Print

Print


I used to have a Benchmark Media AD2402-96 that was incredibly  
transparent.  It does a polarity inversion, but the sound was great  
(Wood Effect, aside).  You can flip the phase in the console feeding  
it, or in the DAW, after capture.  I don't know about their ADC-1,  
but it's probably that good.   John Siao is a genius engineer.

I am thrilled with the sound of the Lavry AD122-MKIII and would also  
probably give a high mark for the ne-plus-ultra Prism Dream ADC or  
Weiss (or out of manufacture but Holy Grail-like Pacific  
Microsonics).  However, these three (before the parenthesis) would be  
about 5-10x the cost of a comparably performing Benchmark unit.  The  
higher priced units would offer only a marginal improvement in  
sound.  However, that margin is where the surf meets the turf, so to  
speak, when it comes to High Fidelity.

Andrew



On Aug 24, 2011, at 4:38 PM, Toby Seay wrote:

> Dan,
>
> I use the same ATR102 playback machine.  I use Apogee AD16X  
> converters and
> am thrilled by their performance.  I do a lot of multitrack, so I  
> needed
> converters with lots of inputs, so the AD16X may be a bit of overkill.
> However, I do prefer them to the Rosetta converters. Since both are  
> going
> out of production, I would try and find a way to listen to the  
> Ensemble to
> make sure its a sonic upgrade.
>
> Toby Seay
> Assistant Professor - Music Industry Program
> Antoinette Westphal College of Media Arts & Design
> Drexel University Audio Archives
> Macalister 3016 - 215-895-5880
> http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~js553/
>
>
>
> On 8/24/11 4:09 PM, "Daniel Roth" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Richard,
>>
>> Thank you for your recommendation. I will be using one of Mike  
>> Spitz's
>> re-manufactured Ampex ATR102 tape reproducers for 1/4" playback,  
>> and an
>> Esoteric Systems Rek-O-Cut Rondine 3 turntable through a KAB  
>> Souvenir EQS
>> MK12 Chronologic EQ/Preamp for capturing records. Given these  
>> excellent
>> analog sources, I wanted to provide the best possible conversion.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Dan
>> ------
>> Dan Roth
>> Audio Technician
>> Walter J Brown Media Archives and
>> Peabody Awards Collection
>> University of Georgia
>> Main Library
>> Athens, GA
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>> [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Richard L. Hess
>> [[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 3:58 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] AD/DA converter recommendations
>>
>> Hello, Dan,
>>
>> It all really depends on what you are digitizing. While we used to be
>> able to obtain substantial improvements with upgrading converters,  
>> most
>> upgrades today really are most noticeable with the highest quality  
>> music
>> sources.
>>
>> Unless you are using one of a handful of high-end tape decks for
>> reproduction, you might see more of an upgrade by spending the  
>> money on
>> the analog portion of your chain rather than the digital portion.
>>
>> I was pleased by the increase in sonic quality with my new RME  
>> Fireface
>> UFX, but it was subtle. The Apogee products have a good  
>> reputation, but
>> I have not first-hand experience with them.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Richard
>>
>> On 2011-08-24 3:25 PM, Daniel Roth wrote:
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> Please give me your opinion on the best AD/DA converter for  
>>> purposes of
>>> archival audio. Currently using an Apogee Rosetta 200 and  
>>> considering
>>> the Apogee Ensemble as an upgrade.
>>>
>>> What are YOUR thoughts?
>>>
>>> Thank you for your insights,
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>> ------
>>> Dan Roth
>>> Audio Technician
>>> Walter J Brown Media Archives and
>>> Peabody Awards Collection
>>> University of Georgia
>>> Main Library
>>> Athens, GA
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
>> Aurora, Ontario, Canada           (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX
>> http://www.richardhess.com/tape/contact.htm
>> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.
>>