I'm about to get an SSL Alpha-Link MADI AX interface to use with an RME Raydat card, and I'm getting all worked up about the 24 analog ins and outs.

I generally work ITB, but I do have outboard reverbs and a Culture Vulture. I'm thinking about adding a Focusrite Red 3 and maybe some other hardware eventually, but then I started wondering...How many trips back and forth into the analog world is too many?

I know many people will say "even one is too many," but let's stipulate that I like to use hardware boxes cuz it's fun and I like all the shiny colors and blinky lights :-)...If I have, say, a hardware box inserted on a channel or two, and then another hardware compressor inserted on the master buss, is that too many? Will the sound have degraded noticeably with two round trips?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts.

Paul

Joe Meek gave the best advice: "if it sounds good, it is good."

Staying totally in the box is the best way to keep the signal pristine - if that's what you want. But usually the desire to integrate analog gear is precisely because a pristine signal is exactly what we want to escape. A hint of noise & dirt is what we are wanting to achieve, and don't underestimate the effect that A/D & D/A have in their own right. Converters are just as much analog devices as the gear you want to interface with.

You could safely use dozens of conversions and get away with it. This is nothing compared to analog tape bouncing. And music probably suffers from a lack of the degradation that multiple tape generations could offer to add depth ...

Good advice. Thanks.

It does depend on the quality of the conversion certainly. I can tell you most individual tracks for me leave the computer twice, and then some in the busses, but with the 16x's the sound i started with is only mangled in the ways i wanted it to be.

The initial run ITB didn't necessarily capture the vibe i was hoping for, and maybe digital conversion can't do that to my asthetic, but it doesn't degrade from there in my case.

Russell

For a single computer, I'd say the limit resides with how many I/O your computer can handle, and still stay stable and glitchfree.

My impression with today's computers, is that 20-25 mono tracks playback/recording, is close to the red area - or perhaps a few more if you got a monster box.

Only you can say. I think its fair to say, you may have a high tolerance for "too much" seeing how you own a Culture Vulture. Kidding! Really, I think the honest answer to your question is NO, [with two round trips] or rather, at best a slight subjective and perhaps negligible difference to the audio in the scheme of the music's relationship with your life. I think you can easily insert any hardware you want, re-record tracks [as long as you understand the physics and concepts involved] if you choose to Mix with the computer and want to use analog hardware in a mix stage. Certainly, in the end, only you can say what running your tracks through processing and back will sound like. On Most days, I have absolutely no problem processing stuff, but the context of the application is important.

I choose to mix analog [Digital Tracks to DAC ---- Console 2-mix ---- ADC --- DAC to monitor] because I dig what can be done there. I will only use a digital hardware insert when I need an analog processor to affect the signal before any volume automation, that could trigger a processor unlawfully. This method is a tool to me, same as a computer's mix engine, but since I am mixing the tracks with a console, I can insert these processors in what I believe is a proper phase coherent manor. I think I operate analog boxes differently, when they are hitting an AD converter [calibrated to a specific range], as opposed to hitting a discrete channel on an analog mixer. I have used the DAW with Hardware inserts [using Apogee Symphony with AD/DA16x's] many times with the same equipment, and there is no question that the result is different, but this is not to say you cannot achieve great mixes with either medium using the same tools in different ways.

Here's my take on it from everything I have personally tested and evaluated by listening:

- The first conversion is the most crucial. This is where the organic texture and 3D soundstage of the analog signal (live acoustic sound or analog tape playback) is degraded the most. IMHO, if you postpone PCM conversion until the mastering stage you are better off. To state it plainly--the very first A/D conversion does the most damage to audio (this is what my ears tell me).

- Once converted, a sound suffers negligible degradation from 2-5 additional AD/DA loops, assuming you are using non-crap converters. I think you could even get away with upwards of 10 if you use high end converters. Look for Norman Nomads thread where he subjected audio to multiple loopbacks.

Brad

With that being said -- and assuming that you could not 're-use' the same converters twice -- would it be general consensus to use your best converters for microphone capture of the audio into the AD and into the computer?

Or have converters gotten so good now that it doesn't even matter anymore?

This thread is 15 years old, but you may find this useful:

https://youtu.be/mI8jU7ee_V4?si=DcsKLmm36bEM8i2f

It’s useful to witness him needing to do D -> A -> D conversion 200 times before there is an audible difference. So his vid demonstrates that modern converters are fantastic using any sample rate.

It leaves me wondering what circumstance would someone need to do 200 or more round trip conversions ?

Probably none, but as you noted it shows there’s a negligible penalty for many round trips.

The OP posted this question back in 2009..when summing boxes first became all the rage. I think the enthusiasm for OTB summing has dissipated. Mostly because unless you are mixing to a 2-track Ampex tape machine, your mix ends up right back in the computer, which is...one more conversion. If you want "analog mojo", you can add that with current "analog" saturation plugins like UAD's or Arturia's Culture Vulture emulations. No need anymore to go OTB to get that sound.

Personally, I never bought into the hardware summing thing. Imo it was born out of people simply not understanding how to mix in the box. Digital and analog each have a different set of rules. The summing box hype was and still is a way for Dangerous Music to sell expensive hardware..again, imo.

It it starts in the box, it should stay in the box, that's how I see it.

Literally no mention of summing boxes in the OP.

An engineer who used to be on here who went by the name Zmix, worked at Paisley Park for years and has a pretty long CV,

he just re-recorded the same piece of audio over 100 times… and there was really no discernible difference... An easy test to set up for anyone with loop record.

I think he posted it somewhere here,

I think the whole ADA converter thing is overblown in this day and age. Even the mid to low level converters are pretty good...pretty fine actually

Mixer Serban and Hanes, use stock Protools converters,


But just like stereophile people… that go crazy for this type of thing


I'm gonna quote Elvis Presley when asked about the Beatles… He said "there's room for everyone"