The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Have Lucid, Getting PT 192...?
Old 8th June 2002
  #1
Lives for gear
 
littledog's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Have Lucid, Getting PT 192...?

I'm using the Lucid Gen6x96 with my Mix+ system right now, with no complaints.It also clocks a HEDD and a couple of other pieces that I only use on occasion.

My question is, soon I will have the new 192 interface, which Digi brags has a "fabulous" word clock. So anybody have any ideas whether it would be better to use the 192 as the master clock, going into the Lucid for distribution to other gear, or continue to use the Lucid as the master?

Chances are, I probably couldn't hear the difference anyway. But i thought maybe some of you non-tinnitus types might have an opinion.spin
Old 8th June 2002
  #2
Lives for gear
 
C.Lambrechts's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Well to start with .... you SHOULD try to hear the difference. Do a shootout between the 2 .... maybe call in some other people to have second opinions.

IMHO the 192 has a GREAT clock. But I don't know the lucid clocks.

We ended up keeping the aardsync II as a master clock but the difference was more a matter of taste / feeling then it had to do with quality imho.
Old 8th June 2002
  #3
What Chris said...

smokin

Meanwhile for clock 'fun' try using the GenX to send the clock from the Hedd round the studio and see if you prefer that...

rollz
Old 8th June 2002
  #4
Gear Nut
 
🎧 15 years
I've got the Genx96 as well. The HD rig is supposed to be in in about a week.

I'm curious to try it with & without.

Also, I think I still need it to rout clock to non-digi stuff, or am I not understanding the new super-clock loop?
Old 9th June 2002
  #5
Lives for gear
 
littledog's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
grumblemumblecursekvetchcarpcomplain....

Hey! If I wanted to do my own research I wouldn't hang out on these bulletin boards!

Oh, wait a minute... I see now... you don't want to do it either so you're trying to trick me into doing it and posting the results! Verrrrrry clever! heh
Old 9th June 2002
  #6
Lives for gear
 
littledog's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Allright, I've calmed down a bit.

So now I will provide extreme amusement and merriment to the general public by exposing the remarkable extent of my ignorance:

Stupid question #1: When I set up a comparison test between three clocks, do i want to record a piece of audio three seperate times (once with each clock) or is it sufficient to take one recorded piece and simply play it back using each clock in turn.

Stupid question #2: What kind of material do you find is most useful for auditioning clocks:

possible examples:

•complex:"full range" complex orchestrations
•simple: single instrument tracks
•even simpler: test tone/sine waves
•really loud material
•really soft material
•other (you provide example, please)

Now that you've all had a good laugh, anyone care to assist? smokin
Old 9th June 2002
  #7
Lives for gear
 
C.Lambrechts's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
First of all ..... the trick in doing comparisson or A/B tests or whatever you like to call them is to set them up. With Wordclock this is not so easy. Usually it takes time to switch between clocks and real blind tests are nearly impossible. Often the difference is in small details and too much time between listening makes it only harder.

Don't know how you setup your gear but if I get it right you want to test the 192 i/o against the Genx96 and the Cranesong Hedd right.


hmmm .... not going to be easy ... I would suggest starting off with 2 at a time. Do tests with 1/2 and then 1/3 and then 2/3.

How to test. .... IMHO you should start with listening to complete mixes. Preferably quite big ones with a lot of outboard (digital) gear used. the clock affects your WHOLE system so you should test all of it.

Take a mix that you know by heart .... I mean ... where you know every little detail that is there allready .... don't start with new material or stuff that you're working on.

Pay special attention to : stereo image / detail .... does the bass sound get tighter when changing clock .... does the high end get fresher ..... in short ... does it sound better. I think you will hear differences allready there and base your initial choice from what you hear on complete mixes.

A good way to to test the stereo image for example is to follow a hihat for example moving from right to left. see if you can position it where you want or if it jumps in the spectrum.


If you're not convinced after that you can start recording material .... but the trouble with that is that it is performance dependant. I mean .... you can be easily influenced by a better or less good performance .... not necessarely meaning that it has been recorded with the best clock.

Sure ... recording with a good clock will improve the result at the end .... more speciffically ... I think it makes it easier to get a good result / sound.


Also .... test both simple (few instruments) and complex (lots of instruments) mixes.


If you do end up testing recordings .... take an accoustic guitar for example, and have the guitar player play the whole range .... low - mid - high .... synths are useless for this IMHO



Boston area .... I'm igoing to be in the "Boston area" early July for about 10 days .... and since I realy like doing that kinda stuff ....



anyhow .... let us know what and how you make your decission .... any other questions .... shoot.
Old 9th June 2002
  #8
My thoughts:

Play back is fine (I prefer to use comercialy recorded CD's)

if you cant hear any difference, try to focus in on the bottom end and look for the 'least wooly' / tightest.

Enlist someone else to join in. Chatter with them during the test, to try and distill you thoughts..

Old 10th June 2002
  #9
Lives for gear
 
littledog's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Chirs and Julian,

Thanks for the insightful responses.

Chris, I would be happy to take you up on your offer, but I suspect my new system may not be installed by early July, even though I am ordering it in a few days.

The reason being, that I have a number of ongoing projects that are using TC Megareverb, which won't be available as an HD compatible upgrade until later this summer, according to my last conversation with TC.

I spoke to Digidesign, and they are graciously allowing me to keep my old system until the new TC plugins are available. This allows me to take advantage of the trade-in incentives without forcing me to redo all my old mixes.

However, if you'd like to feel much better about your own situation by taking a tour of my crappy looking studio, you're welcome to visit. You can always PM me with details as to where you are staying, your schedule, etc. heh
Old 11th June 2002
  #10
Here for the gear
 
🎧 15 years
clock thoughts

Here's my take on the clock issues.

While using a ultrastable clock will definately help on playback, the real benefit of clock help will be while recording (analog) to the workstation. After the audio has been sampled, the clock will not affect the end product that much.

Remember that the final (i.e. end user of your recordings) clock will undeniably be a boom box or walkman.

It is the conversion stages that really benefit from great clocking. If your clock is better, your recorded tracks will benefit.


Rich
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 646 views: 142436
Avatar for Basslik
Basslik 31st March 2020
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