{ "numMessagesInTopic": 11, "nextInTime": 427, "senderId": "vrPyEg94x_ztMwyPV2FOMyoscpRix7x_-_ulhzzORSAtYlyt_6i57qmsS6hmmTUDDoqJZohr1yDk_xIHxFuDjl_97JYzPTbCXZN1h0xuPy1s", "systemMessage": false, "subject": "Re: [01v96] Re: Type I vs Type II EQ", "from": ""Ronny Morris" <digitakmastering@...>", "authorName": "Ronny Morris", "msgSnippet": "... I m surprised that you aren t getting the noise on the 20 bit DAC s too with your first explained procedure. Yes, digital works less effectively the more", "msgId": 426, "profile": "ronnymorris2001", "topicId": 419, "spamInfo": { "reason": "0", "isSpam": false }, "replyTo": "LIST", "userId": 136810499, "messageBody": "
>I'm surprised that you aren't getting the noise on the 20 bit DAC's too with your first
\n> I'm not actually using any gates at all on the system, and the
\n> problem happens without any effects usage, EQ, or dynamics
\n> processing anywhere in the system. Perhaps I'm using the wrong term
\n> for what I'm hearing. Say I have my monitor one mix with the
\n> channel faders up approximately half way. I don't have the 01v in
\n> front of me, but I believe that means they are at about -20dB. Say
\n> I also have my Aux1 master fader halfway up, again at -20dB. If I
\n> allow 12dB of headroom at the preamps, this means that the effective
\n> signal being submitted to the OMNI output DAC is down 56dB from the
\n> input level. Add to that a portion of the program where a person is
\n> speaking instead of singing, and I may be down another 20dB. What
\n> happens, is the signal sounds like it has digital distortion. It's
\n> not a hum or noise floor thing, it's clearly digital. My guess is
\n> that at operating levels of -76dB as I described above, there isn't
\n> enough resolution left over to adequately describe the wave, and the
\n> result is the digital distortion I hear.
\n> This behavior is exactly the same on both of my 01vs, and only
\n> happens on the OMNI outs, not the main stereo outs which are 20bit.
\n> The behavior goes away if I turn my amps down and run the AUX1
\n> master fader closer to 0 rather than -20, and/or run my channel
\n> sends hotter. I seem to notice the behavior at about -60dB, and it
\n> can be really annoying. I'm assuming this problem will go away with
\n> the v96 since all of the outs have the same specs.
\n>
\n
\n
>off my house, or buy a Beamer, or whatever
\n>
\n>
\n> >There may be other factors that aren't the 18 bit DAC's, causing
\n> the noise,
\n> > for example running Par's or Fresnels on the same circuit as the
\n> amps and mixers. Many cd players
\n> > only have 1 bit DAC's, no quantization noise.
\n> > Anyhow, you'll notice a better sound through the v96's DAC's,
\n> IMHO they are the most improved
\n> > item on the new v's, but not noise wise which I can't tell any
\n> difference as both are deady quiet.
\n> > I'm talking clarity and depth of signal. I hear things in old
\n> mixes that I can't hear on the older
\n> > v. The DAC's aren't that far behind a holy mastering DAC, like
\n> Benchmark or Weiss.
\n> >
\n> >
\n> > > Man, they sure seemed to fix everything that was wrong or
\n> incomplete
\n> > > with the first series 01v. I've been reading the Studio Manager
\n> > > manual and looking at the screenshots you posted. The IO
\n> patching
\n> > > in Studio Manager looks just like the Innovason board I used a
\n> few
\n> > > months ago.
\n> > >
\n> >
\n> > It's almost an exact clone of the AW Remote mixer, too. I
\n> haven't seen Innovasion.
\n> >
\n>
\n> I don't think you are missing much. The Innovason is about
\n> $140,000, and for that money I would rather own a DM2000 and pocket > the other $110,000 to pay
\n
> else. The only nice thing about it was the interconnection cablesNever have seen an Innovasion board, but I bet they sound damn good for 140 grand. :O)
\n> between the stage box and the console were just a pair of coax
\n> cables. That was very cool.
\n>
\n
\n
>I use a tap tempo on one my guitar pedal boards once in awhile on improved numbers or songs that
\n>
\n>
\n> > > On another note, has anyone tried assigning a user-defined key to
\n> > > the tap tempo control? I have looked through the manual and
\n> haven't
\n> > > seen a list of things that can be assigned to the user-defined
\n> keys.
\n> > >
\n> >
\n> > I just scrolled through the User Defined Keys library for you
\n> and didn't see any parameter for
\n> > tap tempo, nor any single fx parameters, but a shitpile of other
\n> user assign functions, including
\n> > switching between libraries, where you could set up 8 different
\n> tempo changes on the User Defined
\n> > Keys, via switching fx Lib scenes. Not sure why you'd want a tap
\n> tempo on the user defined keys,
\n> > when you have the Enter button to do it, though. Perhaps you can
\n> use the Remote layer to achieve
\n> > what you desire.
\n>
\n>
\n> The reason I would like this is again for live sound, where it is
\n> nice to have as many of the functions I need right at the top
\n> layer. No biggie.
\n>
\n
\n
>My pleasure, you know that I love to talk shop. :O)
\n> Thanks for the response.
\n>
\n
\n