Mike Rivers wrote:
> David Light wrote:
>
>> The ada8000 mic pres only drive the ADC and have no connection to
>> the analog outputs. The pres. can't really be used standalone that I
>> know of. There's been times when I really wanted to have a direct out
>> of the pre so if there is a way let me know.
>
> What happens if you connect the ADAT Out to the ADAT In? Will that get
> the mic input to the analog output?

Yes.

> Of course it's going through an A/D
> and
> D/A conversion (something that most people would rather sell their
> sister into
> slavery than do) and unless you have an ADAT splitter, you can't get both
> analog and digital output, but if you need to get mics up to line level
> maybe
> it'll work.
>

The pres aren't that good, either.

> I just assumed that it had a "monitor" function like just about every other
> similar (though more expensive) device has. But if the intent (as the web
> site suggests) is that it be used as an expander for the digital console,
> then that's where you get your monitoring.
>
>
>


There ya go. That's all it does.

--
Les Cargill

Arny Krueger wrote:

> I suspect that the software will be out in due course.

That's what PreSonus says.

> My initial disappointment with the Presonus 24.4.2 was the limited
> parametric eq on the channel strips.

It's better than on the 16-channel version which just had a button to switch
the bandwidth of the sweepable high-mid frequency. The "HI-Q" position is
just a but less than 1 octave, not very high Q.


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 18:24:27 -0000, Mike Rivers <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> I'm surprised that MADI hasn't picked up any
> real steam.

It depends which end of the market you are looking at. MADI seems fairly
well supported at the high end but I guess that none of the consumer chip
manufacturers support it so it hasn't found its way down to the hobby
market.

James.


--
http://www.jrpmusic.net

Arny Krueger wrote:

>>> I suspect that the software (PreSonus Virtual StudioLive) will be out in due course.
> I think they will deliver. AFAIK they've been pretty good on their
promises
> in the past.

I'm sure they will. They were showing a functional version of it at the
NAMM show.

> Spec sheet says that the Q of the 16 channel version was set to 0.55.

I didn't remember the numbers quite correctly. I did a few plots and
here's what I
wrote in my (unpublished) review:

The four band EQ is fairly gentle, even in
the Hi-Q mode. Hi-Q (approximately 0.5
octave bandwidth) is more effective for
cutting, while I preferred the standard
bandwidth (approximately 1.5 octave) for
boosts. The High and Low bands can be
switched between peaking and shelving
response. With the High-mid band
extending up to 5 kHz, I found that the
High band was most useful in the shelf mode for adding some “air” to vocals.

> I don't know why they didn't do a real parametric eq with the usual 3
> adjustments per band. That sells me on the 01V96 right there.

The 24-channel StudioLive has the Q adjustable from (it says) 0.1 to 4
on the two mid-band EQs. I suspect that the 16-channel version was intended
to be simple enough for beginning live sound people to use without getting
bogged down in all that technical stuff. I don't know why they made the two
graphic EQs available only on the main outputs (who needs that?) and not on
the Aux outputs where it might come in handy for monitors. The graphic EQs
on the 24-channel version have more flexible routing. And what were they
thinking when they made it so that you need to turn off whatever you're
listening to in the headphones or control room speakers in order to hear a
soloed channel actually in solo? They changed that in the 24, as well.

I offered to give the 24 a going-over before it was too late and was
told that
they knew where they wanted to go with it, and that they weren't using any
outside beta testers for this model. Might be a good thing. They told me
that
their beta testers requested the "not-solo" solo. Wonder what they do in
real
life?


--
"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson

Mike Rivers <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> They told me that their beta testers requested the "not-solo" solo. Wonder
> what they do in real life?

They continue learning English, so they can move up to PT support.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar
http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/hsadharma

On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 17:08:59 -0500, Mike Rivers <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>David Light wrote:
>
>> The ada8000 mic pres only drive the ADC and have no connection to
>> the analog outputs. The pres. can't really be used standalone that I
>> know of. There's been times when I really wanted to have a direct out
>> of the pre so if there is a way let me know.
>
>What happens if you connect the ADAT Out to the ADAT In? Will that get
>the mic input to the analog output? Of course it's going through an A/D and
>D/A conversion (something that most people would rather sell their
>sister into
>slavery than do) and unless you have an ADAT splitter, you can't get both
>analog and digital output, but if you need to get mics up to line level
>maybe
>it'll work.
>
>I just assumed that it had a "monitor" function like just about every other
>similar (though more expensive) device has. But if the intent (as the web
>site suggests) is that it be used as an expander for the digital console,
>then that's where you get your monitoring.

I think connecting the lightpipe output to input would work,
but I haven't tried it.
>
>
>
>--
>"Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without
>a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be
>operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson