Jump to content

In a digital system how important it an analogue preamp?


DomT
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Bigman80 said:

Dunno, but you get a whole DAC with it for £6k

Same price as the MFA



Sent from my KB2003 using Tapatalk

 

But using math can be “transparent” depending on how it’s implemented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But using math can be “transparent” depending on how it’s implemented.
I don't disagree.

Sent from my KB2003 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, JANDL100 said:

There are so many misunderstandings and misconceptions buried in your response to my post that it is clear we are not in any way communicating effectively. 

I'll just leave it at that. 

I agree. We don’t even use the same definitions for “transparency” or “recording”. It’s hard to communicate that way.

 I get what you mean though. I can pick up a “bland” photo and turn it into something more “exciting” using Photoshop to alter tonal balance, dynamic contrast, saturation and detail sharpness.

The content will still be exactly the same, only the “presentation” will change.

Will it look more "realistic" or "involving"? It depends on who you ask.

It's still a bidimensional abstraction, without the ability to transmit sound or smell, temperature and humidity, air movement and pressure, or gravity...

Edited by tuga
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bigman80 said:

No, you will then be removing the limitations of your equipment. The transparency is improved/revealed by improving equipment and removing the things that are preventing transparency.

The recording is the recording. It cannot be anything else.

Sent from my KB2003 using Tapatalk

 

Yes but if your equipment is adding noise or picking say RF, then removing it will improve the transparency?

It similar to saying a digital RAW image is the recording and it can't be improved or made more transparent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Yes but if your equipment is adding noise or picking say RF, then removing it will improve the transparency?
It similar to saying a digital RAW image is the recording and it can't be improved or made more transparent.


Yes, but you aren't improving the Recording....you are improving the performance of the equipment.

Everything you do to a RAW image afterwards is an addition.

Think of it as going from the edited Jpeg to the RAW file.

Sent from my KB2003 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bigman80 said:

Also you do realize that by using the Dave straight into the amplifier that you used it's inbuilt volume control?....a silicone chip.

You do realise the signal path is unchanged within the Dave whether one uses it in DAC mode outputting to a preamp or whether one uses the Dave in Pre Amp mode outputting straight to a power amp. So the only difference is that in the former case one is adding all the extra circuits of the pre amp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Fourlegs said:

You do realise the signal path is unchanged within the Dave whether one uses it in DAC mode outputting to a preamp or whether one uses the Dave in Pre Amp mode outputting straight to a power amp. So the only difference is that in the former case one is adding all the extra circuits of the pre amp.

Is the volume control in the Dave analogue or digital/DSP?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do realise the signal path is unchanged within the Dave whether one uses it in DAC mode outputting to a preamp or whether one uses the Dave in Pre Amp mode outputting straight to a power amp. So the only difference is that in the former case one is adding all the extra circuits of the pre amp.
Ok, I can see that you aren't understanding what I'm saying.

No problem.

Sent from my KB2003 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, StingRay said:

Yes but if your equipment is adding noise or picking say RF, then removing it will improve the transparency?

It similar to saying a digital RAW image is the recording and it can't be improved or made more transparent.

This is a matter if semantics, really.

If your equipment is picking up noise then the circuit or signal path is not "transparent" enough so by addressing the issue you are increasing "transparent".

And any and all commercial equipment can be improved or modded to greater achieve (measured) "transparency". Which may or may not be what the end user is looking for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Fourlegs said:

You do realise the signal path is unchanged within the Dave whether one uses it in DAC mode outputting to a preamp or whether one uses the Dave in Pre Amp mode outputting straight to a power amp. So the only difference is that in the former case one is adding all the extra circuits of the pre amp.

I'm confused, did you mean to say "latter case" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mtbmarkymark said:

I'm confused, did you mean to say "latter case" 

No, I meant what I said but I have added two words below to hopefully clarify as I see my post might have been ambiguous. Sorry.

ie, “You do realise the signal path is unchanged within the Dave whether one uses it in DAC mode outputting to a preamp or whether one uses the Dave in Pre Amp mode outputting straight to a power amp. So the only difference is that in the former case one is adding all the extra circuits of the (additional external) pre amp”

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, tuga said:

Also there's no guarantee that listening to the mixing or mastering system will provide more (or less) enjoyment than one's system and room. As you say, it's a matter of preference.

Listening at the mastering session is listening to the actual recorded performance. People may not enjoy listening to the actual recorded performance but that would be a bit weird wouldn’t it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DomT said:

Listening at the mastering session is listening to the actual recorded performance. People may not enjoy listening to the actual recorded performance but that would be a bit weird wouldn’t it?

You are listening through a system composed of electronic equipment and speakers in a given room.

The same mic feed will sound very different with these systems in these three rooms:

bDauUzL.jpeg

N5iAQIa.png

HZVxe2f.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DomT said:

Listening at the mastering session is listening to the actual recorded performance. People may not enjoy listening to the actual recorded performance but that would be a bit weird wouldn’t it?

Yes it could be too dynamic for some folk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...