I did an A-B comparision..i felt the Orion was compressing the sound a bit..and the Amari just opened it up completely.. amazing how subtle, but great difference it all makes!
I haven't listened to any metal in easily a decade, but the instrumental of The Watch totally blew my mind. Love it!!! I have to watch this video over and over though as I can't seem to find the instrumental anywhere.
I’m listening on a simple iPhone, and I hear separation and fullness overall. It’s easy distinguishable on the hihats, where it creates depth, like layers of sound, the way music production is intended. Orion seems to flatten some transients, in a bad way. For me, the smartphone speakers are relevant these days. Amari is an impressive converter
The Amari does seem to sound better, but you were doing through 2 stages on conversion on the Orion. You should try the test again with the same signal flow you used with the Amari (going through both of the hardware units from a single set of outputs on the orion and going back in on a single set of inputs). Unless I misunderstood what you were doing with the Orion.
Recently I bought the amari dac and I found a serious problem.When the amari decodes a dsd file.Sounds became stuffy and get distorted.But when it decodes the pcm file everything returns to normal.I have tried Jriver and foorbar2000 players and the amari goes on the same problem.For example,when I set the Jriver player in non-convert mode to play a dsd file,the sound became stuffy.And then I played the same dsd file after I set the Jriver player to convert the dsd file to pcm file.Sound returns to normal.It seems the amari has something wrong with decoding original dsd file.I have tried many dsd files including dsd64 and dsd128,all have the same problem.And these files can be well decoded by other dacs I have.Only the amari have this problem.So if anyone knows how to solve this problem.Please teach me.Thank you very much!
very good point, considering the orion one was hitting two stages of conversion it sound excellent. doubt the difference would be as big if what you mentioned about was done
Amari all day John and I didn't even get to 7:42 when you said the Amari sounds bigger before making my decision. I ran clips back at the two main transitions and its clear who is "superior". Running two HS8s thru a Scarlett(puke) if that helps with anything. Major difference. And I will more than likely be purchasing an Antelope instead of my other choice (Apollo) to replace my mentioned interface.
Hey John, man I love that song. Both units sound absolutely killer. Great separation, power, and balance. Id really love to hear more amps going through load boxes and straight into cab IR’s with no additional processing or physical cabs. Synergy direct out, AMP 1, and any of the great amps u have.
Hey John! Love that you're covering pro gear like this, as a recording student I've found your last couple of videos super insightful and helpful in what I'm doing day to day. Thanks man!
I recorded the audio (off of youtube mind you) and brought them into my daw, lined them up and flipped back in forth for comparison. Unfortunatley I cant post a picture, but the largest difference between the tracks is that there is an emphasis on the Left side when going through the Orion (which you can hear well in the lead guitar and cymbals) and extremely balanced stereo field from the Amari. I'm not really sure how the converters would alter this everything else being equal, but that's what I'm hearing and seeing. Everything is extremely similar (albeit after youtube)
Joel's has that processed metalcore vibe to it, while John's has more the organic feel. I honestly love both, but i would love to hear the whole instrumental album with john's mix!
There is definitely more "individual space" for each track to shine through, there appears to be a touch more 10khz+ sheen present, with a not as noticeable "bass pump" from the amount of room the Amari appears to provide in its conversion for sure (makes the overall mix compressors lower floor pull more subtle within the mix overall) - this could be where you feel it sounds bigger? At least to my ears thats how I processed the difference, despite the 2x chain stage in the first example (which is by no means a savage quality sounding mix, just sounds a little 'closer together' and more full bodied) - the 2nd example definitely sounds more "Browne-sound" where that mid-low cut you love is so much more defined and cleanr/cripser in the Amari conversion than the Orion, but as per a previous comment below, Id suggest another side by side comparison by doing the single stage chain as well as the 2x stage chaining to get a more accurate side by side test. Those nuances might be more distinguishable. Nice tight separation in conversion though. Very tidy.
So to recap on my first comment. Night and day. It’s brighter in a good way far more clarity and so much definition in the instruments. The guitars the notes were way more understandable to the ears. Now I’m curious. I wonder what that would sound like in my apogee symphony io mkii 🤔 hmmmm been thinking about buying it but my apogee is really really good.
Nothing immediately jumps out as being significantly different between the two to my ears. But we're all listening after UA-cam's done its thing to the sound. It may very well sound different in person. It's not my type of music, but it's extremely well mixed/produced.
I’m not sure if the compressor is what I’m hearing, but the first one definitely sounds less developed and a lot more one dimensional. The amari seems to really bring out the warm characteristics of the track, and it seems to brighten it up. On a side note I would absolutely buy an instrumental album going through that thing, it sounds great.
Same mix, but all grown up!! Let's just start with how amazing that track was, however, staying on topic, the Amari really does sound better on UA-cam (which probably means the HD files would be more pronounced)
I can't even understand why you would try to compare a multiple round-trip AD/DA conversion chain, regardless of the the converters, to a single round-trip conversion chain, again, regardless of the converters. That said, the Amari sounded great.
