The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Lynx Aurora 16 vs Behringer ADA8000
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #61
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Oh yeah...is there any way to get some of the mastering guys to weigh in with their impressions? I'd love to hear from someone who can listen to these files on a world-class mastering grade playback system / room.

Brian Lucey, we need you and your Barefoots!

Brad
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #62
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
A sounds clearly better to me on my crappy AKG K240 Headphones. More open sound, clearer transients and B is muddy covered crap to my ears ... just my personal view.

The idea is great, the more converters we get to compare the better we all know them. I'm getting back my Motu DH192 from Black Lion Audio next week, so let's check if it was worth the money Could also get a friend to do the test with his Prism Orpheus ...

Would also be interested in the Alpha Link, anyone ?
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #63
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I have a BLA modded MOTU Traveler, Fireface 800 and a Mytek 8x192. This could be fun.

I'm assuming if we post additional converter files we should match the RMS levels of the processed files to the raw track.

Brad
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #64
Lives for gear
 
norman_nomad's Avatar
 
5 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by soundgeezer ➑️
Could also get a friend to do the test with his Prism Orpheus ...
Would LOVE to hear the Orpheus!
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #65
Lives for gear
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
The only problem I see is the use of different cables.
I'm actually writing a review on different audio cable and the differences during recording and mixing are not subtle but huge ...
I thought it was homeopathic nuances but now I heard the differences I'm asking myself how I could use my old (normal and standard) cables for such a long time ...
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #66
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
Listening through Onyx Satellite & Yamaha HS80's / AKG K271 Headphones.

Of course the originals have much more sparkle! They're the ORIGINALS, right?? ;-)


I have worked on The exact same Behringer/RME setup quite a few times and was always impressed by their capabilities. Just never turn up the g(r)ain too far ;-)


The aurora I don't know, appears to be a pretty slick piece of kit, though.


both sounded pretty agreeable to me. I couldn't hear much difference. In fact it is so little difference that I could even file my results under "acoustic psychology" (dunno the english term, excuse my sorry terminology) I mean the fact that the ear is EXPECTING to hear a difference, so the brain projects one... it's pretty darn close.

I know this may seem weird but as I don't personally know the Auroras but do know the Behringers, I'd trust the cheap ones to win the match, thus: A= Behringer. What B is IMO, you might just figure out on your own... ;-)


but then again, I may be wrong...

Muahaha!!


anyway, have fun, guys!

Alexander
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #67
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad McGowan ➑️
Yes, the penalty is you lose credibilty with people that think more expensive gear is the answer to the question "how do I make my recordings sound better".

Brad
ya but i don't think that the 'seeking gearslutz credibility' perspective is remotely healthy. if anyone's posting here to stroke their ego, they probably have bigger problems than their converters.
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #68
Here for the gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovisceral ➑️
ya but i don't think that the 'credibility' perspective is remotely healthy. if anyone's posting here to stroke their ego, they probably have bigger problems than their converters. heh
.....or smaller...
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #69
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pfretzschner ➑️
.....or smaller...
lol
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #70
Lives for gear
 
Zuewi's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I'm guessing A=Aurora somehow sounds more natural and B=Behringer sounds more gritty. The difference isn't that huge on those files I must say.

The results would come more to the daylight if we compare lets say 15sec Loops of "worldclass" recorded albums. What has gerat transients, clearness, seperation,...... That would be really THE base for such a converter test.
You can really hear what the converter does with the surce material...

Upsampling to 96khz and then make the loop would be a nice option to hear how the different converters react to this..., that's how most ppl record nowadays


Queston: are we allowed to do that? I mean take 15 sec of an record for edicational purposes? heh


Those different comparisons would always need 100% level matching otherwise such a comparison makes no sense really.
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #71
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuewi ➑️
I'm guessing A=Aurora somehow sounds more natural and B=Behringer sounds more gritty. The difference isn't that huge on those files I must say.

