Question on Santa Cruz sound card

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:04:49 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
<geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote:

>ansermetniac wrote:
>>> Look at the M-Audio Audiophile 2496.
>> I bought the Santa Cruz upon reccomendation. After 60 seconds I took
>> it out and put back by Sound Blaster
>>
>
>Did you have a broken one or are you deaf ?
>
>geoff

Sorry can't hear you. Have my acoustical engineering patents stuck in
my ears.


Abbedd
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

ansermetniac wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:04:49 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
> <geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote:
>
>> ansermetniac wrote:
>>>> Look at the M-Audio Audiophile 2496.
>>> I bought the Santa Cruz upon reccomendation. After 60 seconds I took
>>> it out and put back by Sound Blaster
>>>
>>
>> Did you have a broken one or are you deaf ?
>>
>> geoff
>
> Sorry can't hear you. Have my acoustical engineering patents stuck in
> my ears.

Even George Martin is deaf nowadays ...

geoff
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004 08:44:08 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
<geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote:

>ansermetniac wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:04:49 +1200, "Geoff Wood"
>> <geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote:
>>
>>> ansermetniac wrote:
>>>>> Look at the M-Audio Audiophile 2496.
>>>> I bought the Santa Cruz upon reccomendation. After 60 seconds I took
>>>> it out and put back by Sound Blaster
>>>>
>>>
>>> Did you have a broken one or are you deaf ?
>>>
>>> geoff
>>
>> Sorry can't hear you. Have my acoustical engineering patents stuck in
>> my ears.
>
>Even George Martin is deaf nowadays ...

Yes, his remastering of the Beatles' CDs is a disgrace. But that is
because he is an alter kaker. I am only 44

Abbedd
>
>geoff
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"ansermetniac" <ansermetniac@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ienne0hakdvssbmhousqg2bpi8egirhbml@4ax.com...
> >Says more about the person than the cards really.
>
> Maybe I have better ears than you. And the knowledge to know what I am
> hearing.

Since you admit you never even tried to get it working properly, there could
be a million reasons why it sounded bad to you.
However measured performance is definitely better for a SC in proper working
condition Vs a SB Live also working properly.
I have measured both many times. There are much better cards available if
you were really worried, which obviously you are not.

TonyP.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:Xu6dnc1AaJHrfnbdRVn-tA@comcast.com...
> "Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@yis.us> wrote in message
> news:2l220aF7nsqjU1@uni-berlin.de
> > Looked over the Echo card. I'd rather stick with unbalanced analog
> > in/outs, I think. I'd like to keep my existing preamp etc without
> > using adapters. Just more clutter.

You need some sort of lead anyway, where's the problem?
I bet the pre-amp probably uses RCA's and the TB-SC doesn't have those!

> Ironically, the Echo Mia, the Audiophile 2496 and the Delta 44 and Delta
66
> all have unbalanced I/O. The TRS jacks are in effect, decoration.

Yes, sad isn't it. Performance does not seem to be compromised though, so
it's irrelevant to most people.

TonyP.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"TonyP" <TonyP@optus.net.com.au> wrote in message
news:40ee57d4$0$25460$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:Xu6dnc1AaJHrfnbdRVn-tA@comcast.com...
> > "Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@yis.us> wrote in message
> > news:2l220aF7nsqjU1@uni-berlin.de
> > > Looked over the Echo card. I'd rather stick with unbalanced analog
> > > in/outs, I think. I'd like to keep my existing preamp etc without
> > > using adapters. Just more clutter.
>
> You need some sort of lead anyway, where's the problem?
> I bet the pre-amp probably uses RCA's and the TB-SC doesn't have those!

No, but I can use a direct adapter cable from the RCA to 1/8" stereo mini
plug with no other adapters, transformers, or the like. Slight compromise
possibly, but one I've used often before and feel I can live with.

Mark Z.

>
> snip>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Once again, I need about a 35 feet digital audio connection from my computer
to the main stereo.
The system connections would go something like this:

TB analog input to the rec out of the preamp. TB analog output it tape input
of preamp. This allows normal record/play of analog sources from the preamp
to the computer, and monitoring of same there at the computer.

At the same time, I need a digital connection for when I wish to make the
sound card output available to the main stereo, approximately 35 feet away
(as the cable runs, so to speak).
I presently run a shielded stereo cable that distance, and it works OK,
since the main system is ungrounded, there's no particular hum problem, but
I believe the sound is compromised by the cable length etc.

So anyway, it appears from my Googling exploits that optical cables of the
length I was wanting don't exist. I see 12-footers, and couplers, but I
really doubt that three cables and 2 couplers is the way to go.

