Help me choose an interface please

TalismanRich said:
A bit of FYI, here is Julian Krause's review of the UAC-232. If you go to 12:50, he has the graph of the line input response and it is indeed flat out to 80kHz. But as always, there are good and bad points about any device, and there are some things that might be considered questionable choices in the design like not having any input attenuation. That might be fine for using in 32 bit mode, but if you go to 24 bit, it might well be an issue..



As for the steaks.... I've got 4 NY Strips in the fridge, just waiting to be tossed on the grill (it's not going to be abnormally hot here in the Midwest US). :giggle:
Click to expand...

Ah, okay then this is along the lines of their field recorder where the interface is designed to handle the full dynamic range of the analog front end so there’s no need to adjust an input attenuator and risk clipping.

I’m still not understanding why it would be flat to 80KHz unless they are expecting to use it for instrumentation. Nobody needs that kind of bandwidth for audio.

It also means the anti-alias filter is a little steeper, so probably has additional ringing and latency. Maybe okay for field recording but not so good for podcasting and multitrack home recording.
 
"I’m still not understanding why it would be flat to 80KHz unless they are expecting to use it for instrumentation. Nobody needs that kind of bandwidth for audio."
'Politics' mate. The adpuff dept want specifications that they think will impress many people. One problem is that if you build for a 3dB point at a rather saner point of say 30-40kHz you cannot really avoid a 0.2-3dB loss at 20kHz and THAT to the copywriters is heresy! But, I can live with 80k, it is when they break into the MW band that I get pissed off.
There are counter arguments about "preserving phase" and even the old nonsense that "the audio contains harmonics out to 30-50kHz so we must preserve them" Totally ignoring the fact that few microphones even reach 20k and even fewer get much past it. Then I cannot think of a monitor that get past 25kHz though I guess there might be a few?

It is the same philosophy that keeps the dB"u". Getting on for a century old, derived from the "dBm" from passive telephone days but it makes the specs look better. "+22dBu" for an AI output beats "+20dBV" on paper.
Not everyone is so enmired however? Those rough arsed guitar electronics boys get on happily with dBV!

Dave.
 
CJ, you wouldn't need a steep cutoff filter with 80K bandwidth. Your microphones will naturally roll off just about everything above 20kHz. Signals above 80k would be nonexistent, so no alias artifacts. But this is into "cork sniffer" territory. For us common folk, 20k is perfectly workable. And yes, Zoom actually says that the interface is derived from the F series field recorders.

It's probably like having a car that can do 150 but you never drive it above 80. You're not pushing the limit of the system.
 
ecc83 said:
"I’m still not understanding why it would be flat to 80KHz unless they are expecting to use it for instrumentation. Nobody needs that kind of bandwidth for audio."
'Politics' mate. The adpuff dept want specifications that they think will impress many people. One problem is that if you build for a 3dB point at a rather saner point of say 30-40kHz you cannot really avoid a 0.2-3dB loss at 20kHz and THAT to the copywriters is heresy! But, I can live with 80k, it is when they break into the MW band that I get pissed off.
There are counter arguments about "preserving phase" and even the old nonsense that "the audio contains harmonics out to 30-50kHz so we must preserve them" Totally ignoring the fact that few microphones even reach 20k and even fewer get much past it. Then I cannot think of a monitor that get past 25kHz though I guess there might be a few?

It is the same philosophy that keeps the dB"u". Getting on for a century old, derived from the "dBm" from passive telephone days but it makes the specs look better. "+22dBu" for an AI output beats "+20dBV" on paper.
Not everyone is so enmired however? Those rough arsed guitar electronics boys get on happily with dBV!

Dave.
Click to expand...
Well Dave since my aged and abused hearing taps out at 10KHz with lots of treble rolloff all the way down to 3Khz, and enough gritty distortion to make any carbon microphone drool with envy, maybe POTS specs are just what the doctor ordered.

I bought a set of Behringer B215XL FOH for my practice PA and blamed the tweeter crossovers for the whispering I heard coming from the tweeters when I played bass. I similarly blamed two different sets of cans for the distortion I heard while practicing bass through mixers and a through a bass amp. "All of this used gear is fried!" I whined, feeling completely ripped off.

Then I tried thinking for a change and remembered that my hearing is what fried.

LOL so much for hypothesizing wildly. What I'm hearing is either my tinnitus synthesizing phantom harmonics, or the bones of my middle ears rattling. Take your pick, either one is equally likely AFAIK although given that the distortion seemed to ease considerably when I started going to clubs again I'm guessing that the primary mechanism is hallucination.

Apparently blasting myself with high dBs again seemed to help retrain my audio cortex a little. That's what I was told by a drummer, he said his audiologist told him to get hearing aids before he started hearing distortion so I guess it must be true.

Obviously sound quality isn't all that important to me but I'd still like to preserve it all the way out to 80KHz anyway just in case the dog is listening lol
 
I was watching this video, and it might be a good explanation about where 32 bit floating point recording is really useful. As the man says, you need a DAW that will accommodate 32bit FP recording. In this case, he's using a new version of the Rode NT1 with the USB output that will record 192k/32bit audio. ( in case the video doesn't start at the right point, advance to 3:14)


 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top