The results would come more to the daylight if we compare lets say 10sec Loops of wordclass recorded albums. More transients, clearness, seperation,...... That would be THE base for a converter test.
Maybe upsample those material to 96khz and loop it with that would be nice also, that's how most ppl record nowadays

btw. are we allowed to do that? I mean take 10 sec of an record for edicational purposes? heh
he did that. what i would like though, eg. with the live clip above, is if norman could send the song out and in, then repeat that conversion step with the resultant file again and again.

that way you can compare the song after say 10 rounds of successive conversion with each.

should amplify the differences considerably.
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #72
Lives for gear
 
Zuewi's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
hm.... I didn't know any of those songs heh
Wouldn't use those for a converter test throu. They somehow lacked already at the Original IMHO.

If we really do that test we still have the different wirings so this would also make a difference.
Old 22nd October 2008 | Show parent
  #73
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuewi ➑️
hm.... I didn't know any of those songs heh
Wouldn't use those for a converter test throu. They somehow lacked already at the Original IMHO.
live - selling the drama, from throwing copper

sold 8 million copies in US

Throwing Copper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

not my fave either, but certainly not bad, i'd say.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewDAgKKzsSE
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #74
Lives for gear
 
norman_nomad's Avatar
 
5 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovisceral ➑️
what i would like though, eg. with the live clip above, is if norman could send the song out and in, then repeat that conversion step with the resultant file again and again.

that way you can compare the song after say 10 rounds of successive conversion with each.

should amplify the differences considerably.
I actually did that test with another song here if you're interested: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-e...-you-vote.html
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #75
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by norman_nomad ➑️
I actually did that test with another song here if you're interested: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-e...-you-vote.html
very cool! would you consider taking that same clip again and doing 32x with the lynx for comparison?

same sample/bit rate of course.
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #76
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
I'm curious what running audio through converters 32X is going to prove to anyone. I think realistically we may pass audio through conversion 4-5 times max roundtrip in a typical mix. Example:

Record Bass DI: A/D
Reamp Bass DI: D/A
Record reamped bass: A/D
use outboard compressor during mixdown: D/A > comp > A/D
print mix of song through outboard gear: D/A > magic boxes > A/D

That's a total of four A/D conversions and three D/A conversions. If you have tons of ins/outs on your DAW you may hook up each piece of outboard to a separate pair of I/O, in which case you would incur an additional conversion roundtrip for each unit.

I think comparing each converter at 4X or 5X would be much more helpful and reveal real world performance better. My hypothesis is that you wouldn't be able to discern any appreciable difference between 1X and 5X to really care when using any reasonable converter.

Brad
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #77
Gear Guru
 
lucey's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad McGowan ➑️
I think comparing each converter at 4X or 5X would be much more helpful and reveal real world performance better. My hypothesis is that you wouldn't be able to discern any appreciable difference between 1X and 5X to really care when using any reasonable converter.

Brad
I would imagine that with this process the artifacts would pile up in an obvious way.

As far as A and B ... A has an extra low midrange bump and distortion, making for power/width and a relative definition loss in the middle compared to the source. B is maybe closer to the source, but the opposite effect with ever so slightly cleaner low mids, pushing the power up from the bottom, and is more centered in stereo as a result.

Both A and B do some bizarre things in a null test, with a phase filp vs the source!

I don't know which is which, but I'd prefer A for it's beef in tracking, and B for it's closer sound in mastering.
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #78
Lives for gear
 
peeder's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Owwwwwkay you asked for it!

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-...tml?highlight=
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #79
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad McGowan ➑️
I'm curious what running audio through converters 32X is going to prove to anyone. I think realistically we may pass audio through conversion 4-5 times max roundtrip in a typical mix.

I think comparing each converter at 4X or 5X would be much more helpful and reveal real world performance better. My hypothesis is that you wouldn't be able to discern any appreciable difference between 1X and 5X to really care when using any reasonable converter.

Brad
it highlights/approximates the layering effect you might get from a 100 track project and exaggerates subtle differences into audible ones.

nomad, if you can do it to match the behr thread, i'd definitely be listening.
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #80
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovisceral ➑️
it highlights/approximates the layering effect you might get from a 100 track project and exaggerates subtle differences into audible ones.

nomad, if you can do it to match the behr thread, i'd definitely be listening.
Right, but I believe the effects accumulate in parallel and not in series over those 100 tracks. See the thread about stacking theory. A given track my have 4 or 5 conversions in series and I feel that is what you would notice.

Brad
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #81
Lives for gear
 
soupking's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is durability.

