Distressor or Rosetta 200

[monkie]

Okay, so I had to choose between which gear will be of more benefit for my studio. I previously posted back a while ago about which converter I should get and all replies have been very helpful. I appreciate all your inputs and recommendations. However, by reading all your replies and taking your recommendations, I have decided to treat my room first before going the converter route. But with some extra $ to spend in the mean time, I'd like to make use of it to beef up my mix with a new compressor-the Distressor (EL-8XM $1530, or EL-8M $1350). I've been doing some research about the distressor and so far got mostly awesome reviews about it. What do you guys think about the Distressor? How are the EL-8XM and the EL-8M different? What's the xtra feature of the EL-8MX?

I want to know if you guys think if I should get the converter first or the distressor? Which will I benefit from most considering my room has already been treated?

Again, I appreciate all your inputs and recommendations. Can't wait to hear from you all. Have a nice day.

[TexRoadkill]

In my experience the most important stuff is at the beginning of the chain and you should upgrade starting at the front and work back.

The chain being:
Performer-instrument-room-mic-preamp/processors-convertor-recorder.

In other words if you are a shitty player playing on shitty gear then no amount of expensive input hardware will help that much.

[xstatic]

Personally, I would go the converter route first, assuming you are currently using a run of the mill affordable converter. I certainly like compressors more, they are more interactive, so you feel like you are getting more for your money. In reality however, the converter affects how you hear things and every track you do (assuming you always use that converter).

That being said, Distressors are awesome "do it all" compressors. The "x" version adds the stereo link button should you ever get another distressor later, and adds the nuke button. Personally, I don't use the nuke setting as much as I thought I might upon first purchase, but I find that sometimes it really sounds great and is therefore worth the extra $200 to $300 that it costs to get the "X" version.

[yaknski]

Originally Posted by xstatic

Personally, I would go the converter route first, assuming you are currently using a run of the mill affordable converter. I certainly like compressors more, they are more interactive, so you feel like you are getting more for your money. In reality however, the converter affects how you hear things and every track you do (assuming you always use that converter).

That being said, Distressors are awesome "do it all" compressors. The "x" version adds the stereo link button should you ever get another distressor later, and adds the nuke button. Personally, I don't use the nuke setting as much as I thought I might upon first purchase, but I find that sometimes it really sounds great and is therefore worth the extra $200 to $300 that it costs to get the "X" version.

I have both units. Definitely the Rosetta 200 first. You won't be sorry. Just playing a CD through it is amazing. The Distressors are great too, but it makes sense to get better AD/DA conversion first if you can get your projects done with 2 channels of input.

[monkie]

I appreciate all your inputs. From what I've been reading in discussion forums and opinions from others, people's been saying that you don't really hear that much of a difference with a converter; even if you do, it'll only be subtle. I don't know because I haven't used one before. Some recommended that I should get the converter (Rosetta 200 in particular) as the last gear in the chain. And with the extra $ on the side, I should use it for something else that I would notice it the difference more and that would be more beneficial to my studio. I'm quite stressed about which to get first as I've never heard the difference a converter really makes. Do any you here know where I can get a audio sample of the difference between using a converter vs. without a converter?

All your ideas and suggestions really help. Please keep it coming.

[NL5]

Another vote for conversion first. Probably third on the list for biggest difference in my recordings, just behind room design/treatment, and better monitors. Much more than preamps ever made in my recordings, and while comps are great, I echo what Xstatic has said.

[monkie]

Originally Posted by NL5

Another vote for conversion first. Probably third on the list for biggest difference in my recordings, just behind room design/treatment, and better monitors. Much more than preamps ever made in my recordings, and while comps are great, I echo what Xstatic has said.

true!~

[pohaku]

Well, if you are currently recording using your computer, you are already using a converter. The converter converts analog input signal to digital so that it can be stored by and manipulated with your computer. It also converts the digital audio information in your computer back to analog so that you can hear it on whatever playback system you have (monitors, phones). The issue is whether getting a better converter is worthwhile to you at this point in time.

You will get widely divergent opinions on this issue as you can already see. Both positions (converter next -- compressor next) have valid points of support.

I suppose that in some sense it may come down to need. What is your current recording chain, including sound card/interface? If you have a relatively decent sound card/interface, the difference you will gain with a converter like the Rosetta, while certainly audible, will typically be relatively subtle. Upgrading items further up the chain will have a more significant effect on your sound -- room, mics, preamps, etc. Does the sound of your current work need better conversion right now, or does it need better compression? Which would benefit it the most?

I had an Aardvark Q10 and chose to replace it last in the chain with a Lynx Aurora 8. Does it sound better? Yes, but I was getting decent results with the Aardvark before and chose to spend money on mics and outboard first. IMHO it's kind of a personal decision where you have to weigh the perceived benefits to you at this point in time.

[Daisy]

Compression is a very obvious effect that can significantly alter the dynamics of your tracks.

A conversion upgrade is one of those subtle things that you may or may not hear or derive much benefit from. A guy like NL5 has a pretty good ear for that kind of stuff, but he is by no means representative of the "typical" listener in a typical listening environment.

