|
Post by Guitar on Sept 28, 2018 18:28:09 GMT -6
I guess you mean the new 6X SHARC chips. UA has not moved to FPGA. It's all DSP, yeah. EDIT: this is all very much above my head, I might add. I think what apollo X has offered is basically more of the same as what it had before. No, I mean FPGA. I'm just talking about the routing that takes place within the FPGA and not the DSP which takes place on the Sharcs. Oh, gotcha. I'm a little behind on my homework I would love to see UA make some improvements in that area, it was for me a pretty bad limitation with early Apollos.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Sept 28, 2018 19:30:31 GMT -6
The new X’s have been significantly redesigned and do have a new fpga, that’s why they can support the 6 sharc chips. The previous apollo’s were in effect throttled at 4. I can’t imagine the X’s are already at 100% on board throughput capacity. Experience would indicate that UA wants at least a roughly 5 year run with this hardware but to keep X fresh it will have to introduce new software based features. I have sold all my ua stuff and do enjoy being able to open and work in sessions on my laptop not tethered to either the apollo or a card and not having to disable all my ua plugs: tedious was that ! But, ya I thought about X but too many things to switch out. I am getting my recording/ mixing/ producing groove on with my delta and OB, actually have 2 sa76 adg’s on the way to round out my farm of comps:) But I am still a bit undecided about all that as I do appreciate the convenience of plug ins too. If people pan the mix on my upcoming first album, maybe I screwed up going OB ! Only joking, I am very happy with my current sound and workflow but I think UA did a really good job updating apollo and that there is more to come for you guys !
|
|
|
Post by Drew @ UA on Sept 29, 2018 7:34:00 GMT -6
John, Have you tinkered around any with the new +24dBu setting? I've been curious about this feature and how much difference it might make. Quint, It basically moves the I/O levels up 4dB, which allows Apollos to accept hotter signals, send hotter signals and moves the noise floor down 4dB. And you're right, with Xs there's no reason to not run it @ +24dB. All our plugins were developed at the +20dB level so if you compare hardware to plugs, they won't match if you're running at +24.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Sept 29, 2018 10:52:39 GMT -6
John, Have you tinkered around any with the new +24dBu setting? I've been curious about this feature and how much difference it might make. Quint, It basically moves the I/O levels up 4dB, which allows Apollos to accept hotter signals, send hotter signals and moves the noise floor down 4dB. And you're right, with Xs there's no reason to not run it @ +24dB. All our plugins were developed at the +20dB level so if you compare hardware to plugs, they won't match if you're running at +24. So when you switch to +24db, are changes taking place within the Apollo at an analog/component level or is this purely a change in the digital realm?
|
|
|
Post by Drew @ UA on Sept 30, 2018 10:17:01 GMT -6
Quint, It basically moves the I/O levels up 4dB, which allows Apollos to accept hotter signals, send hotter signals and moves the noise floor down 4dB. And you're right, with Xs there's no reason to not run it @ +24dB. All our plugins were developed at the +20dB level so if you compare hardware to plugs, they won't match if you're running at +24. So when you switch to +24db, are changes taking place within the Apollo at an analog/component level or is this purely a change in the digital realm? Apollo Xs are "natively" +24dBu. When placed in +20 mode, it's a simple digital trim that gets applied. Some users may want to do this when mixing MKIIs and Xs.
|
|
|
Post by Drew @ UA on Oct 9, 2018 13:13:24 GMT -6
|
|