ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

A place to talk about whatever Scope music/gear related stuff you want.

Moderators: valis, garyb

User avatar
yayajohn
Posts: 1694
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 5:01 pm
Location: Everywhere....Nowhere

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by yayajohn »

hey guys Peace!.......Thank You! I really appreciate the info, a lot to mull over if I run into any problems with this. This is not a pro studio and I don't do pro audio work, just a makeshift home-made laboratory with mediocre skills. Hopefully i won't be able to hear any difference.
User avatar
at0m
Posts: 4743
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Bubble Metropolis
Contact:

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by at0m »

valis wrote: Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:11 am the root question of this topic—how much latency does ADAT add? A few samples...
The old planetz Pulsar pages have a chart, and test procedure that lead to that chart. tl;dr: it was 9 samples in the test. This probably changed with hardware upgrades, so if anyone's interested to update for later DSP cards and maybe Xite, here's for inspiration:
Pulsar hardware latencies testing and chart
more has been done with less
https://soundcloud.com/at0m-studio
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23248
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by garyb »

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


audio is audio.
it's what we listen to.

i hope that nobody is insulted, whether scientist, musician, or a combination.

yayajohn, for most purposes, you do not need to concern yourself with latency(ADAT to ADAT). if you have comb filtering to the point that the music sounds wrong, then you can concern yourself with fixing it.
User avatar
valis
Posts: 7306
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: West Coast USA
Contact:

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by valis »

fra77x2 wrote: Sat Feb 22, 2020 1:11 pm My friend when I post in this forum I am very careful because I know the story.

Let me clear a bit the mist.

You reply (before I make any posts) in this thread as
Still important to correct this offset (a few samples) if you're doing parallel processing.
GaryB reply:
only for some music.
with hardware and real patchbays and mixers, those kinds of offsets are normal and part of why things sound great, sometimes...

computer nerds are funny sometimes.
By my understanding he hasn't even understood your reply. You mention parallel processing and he replies: only for some music!
The "phase accurate" music. All other music is normal. Perfect "phase accurate" music is made by nerds and you know we don't spot any difference and we also don't like it....

He also calls you a computer nerd in a "friendly" response that you know a lot of "difficult stuff". You reply by admitting the
"friendly" call. -> Yes, I am indeed a computer nerd
If you think Gary didn't understand my reply...well let's just say you're not giving credit where it's deserved.

These are user forums, and what we all do here, we do freely and willingly. You might be taking things too literally, and missing the subtext of the conversation. Subtext + 'friendly' banter can be best summarized as:

What-Rods-the-Grumpy-Old-Men-Would-Build-Feature.jpg
What-Rods-the-Grumpy-Old-Men-Would-Build-Feature.jpg (79.91 KiB) Viewed 3102 times

fra77x2 wrote: Sat Feb 22, 2020 1:11 pm You then reply in support of Gary, obviously because you don't like me telling you how to work.
And you know it was expected.

So I'm not pedantic I try to be helpful and of course I get tired when reading ill-digested knowledge presented with the pose of authority.
I will acknowledge that it's possible there's language or cultural barriers at play here, so let me clarify: my aim isn't to denigrate you or be sarcastic. Nor have I said I don't like your input (please show me where if you think this is the case). You did however bring up a thread that YOU seemed to dislike, where I also responded--as asked--very respectfully.

My response to you wasn't because I "don't like you telling me how to work" but rather an attempt to aid in slowing our collective roll after I contributed (to the roll) via posting a lengthy diatribe that was fitting of the moniker "computer nerd". Subtext...

(See above pic again, and btw that movie is called "Grumpy Old Men").
fra77x2
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun May 03, 2015 3:23 pm

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by fra77x2 »

Send an audio file like a drum loop to a channel and the same audio via a dsp delay line to a second channel and mix them.
With 0 samples delay the audio just gets louder. With 1 sample delay, it is still the same. But with 2 samples delay I can hear a degradation in the high frequencies and in the spectrum analyzer the first dip of the comb appears. With 3 samples delay the audio is degraded severely and go on.

So I'm not really sure what you are talking about, I know Walter Matthau and Jack Lemmon.

In this context I can reply to your team:

A coffee is a coffee.

Dip one small piece of a turd inside it and you are not going to notice. It would be like a normal coffee. Now dip a bit bigger piece in it. Perhaps you still won't notice it. You could even say that all great people drink coffee that has small pieces of turd inside and everyone likes their coffee.
But there is an amount that your coffee will start to stink like a turd...

Good morning :-)
nebelfuerst
Posts: 479
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 10:55 am

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by nebelfuerst »

I think the initial question was about latency, not mixing the delayed signal with the original one.
This would lead to some effects, which most of us don't like, but sometimes is also might provide nice special effects.

Feeding the signal from Xite to Scope and reverse is the same for me like going through an Aux-device. You get some constant delay = latency on both channels.
Mixing delayed signals to undelayed signals brings up the word "phase", which then causes frequency dependant amplitude amplification or degradation.
The best audio engineer on earth will add 10% to the success of an audio production. If the basic song is boring crap, all perfectionism in Scope/DAW won't help.
\\\ *** l 0 v e | X I T E *** ///
fra77x2
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun May 03, 2015 3:23 pm

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by fra77x2 »

So you like to take part in the conversation.

I like your attitude, so you are saying if you don't do your job right, it is another person's fault, you blame the songwriter?

Are you saying that doing your job right is perfectionism, the normal case is to not care?

Great character.
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23248
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by garyb »

i'll await the Grammys.

yes, the song is more important than the engineer, although the engineer can certainly polish that turd.
have you ever seen a polished turd? it looks like a gemstone...
User avatar
t_tangent
Posts: 970
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: UK

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by t_tangent »

This has been an interesting thread with some great insights, so thanks to all for the useful info.

On a lighter note, all that talk of turds just reminded me of a scene from American Dad.

https://youtu.be/4CqM2Kw687A

:)
User avatar
valis
Posts: 7306
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: West Coast USA
Contact:

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by valis »

Golden turd indeed :)
User avatar
yayajohn
Posts: 1694
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 5:01 pm
Location: Everywhere....Nowhere

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by yayajohn »

So to close the loop on this thread... 8)

No audible latency noted even when running the signal through multiple converters.

yay!

perception = reality
User avatar
dante
Posts: 5043
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia
Contact:

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by dante »

For more reading on phase/latency taking place within XITE:

https://www.scopeusers.com/ScopeRise/is ... p_mast.htm
https://www.scopeusers.com/ScopeRise/is ... temast.htm

Both these articles point out that the price of DSP gain by manual assignment is that more care needs to be taken care with regards phase/latency (taking place within the DSP 'farms') within XITE. With Manual assignment on large devices that span farms you need to be aware that you may be overriding developer placement thats already taken care of phase. Less of an issue in the XITE-1D of course.

If you're going to worry about ADAT latency (which I dont) - you might as well read these articles as well for full coverage. If you don't manually assign its less of an issue of course - if the developer has taken care of it.
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23248
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: ADAT to Scope PCI to Xite ADAT

Post by garyb »

yayajohn wrote: Tue Mar 03, 2020 12:53 pm So to close the loop on this thread... 8)

No audible latency noted even when running the signal through multiple converters.

yay!

perception = reality
eggs-ackaly
Post Reply