Jump to content

VASI

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,158

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

 Content Type 

Posts posted by VASI

  6. On My Radio

    in The Daily Journal

    Posted

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimalist_music

    Steve Reich - Piano Phase

    http://youtu.be/Vs3wFNtqdAs

    What a wonderfull music and performing!

    And one of the best minimalist composer. Philip Glass.

    Philip Glass - Einstein On The Beach

  15. Best 5.1 options

    in The Post Place

    Posted

    Apollo High-Resolution Interface

    apollo_front_sq.png

    apollo_back_sq.jpg

    Overview

    Apollo® is the first professional, high-resolution computer audio interface that delivers the sound, feel, and flow of analog recording. This 18 x 24 FireWire/Thunderbolt™- ready interface combines genuine UA analog design with class-leading 24-bit/192 kHz sound quality and onboard Realtime UAD Processing. Using Apollo, music producers and performers can finally track audio through a range of classic UAD analog emulation plug-ins — from Neve, Studer, Manley, Lexicon and more — in real time, and with a sleek, elegant workflow on both Mac and PC.

    Features

    Class-Leading 24-bit/192 kHz Sound Quality

    Designed to play a central role in a modern Mac- or PC-based studio, Apollo incorporates a true “no compromise” approach to audio quality. Building upon decades of UA’s analog hardware heritage, it offers extremely high-resolution sonics, with the lowest THD and highest dynamic range in its class. Apollo’s premium mic preamps, top-end converters — and UA’s meticulous attention to circuit design — translate into greater accuracy and depth in your recordings, from tracking and overdubbing, to mixing and mastering.

    Realtime UAD Plug-In Processing for Tracking, Mixing and Mastering

    While Apollo’s “natural” sound is exceedingly open and transparent, it can quickly deliver a wide range of classic analog tones and color via its Realtime UAD Processing. Available with either DUO Core or QUAD Core processing onboard, this onboard DSP Acceleration allows for recording and mixing through UAD Powered Plug-Ins — with as low as sub-2ms latency — so that producers can quickly monitor, audition, and “print” audio using classic analog emulations from Ampex, Lexicon, Manley, Neve, Roland, SSL, Studer, and more. Want to place multiple 1176 compressors on your drum inputs, or record vocals through a classic Neve 1073 EQ, or even track the entire band through a Studer A800 tape machine in real time? No problem. With Realtime UAD processing, Apollo’s sonic options are virtually endless.

    Thunderbolt™ I/O: The Next Generation of Connectivity

    Apollo offers compatibility with Intel’s new Thunderbolt technology, as found on the newest iMacs, MacBook Pros, MacBook Airs, and next-generation PCs.

    Available via a user-installable dual-port Thunderbolt I/O Option Card (sold separately), Thunderbolt provides lower latency, reduced audio buffer size, improved performance, and greater UAD plug-in instances versus FireWire. And because Thunderbolt offers many times the bandwith of FireWire, it allows music producers to connect numerous devices in series with the Apollo interface — including hard drives, processors, and additional computer monitors — all with fast, flawless performance.

    Deeper Integration with Pro Tools, Logic, Cubase and more

    Apollo’s Core Audio and ASIO* drivers ensure compatibility with all major DAWs, including Pro Tools, Logic Pro, Cubase, Live, and more. Beyond this basic compatibility, Apollo’s included Console application and companion Console Recall plug-in (VST/AU/RTAS) provide control and recall of all interface and UAD plug-in settings within individual DAW sessions, even months and years later.

    Elegant Hardware Design and Workflow

    One key feature of Apollo isn’t really a “feature” at all. It’s the numerous design details that give you a fast, natural workflow — and better results. There are physical front-panel controls for all the most commonly used features, including Preamp and Monitor level knobs, channel selection, mic pad and low cut, phantom power, and even dual headphone outs with independent level control. Smart Hi-Z inputs on the front panel detect when you've connected your guitar or bass, and automatically enable hardware and software monitoring.

    Sonically, Apollo's Mic inputs and Monitor outputs are digitally controlled analog, so you don't lose audio resolution when you adjust gain. High-resolution/high-contrast metering, derived from UA’s legendary 2192 interface, is designed to be viewable at nearly any angle. Finally, standalone operation means that you can use Apollo’s audio connections, and last-used DSP mixer settings, even without a computer connected.

    http://www.uaudio.com/apollo

  20. On My Radio

    in The Daily Journal

    Posted

    We parted one dusk with tears in our eyes

    our love was meant to be torn in two pieces

    It hurts when i think about the beautiful nights

    when you were giving me sweet-sweet promises, kisses and caress

    With eagerness and pain in my heart i wait

    that one day you might return again in my arms.

  23. 10 Statements on Condenser Microphones vs. Dynamic Microphones

    in Technical Reference

    Posted

    10 Statements on Condenser Microphones vs. Dynamic Microphones

    By audio specialist Eddy B. Brixen

    www.dpamicrophones.com

    The topic of discussion on the difference between dynamic microphones and condenser microphones is never ending. That’s fine, we don’t want it to end, rather, we want to add to the discussion and further enlighten readers a little…First of all, we must clarify a few things: The difference between dynamic microphones and condenser microphones is all about two different transducer principles. In other words, it has nothing to do with the directional characteristics of the microphones. You cannot ask: ‘What kind of directional characteristic does a dynamic microphone have?’ or ‘Which one is more directional, the dynamic or the condenser?’ Please erase such questions from your mind!

