S/PDIF or XLR

  • Thread starter Thread starter killdasoundboy
  • Start date Start date
K

killdasoundboy

New member
i was just wondering which output from my pre-amp offers better resolution/quality..the S/PDIF port or the XLR port?

Current setup TLM 103--->Focusrite ISA One Microphone Preamp---(S/PDIF out to the S/PDIF in on my---> M-Audio Delta 1010 LT sound card)

If i decided to use the XLR input on my Delta 1010 LT would there be any benefits over using the S/PDIF?
 
The only real difference is which set of converters you want to use. spdif is a digital signal, so there has to be an AD converter in the preamp. IF you think that one is better sounding than the converter in the Delta, use it. Of course, if you do use it, you need to make sure the delta clock is slaved to the preamp clock.
 
Basically, what Farview said. Every vocal chain in digital recording has a mic, a cable, a preamp, an A-D convertor, and usually another cable. There's one main thing to consider. Which has the better A-D convertor, the Focusrite or the Delta (my guess is the Focusrite)? The second thing is whether the S/PDIF connection is coaxial or optical. An optical/Toslink connection is far less susceptible to interference from power bearing cables and radio frequency interference. If I have a choice, I'll always use the optical connection.
 
The other useful thing about optical is that it eliminates any possibility of the all-to-common earth (ground to you yanks) loop. This is a problem more often than outside electrical interference with a digital signal.

Otherwise, as has been said, just listen to the quality of the A to D and go with what sounds best to you. Frankly, I'll wager the differences are subtle if audible at all (but I've never had a chance to do and A/B comparison of Focusrite vs. the Delta).
 
In most cases that I have been in, going s/pdif runs on it's own so you still have use of those xlrs you have. In other words, going s/dif usually adds an inputs verses running it line where it eats an input.
 
Guitargodgt said:
In most cases that I have been in, going s/pdif runs on it's own so you still have use of those xlrs you have. In other words, going s/dif usually adds an inputs verses running it line where it eats an input.
Click to expand...
Why would you need to use both? You would simply have to choose to monitor the spdif instead of the analog input to hear it. Most of the time, the spdif gives you an extra two channels of input, so you should be able to use both to get 4 input channels.
 
Not trying to hijack your thread here, but what about XLR versus AES for a digital compressor:

Mic -> Interface/preamp OUT -> Compressor -> Interface/preamp IN
 
dainbramage said:
Not trying to hijack your thread here, but what about XLR versus AES for a digital compressor:

Mic -> Interface/preamp OUT -> Compressor -> Interface/preamp IN
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter which i/o you choose.

The upside to using the digital route is that you don't go through any conversions to analog and back.

The downside to going the digital route is you have to make sure that everything is clocking correctly and runs at the same sample rate.

That is pretty much it. There is no difference between spdif and AES/EBU as far as the data is concerned. The only real difference is the impedance of the outputs and the fact that AES/EBU is balanced and spdif is not.
 
Farview said:
It doesn't matter which i/o you choose.

That is pretty much it. There is no difference between spdif and AES/EBU as far as the data is concerned. The only real difference is the impedance of the outputs and the fact that AES/EBU is balanced and spdif is not.
Click to expand...

Just to be pedantic (in case it ever matters to anyone), AES/EBU exists in both balanced and unbalanced varieties. As you say, the data stream is compatible but there are also differences in the voltages used and the fact that S/PDIF carries SCMS copy protection data and AES3 doesn't.

The one area that could be significant to some users is that AES3 can be used for cable runs up to 100m (1000m for unbalanced) but S/PDIF is restricted to about 10m.

/pedant mode off
 
Farview said:
The upside to using the digital route is that you don't go through any conversions to analog and back.
Click to expand...

So in my case I should go digital (AES/EBU) instead of XRL since the converters on the compressor (which is from 2002) is probably inferior to the ones on my interface (from 2011) and the compressor converters would automatically be bypassed?

It confuses me when you say it doesn't matter.
 
dainbramage said:
So in my case I should go digital (AES/EBU) instead of XRL since the converters on the compressor (which is from 2002) is probably inferior to the ones on my interface (from 2011) and the compressor converters would automatically be bypassed?
Click to expand...
That would be the purest route to go.

dainbramage said:
It confuses me when you say it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
One of the reasons that it doesn't matter is the fact that you are using the compressor to change the sound of what you are feeding it. The sound of the converters could be useful in that context.

For example, with some digital processors, especially really old units from the 80's, part of their charm is the sound of their (crappy sounding) converters. If you bypass them, you might not get the sound you are expecting.

Hook it up both ways and see which one sounds better, is more useful or is better for your work-flow. If you get a sound you want, it doesn't matter how you got it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top