sylva
New Member
Posts: 14
|
Post by sylva on Aug 14, 2019 14:34:22 GMT
Ethan, A BIG THANK YOU FOR PAYING ATTENTION TO MY SMALL INCOMPETENT experience.
I am inclined to buy the Scarlett 6i6 2nd gen. However, in general, people complain about the weak headphone output(s) when using higher impedance headphones (250 ohms and on up). Can you, please, give me some feedback? I know, you said that impedance match is not desirable, and I know that, however, weak outputs are a major concern since I do my work on cans exclusively.
Thanks again, John.
|
|
|
Post by Ethan Winer on Aug 14, 2019 15:00:58 GMT
I have no idea how sensitive your headphones are. Can you buy the Scarlett from a local music store and try it there first? Otherwise buy it from a place that lets you send it back if you're not satisfied.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2019 21:23:52 GMT
I have a Scarlett 2i2 (1st gen), I couldn't get my 250ohm beyerdynamic DT-880 loud enough from the headphone out. I have now clarett 8pre(thunderbolt version) in the studio, and it's good to drive 250ohm headphones.
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Aug 15, 2019 8:51:29 GMT
Pasim's headphone out says max 15dBu. The new gen of Scarletts says '15dBu >100R'
What does '100R' mean?
|
|
sylva
New Member
Posts: 14
|
Post by sylva on Aug 15, 2019 12:48:38 GMT
Ethan, thanks. I only have a best buy, some 30 miles away. Here are some data:
General results Beyerdynamic DT 880 Pro Default
Sensitivity by voltage: 101.53 dB/V SPL
Sensitivity by power: 95.56 dB/mW SPL
Impedance: 252.92 Ohm
Hexspa, no idea either. I have a table of all kinds of decibel terminology and categories, but this one I don't know of and one would have to do a little research.
Pasim, yeah, that's what I am talking about, however the Clarett is beyond my budget, so I'll have to look for other interfaces. One of them, as I stated before, is Audient iD14, almost unanimously praised for sound quality, but it only has output for 1 set of monitors. True, I mix on cans exclusively, or, almost, because I do have a set of monitors and a sub woofer, Celestion made sometime in the '90s, that has the great quality of discernible low frequencies as opposed to many other subs that only give you a rumble. However, for the future, I want a multi-output interface to maybe compare the mix on multiple (well, 2 pairs max) of monitors. This is why I thought about the Scarlett 6i6.
Best all, John.
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 15, 2019 13:44:11 GMT
So we're talking about headphone impedance which is measured in ohms so the R probably stands for "Ohms". I don't recall seeing "R" used that way before but it's my best guess. Here and explanation of the common schematic usage: electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/246920/what-is-a-100r-resistor/246934Impedance is more commonly expressed with the letter "Z" as in "100 Z" which would be interpreted as "An impedance of 100 ohms". Resistance, reactance and impedance are all measured in Ohms but they are not the same thing. electronicsclub.info/impedance.htm
|
|
|
Post by Ethan Winer on Aug 15, 2019 14:45:19 GMT
Yes, 100R means 100 ohms, as opposed to 100K or 100M. I guess they add the R to be extra clear.
If the current 3rd generation of Scarletts can output +15 dBU as Hex says, it should be able to play as loudly as the Claret.
A 30 mile drive isn't so bad given you only want to do this once. Or have them ship it to you.
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Aug 15, 2019 15:28:06 GMT
Ok, so 'R' for 'resistance' then.
I just read rock's link. So k is thousand and M is million.
100k would be 100,000 ohms etc.
Thanks.
|
|
sylva
New Member
Posts: 14
|
Post by sylva on Aug 17, 2019 22:07:01 GMT
Another question.
Since my computers' motherboards are USB2 and 3, would these have sufficient bandwidth for the transmission of a large symphony orchestra? I see that most of the interfaces are going USB3 C. There are gen2 interfaces still available with USB2 connections, but I am not sure that 450mb transmission rate is enough without introducing significant latency.
Thanks, John.
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 18, 2019 15:05:04 GMT
Hey Hex, Yes, you are correct that the R stands for resistance but the reason to even bother writing R is actually redundant in the case of 100RΩ. The actual reason for using "R" is because of an alternate method of notating values on schematics. The first method I learned involved using "actual" decimal points where needed. Many values involve decimals like 4.7Ω, very common in electronics components (other common decimals are 1.5, 2.2,3.3,6.8 and more www.resistorguide.com/resistor-values/ ). In the "old notation" we would (and I still sometimes do) write 4.7Ω ,4.7KΩ, 4.7MΩ etc. You can also eliminate the Ω symbol if the notation is right next to the resistor so you get 4.7, 4.7K, 4.7M etc. Now, the real problem, believe it or not, is with that little decimal point. If the print is small or you're using a photo copy, that little point can get "lost" hence the "new notation". This alternate notation eliminates the use of the decimal point entirely! It uses the K or the M as the DECIMAL POINT ITSELF! i.e. 4K7, 4M7. When there is no multiplier like K or M, a symbol was needed to represent the absence of a multi[lier hence "R" as in 4R7. So that's where the "R" came from. We really don't need to know it means "resistance" because the notation on a schematic is right next to the resistor symbol. This convention has now spilled over into usage in text like spec. sheets etc. In the case of 100R, the R simply tells us there is no multiplier. You will also see 1R and 10R to differentiate from 1K, 1M and 10K, 10M etc. You really don't need to know any of this unless you read or write schematics LOL.
