Night and day difference between analogue/digital converters

TheBigDipper

I did an interesting experiment this week. well, it was for me.

I've had an Audient Sono sitting on my desk for a while now, and I like it a lot for recording and for just playing back music for listening pleasure using the computer as a streamer. I've also got a cheap little Behringer mixer that I bought to use in lockdown as a remote practice device to play with my neighbour without us leaving our respective houses. I don't leave that out on the desk.

I thought it might be nice if I did have the ability to play, mix and record without getting out the mixer every time and plugging stuff in, etc., etc. To that end I bought a Yamaha MG10-XU. It arrived yesterday and I tried it out. As the main reason for buying was to have a mixer on the desk that replaced the Sono, I tried that aspect first.

Awful. Compared to the Sono, music I know really well sounded thin and unmusical. There's an Elbow track called "Bones Of You" with a distinctive synth bass part underpinning the chorus. The Yamaha couldn't decode it - it was harsh and lo-fi sounding rather than the fat mono synth sound I knew. All of the music I played back sounded better using the Sono. 

It's gone back. I couldn't find the heart to try it as a recording device or an analogue mixer. It failed on the first feature that I bought it for. 

And that's the story... 

Philtre

Interesting. I was thinking of getting a MG12XU. I wonder if the analogue part is OK?

Lestratcaster

I've got the Yamaha MG10 and I think its very good. Mind you I use it slightly differently as I have several things plugged into it and then send the stereo out into my Focusrite for online lessons. Would have got the XU but I don't think it does 2-way monitoring i.e so BOTH of us can hear the mix.

It sounds good to me but its only to make my guitar and backing music in sync. They're not overly fussed on it sounding studio quality. (Way better than using the webcam mic though!)

octatonic

It is worth getting your hands on something like an Avid MTRX, Merging Horus, Lynx Aurora n, Burl or anything by Prism at some stage.

Danny1969

The actual chips used in converters for the past 15 years or so are fairly generic, like the CS 5396 but the filter design and supporting discrete design and components make a real difference. 

My first professional rig was PT24 and the converters were 20 bit rather than 24 and they certainly had a sound that I can still hear today. One giveaway of a bad sounding convertor is the stacked sound effect, which becomes more apparent as the track count goes up. The more tracks you do the more you hear the effect of the poor converter. Once I got a 192 and HD I never noticed that stacked effect, the conversion seemed a lot more transparent but a lot of engineers still bused those out to external better convertors. 

Stuckfast

I've tested a lot of audio interfaces over the years and I have never, ever, heard the sort of 'night and day' contrast you describe just from differences in converters. Also, Yamaha stuff is usually very solid. It sounds to me like something was faulty or wired up wrong.

I've heard tracks from that Elbow album sound awful on big studio monitors too, I don't think it's very well mixed.

TheBigDipper

Philtre said:

Interesting. I was thinking of getting a MG12XU. I wonder if the analogue part is OK?

I can't comment on that, as it didn't matter to me if I still needed to keep the Sono on the desk as well, so I didn't test it. Looked beautifully made and had a quality feel about it. 

TheBigDipper

Stuckfast said:

I've tested a lot of audio interfaces over the years and I have never, ever, heard the sort of 'night and day' contrast you describe just from differences in converters. Also, Yamaha stuff is usually very solid. It sounds to me like something was faulty or wired up wrong.

I've heard tracks from that Elbow album sound awful on big studio monitors too, I don't think it's very well mixed.

Fine. That's your audio interface experience. I'm not an expert on recording interfaces, but I do have the ears to hear that there was a big musical difference between the two. Nothing I played back sounded as nice to me. The Elbow track was just a surprise that it was decoded so poorly. It didn't handle playing the guitar through S-Gear as well, either. Sounded very thin and artificial compared to the Sono. 

I'm just telling a story about one mixer at my house, not slagging off Yamaha and every product they've ever made.  

Stuckfast

Not doubting your experience was real, just suggesting it's unlikely to have been due solely to different A-D converters. Were you monitoring on headphones or speakers?

WiresDreamDisasters

harsh and lo-fi sounding rather than the fat mono synth sound I knew

This sounds extremely suspect. A difference of AD/DA wouldn't cause harsh or lofi changes to that degree, not without something being really wrong. How exactly did you have it all connected up??

TheBigDipper

Stuckfast said:

Not doubting your experience was real, just suggesting it's unlikely to have been due solely to different A-D converters. Were you monitoring on headphones or speakers?

WiresDreamDisasters said:

harsh and lo-fi sounding rather than the fat mono synth sound I knew

This sounds extremely suspect. A difference of AD/DA wouldn't cause harsh or lofi changes to that degree, not without something being really wrong. How exactly did you have it all connected up??

Fair observations and good questions all round. Thanks. 

I monitored on headphones, through speakers through the monitor outputs and through speakers on the main outputs. 

Connection was just a USB cable - but not the same one. The Sono has a USB-C socket and the Yamaha has a USB-B socket. I did try a second cable just in case the first one I used was defective in some way, but got the same result. 

It was a second hand mixer, which is why I returned it rather than swapped it out, and it hasn't put me off the MG10XU, just not that specific unit, which clearly has some sort of problem somewhere. It's just the game has changed from an impulsive casual tryout of an inexpensive mixer into a proper think about what I want if I'm going to do this properly. 

Stratavarious

Did you install or configure the driver correctly.  Was another driver active?  It is plug and play on Mac but uses a Steinberg driver on PC.

i uses one extensively in my little project studio for TV stuff and voiceovers as well as band stuff. It has a fine sound.

TheBigDipper

Stratavarious said:

Did you install or configure the driver correctly.  Was another driver active?  It is plug and play on Mac but uses a Steinberg driver on PC.

i uses one extensively in my little project studio for TV stuff and voiceovers as well as band stuff. It has a fine sound.

macOS and iOS, so no drivers required. Glad you're getting good sounds out of yours. I originally posted because I couldn't believe that was what people would accept. You're the first person to say you personally use it as an audio interface and are happy with what you get from it as such. That's positive. 

It was probably just faulty - but a heck of a difference and a shock. I might well try a new one to see how that goes. There's no point in debugging a second hand unit that only cost me £130 in the first place. 

octatonic

octatonic said:

It is worth getting your hands on something like an Avid MTRX, Merging Horus, Lynx Aurora n, Burl or anything by Prism at some stage.

Let me clarify why I said this too.
I've got a number of different converter technologies here, some prosumer (UA Apollo), some pro end (Focusrite Red/Rednet) 'super high end (Avid MTRX).
I also have the usual PC Soundcard outputs, phones, iPads etc.

In terms of listening in the studio there isn't actually a huge difference (although there is a difference) been the low end and the super high end when dealing with single source or finished mixes.

Audio quality in even moderately cheap devices is pretty darn good.
Why then would you go for a high end converter? 
Seems like a waste of money?
Perhaps or perhaps not.

I'm largely concerned with things other Han audio quality when buying converters now, because they all sound very good.
There is a small but appreciable difference between the converters in the Avid MTRX compared to something like a low end audio converter. The main issues I am focussed on is expandability, routing, monitoring, driver support and latency.
Converter quality is after all of that.