So the Behringer sounds really close in quality to the Aurora. Great. For how long?

I want gear that's not going to crap out on me during that Awesome take I'll never get back when the ghost in the machine kicks in and does something at the exact time the musician nails the part and it sounds awesome.

Granted this is a converter and not a hard drive, but still. I'm a firm believer in that you get what you pay for eventually.

Death & Taxes,
-soupking
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #82
Lives for gear
 
norman_nomad's Avatar
 
5 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiovisceral ➑️
it highlights/approximates the layering effect you might get from a 100 track project and exaggerates subtle differences into audible ones.

nomad, if you can do it to match the behr thread, i'd definitely be listening.
I'll see if I can match the Behringer with the Aurora.... but I agree with Brad... and we have a good example of it right here in this thread.

If there was a cumulative effect... shouldn't you hear it in my 16 track mix?
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #83
Lives for gear
 
norman_nomad's Avatar
 
5 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
Results Time (drum roll.....)


A = Behringer Ada8000
B = Lynx Aurora 16


(For the record, 15 either mistook the Behringer's for the Aurora's or preferred them, 4 picked correctly or preferred the Auroras)
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #84
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Damn...I was right.

Thanks Damon for giving me the opportunity to realize that I don't need to upgrade my Fireface or BLA-modded MOTU converters any time in the foreseeable future (I have Mytek as well).

Soupking does make a good point about quality and reliability. I'm 100% sure that the Aurora would outlast the Behringer in long term performance. But with the price of the Behringer being 1/10th the cost I wouldn't feel so bad about just buying a new one to replace it.

If I ever need another 8 channels of ins/outs, I'd probably consider the Behringer unit since I already have nice stuff for my most critical tracks.

thanks,
Brad
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #85
Lives for gear
 
blaugruen7's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
thats fun
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #86
Gear Nut
 
1 Review written
🎧 10 years
I said i like A better previously when i listened to the wav files through desktop computer speakers, A seemed to preserve the highs of the original, i am not changing my word but when i listened to the same files on Adam P33A i found that B is closer to the original than A, but A sounded too good also and no big difference, Priced at $200 the behr is a great unit.

i wounder now how would a fireface 800 compare to aurora 16 heh
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #87
Gear Guru
 
lucey's Avatar
When I saw this thread title I thought it was the Apogee AD8000 vs the Aurora 16, and I was going to say that A was the Apogee as that's the AD8000 sound for sure.

Then I saw it was Behringer, and as I don't know either converter I didn't guess, but in retrospect it seems very possible that Apogee is the latest victim of photocopying by Behringer. An amazingly low price for the AD8000 sound, no doubt about that, but I would have a hard time buying Behringer.
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #88
Lives for gear
 
blackcatdigi's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by norman_nomad ➑️
Results Time (drum roll.....)


A = Behringer Ada8000
B = Lynx Aurora 16


(For the record, 15 either mistook the Behringer's for the Aurora's or preferred them, 4 picked correctly or preferred the Auroras)
HAH! I love it.

Now, if Behringer would just put the fancy new "Xenyx" mic pres in it...

heh
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #89
Lives for gear
 
BradM's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
What they should do is release a version without the mic pres and sell it for $149.

Brad
Old 23rd October 2008 | Show parent
  #90
Lives for gear
 
norman_nomad's Avatar
 
5 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
A couple of thoughts...

If you do a null test on any of the files you'd find that B always nulls better with the original than A. No matter how you adjust the volume of either track, A will always have some high frequency residual that won't cancel out. This is even the case with my original 16 track mix.

I found this graph on Prodigy Pro which is a frequency plot of the Behringer Ada8000.



Lucey's interpretation bets fits what you see on this graph as well as what I hear when I listen to these two files.

It's interesting that people interpret that slightly hyped top end and greater noise/distortion of the Behringer as sounding "more real" or "closer to the original" when in fact the Aurora, in all cases, is the more accurate converter.
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 157 views: 28290
Avatar for AMIEL
AMIEL 26th October 2007
replies: 84 views: 68019
Avatar for Melodnb
Melodnb 2nd July 2012
replies: 2352 views: 397669
Avatar for didier.brest
didier.brest 10 hours ago
replies: 50 views: 8060
Avatar for McDingus
McDingus 14th October 2011
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump