well understand that something like DPS II can't possibly have any quality converters for that price. Although, it's a bit surpricing to read reviews in SOS and EMusician which give quite good marks for this preamp in general and also it's converters:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Oct0...les/artdps.htm

http://emusician.com/signalprocessor...dps/index.html

For someone like me, with no own knowledge base in these things, it's quite difficult to make decisions when all kind of information and opinions come in from many directions...


One more silly question: how much do you think the quality of conversion affects the sound quality, compared to the effect of a good preamp? So, with my Roland 1680 and limited budget, should I spend my money to a decent converter (maybe RME ADI-2?) + an OK pre (like DMP3) or just buy a better pre (RNP, Grace...) and use the analog ins?

[reshp1]

You have to take magazine reviews with a grain of salt, how many times have you ever read a really bad review? You have to kinda read between the lines and see what actual users think.

[NL5]

Originally Posted by jsavisalo

One more silly question: how much do you think the quality of conversion affects the sound quality, compared to the effect of a good preamp? So, with my Roland 1680 and limited budget, should I spend my money to a decent converter (maybe RME ADI-2?) + an OK pre (like DMP3) or just buy a better pre (RNP, Grace...) and use the analog ins?

I was always under the impression that converters made the SMALLEST change to the sound. However, Dot (Dan at www.soundpure.com) said my converters (MOTU 828mkII) were holding me back from realizing the improvements from better mics and pres. So, I bought a used apogee ad16/da16 - it made a HUGE difference. Way more than any other single piece of gear. Converters really do make a difference!

[dwillis45]

Originally Posted by jsavisalo

One more silly question: how much do you think the quality of conversion affects the sound quality, compared to the effect of a good preamp? So, with my Roland 1680 and limited budget, should I spend my money to a decent converter (maybe RME ADI-2?) + an OK pre (like DMP3) or just buy a better pre (RNP, Grace...) and use the analog ins?

Check to make sure you Roland recorder has an input for overriding the preamps. In other words, not plugging a preamp into a preamp. Some of these SIAB (Studio In A Box) units make you jump through hoops to use external preamps, converters, and effects. If you are bypassing the converters, also check to make sure that the Roland has a digital input that matches your converter. Most converters offer SPDIF, TOSLINK or AES. You should also check the Roland manual to see if the "clock source" can be changed from internal to external.

I wouldn't sweat the difference between preamps and converters. Just assume both are important and plan to eventually get the best you can afford in both categories. The same can be said for mics.

[gemsbok]

the art unit has a DIO converter in it. it has been known by the audiophile types to kick some butt just do a internet search. for the price you cant go wrong. you will get a good converter much better than the roland and a mic pre that will keep you busy with all its different settings for a while till you feel the need to upgrade.

[jsavisalo]

Hehe... this is just what I ment in my earlier post when I talked about the many kinds of opinions and reviews . Yes, a quick search shows that many people indeed seem to like the DIO.

Dwillis, the Roland unit has both optical and coaxial SPDIF in/out. And the manual describes how to change the "reference clock" from internal to external, so I guess everything should be fine for using an external converter that has SPDIF out.

[dwillis45]

Originally Posted by gemsbok

for the price you cant go wrong. you will get a good converter much BETTER than the roland....

Or just DIFFERENT. At that price, I'm thinking different which sometimes can be confused with better. At any rate, if you don't mind taking the chance with $250 it's worth a try. After all, variety is the spice of life and a different sound might shake thinks up.

[deepwater]

Ive been doing this for about 4 years now and started out buying cheap gear. Now that Ive grown in understanding and bought 4 of everything trying to get a good sound Ive learn one important thing.

If your not spending at least 1000.00 for a pre or converter you're just wasting your money for something that is not much if an improvement and you'll soon be replacing. Save your money by buy some professional equipment.

[dwillis45]

Originally Posted by deepwater

Ive been doing this for about 4 years now and started out buying cheap gear. Now that Ive grown in understanding and bought 4 of everything trying to get a good sound Ive learn one important thing.

If your not spending at least 1000.00 for a pre or converter you're just wasting your money for something that is not much if an improvement and you'll soon be replacing. Save your money by buy some professional equipment.