Kept coming back to this video since I first saw it trying to judge for myself how much of an actual difference there is. I'm honestly thinking, like a few other people I see in the comments, that the difference is actually coming from the double conversion in the first chain.
But: according to your signal chain in the first example (Orion 32) you went through 2 steps of DA-AD while with the Amari only one, this will not lead to a fair A-B between the units
Listening through my Sennheiser HD650 and to my ears, the Amari sounds a lot better. It sounds more open and the low end is not as "flubby" as it was through the Orion 32+. It sounds like the Orion compresses the signal.
to my ears, it feels like the amari is louder, less dynamic, and a bit more pleasing. Maybe both rigs have the same loudness but the amari adds compression/distortion with a specific harmonics content. That would explain what I hear... but then I compare at 3:42 and 6:22, and it sounds pretty identical... still I think I prefere the amari... But when differences get SO subtle, does it even matter ?
Since this mastering matter has been brought up, have you even considered remastering Gnosis and Amanuensis? I am beyond stoked with the quality production of Phronesis, it is so sharp and pleasant to listen!
At first I thought it was psychosomatic, but upon a few blind tests I think I hear noticeably more upper-mid and high frequency content coming out of the second sample. More open-sounding, more detail in everything, and the lows probably had a positive impact by proxy but I didn't detect anything as obvious as the highs.
It sounds like Amari is louder but it has more headroom. It doesn't sound as compressed as the other signal chain. It breathe better, it this makes sense :)
honestly the better idk, first round was more satisfying nonetheless but i guess the point is and i dunno for sure whether it is or not that the second option is a potentially more promising one if the mixing process were to be done from the beginning to utilize that broadness. and again perhaps the mastering stage is the exact place for that to happen. Any way the first one was a two room flat which was stuffed with decoration but so effectively that the living space was reflecting a lifestyle and then the other apperaed as the potential to re config that atmosphere into a three room flat and that makes me thinking like ok lets record or mix it from the beginning to fill those gaps. no matter what i would like to have stuffed that new config like the first one minus the limiter attack. Nice vid ,Thummieis upward
I don’t understand; What are you comparing? In one config you have a d/a with outboard gear and several stages of a/d d/a, not sure if you mentioned bit depth and rate there, or any considerations for impedance matching with the outboard gear... then you’re comparing all of that mayhem with just the Amari? That seems like an odd comparison if that’s the case.
ThreepE0 impedance matching is only required on the reallllly old and perhaps if I was using tape. The differences between the units will have been less than a loss of 0.005dB with today’s standards
John Browne it’s not just dBs that you come up against with impedance mismatches, but I guess that’s the least likely issue to come into play with modern gear. Levels might be an issue though; if you’re not careful to stay at unity the whole way through you might have some of the differences I heard in the two. What about the multiple ad da stages? And during conversion what rates were used?
Well actually that's what I thought Monuments records always missed, more head room, more width to it. This one actually fills the gap really good to my ears
Both sound amazing but I prefer the first one, for me, the first it sounds brighter, the second less bright and fattier (at least comparing the start of the tracks before you reduced the volume).
Sounds nice. Though I wish you would A/B throughout the playback instead of playing one, speaking, and playing the other. It makes it difficult to compare.
Seems like it got wider! Less thump in the middle. Overall yes better to my ear, I was able to hear more dynamic range with the same loudness. I hope there was no widening plugin added to the chain given we couldn't see the session 🤣
For anyone out there who feels like they'll never have what they need for good recordings because they can't afford this kind of special stuff - don't worry at all. Alot of this high-end, ultra-expensive stuff is made by nerds (respectfully) who get boners over hand-wired mega biased components. I didn't hear anything in this video that justifies the cost of this mixing converter. *Nothing.* Save your money and stick to buying equipment that's going to make the _most dramatic_ differences in your recordings for the _least amount_ of money, NOT the _least_ difference for the _most_ amount of money. Use your head! For all those who can afford it responsibly, have at it.
Nice presentation, but as you note you compare a 2 time "DA-->Proc1-->AD-->DA-->Proc2+Proc3-->AD" at 44.1kHz to a "DA-->Proc1+Proc2+Proc3-->AD". To me this is not quite the same... running at 96kHz might give you a closer match in this case.
Definitely Amari! Better soundstage and more interesting nuances from around 4k up. Bit bigger dynamics sneak in there with that headroom. Listened to it on an LG Stylo 4 Plus with a pair of KZ ES3 IEMs with KZ silver plated 6 core wire.
It's weird, imho the tapping part in the beginning sounds better on the Orion up until 3:48, everything after that I like better on the Amari. But then again I've never mixed anything in my entire life so no idea if that's just my brain going "louder = better" lol. What happened at that timestamp, is it the compression because of the bass drum? Gets so quiet suddenly
Love your content. Nice to see you post more! Thx a lot. Question: Does it really make a difference? In the end Spotify, ITunes etc. (MP3) destroys your sound. At least what converting concerns. I'm sure in your studio you can hear the difference.
