I can’t hear any difference …
blimey @baddcr, a tad overzealous back there, glad it calmed down, visions of pistols at dawn 
- to be fair, when i did a quick A/B/C test, there was discernible differences in that particular material, but where it mattered, in that instance it didn’t matter too much to me, it was encouraging and was evidently unclear to those that listened in which take was which or which was the original ! However, touching on 154’s observation, it’s possibly helpful to consider the experience of listening analog through the outs and comparing to a digitised version via anything.
Anyway, source is important here, i think if you compare a variety of sources it may be more valid to draw conclusions, plus don’t forget everyone has different eyesight, hearing etc …
on the bar test - i can’t get passed the fact that it is a bit full on (not to mention brief) to listen to intently
it’s also difficult to listen passed the fact that the kit is differently tuned, i.e. it’s not the same take, there are other differences
psychologically one gets drawn to the higher pitched first bar hits as this ‘seems’ brighter, but i’m not getting drawn in to assessing different passages
i’m sure the nord is great, i have lots of nord gear, but i wonder just how much life, magic and sparkle is present in the sound to begin with before it could potentially be lost having been A > D & D > A (and gained internally)
i certainly thought the trace of the sampling was evident in the noise colour or air around the instruments or the perception of the roomspace in the test i posted and that i had no crisis over the body of the sound which I expected (partly based on opinions here) would be obvious, it wasn’t, i was happy to proceed with the gain fixing the OT needs if you sample
I’m curious to try a more focussed test soon to consider whether the magic is still there for some material
the important thing for me was that the OT didn’t feel at all compromised, and lets not forget lots of OT audio gets churned through a time stretching algorithm that is hardly all about fidelity
this thread is well derailed now
the first bar
Listening on Sennheiser Amperiors, the kicks in the first bar have marginally more punch to my ears…so for me OT is second bar.
My take then, if i’m forced to commit more transparently, my bet’s on the first being direct and the second being OT’d
I would add that if you used the loop as is, it wouldn’t make a significant difference imho
I tried through MOTU w Beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro btw
and when i mentioned different frequency i guess i meant frequency distribution or weighting of harmonics and such, the first kick plays out way different to the 5th, the earlier emphasis of the higher freq content is more dominant than in the second where the next phase seems to grab more - either way i guessed it may have been a random timbral thing, but if the loops were identical it spells bad news for the OT
So 2nd Bar is OT because the kicks sound rounder in the first, however, intuitively i’d imagine that the ADDA process would perhaps introduce higher spectrum emphasis, a bit like the way old 12bit samples sound crunchier and livelier for it
i just realised i left my Ultralite on 44k, tried 96, same tbh, so i’m saying the 2nd is OT
that makes me convinced i got it wrong !
anyway, standing my ground
use a patch bay or splitter cables to send the audio direct to input 1+2 and also record the OT feedthrough on 3+4 so both recordings are contemporaneous - i also had a quick listen to A4 and OT dir’d A4 w same headphones, until I added a big dollop of gain the OT sounded limp, so I think the DIR passthrough at 127 still leaves the signal short by 12db - based on headphone evidence, but once gain was evened out iit sounded less alarming but there was more airiness to the A4 direct, it was a rushed 2min test so not thorough or blind - i do hope these reports of squashed sound people are reporting isn’t just because the level has dropped, it does sound underwhelming as well as quiet at -12db !
Edit : Inputs not attenuated on OT, see here
Maybe you shouldn’t be so set on a certain outcome. And also realize that different folk have different methods and priorities.
I stated that monitoring through the Octa made a difference in dynamics. The setup where Octa is used to expand inputs is likely a setup where its about being able to do sound design. At least in my case. I have zero interest in static source-material as it is irrelevant for my case. A sine recorded might look exactly the same for both chains. But carving a delicate kick might prove to be a difficult task in the setup including Octa. Those are my findings at least. If its a setting that should differ from the empty reset-state of the Octa please show me and perhaps explain.
I give up…
The OT, just like any converter out there, WILL change the sound of your source material. Whether everyone can hear it or not, is not the issue. When 2 people come on here and say they can’t hear a difference (in fact they said they could), it’s not a conclusive test.
Furthermore, some people have ears that are trained to hear minute differences in frequency. I don’t know many people who can hear a 2db boost at 1khz, but the big mixing engineers in the world certainly can.
What I’m suggesting :
-
A/B tests are not the definitive answer, as we’re relying on people’s ears, feelings, expectations and experience while comparing.
-
not everyone’s ears are trained to detect minor differences in sound, ESPECIALLY when doing a blind test.
-
people are not necessarily honest during blind tests, they each have their own expectations and have, usually, already arrived at a conclusion before even starting the test.
What IS sure, is that the OT applies some heavy compression on the output, past a certain point. It’s some kind of limiting/overdriving that is VERY apparent when pushing levels a bit too hot. This, indeed, results in a squashed, flat sound, which the OT is infamous for. Sure, this has to do with gain staging, BUT, some other instruments out there don’t flatten the sound when overdriven. The OT does.
I think most people’s complaints are because there is no way to monitor levels in Electron kit, except for the input lights, which flicker red long before the inputs are actually distorting.
In conclusion, any attempt at A/B 'ing the OT and a pure source, is somewhat compromised by the fact that the gain structure of the OT is multi staged and not informative. Furthermore, and as it has been pointed out already, the kind of material you A/B has a massive influence on the results.