    Instead, this is actually a matter of transducer principles. Both dynamic and condenser microphones do have a membrane that vibrates in accordance with the air movement around it, also known as the sound. The microphone must then transform this membrane movement from acoustical energy into electrical energy. This is where the transducer comes into the picture and each type of microphone has different transducer properties.

    Statement #1: Dynamic microphones are more robust than condensers.

    Comment: Many microphones have a delicate design intended for use in studios. This goes for both dynamic microphones and condenser microphones. Occasionally, some of these delicate microphones will hit the road with musicians. A microphone design that was fine for the studio may seem too fragile for touring. This may, for instance, apply to microphones equipped with tubes and other delicate internal components. This is not the case with high-quality solid state condenser microphones, which can manage the rough handling as well as any robust dynamic microphone. In fact, the lightweight membrane of the condenser microphone often survives heavy beats and drops better than the dynamic moving coil microphone. This is due to the mass of the dynamic microphone’s membrane system, which is attached to a coil. (The dynamic microphone also hits the floor harder because of its heavier weight.)

    Statement #2: Dynamic microphones do not need a power supply.

    Comment: The vast majority of dynamic microphones can manage without power but there are some exceptions. Basically, all condenser microphones need some kind of power supply. This is primarily to supply the impedance converter and for non-electret condensers to charge the electrodes (membrane and back electrode). Not to be outshined, active dynamic microphones need a power supply as well!

    Statement #3: Condenser microphones are louder than dynamic microphones.

    Comment: No, one microphone is not louder than the other, this is just a question of sensitivity. In general, condenser microphones exhibit a higher sensitivity than dynamic microphones. Either way, the sensitivity should always be chosen relative to the requirements of the job. In other words, if the microphone has to handle very high sound pressure levels, it would be advantageous to select a unit with a low sensitivity – whether it is a condenser or a dynamic microphone.

    Statement #4: It is easier to mike up the band using dynamic microphones.

    Comment: This statement is definitely more related to tradition and laziness than it is related to fact. No matter what you choose, you have to consider the specs and the application. In some cases it is argued that the frequency range is too wide or the opening angle is too wide.

    Well, sometimes it is easier to reduce bandwidth on a condenser than it is to equalize a dynamic microphone. In general, the directional characteristics of the condenser microphones are at least as good as can be achieved by any dynamic microphone. But, as always, it’s important to pick the right microphone for the job no matter what transducer it may have.

    Statement #5: The condensers feed more easily than the dynamics.

    Comment: As with many of the previous statements, this is simply a question of choosing the right microphone. One basic error is selecting a condenser microphone that is developed for recording at a distance. When amplified, this may result in low frequency feed. Instead, use low-cut/high-pass or pick a microphone that is designed for stage use.

    Statement #6: Dynamic microphones can handle higher sound pressure levels than condenser microphones.

    Comment: This is not true. Condensers can, in general, handle extremely high sound pressure levels. The question instead is whether the mike preamp can handle all the juice coming out of the microphone.

    An extremely loud singer can produce a sound pressure peak level in the range of 150 dB, measured at the lips. If you have two microphones with a sensitivity of 1 mV and 10 mV respectively (what comes out of the microphone when exposed to a sound pressure level of 94 dB re 20 μPa), you have outputs of 0.63 and 6.3 volt peak! Signals of this magnitude should instead be handled by the line input or the signal should be attenuated in one way or another.

    Statement #7: Dynamic microphones change sound in dependence of the load.

    Comment: This is actually true regarding passive dynamic microphones terminated by a very low impedance (remember the rule that the microphone should be terminated with a load that is at least five to 10 times higher than the output impedance of the microphone). This is due to the physics of the moving coil. A heavy load (= low ohms) acts more or less as a short circuit and reduces the low frequency output of the microphone. Eventually, high frequencies may also be reduced. This is normally only a problem with very poor mixer designs. However, making passive splits – one microphone to two or more inputs – may result in the same problem.

    Statement #8: It is cheaper to use dynamic microphones than it is to use condenser microphones.

    Comment: Well, if the goal for the use of the microphone is to destroy it, then go ahead, purchase the cheapest one possible. If your goal is simply to reduce the costs of replacing equipment, which are eventually exposed to rigorous or rough use, you may find it better to use a $100 microphone rather than a $1000 version. This is certainly better for economical reasons, but in the end you will probably lose sound quality.

    Statement #9: People only buy condensers as a result of the Veblen effect.

    Comment: Veblen effect: when people buy expensive stuff when they could have cheaper versions. In audio, the Veblen effect exists for users who are trying to achieve prestige by spending more money than they should. However, when audio engineers consider their budgets and requirements, most will buy the product that fulfills their needs in the most cost-effective manner possible.

    Statement # 10: I don’t need condensers because my PA is perfect!

    Comment: If the rest of the PA/SR system is first class, why shouldn’t the microphones be first class as well?

×
×
  • Create New...