|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Mar 2, 2016 17:50:29 GMT -6
oh ya, I understand the different market for the 8 and 16 but not everyone needs 16 channels so it just seemed odd not to offer the best DA on the 8 too ? I like my new bf 8 just fine but I do also honestly feel that is not UA's best cus I know it doesn't have the top of the line DA and and although its better than the original, I have also had a 2192, b2 and a dbox so I do know who different DA converters and design sound like. I would prefer the DA to sound even more linear and as drumrec said more open but I am not going to buy a 16 just for that  Hell, I'd need to be a professional drummer to afford that coin ! |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Mar 2, 2016 18:13:34 GMT -6
For what it's worth, I think the Apollo8 (BF) DA is quite good. I put it on par with th D Box (I can toggle back and forth between them). At first I though the D Box had the edge, but it's louder when you switch to it. I find myself mostly using the Apollo DA. It's a significant step up from the SF Apollo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 2, 2016 19:02:24 GMT -6
Yeah - Apollo bf da is very similar to the DBox da. I tend to think the Dbox is a little more extended in the top and punchier on bottom. Really not much "bedroom" about the BF. If you can't make a record with this thing then you've got bigger issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Mar 3, 2016 6:21:20 GMT -6
Oh ya, I agree; just found it odd the ua didn't give the option of getting the top of the line DA on the 8.
I understand the Apollo is not for everyone but, again personally, I really like the front end convenience of monitoring/tracking with UA plugs in console, the improved sonics of the current version and the affordability of everything in one box.
|
|
|
|
Post by category5 on Mar 3, 2016 14:26:58 GMT -6
oh ya, I understand the different market for the 8 and 16 but not everyone needs 16 channels so it just seemed odd not to offer the best DA on the 8 too ? I like my new bf 8 just fine but I do also honestly feel that is not UA's best cus I know it doesn't have the top of the line DA and and although its better than the original, I have also had a 2192, b2 and a dbox so I do know who different DA converters and design sound like. I would prefer the DA to sound even more linear and as drumrec said more open but I am not going to buy a 16 just for that Hell, I'd need to be a professional drummer to afford that coin ! Don't worry about it Kcat. The AKM chip is brand new, and AKM's best chip. It is a top tier chip. The ESS is awesome, and well loved, but has been out a while (2012?) There may very well be folks complaining that XXX manufacturer used the ESS instead of the AKM a year from now. Dangerous made their top-of-the-line conversion around the Analog Devices AD1955 chip. These (among others from Burr Brown, Wolfson, etc.) are all top-tier chips and it comes down to design preference. I'm sure they put the ESS chip into the Apollo 16 specifically to target buyers of the Apogee Symphony. Ferrari, Lamborghini, Bugatti, McLaren... There's room for a lot of high performance options. The DAC was only a part of the re-design, remember. Without trying both designs, and deciding which one sounds best to you, there really is no clearly better option. The Dangerous Convert 8 looks pretty awesome. I wonder when Dangerous will combine the converter and the 2 bus into a single unit, with software routing control. That would be killer (although I'm sure expensive too!) |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Mar 3, 2016 14:31:06 GMT -6
thx cat5, oh ya, not losing any sleep and very happy with the bf8 as the right package for me for now its a few year's away but it will interesting to see what the next apollo is configured like how are you liking your dual 8p's; live ? |
|
|
|
Post by category5 on Mar 3, 2016 19:39:24 GMT -6
thx cat5, oh ya, not losing any sleep and very happy with the bf8 as the right package for me for now its a few year's away but it will interesting to see what the next apollo is configured like how are you liking your dual 8p's; live ? Been using the mixer still. Dual BF8s aren't my main system yet. To be honest if they'd give me FX on the output, and groups with FX in Console I'd be set. Oh yeah, a dedicated ipad app would be great too. Just upgraded Studio One though, and I'm thinking of running it just as a routing engine. Run FX on the Apollos, and use the DAW just for groups and monitoring routing. I'm just nervous relying on a DAW live. Hopefully those additions will come to Console soon. |
|
|
|
Post by javamad on Apr 25, 2016 6:20:35 GMT -6
I just got my Apollo 8 last weekend. Awesome sound. It came with two new A7X monitors too ;-)
So I'm comparing it with my old Motu 8pre .. and as expected it blows it away. Between the new monitors and the Apollo 8 plus the load of UAD plugins .. I'm pretty set for home recording for a while.
|
|
|
|
Post by kilroyrock on Apr 25, 2016 7:14:29 GMT -6
I heard my neighbor's Apollo 8p on Saturday - He tracked through his focusrite pre's, and writes early 80's Cure type songs; but just playing back the mix, he and I both could hear so much more in his mix than previously through his old maudio interface (I know, I know). I was never one to believe that modern AD/DA is that much improved compared to stuff from even 5-10 years ago, but yesterday I became a believer...
