iv found the "air mode" function helpful really for acoustic instruments. iv recorded a wide range of acoustic instruments including piano, acoustic flat top and classical guitars, bansuri flute, kalimba, hand percussion, and it seems helpful. im looking forward to testing it on my sitar.

Thanks for the video, Barry. I appreciate your work on this. The only thing I can say about this video is that I think this content could have been distilled into a video about half its current length. Figured I'd provide some feedback from a viewer's perspective on this. Looking forward to seeing future content from you. Cheers.

@Barry-Watson

Жыл бұрын

Great point!

Nice video. It would be fun to see how both your curves and distortion measurements compare to one of those actual classic pre-amps.

@Barry-Watson

Жыл бұрын

Great suggestion! If you send me a Focusrite ISA preamp, I'll measure it! amzn.to/3U0NIrR

I agree, I leave it off as well, but I'm using it for guitar so I want it to sounds as real as possible

I’ve been watching all your videos, regardless of my interest in the topic, because the way you talk is extremely calming.

@Barry-Watson

Жыл бұрын

Glad you like them!

Great video!

@Barry-Watson

2 ай бұрын

Thanks!

At last someone who knows what he´s talking about, I bet 99.9% off reviewers in youtube don´t know what a dB is, or the concept of frecuency resonse or how an ADC works, well done, a bit of fresh air.

@Barry-Watson

5 ай бұрын

Thanks! I appreciate that.

Considering I've already demoted my Scarlett 4i4 to be my new VoIP Microphone preamp, I doubt AIR will effect what I do... but If I was making a master track for a single I would definitely avoid AIR or even Scarlett in general

@RobertSlover

Жыл бұрын

why? it seems solid to me.

I have an 18I20 - first gen I guess, certainly no 'air'. Point is I'm used to how it sounds without the air feature. Recently I had a gen 3 pass through briefly, but I did get the chance to have a quick play with it. I was curious if it would sound any different to mine (better ???) but honestly I couldn't really tell much difference. The other thing was the 'air' feature. Firstly I have to say there's no doubt it does 'something' - engaging the button does change the sound a bit, maybe the boosted hf makes an audible difference, but there's something else. I suppose the name they gave it is the best way I can describe it - it seems to impart a feeling of space and airiness, it's less muddy, less muffled (boosted hf again), and with repeated A/B ing It has to be said that I was liking it. It might get old after a bit, but in the couple of hours I played with the unit I honestly thought it wasn't half bad. Now I'm pretty sure everyone's results in the real world will vary. I was mostly using a JZ Black Hole, which is just superb for certain situations like lighter stuff, maybe not so good for slipknot lol. That gave me the best results by far. I also plugged an sm58 into it with rather less pleasing results - it sounded brittle. Then an AKG Dxxx sorry I forgot which one it is, and that seemed to benefit from 'AIR' a little more than the sm58. I ran out of time or I would have tried a bunch of other mics, but from what I did get to do it seems the air effect is not good for everything, but can be good under the right conditions, the kind of thing where you actually want a very open mic sound - acoustic stuff, nice female vox etc etc . Sure there are things one can do in post, but sometimes it can be quite inspirational to just hit the button and go, and if it's making a sound that sounds nice to you, you're likely gonna have a better time :) On the other hand I'm not looking to 'upgrade' any time soon lol

@Barry-Watson

Жыл бұрын

Yup. I suspect you could get that "air" sound with your EQ by approximating the curve that was measured.

@mordokch

Жыл бұрын

@@Barry-Watson Some of it sure, I mean we've all played with eq a million times, and careful eqing can open up a mic somewhat but the more one pushes it the more brittle and tinny and un natural things start to get. Your graph was quite subtle really, I mean nothing crazy, yet the difference I was hearing seemed more than that without that over eq'd harshness creeping in. But who knows eh? My ears are getting pretty old now at 58 years and for sure what I hear won't be what a 20 year old will hear, and a little top boost is going to sound good to me as my ears drop off the highs. Ultimately I always prefer to use as little eq as possible though, and using a really good mic is a huge part of that - the black hole lets me do that a lot more than an sm 57/8, or in fact any mic I've owned (and that's a good few lol). I really wish I'd had the time to set up some other condensers for a better comparison but I just didn't. I did think it would be nice to have some control over the effect though, I mean to be able to dial as much or as little of it as needed or wanted more like lol - just being able to blend the dry/wet signals would be helpful. Keep digging though man - it is interesting and I would like to know more if only because I'm a curious guy. To be honest the scarlet is only a messing around interface hooked up to a laptop upstairs, my main interface in the studio is a little more esoteric lol, and a LOT more expensive. So I really only have a very small dog in this 'fight' , barely a poodle, but it's still interesting. Have you tried asking focusrite directly for a more technical explanation ? Are you planning anything more with this subject ? Cheers !

@Barry-Watson

Жыл бұрын

I don't think I have a lot more to add on the analysis of the Scarlett, but I'm always open to ideas. I think it might be interesting to measure the performance of Behringer's "guitar amp emulating" DI box. Maybe that will be an upcoming episode.

Good one m8, pfft 'Air', I like your approach can't beat the facts.

Can you please share the frequency response graph for 96 Khz?

@gerardoromano3436

5 ай бұрын

Hi, if you look at 9:37 you´ll se a graph with frecuency response of 44.1K, 48k, 96k and 192K with four curves in the same graph, the 96khz one extends up to 50 khz is the one at the left of 100khz (192khz Sampling rate) , All this graphs are related to the Nyquist Theorem, the frecuency response is about 50% of the sampling rate , in this case 50khz is almost 50% of 96K, the exact cut off frecuency is at -3db but in this case you can take the botom of the curve as a reference at -10db because the filters are steep. Hope this helps

It makes me think they knew they didnt do a good job on the eq curve so they had to give you the choice. There must be a downside to using air for sure.

Thanks for the video. You're right, for pro-level vocals, I would look elsewhere

@Barry-Watson

Жыл бұрын

Thanks! I think it's a pre-amp with good performance, but for me the AIR feature isn't a reason to choose this model over something else.

@jaseyn

Жыл бұрын

​@@Barry-Watson Is AIR Feature worth to enable it if I dont have a separate monitoring eq for my vocalist? With the AIR he deffinatly hears himself better and perrforms better. But i wonder if I track his vocal with the AIR am I doing something irreversble to track in therms of general frequency balance? Does this test show the same results at different volume levels?Maybe there is some kind of compression/dynamic processing? Thanks for the video!

@Barry-Watson

Жыл бұрын

A bit of broad EQ lift, but I don't see any other nasty artifacts, track a vocal with it on, and off and see what you prefer. Do what sounds best to you. For me, I think I'd record clean/flat, and add EQ in post as desired. I think you'll get "good" sound with it on, or off, it's a natter of personal preference.