RNC as a mastering compressor

  • Thread starter Thread starter cominginsecond
  • Start date Start date
cominginsecond

cominginsecond

Decentralized Media Mogul
I was just wondering if anyone has had any luck using the RNC as a mastering compressor.
 
I would consider it if........ it had digital ins and outs. It doesnt. Presently, it only offers unbalanced ins and outs so youll lose in the AD/DA conversions.

Im waiting for the RNC plugin.


:)
 
JuSumPilgrim said:
I would consider it if........ it had digital ins and outs. It doesnt. Presently, it only offers unbalanced ins and outs so youll lose in the AD/DA conversions.

Im waiting for the RNC plugin.


:)
Click to expand...

That's funny, most of the best mastering houses do DA/AD conversions with analog gear inbetween for mastering!!!

The unbalanced I/O will not be an issue if you don't use cable runs of longer than say 12' and don't have and RFI or EMI problems in your control room. The unit I am sure runs at +4 operating levels.

I have used a damn Behringer Composer and the eq's on a Soundcraft Ghost for mastering, and the client claimed that the mastering job did EXACTLY what he was looking for, which was increasing volume in an invisible way. I didn't hear any hash from the conversions, and neither did he. In fact, I got the mastering gig after he had a dood with some major label experience master the stuff using all sorts of VERY expensive gear. Sounded like shit!!!

Try out your RNC. If you achieve the results you want from mastering, then there is certainly nothing wrong with using it.

Eddie
 
Right on, Sonus.

Use what works.

And as far as the A/D D/A chain goes, if you're not using outboard converters, you've got other issues to address. Don't buy a box with everything included in it - you'll find that that "everything" is below acceptable standards - so you'll have a box full of NOTHING when all is said and done.
 
I havent had a need to use anything outside the computer for mastering. I use waves and stein plugs. Mastering houses typically spend $10k or so on outboard converters. I have my 1010 and DIport converters,,,which are fine but Id rather do as little degradation to the sound as possible.

Im waiting for the soundcraft EQ plug too. :)
 
chessrock,

Forgive me for chasing you around the board, but I want to draw your attention to some questions about the 528E I sent to your personal messages.
 
sibleypeck said:
chessrock,

Forgive me for chasing you around the board, but I want to draw your attention to some questions about the 528E I sent to your personal messages.
Click to expand...

Post 'em here! A couple people around here have 528E's, myself included.
 
JuSumPilgrim said:
I havent had a need to use anything outside the computer for mastering. I use waves and stein plugs. Mastering houses typically spend $10k or so on outboard converters. I have my 1010 and DIport converters,,,which are fine but Id rather do as little degradation to the sound as possible.

Im waiting for the soundcraft EQ plug too. :)
Click to expand...

I am betting you could not hear any degregation to audio that has gone through an extra conversion using those converters. I could prove that too. In fact, I am betting most people around here would prefer the sound of a song that was dithered down to 16 bit via a conversion over the original!

I like the sound of stuff that is mastered outside of the digital realm. An extra analog path really seems to round things out, and with some good dithering, you can add a nice sweet quality to things. YMMV!!!

I am a Creep!
 
Creepy, I doubt you could hear the dif between something mastered totally digitally and something mastered outside the computer.

Prove me wrong. Post 5 tracks that went through the extra conversion and post 5 that didnt. Everybody can find exceptions to rules, prove it over a dozen tracks using the 1010.

I agree that sometimes the 16 bit dithered version sounds better bec it can sound smoother and less defined more glued togeather so to speak after dithering to 16 bit. Usually not though. Usually 32 bit sounds wider, clearer and better.

Analog doesnt round things out. Not under $1k. And theres plenty of digital that sounds rounder than analog. The whole analog vs digital debate is tiring and old.

Chess buddy, Waves RCL is not the RNC by any stretch. Its tubier sounding even in manual/opto/smooth mode. BTW, hows the DIport treating you??
 
Sshhh. Remember, we can't refer to anything mastered on the DAW as "mastering" or else the mastering police will throw us in BBS prison.

The D.I. port is working out very well so far. I put it to the test just yesterday. I was recording some sound for my buddy's video shoots. He had these people "paddling" in a canoe, and as the camera pans out, you can see that they're actually just sitting in a canoe on grass. So I overdubbed the sound of the paddling. Yea, I know that's really cheezy, but the D.I. port captured all of the detail of my hand swishing around in a bucket of water really nicely. :)
 
Wow. Thats by far the best paddled water Ive ever heard. You got a real nice balance of top end and bottom end. Such realism...it was like....like...I was there. :D

It does sound like it was done in a bathroom but the clarity and transparency is unmistakably mindprint. Class A, folks. :D :D


I would add some running water in the backround and pan it left and right,,,run the paddling down the center/left.
 
Last edited:
I'll make sure to do exactly that when my buddy's home video makes it to the imax theatres in Dolby Surround. For now, though, I think the mono will have to do . . . unless he wants to up my hourly rate, of course. :)
 
Griffinator said:
Right on, Sonus.

Use what works.

And as far as the A/D D/A chain goes, if you're not using outboard converters, you've got other issues to address. Don't buy a box with everything included in it - you'll find that that "everything" is below acceptable standards - so you'll have a box full of NOTHING when all is said and done.
Click to expand...

Hmm. I'm not too sure about "acceptable standards." If, as Sonus implies, a RNC can be "acceptable," I'm sure the "everything included in it" Finalizer Plus should meet that standard. Then again, maybe that's apples to oranges because Sonus is referring to stuff you have lying around and the Finalizer is a more expensive device designed for DIY mastering.

FWIW, the Finalizer has S/PDIF I/O so no A/D conversion is necessary.
 
Please tell me what S/PDIF is (I know stands for Sony/Phillips Digital InterFace).
Does it preclude, or, is it an alternative to DA/AD conversion? Better? Worse? Different?
 
SPDIF is a digital input. If you use a digital, rather than an analog input, your audio does not have to go through another D/A A/D conversion. This means there will be no degradation in the signal. However, the amount of degradation going through one conversion is not going to significantly degrade the signal, and if doing so helps the sound, it's more than worth it, IMHO.
 
Right. If your audio card has S/PDIF I/O, you can send your mix through the Finalizer's S/PDIF I/O without any conversions.

Regarding the degradation of conversions, keep in mind this can depend on the quality of your converters, sampling rate, etc. Lower quality converters with low sampling rates can degrade your signal on the first conversion. Thus, multiple conversions will seriously degrade your sound quality. A couple of conversions with higher quality converters and high sampling rates might not be noticeable.
 
Just as a frame of reference here...I hear a loss of volume, and stereo definition after 1 conversion (D/A - A/D) with the 1010.
 
One thing to keep in mind is that most pro mastering houses take it out of the digital realm to do their work. I guess they probably have thousand dollar per channel A/D D/A converters, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top