So, any problems with a coaxial digital connection of this length? It wasn't
my first choice, but I could probably live with it. Plus, I could make use
of a Denon D/A converter I already own.

Or, another thought. Are any of these 2.4 gHz transmitters any good?


Mark Z.

--
Please reply only to Group. I regret this is necessary. Viruses and spam
have rendered my regular e-mail address useless.

>snip>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@yis.us> wrote in message news:2l7c47F9ciqvU1@uni-berlin.de...
:
:
: I apologize in advance that I'm a bit murky on the subject of balanced vs.
: unbalanced. From what I can see, however, a direct connection from
: unbalanced to balanced, as you seem to suggest, is much less than ideal.
:
: I Googled the subject, and came up with this:
:
: www.jensen-transformers.com/an/an003.pdf
:
:
: Which recommends the use of transformers, modifications to existing output
: circuits, etc.
:
: I was wishing to avoid this type of thing. Surely a phone plug gives better
: connection, all things being equal, but simply tying one side of the
: balanced line to ground bothers me. Should it not?

Did you ever listen to a tube amp? One side of the output transformer is usually grounded when
it could be balanced if the designer so wished. The other side of a balanced line output
transformer or a balanced mic input transformer is grounded.

Phil Abbate
:
:
: Mark Z.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@yis.us> wrote in message news:2l78ktF9ej8hU1@uni-berlin.de...
: Once again, I need about a 35 feet digital audio connection from my computer
: to the main stereo.
: The system connections would go something like this:
:
: TB analog input to the rec out of the preamp. TB analog output it tape input
: of preamp. This allows normal record/play of analog sources from the preamp
: to the computer, and monitoring of same there at the computer.
:
: At the same time, I need a digital connection for when I wish to make the
: sound card output available to the main stereo, approximately 35 feet away
: (as the cable runs, so to speak).

I have been running Spdif out of an M-Audio 2496 usb to a theta probasic IIIA converter via
the 30' AUDIO cable that came with a Paradigm x30 subwoofer crossover for about a year with no
problem at all. I also used the same type cable to run the output of a SBL livedrive (now in
the attic) to the same probasic IIIa as well as the output from my Fostex VF16 which is
converted to coax with a 15 dollar toslink to coax converter with no problems. I also used the
same cable to go from the Theta SPDIF out and back into the fostex and SBL.
Try it and report.

Phil Abbate

: Mark Z.
:
: --
: Please reply only to Group. I regret this is necessary. Viruses and spam
: have rendered my regular e-mail address useless.
:
: >snip>
:
:
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Codifus" <codifus@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:cchnme$1s5m$1@news.interpublic.com...
> Why not? I'd like to know that when I set the card to a certain sampling
> rate/bit depth, that's what I'm getting, not some artificially
> re-created samples. And to take it further, what's to say that when I
> set my WDM driven TBSC to 44.1/16, a rate that it can do, this data is
> not being re-sampled either?

If the measurements I obtain from the card are as good as I expect, then I
don't really care.
There are a few cards around that do native 24/96 and yet have a frequency
response below 40 kHz, that sort of thing worries me too. Why save all the
extra samples if you still can't make use of them?

TonyP.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004 05:59:23 -0500, "Mark D. Zacharias"
<mzacharias@yis.us> wrote:

>I apologize in advance that I'm a bit murky on the subject of balanced vs.
>unbalanced. From what I can see, however, a direct connection from
>unbalanced to balanced, as you seem to suggest, is much less than ideal.
>
>I Googled the subject, and came up with this:
>
>www.jensen-transformers.com/an/an003.pdf
>
>
>Which recommends the use of transformers, modifications to existing output
>circuits, etc.
>
>I was wishing to avoid this type of thing. Surely a phone plug gives better
>connection, all things being equal, but simply tying one side of the
>balanced line to ground bothers me. Should it not?

At line level, not really. You'd lose the common-mode rejection of a
balanced connection. But noisy connections aren't often a problem at
line level.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Mark D. Zacharias" <mzacharias@yis.us> wrote in message
news:2l7c47F9ciqvU1@uni-berlin.de...
> I was wishing to avoid this type of thing. Surely a phone plug gives
better
> connection, all things being equal, but simply tying one side of the
> balanced line to ground bothers me. Should it not?

No since they are not really balanced in the first place. Even if they were,
you would be no worse off tying one side to ground than using an unbalanced
system anyway. The transformers are necessary where you need to maintain
common mode rejection.

Why don't you read the manufacturers data sheets, it probably tells you that
connection is perfectly acceptable at line levels with normal length cables.

TonyP.