Seriously, the guy could probably hear a dog whistle, but you're probably not there yet. If recording of accoustic instruments and voice is your thing right now, then worry about the room treatment and the monitors. Then worry about the instruments. A nice compressor would be cool to have as well, and you might have some fun with it. All the other stuff is just sweating the minute details.

[monkie]

[QUOTE=pohaku;2882253]

I suppose that in some sense it may come down to need. What is your current recording chain, including sound card/interface? If you have a relatively decent sound card/interface, the difference you will gain with a converter like the Rosetta, while certainly audible, will typically be relatively subtle. Upgrading items further up the chain will have a more significant effect on your sound -- room, mics, preamps, etc. Does the sound of your current work need better conversion right now, or does it need better compression? Which would benefit it the most?
[QUOTE]

My current recording chain is Rode K2--LA610--002R/Pro Tools 7--Mackie Big Knob--ASP8 monitors. I currently use Digidesign BF76 compressor and Waves plug-ins for processing and Waves L3 for mastering. I don't have any outboard dynamics processors at this time. Waves plug-ins are very nice but I've been hearing good things about the distressors other outboard processors-something that plug-ins can't do.

Let's say, if my room is not treated, what would be a better option for me-the converter or the distressor? Which one is more bang for the buck? In your opinion, what how does the Waves compressors compared to the Distressor? By the way I have the Diamond version of Waves. There are just somet things that I can't achieve with plug-ins and I want to know if hardware processors will be the answer to my questions. And for converters, I know that the 002R's converter does not stand up to the Rosetta's but how much better is the Rosetta to the 002R? Is the difference obvious to (lets say) a newbie?

I also heard good things about the Aphex 204 that it can make mixes stand out more professionally. For $300, that's a pretty good price for what you get out of it. What are you views on the 204? I know I'm going off subject but it's just something on the side I might want to consider in the future.

I think my mixes sounds good, but not exactly how I intended to be. I always feel like I'm missing something sweet. I do pop/trance/hip-hop/and rock. How much will I benefit from the Distressor doing pop? compared to trance? hip-hop? or rock?

Can't wait to hear from you all.

[NL5]

After reading your last post, I am starting to think you should really just concentrate on treating your room. It's not all that cheap nor easy to do. It is the BIGGEST thing you can do to help you achieve a better sound (other than making the source better, but we will assume you have a great sounding source)

While I don't particularly like waves plugins myself, and think they are WAY overpriced, I don't think you will find a major difference with an outboard compressor. I would concentrate on learning to use what you have. I have Distressors, and an MC77, and I can get very close to the same sound with a UAD 1176. I feel conversion made a bigger change in my recordings than did adding the outboard comps. Which brings me to my next point.

I appreciate the compliments from Daisy, but I really don't have that good of ears. What I do have is a professionally "designed" CR, great conversion, and great monitors - that is why I can hear things I do. Or, I fire up the Beyer DT770's - you can hear a gnat fart in a metal mix with those things.

Lastly, you are going to find out that no one thing is going to be a silver bullet. Everything adds up. It definetly becomes a game of inches in the end. I am still fighting that fight myself. You really need to learn what you are doing, and you need to be able to hear what you are doing in order for that to happen.

[monkie]

Originally Posted by NL5

After reading your last post, I am starting to think you should really just concentrate on treating your room. It's not all that cheap nor easy to do. It is the BIGGEST thing you can do to help you achieve a better sound (other than making the source better, but we will assume you have a great sounding source)

While I don't particularly like waves plugins myself, and think they are WAY overpriced, I don't think you will find a major difference with an outboard compressor. I would concentrate on learning to use what you have. I have Distressors, and an MC77, and I can get very close to the same sound with a UAD 1176. I feel conversion made a bigger change in my recordings than did adding the outboard comps. Which brings me to my next point.

I appreciate the compliments from Daisy, but I really don't have that good of ears. What I do have is a professionally "designed" CR, great conversion, and great monitors - that is why I can hear things I do. Or, I fire up the Beyer DT770's - you can hear a gnat fart in a metal mix with those things.

Lastly, you are going to find out that no one thing is going to be a silver bullet. Everything adds up. It definetly becomes a game of inches in the end. I am still fighting that fight myself. You really need to learn what you are doing, and you need to be able to hear what you are doing in order for that to happen.

That's very encouraging NL5. I guess I just need more learning and experimenting with what I have. I'll save myself more $$$ for the future instead or maybe treat my room a little more. I was just reading Ethan Winer's website about acoustic treatments. I guess it was all about the room all along.

NL5, you seem like a nice and honest person, How long have you been in this business? Thanks to you I saved myself some $$$.

[NL5]

Originally Posted by monkie

That's very encouraging NL5. I guess I just need more learning and experimenting with what I have. I'll save myself more $$$ for the future instead or maybe treat my room a little more. I was just reading Ethan Winer's website about acoustic treatments. I guess it was all about the room all along.

NL5, you seem like a nice and honest person, How long have you been in this business? Thanks to you I saved myself some $$$.

Thank you!

I'm not really "in the business", it's more of an out of control hobby for me. But I have been doing it for about 6 years pretty steady, but have been dabbling off and on since about '92.