I wouldn’t get all excited about it. Every single professional around me hears a noticeable difference when running kit through the OT or straight in the board. This may have to do with gain staging, but since we don’t actually know what is “perfect” gain staging, it’s pointless to obsess about it.
The real question is if you like the sound of your kit running through the OT, or not. Personally, I use it as an FX unit, so i do. But I would not run my main elements through it, not necessarily because of the degraded sound fidelity, but simply because i want a signal as clean as possible.
Cheers
My main problem is that sounddesign in the drum regions is a bad idea through it, and its better(and more useful) with textures and stuff. The topicstarter stated he tried to get a powerful top sounding chain and I don’t think putting the OT in the chain is a good idea if you’re looking for punch in the drums section(Rytm). And thats when all the magic started to happen in this lovely thread 
Stop being a douche Baddcr
I’m merely trying to get you to back off a little, but you only seem to know this aggro attitude. Could you maybe just go bug someone else please? It’s absolutely useless…
I really tried… but man…
Seriously, Baddcr?
===============================
OP - WTF just did a bit o’ googlin’, those things cost a fortune, blimey, tasty !
any particular sunday
@ OP
Please, can you tell which Transient Designer hardware you have got?
You seem to understand this wrong. No one is saying the OT sounds bad.
What educated, trained engineers with years of experience and gold records under they belt are saying, is that the OT colours the sound. Which is an obvious fact, since every converter in any piece of hardware will , somehow, colour the sound. Maybe they colour it differently depending on how hard they’re driven. There are thousands of variables that makes this a very subjective matter. What’s not subjective is that the OT colours the sound. The fact that you can’t hear it (in fact you are saying you can) doesn’t mean it’s not there. You have to accept the fact that some engineers have ears that are much more trained and sensitive than yours.
If I taste a wine, I taste wine. A connoisseur would be able to drink the same wine and identify tastes, smells, nuances, colors that I would be completely oblivious to. Would I then be in a spot to argue with them that those tastes, smells and nuances are not there ? Would I be arrogant enough to declare that if I can’t taste them, they don’t exist ?
Ultimately, and I think this is the point you’re trying to make, for the end consumer of music, this coloration makes no difference. And indeed, when my sister listens to a 320 mp3 on her iPhone earbuds, there is no way she’ll hear that the reverb tail on the snare sample is a bit duller than usual. She doesn’t care. But, we do. We care not because we want it to change, not because we don’t like what it does, but simply because this is a passion for us, and with this passion, comes the obsession for minute details. This is a forum populated by music makers and, really, as long as the music’s good, and has soul, who cares if it was sampled in an OT or a Volca.
But, we’re here to talk about the nitty gritty of our kit. Those things that only matter to a few. If you’re not into discussing the effect that the OT’s A/D and D/A have on the sound, maybe it is better to let go indeed, as it’s a subject that is very interesting to me and quite a few of us around.
Finally, as I have pointed out already, A/B tests are very rarely conclusive, unless conducted with a reasonable sample size, of the appropriate group. Having 3 people on here say they can’t hear a difference (in fact they can) is hardly “proof” of anything, except maybe your eagerness
Cheers
Well actually it sounds really good but there is a ‘smudging’ or minor loss of detail in the upper frequencies that will only be revealed by the most accurate tweeters. The argument imo stems from the fact that everybody is listening on different reproduction systems and the difference in clarity is masked by varying degrees of accuracy of the speakers. It’s not so much a case of 1 person’s hearing being fantastically better than another’s though critical listening and minute eq adjustment of xover points and how different driver materials react is good training to detect subtle variations. For example, Beryllium is an incredibly lightweight & hard element that will not flex or ‘break up’ in the audible range when used in HF speaker drivers, this leads to unprecedented percieved accuracy in HF reproduction. Also, different codecs or converters do have their own ‘colouration’ mainly due to the different filtering techniques adopted in the individual product design but imo this does not nessecarily explain the minute levels of HF smudge but given than many D/A comverters are in the same price category as the entire OT, it’s understandable that it won’t have the same level of professional sound. The previous poster mentioned that the OT colours the sound but given that colour usually refers to equalisation I would disagree. It sounds as transparent to me in both examples provided, the difference I noticed was in the clarity of the HF transient response. An OT with track summing in the analogue domain or at least digital outs for use with high end converters would be a good optional hardware upgrade but not very likely so we must enjoy it as is
Indeed, very good point as well. The monitors used are definitely a big factor in how one perceives the music. This is part of the hundreds of variables that I was mentioning in my previous post. Doing an A/B comparison on KRK’s is not going to reveal anything if the differences are minute. We use Focal SM9’s at the studio as our main system, and those monitors are incredible in how revealing they are. I hear sounds on them that I had never heard before. It makes mixing so much easier, as they help pinpoint the problem areas. They are not flattering or smudging. Therefore, they are a pretty good reference point when observing what the OT (or any other piece of kit with an input) does to the signal as it goes through. We know it does - something - , we want to know what, exactly. For science
Edit : to bring it back to the OP, last time i tried the AR through a Sherman filter bank, it was quite magical. The vanilla sound of the AR is very very clean, but run it through an angry piece of kit, and it will come to life