That's pretty close to the way I feel except I wouldn't put a specific number on it. There are actually a few things that are under 1k that are really good, work well, and can show a "significant" improvement over the cheap stuff. The Lucid 9624 AD converter, for example, costs about $850 for two channels. It's arguably better than most stock (built-in) converters and holds it's own until you get into the really expensive stuff. Other people like the Myteks which also go for less than 1K.

[deepwater]

Originally Posted by dwillis45

That's pretty close to the way I feel except I wouldn't put a specific number on it. There are actually a few things that are under 1k that are really good, work well, and can show a "significant" improvement over the cheap stuff. The Lucid 9624 AD converter, for example, costs about $850 for two channels. It's arguably better than most stock (built-in) converters and holds it's own until you get into the really expensive stuff. Other people like the Myteks which also go for less than 1K.

I guess I should have said as you get close $1000.00 you start noticing a major imporvement as a general rule.

[gemsbok]

the 1680 roland is only 20 bit so going to 24 bits with the art DIO as well as a better converter WILL BE NIGHT AND DAY i have used my brothers a couple years back so i know. do a search for THE BORDER CABLE COMPANY if you have any doubts to its quality. im thinking its better than the flying cow.

[dwillis45]

Originally Posted by gemsbok

the 1680 roland is only 20 bit so going to 24 bits with the art DIO as well as a better converter WILL BE NIGHT AND DAY i have used my brothers a couple years back so i know.

Well, I can't argue with your experience but I think the difference will be more like DUSK and DAWN. But like I said above, if jsavisalo has $250 rolling around in his pockets, give it a shot. If it doesn't workout, return the converter. Just keep in mind that you may hear "better" or "different" and
there is always the possibility that you may hear no difference at all given the perceptiveness of your ears or the quality of your monitoring setup.

[Big Kenny]

Originally Posted by gemsbok

the 1680 roland is only 20 bit so going to 24 bits with the art DIO as well as a better converter WILL BE NIGHT AND DAY i have used my brothers a couple years back so i know. do a search for THE BORDER CABLE COMPANY if you have any doubts to its quality. im thinking its better than the flying cow.

Why would you possibly think it is better? Maudio makes some very nice sounding gear at this price point, the Cow is a usable converter. Just because the DIO is in 24 bit won't make it better and that tube won't make it warm. Your logic escapes me. At $150, how good can it be, and if it is, why doesn't apogee make one?

[jsavisalo]

Originally Posted by reshp1

You have to take magazine reviews with a grain of salt, how many times have you ever read a really bad review?

Actually, during my searh of a suitable preamp I have read at least one quite bad magazine review of DBX 386, and the review of Aphex 207 is not very flattering either:

http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_dbx/index.html

http://emusician.com/signalprocessor...l_2/index.html

[treymonfauntre]

ahem, if you are plugging this into your roland machine and its only 20 bit, whos to say it won't just ignore the extra 4 bits from a 24bit converter?

[jsavisalo]

Originally Posted by treymonfauntre

ahem, if you are plugging this into your roland machine and its only 20 bit, whos to say it won't just ignore the extra 4 bits from a 24bit converter?

As far as I know this Roland model uses 24 bits in its internal processing, only the converters are 20 bits. I don't know however if this guarantees anything...

[dwillis45]

Originally Posted by jsavisalo

Actually, during my searh of a suitable preamp I have read at least one quite bad magazine review of DBX 386, and the review of Aphex 207 is not very flattering either.

For me at least, the magazine reviews (hard copy or internet) are not particularly useful. I find that the best way to get a sense of a product is to search multiple forums (including this BBS, Gearslutz, etc.) and try to glean some sort of general consensus. I also find that it's helpful to follow the ebb and flow of gear at select high end dealers like Mercenary or Atlas Pro Audio. These guys aren't perfect but they test equipment and use it in professional applications. Finally, although I had to admit it, sometimes the most telling measure of a product is price. Capitalism has it's quirks but cost is often just as useful as a 1,000 words from an unknown reviewer or pages and pages of unweildy internet discourse.