reclocking 002 - there's a thing

[mfdu]

ok

so you all know i got a piece of crap prosumer b*&^#%*r ad/da for my stereo bus.

interesting thing.

when i clock the 002 to the DEQ, the soundstage becomes more cohesive (denser, maybe? more physical?) and any reverb takes on a size "within a physical space" (as opposed to sounding like just another protools session)

same signal path, only change being whether 002 is clocked to internal or external.

i've heard much about the deficiencies of the 002 internal clock, and have now had the chance to test it with what we all agree is a bottom end a/d convertor.

so on the basis of that, i would recommend to any 002 user to reclock to an external convertor.

next test is to compare the different clocks to the 8track tape and see how the external clock stands up against 1/2" ampex 499 at 15ips . . .

i just thought you chaps might be interested in a bit of low-end theory.

chris.

[Kurt]

It's funny how even though it has made your system sound better you still call it a piece of crap. In the other thread you said visual cues were not as important as listening, doesn't this also cover the badge on the gear?

i guess the whole thing comes down to this - we're dealing with aural, not visual.

a visual prompt can be handy at times, but it wont take the place of actually listening, huh?

chris.

[Martin]

it seems that if you call a bit of be!@#$%^& anything BUT a piece of crap you wear it for being a supporter or 'one of them'!

if you like it, use it, enjoy it...

[mfdu]

personally, i'd like to not feel compelled to make excuses for the gear i use.

i am able to avoid making excuses for any other parts of my life, but then i hop on here and feel intimidated by the breadth of experience that you chaps have.

there's also the whole wrist-slapping be*&$^r seem to be recieving at the moment from bodies such as the FCC - not particularly inspiring.

out with the texta - i'll cover over the badges on the two b*&%#r units i have (one reverb, one ad/da). that way they'll just blur in amongst the other gear.

so in short -
effective? yes.
expensive? no.
euphonic? no.
worthwhile? yes.

chris.

[Jason]

Hi Chris,

You shouldn't have to make excuses for the gear you use. Have a quick google of studios and we will see that there are loads of bigger studios that have that 'B' word gear in there racks. They have it because it does what its ment to. If the gear didn't work, then no one would use it. Its that simple.

[Adam Dempsey]

That's right, clock from the digital audio source. So if you're running an external A/D, that should be your clock source. If it's: be*&$^r -> 002 -> DAW you should clock your system from your A/D during record, ie with the A/D set to its internal clock and the 002 set to external clock. Either that or clock all digital gear from a room master clock, in which case the 002 is obviously clocked to external anyway.

As for metering, sure, it's the aural above the visual that matters when it comes down to it, and apols if I'm stating the obvious, it's still nice and worthwhile to be able to trust ppms - to know that an over means an over, or equally with yours, to know with enough certainty that you're not clipping by peaking to, say - 2dBFS instead. ;)

[Adam Dempsey]

... and I've got two pieces of (albeit earlier) "B" gear: an exciter which, although rarely used, is sometimes the bees knees for cassette sources devoid of sparkle or low end content, and a multiband analogue comp, for gentle low end squeeze without hurting mids, or great for spoken word programs. Tools for certain tasks. Just gotta watch gain structure and work within this gear's limited headroom.

[mfdu]

the interesting thing with the reclocking exercise is that i didn't change my signal path.
no input through the DEQ - only 8 outs off the 002 into the console and monitoring off the console.
noticable difference in soundstage and reverb tails between internal and external clocking.

interesting, yes? especially when the DEQ isn't even billed as having "stable clock" or blah blah, but it is still an improvement.

wonder if an apogee big ben (or similar) would be a 60% improvement over the DEQ, or only a 10% improvement?


[edit]
i feel like i've been ranting. migt as well have had the caps lock on.

sorry guys.

chris.