StreetShooterMe if that’s the mindset then does spending any time mixing it really matter as it’s going to be listened through a phone speaker or Apple AirPods?! Haha
The difference is huge. It's like two different mixes. Not a comparison. I propose to use the same settings on both to be able to judge it. The Orion seems to move the stereo image left and right all the time. Like the compressor was not stereo linked. It sounds more distorted and 2d. I couldn't understand the image of your mix. It was a fail. The Amari sounds as your mix should sound. It has depth. Stereo seperation. The image doesn't move. We heard the instruments roles, inside a virtual space. The quality of transients was beautiful. The highs were open and the low stable. Nothing to do with the orion. You should do the same test with the same settings with both converters.
The Amari sounds just as Big ans awesome as the 3 times more exoensive mastering converter. As sooon as i have to money i will buy one for myself. I came to Antelope audio through Thomas Rackavsky of Babylon Studio and Modern Day Babylon, from theTczech Republic, he was as far as i know in modern metal the first to have used the Orion 32 and many other of their products. Even thoughntheir djent/metal core songs are absolute instrumental but at the same time sound bigger than Periphery’s P2 which Taylor Larson created with Avid Converters and Protoools Pro software, thereas Thomas not just used the Orion 32 but in addition to that Steinberg Cubase which not just runs especially under the apple mojave totally stable without crashing nonstop like Avid Protools. Since i have always been a Mac person i never liked Protools, i think that besides which brand of converters you use under or withwith Steinberg Cubase sounds are more analog, almost like high quality traditional tape. And not to try to make adverrtisement for Rupert Neve Designs, but in every test rack that they show besides their own gear they always show Antelope Gear, especially the Orion 32 and the Pure 1. They have not shown them using of the Amari converter but heard online from Will Putney that he uses Antelope gear too, and the sound of his records, especially Northlane’s Node, is all the proof you need, even though he uses Logic and not Cubase to be accurate.
Hello! i was wondering why do you go your signal path thru so many ad/da conversions using the orion? every conversion changes the sound ... i thought that it should be better to go out once D/A - analog gear analog gear analog gear and then A/D ... then the limiter.....just wondering
Curious to see if John will be producing the next Monuments album on his own. These videos also have me craving some remastered/instrumental Monuments albums right now.
Don't look pass Burl Audio.. Very very analogish type of good conversion.. I The head designer worked for Ensoniq and worked on the PARIS DAW system.. If youve never heard the Paris Daw with its Analog Sound quality, it is then you know how great that system sounds.. Burl had that heritage, vastly improved by the form Ensoniq engineers.
@johnbrowne Hey!! hope you are well, i would love to know how you hook up your analog chain and still manage to monitor please, I'm have trouble trying to use Amari as an AD then DA
@@JohnBrownemonuments oki doki thank you for taking the time to answer!!🙏 I did a couple of different settings, and people and Antelope advised to use the amari as my monitor.. but at the end, it would inevitably create a feedback loop. Also it seemed that you would lose the amari quality by using the orion as monitor 😅🤦♂️ so I was super confused for a few weeks lol
If you're wanting the science, the dude at www.audiosciencereview.com has done a ton of reviews with his Audio Precision APx555 analyser (not cheap by any stretch!)
Were there multiple AD/DA conversions happening in the first example? You mentioned that with the Amari example , the outboard gear was all patched into one signal chain, avoiding any excess AD/DA round trips. Could that also explain the noticeable increase in dynamic range, and clarity? Sounds killer!🤘🏼
John Browne Hey John just revisited this video.. When you patched everything into “one chain” in the amari example, was that using Antelopes digital routing matrix? Or did you do that literally in the analogue domain with cables or a patchbay? Im considering a Goliath HD and want to be able to internally route hardware in different configurations for mixing and mastering, but dont want any excess roundtrips. Its a bit unclear if antelopes matrix allows for this, or if I would need something like the flock audio patch.
@@jannatinkarlen8702 really? I've had one for years and dig it. I even picked up a axe FX ultra after the 11R but sold the axe FX cause I didn't like how it sounded.
Recently I bought the amari dac and I found a serious problem.When the amari decodes a dsd file.Sounds became stuffy and get distorted.But when it decodes the pcm file everything returns to normal.I have tried Jriver and foorbar2000 players and the amari goes on the same problem.For example,when I set the Jriver player in non-convert mode to play a dsd file,the sound became stuffy.And then I played the same dsd file after I set the Jriver player to convert the dsd file to pcm file.Sound returns to normal.It seems the amari has something wrong with decoding original dsd file.I have tried many dsd files including dsd64 and dsd128,all have the same problem.And these files can be well decoded by other dacs I have.Only the amari have this problem.So if anyone knows how to solve this problem.Please teach me.Thank you very much!