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 25, 2016 12:16:13 GMT -6
Definitely an improvement...
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Feb 17, 2017 8:59:55 GMT -6
I have a SF. It was a huge uograde when I got it. It is good to know the BF is a better upgrade still. I need to wait for a computer upgrade before I go there.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Feb 18, 2017 2:56:07 GMT -6
Yeah - Apollo bf da is very similar to the DBox da. I tend to think the Dbox is a little more extended in the top and punchier on bottom. Really not much "bedroom" about the BF. If you can't make a record with this thing then you've got bigger issues. Still feel the same ? Do you still use the BF Apollo or you svart box and symphony? |
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Feb 18, 2017 2:56:53 GMT -6
For what it's worth, I think the Apollo8 (BF) DA is quite good. I put it on par with th D Box (I can toggle back and forth between them). At first I though the D Box had the edge, but it's louder when you switch to it. I find myself mostly using the Apollo DA. It's a significant step up from the SF Apollo. Do you still feel the same or do you feel the Symphony is better ? Mk1 or mk2 symphony? |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 18, 2017 6:06:34 GMT -6
For what it's worth, I think the Apollo8 (BF) DA is quite good. I put it on par with th D Box (I can toggle back and forth between them). At first I though the D Box had the edge, but it's louder when you switch to it. I find myself mostly using the Apollo DA. It's a significant step up from the SF Apollo. Do you still feel the same or do you feel the Symphony is better ? Mk1 or mk2 symphony? Over the last year since that post, I found myself using the D Box DA more. I give the D Box the edge over the Apollo and the Symphony (MKII) the edge over the D Box, all in pretty slight increments. |
|
|
|
Post by mikec on Feb 18, 2017 7:53:01 GMT -6
Do you still feel the same or do you feel the Symphony is better ? Mk1 or mk2 symphony? Over the last year since that post, I found myself using the D Box DA more. I give the D Box the edge over the Apollo and the Symphony (MKII) the edge over the D Box, all in pretty slight increments. I would totally agree with this assessment. I had the Apollo 16 BF running through a 2 bus+ to a D Box and I had no complaints. I've since replaced the Apollo 16 BF with a 16x16 Symphony MKII but still use the same setup. Being very critical, I felt the Symphony MKII had the best DA but for the most part I use the D Box for my monitoring because it is so flexible and works great with my setup. When I am mixing I monitor the summed analog out from the 2bus+ via the D Box and when I am printing my stereo mix I can monitor the print track by just pressing the DAW button on the D Box. I love being able to switch back and forth so easily. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 18, 2017 9:26:58 GMT -6
I would say the DA of he dbox is objectively better than the DA of the bf Apollo. That's not to say the da of the Apollo is bad - it's not. I also compared the Hilo with the Dbox and while I found the bottom end a little tighter, the image was exactly the same. The top might have been subjectively smoother. In the end, it wasn't enough of a difference for me. I felt the same way about the Black Lion Micro Clock III. In fact, the differences were very similar. And we are talking about tiny, tiny differences. Now, the difference from the SF Apollo were much more noticeable.
As for the AD, I compared the Hilo to the Svartbox. I found the svartbox was more forward in the lower Mids and maybe a little less detailed in the top. Now this could be a number of things. The svartbox could be less pristine on top. Maybe a push in the lower mids could make the top sound rolled off more. Maybe the top of the Hilo is too brite. I don't know. My guess - and no offense to svart - the Hilo is passing the more linear signal. That being said, I preferred the svartbox. Less clinical for tracking.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Feb 19, 2017 11:02:50 GMT -6
Wow, lot of high praise for the D-Box! That's pretty impressive considering it's been around for a while.
|
|
Hell, I'd need to be a professional drummer to afford that coin ! 