|
|
|
Post by Ethan Winer on Aug 18, 2019 15:21:46 GMT
Rock, another standard is to use "R" instead of the decimal point because it's not likely to be missed. So 4R7 means 4.7Ω.
Sylva, USB2 can handle at least 16 channels of 44/16 CD quality audio. Whether you're recording an orchestra or rock group is not the issue, it's the number of microphones and simultaneous channels. A lot of orchestra recordings use only two microphones, sometimes with a few extra "spot" mics on soft instruments like the harp, or for a soloist.
|
|
|
Post by rock on Aug 18, 2019 17:12:53 GMT
Thanks Ethan. That's what I was trying to say Yeah Sylva, I have a cheap (under $300 USD) Tascam US 16x08 to record me and my friends in the basement; it works great and never any problem recording all 16 channels simultaneously. BTW, that Tascam US16x08 is the only unit for almost any money (that I have found) that can record 16 analog channels (8 mic + 8 line) simultaneously. It can do Midi too but NO digital audio inputs at all. Most of all the other "affordable" (>$1000) multichannel interfaces can only handle 8 analog inputs with various digital audio inputs to make up the balance of the advertised 18 or 20 available inputs ... so if you are only recording analog inputs, I think the US16x08 is the way to go although you might need outboard mic pre-amps if you record more than 8 mics. My 2 cents, YMMV. Back to the Orchestra recordings, I worked for Neotek back in the 80's and most of the consoles we made were 24 to 48 channel but IIRC, Jack Renner of Telarc ordered one with only 6 or 8 channels but that he would typically only use 4. Thinking about Jack Renner, one funny thing is that he requested a mod for the slate circuit. (that's the button the console that puts a tone and talk-back mic to tape so you can separate takes, ya know, where you say "Take 3" etc.) Well, the mod was to switch the slate talk-back NOT to go to the Studio speakers or cue (headphones) so the orchestra members could not hear how many takes they had played...as in "Take 137" as it was just one more source of annoyance for the musicians, LOL
|
|
sylva
New Member
Posts: 14
|
Post by sylva on Aug 18, 2019 19:26:08 GMT
Rock, another standard is to use "R" instead of the decimal point because it's not likely to be missed. So 4R7 means 4.7Ω. Sylva, USB2 can handle at least 16 channels of 44/16 CD quality audio. Whether you're recording an orchestra or rock group is not the issue, it's the number of microphones and simultaneous channels. A lot of orchestra recordings use only two microphones, sometimes with a few extra "spot" mics on soft instruments like the harp, or for a soloist.I Ethan & Global: Yes, but I am NOT recording an orchestra, I use multiply layered sample libraries which leads to a large number of channels and enormous amount of data. This is why I am (inadvertently) pestering you all. In other words, I am to use any interface mostly AS A SOUND CARD. Everything would happen in my DAW. The input into the interface would be the MIDI tracks that I create by sticking notes directly into the tracks (sometimes 60 or more) and then rendering them through the interface to several pairs of cans for comparison, eventually to monitors as well. But rarely would I use mic inputs or line inputs. I used the Delta44's inputs only a few times in 16 years to record some friends' string quartet or a few violin students' recitals. That is all. For me, then, most important are very high quality outputs. Ah, Telarc. Well, he and the engineer Ingebretsen (one of the pioneers of digital tape recording) from Salt Lake City, came to record The Rite of Spring with the Cleveland orchestra, where I was working under Lorin Maazel as a "conducting fellow". The recorder looked like the most godforsaken contraption I'd ever seen in my life up to that point. However, the sound that played back was absolutely great. An incredible experience. Oh, Those heady days of early digital revolution! Best, John.
|
|
|
Post by Ethan Winer on Aug 18, 2019 19:52:25 GMT
Sylva, it sounds like all those tracks in your DAW still go out through only two channels.
Rock, good story about the musicians cue.
|
|
sylva
New Member
Posts: 14
|
Post by sylva on Aug 18, 2019 20:05:01 GMT
Ethan, you're absolutely right, 2 channels only. I just want to make sure that everything will work. And, Global, I'll definitely check on the Tascam. In fact, I looked it up and I like what I am seeing. The only thing now is output quality. That's up to the beholder, I guess...
Best, John.
|
|