I'd advise you get a dsd specific dac. There are dac design out there that makes DSD way easier/better to decode (eg. PS audio directstream, emm labs...). Antelope design is using CS43198 x 8, their basic design is for PCM. Yes they support DSD over PCM, but comparing to other DSD-first design, it's not the same. You need to know the characteristics of the tool you are using.
@@bryantai747Thank you very much!I had contacted the local seller and returned the amari dac.You are right.I shall know the characteristics of the tool.Thank you!
It’s out of most of our price ranges my dude 😂 the setup this guy has is literally my dream studio setup. All I’d change would be some of the extra outboard, but I’d love an Orion and amari paired with some A77X’s
Obviously there's a HUGE objective difference, but I'm confused how does it make such a big difference when it's only converting the end result of a mix that was done presumably with conversion handled by the Orion?
Well, when converting a sound wave there's always an amount of approximation due to the nature of the digital realm. Better converters approximate the signal better and with better antialiasing algorhythms resulting in more separation between the instruments, more precise low end and less hiend artifacts. Also, the signal didn't convert two times like in the first example
i was thinking the same thing.. obviously its adding top end eq.. because its been converted once which is why these videos are a waste of time if its not coming directly from a mic or analog source.. my question is what is he using to send audio to this video? the only real way to tell is to be there with on analog recording device listening directly through speakers or record it and upload a sample. listening to a sample that was recorded with orion from the get go defeats the purpose lol
@@JohnBrownemonuments yip the search for clarity perfect saturation and density, tone is a long road to oz, get there and the wizard will be using tape lol
@@JohnBrownemonuments Actually it is more a psycho acoustic thing, because the amari de-harshed the track so much. The high strings intervention during the guitar riffs wich was a loud element in the mix feels softer and quieter (wich is a good thing cause it was way too harsh) but in consequence the mix lost a bit of volume even if it is more clear. Maybe your room make appear variation in the low end and made it louder than it should be but when i listened to this on my speakers and on my sonarworks headphone it was not the case.
I did an A-B comparision..i felt the Orion was compressing the sound a bit..and the Amari just opened it up completely.. amazing how subtle, but great difference it all makes!
The differences are subtle but that added wideness and clarity go a long way in the end!
Boy do we need instrumetal version of Phronesis with these sound improvements !
1,000% would pay money for that
Timofey Repnikov agreed! also the underlying tapping parts are more pronounced, and with that huge reverb it makes the sound enormous. i love it
I would buy it in a heartbeat.
I haven't listened to any metal in easily a decade, but the instrumental of The Watch totally blew my mind. Love it!!! I have to watch this video over and over though as I can't seem to find the instrumental anywhere.
Test is flawed... 2 roundtrips on the Orion VS 1 trip for the Amari.
I’m listening on a simple iPhone, and I hear separation and fullness overall. It’s easy distinguishable on the hihats, where it creates depth, like layers of sound, the way music production is intended. Orion seems to flatten some transients, in a bad way. For me, the smartphone speakers are relevant these days. Amari is an impressive converter
WOW!! Antelope has definitely upped their game with this!
The Amari sound has more “sheen” and space to it if that makes sense
totally agree dude!
I agree!, def brought them highs out and made it a little thinner if that makes sense. The Orion gave the track amazing body!.
Dre C gg
Yeah, I don’t know what the future that box is doing to the sound but it’s transporting it through the 4th dimensional weave!
Less hard limiting sound - more controlled and focused imo
The Amari does seem to sound better, but you were doing through 2 stages on conversion on the Orion. You should try the test again with the same signal flow you used with the Amari (going through both of the hardware units from a single set of outputs on the orion and going back in on a single set of inputs). Unless I misunderstood what you were doing with the Orion.
And the Amari has some problem with DSD decoding.While it decoding the DSD files.The sound became very stuffy and has serious distortion.
Recently I bought the amari dac and I found a serious problem.When the amari decodes a dsd file.Sounds became stuffy and get distorted.But when it decodes the pcm file everything returns to normal.I have tried Jriver and foorbar2000 players and the amari goes on the same problem.For example,when I set the Jriver player in non-convert mode to play a dsd file,the sound became stuffy.And then I played the same dsd file after I set the Jriver player to convert the dsd file to pcm file.Sound returns to normal.It seems the amari has something wrong with decoding original dsd file.I have tried many dsd files including dsd64 and dsd128,all have the same problem.And these files can be well decoded by other dacs I have.Only the amari have this problem.So if anyone knows how to solve this problem.Please teach me.Thank you very much!
very good point, considering the orion one was hitting two stages of conversion it sound excellent. doubt the difference would be as big if what you mentioned about was done
i have to save for the amari ! the space it creates is just awesome !
Amari all day John and I didn't even get to 7:42 when you said the Amari sounds bigger before making my decision. I ran clips back at the two main transitions and its clear who is "superior". Running two HS8s thru a Scarlett(puke) if that helps with anything. Major difference. And I will more than likely be purchasing an Antelope instead of my other choice (Apollo) to replace my mentioned interface.
Hey John, man I love that song. Both units sound absolutely killer. Great separation, power, and balance. Id really love to hear more amps going through load boxes and straight into cab IR’s with no additional processing or physical cabs. Synergy direct out, AMP 1, and any of the great amps u have.
Hey John! Love that you're covering pro gear like this, as a recording student I've found your last couple of videos super insightful and helpful in what I'm doing day to day. Thanks man!
I recorded the audio (off of youtube mind you) and brought them into my daw, lined them up and flipped back in forth for comparison. Unfortunatley I cant post a picture, but the largest difference between the tracks is that there is an emphasis on the Left side when going through the Orion (which you can hear well in the lead guitar and cymbals) and extremely balanced stereo field from the Amari. I'm not really sure how the converters would alter this everything else being equal, but that's what I'm hearing and seeing. Everything is extremely similar (albeit after youtube)
2023, are you still using the Amaris
Amari is on another planet
Wow, John's mix is soo different from Joel's. And I like both.
Joel's has that processed metalcore vibe to it, while John's has more the organic feel. I honestly love both, but i would love to hear the whole instrumental album with john's mix!
I thought the amari sounded less compressed and a lot cleaner. It's all preference though. I kinda liked the first one better. Little more dirt on it.
There is definitely more "individual space" for each track to shine through, there appears to be a touch more 10khz+ sheen present, with a not as noticeable "bass pump" from the amount of room the Amari appears to provide in its conversion for sure (makes the overall mix compressors lower floor pull more subtle within the mix overall) - this could be where you feel it sounds bigger? At least to my ears thats how I processed the difference, despite the 2x chain stage in the first example (which is by no means a savage quality sounding mix, just sounds a little 'closer together' and more full bodied) - the 2nd example definitely sounds more "Browne-sound" where that mid-low cut you love is so much more defined and cleanr/cripser in the Amari conversion than the Orion, but as per a previous comment below, Id suggest another side by side comparison by doing the single stage chain as well as the 2x stage chaining to get a more accurate side by side test. Those nuances might be more distinguishable. Nice tight separation in conversion though. Very tidy.
Wow! That was immediately better. I want one.
Wow, pretty insane how much better the Amari sounds.
So to recap on my first comment. Night and day. It’s brighter in a good way far more clarity and so much definition in the instruments. The guitars the notes were way more understandable to the ears. Now I’m curious. I wonder what that would sound like in my apogee symphony io mkii 🤔 hmmmm been thinking about buying it but my apogee is really really good.
Nothing immediately jumps out as being significantly different between the two to my ears. But we're all listening after UA-cam's done its thing to the sound. It may very well sound different in person. It's not my type of music, but it's extremely well mixed/produced.
I love the oomf you put into your mixes John....such punch
I’m not sure if the compressor is what I’m hearing, but the first one definitely sounds less developed and a lot more one dimensional. The amari seems to really bring out the warm characteristics of the track, and it seems to brighten it up.
On a side note I would absolutely buy an instrumental album going through that thing, it sounds great.
Drew Murphy compression settings didn’t change at all, all that changed was the routing between the 2 devices.
Same mix, but all grown up!! Let's just start with how amazing that track was, however, staying on topic, the Amari really does sound better on UA-cam (which probably means the HD files would be more pronounced)
Well F me. One more GAS light clicked on. Great sounding work either way, dude! Thanks for the video.
Awesome video! Where can I find the track you were playing for the comparisons? It’s a MUST HAVE on my playlist 🔥🔥🔥 .
I can't even understand why you would try to compare a multiple round-trip AD/DA conversion chain, regardless of the the converters, to a single round-trip conversion chain, again, regardless of the converters. That said, the Amari sounded great.
Kept coming back to this video since I first saw it trying to judge for myself how much of an actual difference there is. I'm honestly thinking, like a few other people I see in the comments, that the difference is actually coming from the double conversion in the first chain.
I wasn’t expecting that much of a difference but there was. Amari was more dynamic, more upfront, bigger.
But: according to your signal chain in the first example (Orion 32) you went through 2 steps of DA-AD while with the Amari only one, this will not lead to a fair A-B between the units
Listening through my Sennheiser HD650 and to my ears, the Amari sounds a lot better. It sounds more open and the low end is not as "flubby" as it was through the Orion 32+. It sounds like the Orion compresses the signal.
to my ears, it feels like the amari is louder, less dynamic, and a bit more pleasing. Maybe both rigs have the same loudness but the amari adds compression/distortion with a specific harmonics content. That would explain what I hear... but then I compare at 3:42 and 6:22, and it sounds pretty identical... still I think I prefere the amari... But when differences get SO subtle, does it even matter ?
Since this mastering matter has been brought up, have you even considered remastering Gnosis and Amanuensis? I am beyond stoked with the quality production of Phronesis, it is so sharp and pleasant to listen!
the amari is the winner, i have picked up the RME ADI 2 pro fs two weeks ago, comparison to amari would be interesting
so have u compare? im still deciding between amari and RME ADI
@@yodhamheaven yes i have compared the winner was rme adi2 pro for me, like the AD Filters
Watching again. I'm wondering if you have converters from any other brands to select from?
At first I thought it was psychosomatic, but upon a few blind tests I think I hear noticeably more upper-mid and high frequency content coming out of the second sample. More open-sounding, more detail in everything, and the lows probably had a positive impact by proxy but I didn't detect anything as obvious as the highs.
It sounds like Amari is louder but it has more headroom. It doesn't sound as compressed as the other signal chain. It breathe better, it this makes sense :)
honestly the better idk, first round was more satisfying nonetheless but i guess the point is and i dunno for sure whether it is or not that the second option is a potentially more promising one if the mixing process were to be done from the beginning to utilize that broadness. and again perhaps the mastering stage is the exact place for that to happen. Any way the first one was a two room flat which was stuffed with decoration but so effectively that the living space was reflecting a lifestyle and then the other apperaed as the potential to re config that atmosphere into a three room flat and that makes me thinking like ok lets record or mix it from the beginning to fill those gaps. no matter what i would like to have stuffed that new config like the first one minus the limiter attack. Nice vid ,Thummieis upward
the amari sounds fuller and clearer imo, really nice sound!
I don’t understand; What are you comparing? In one config you have a d/a with outboard gear and several stages of a/d d/a, not sure if you mentioned bit depth and rate there, or any considerations for impedance matching with the outboard gear... then you’re comparing all of that mayhem with just the Amari? That seems like an odd comparison if that’s the case.
ThreepE0 impedance matching is only required on the reallllly old and perhaps if I was using tape. The differences between the units will have been less than a loss of 0.005dB with today’s standards
John Browne it’s not just dBs that you come up against with impedance mismatches, but I guess that’s the least likely issue to come into play with modern gear. Levels might be an issue though; if you’re not careful to stay at unity the whole way through you might have some of the differences I heard in the two. What about the multiple ad da stages? And during conversion what rates were used?
I think Amari brings speed to the table!
Excellent content brother ! Love converter talk
Well actually that's what I thought Monuments records always missed, more head room, more width to it. This one actually fills the gap really good to my ears
More separation, sheen ..and less pump. To my ears it's better.
Both sound amazing but I prefer the first one, for me, the first it sounds brighter, the second less bright and fattier (at least comparing the start of the tracks before you reduced the volume).
Sounds nice. Though I wish you would A/B throughout the playback instead of playing one, speaking, and playing the other. It makes it difficult to compare.
Seems like it got wider! Less thump in the middle. Overall yes better to my ear, I was able to hear more dynamic range with the same loudness. I hope there was no widening plugin added to the chain given we couldn't see the session 🤣
For anyone out there who feels like they'll never have what they need for good recordings because they can't afford this kind of special stuff - don't worry at all. Alot of this high-end, ultra-expensive stuff is made by nerds (respectfully) who get boners over hand-wired mega biased components. I didn't hear anything in this video that justifies the cost of this mixing converter. *Nothing.* Save your money and stick to buying equipment that's going to make the _most dramatic_ differences in your recordings for the _least amount_ of money, NOT the _least_ difference for the _most_ amount of money. Use your head!
For all those who can afford it responsibly, have at it.
I see the Helix racks in the background. Can I hope for an up-to-date tone tutorial?
Ευάγγελος Κοτζιάς I’ve just filmed one but it will only be available on riffhard!
John Browne Yet another reason to subscribe to riffhard.
Nice presentation, but as you note you compare a 2 time "DA-->Proc1-->AD-->DA-->Proc2+Proc3-->AD" at 44.1kHz to a "DA-->Proc1+Proc2+Proc3-->AD". To me this is not quite the same... running at 96kHz might give you a closer match in this case.
Definitely Amari! Better soundstage and more interesting nuances from around 4k up. Bit bigger dynamics sneak in there with that headroom. Listened to it on an LG Stylo 4 Plus with a pair of KZ ES3 IEMs with KZ silver plated 6 core wire.
cynaptyc more headroom too I believe!
@@JohnBrownemonuments agreed!
The Amari works like and audio interface for mastering via usb? same sound quality?
It's weird, imho the tapping part in the beginning sounds better on the Orion up until 3:48, everything after that I like better on the Amari. But then again I've never mixed anything in my entire life so no idea if that's just my brain going "louder = better" lol. What happened at that timestamp, is it the compression because of the bass drum? Gets so quiet suddenly
Love your content. Nice to see you post more! Thx a lot.
Question: Does it really make a difference? In the end Spotify, ITunes etc. (MP3) destroys your sound. At least what converting concerns. I'm sure in your studio you can hear the difference.
StreetShooterMe if that’s the mindset then does spending any time mixing it really matter as it’s going to be listened through a phone speaker or Apple AirPods?! Haha
To subtle of a difference for the price imo. Get it good at the source and mix, then sent it to a good mastering engineer.
You mentioned Prism Sound. Are you a fan of those converters for metal, or do you find they add too much low end information to distorted guitars?
I hear the amari as cleaner but I am definitely curious why you had all the I/o going on with the Orion?
The difference is huge.
It's like two different mixes. Not a comparison.
I propose to use the same settings on both to be able to judge it.
The Orion seems to move the stereo image left and right all the time.
Like the compressor was not stereo linked. It sounds more distorted and 2d. I couldn't understand the image of your mix. It was a fail.
The Amari sounds as your mix should sound. It has depth. Stereo seperation. The image doesn't move. We heard the instruments roles, inside a virtual space.
The quality of transients was beautiful. The highs were open and the low stable.
Nothing to do with the orion.
You should do the same test with the same settings with both converters.
The Amari sounds just as Big ans awesome as the 3 times more exoensive mastering converter. As sooon as i have to money i will buy one for myself. I came to Antelope audio through Thomas Rackavsky of Babylon Studio and Modern Day Babylon, from theTczech Republic, he was as far as i know in modern metal the first to have used the Orion 32 and many other of their products. Even thoughntheir djent/metal core songs are absolute instrumental but at the same time sound bigger than Periphery’s P2 which Taylor Larson created with Avid Converters and Protoools Pro software, thereas Thomas not just used the Orion 32 but in addition to that Steinberg Cubase which not just runs especially under the apple mojave totally stable without crashing nonstop like Avid Protools. Since i have always been a Mac person i never liked Protools, i think that besides which brand of converters you use under or withwith Steinberg Cubase sounds are more analog, almost like high quality traditional tape. And not to try to make adverrtisement for Rupert Neve Designs, but in every test rack that they show besides their own gear they always show Antelope Gear, especially the Orion 32 and the Pure 1. They have not shown them using of the Amari converter but heard online from Will Putney that he uses Antelope gear too, and the sound of his records, especially Northlane’s Node, is all the proof you need, even though he uses Logic and not Cubase to be accurate.
Hello! i was wondering why do you go your signal path thru so many ad/da conversions using the orion? every conversion changes the sound ... i thought that it should be better to go out once D/A - analog gear analog gear analog gear and then A/D ... then the limiter.....just wondering
Yeah, the Amari sounds a bit cleaner, I wanna say more full as well
As an audiophile, good it be good in a home concept? Can it match with chord, naim, ayre etc.?
The Orion has more oomf. Like it's very slight but somehow makes a lot of difference in my ears
Curious to see if John will be producing the next Monuments album on his own. These videos also have me craving some remastered/instrumental Monuments albums right now.
Mike Morrison I mixed the first 2 records and I’m totally ok with not losing my sanity by doing another one. But thank you!
Don't look pass Burl Audio.. Very very analogish type of good conversion.. I The head designer worked for Ensoniq and worked on the PARIS DAW system.. If youve never heard the Paris Daw with its Analog Sound quality, it is then you know how great that system sounds.. Burl had that heritage, vastly improved by the form Ensoniq engineers.
Burl make great stuff from word of mouth that I've heard, I've just never had the opportunity to try one!
@@JohnBrownemonuments Burl is life. Get a B2 ADC and TRY not to sell it to get a Mothership. I dare you lol
Can you give us to download the two files to be able to compare more close.Please
The amari seems a lot tighter in the low end to me just from clicking back and fourth between the two examples.
Jhon amari es mejor que lavry gold?
You should also have done an ITB mix of the song too for comparison!
have you tried the ssl fusion? If so, what do you think of him?
@johnbrowne Hey!! hope you are well, i would love to know how you hook up your analog chain and still manage to monitor please, I'm have trouble trying to use Amari as an AD then DA
Yes I use it as external effects within Cubase so my master chain is inserted as a plugin
@@JohnBrownemonuments oh!!!!! Massive of I will try it tomorrow then thank you so much for the hint!! Do you Instagram?
@@JohnBrownemonuments wait! So you monitor from the orion? The orion is the main interface in cubase?
@@lilchulochulito yes sir, and output through SPDIF to the Amari for the master chain as a plug-in
@@JohnBrownemonuments oki doki thank you for taking the time to answer!!🙏 I did a couple of different settings, and people and Antelope advised to use the amari as my monitor.. but at the end, it would inevitably create a feedback loop. Also it seemed that you would lose the amari quality by using the orion as monitor 😅🤦♂️ so I was super confused for a few weeks lol
Thanks for video!
Hi. The first option is more compressed.
Can I use this with my apollo x6 ?
Are these converters good at clipping?
Sounds more 'open'. Top end has more clarity to it and soundscape seems a bit wider to me.
Amari sounds "gainier" to me. I liked Orion better
If you're wanting the science, the dude at www.audiosciencereview.com has done a ton of reviews with his Audio Precision APx555 analyser (not cheap by any stretch!)
and yes - the amari blew my head vs orion....more deeper, more cleaner, more wider, more headroom
Amari you the high end is brighter and cleaner..--better note articulation
Night and day difference mate
Were there multiple AD/DA conversions happening in the first example? You mentioned that with the Amari example , the outboard gear was all patched into one signal chain, avoiding any excess AD/DA round trips. Could that also explain the noticeable increase in dynamic range, and clarity? Sounds killer!🤘🏼
I mean potentially it could, I won't rule that one out.
But yes first example the compressors were connected in different loops in the Orion, as I sometimes use those compressors individually within a mix.
John Browne Hey John just revisited this video.. When you patched everything into “one chain” in the amari example, was that using Antelopes digital routing matrix? Or did you do that literally in the analogue domain with cables or a patchbay? Im considering a Goliath HD and want to be able to internally route hardware in different configurations for mixing and mastering, but dont want any excess roundtrips. Its a bit unclear if antelopes matrix allows for this, or if I would need something like the flock audio patch.
hard to compare when they're not level matched
John, did you ever mess about with the eleven rack?
Briefly in 2012!
They are not amazing
@@jannatinkarlen8702 really? I've had one for years and dig it. I even picked up a axe FX ultra after the 11R but sold the axe FX cause I didn't like how it sounded.
Recently I bought the amari dac and I found a serious problem.When the amari decodes a dsd file.Sounds became stuffy and get distorted.But when it decodes the pcm file everything returns to normal.I have tried Jriver and foorbar2000 players and the amari goes on the same problem.For example,when I set the Jriver player in non-convert mode to play a dsd file,the sound became stuffy.And then I played the same dsd file after I set the Jriver player to convert the dsd file to pcm file.Sound returns to normal.It seems the amari has something wrong with decoding original dsd file.I have tried many dsd files including dsd64 and dsd128,all have the same problem.And these files can be well decoded by other dacs I have.Only the amari have this problem.So if anyone knows how to solve this problem.Please teach me.Thank you very much!
I'd advise you get a dsd specific dac. There are dac design out there that makes DSD way easier/better to decode (eg. PS audio directstream, emm labs...). Antelope design is using CS43198 x 8, their basic design is for PCM. Yes they support DSD over PCM, but comparing to other DSD-first design, it's not the same. You need to know the characteristics of the tool you are using.
@@bryantai747Thank you very much!I had contacted the local seller and returned the amari dac.You are right.I shall know the characteristics of the tool.Thank you!
Looks cool and sounds great but out of my price range (broke)
no worries mate i feel as if im far from broke and its not in my means at all. dont get discouraged make music my dude.
It’s out of most of our price ranges my dude 😂 the setup this guy has is literally my dream studio setup. All I’d change would be some of the extra outboard, but I’d love an Orion and amari paired with some A77X’s
Obviously there's a HUGE objective difference, but I'm confused how does it make such a big difference when it's only converting the end result of a mix that was done presumably with conversion handled by the Orion?
Well, when converting a sound wave there's always an amount of approximation due to the nature of the digital realm. Better converters approximate the signal better and with better antialiasing algorhythms resulting in more separation between the instruments, more precise low end and less hiend artifacts. Also, the signal didn't convert two times like in the first example
@@scacchomattho You're not understanding my question.
i was thinking the same thing.. obviously its adding top end eq.. because its been converted once which is why these videos are a waste of time if its not coming directly from a mic or analog source.. my question is what is he using to send audio to this video? the only real way to tell is to be there with on analog recording device listening directly through speakers or record it and upload a sample. listening to a sample that was recorded with orion from the get go defeats the purpose lol
more room, more resonance, defo a huge difference.
amari kinda harsh
💜💜💜💜💜💜
Orion: 3:39
Amari: 6:20
💔
more focus and punch, wonder how itl kick against my prism titan
I think at this level, it really all comes down to personal preference.
@@JohnBrownemonuments yip the search for clarity perfect saturation and density, tone is a long road to oz, get there and the wizard will be using tape lol
You expland what it does but not why you need. the video is called do you need it
Funny, but to me, it sounds better on the Orion)))
Less harsh with amari, more space and definition. But it is not 100% cause the orion 32 sounds a bit louder like 0.5 db.
Duguy i actually thought the Amari was slightly louder!
@@JohnBrownemonuments Actually it is more a psycho acoustic thing, because the amari de-harshed the track so much. The high strings intervention during the guitar riffs wich was a loud element in the mix feels softer and quieter (wich is a good thing cause it was way too harsh) but in consequence the mix lost a bit of volume even if it is more clear. Maybe your room make appear variation in the low end and made it louder than it should be but when i listened to this on my speakers and on my sonarworks headphone it was not the case.
But if i plug in my guitar into interface and record within DAW why do i need a converter? What extras do i gain?
Someone answer please
Better conversion, dynamic range, clocking, superior filter. Ya know...the works. By the way, your interface is a AD / DA.
less distortion than the Orion
The Orion has better stereo image.
Orion win for me on this