|
Post by geoff738 on Oct 19, 2018 18:47:35 GMT -6
ok,
Been a lot of converter or interface threads on here lately. I’ve tried to read all of them as much as I can.
But I have to admit I don’t think I can grok all the technical details of a particular ESS chip vs. whatever. And I find the different models even within the same brand, say RME, but it could be Motu etc. to be a bit bewildering. And a few brands like BLA have gotten out of the game.
I think it’s safe to say that we have new chips and that converter quality has had a leap in quality the last few years.
So, my particular quandary. I currently run Logic on a geriatric iMac with an Echo audio interface on Firewire that is probably getting close to ten years old. So, prosumer at best a decade ago. I’m mostly a one band man these days. So, I really only need a couple channels of quality ad/da. I’m ok for pres etc. I’d like to get something that will work with what I have, on the off chance I ever record another band, and going forward. I’d like a definite step up from the Echo, but probably don’t want to spend a few grand. Ross Martin? I started one of the ancient threads about him here. I just looked. His website hasn’t gotten any better. Should I just get a cheap Focusrite or Presonus and call it a day? Anything new out of AES? I’m intrigued by the Cranborne stuff but will wait and see what the word is once they’re out and about.
But basically I’m looking for 2 channels of ad/da that’ll play nicely with my Firewire Echo on an old iMac without thunderbolt connections. I’d consider replacing the computer too as long as the Echo would still work.
I hope this is clear, and thanks in advance for any advice.
Cheers, Geoff
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 19, 2018 19:59:29 GMT -6
ok, Been a lot of converter or interface threads on here lately. I’ve tried to read all of them as much as I can. But I have to admit I don’t think I can grok all the technical details of a particular ESS chip vs. whatever. And I find the different models even within the same brand, say RME, but it could be Motu etc. to be a bit bewildering. And a few brands like BLA have gotten out of the game. I think it’s safe to say that we have new chips and that converter quality has had a leap in quality the last few years. So, my particular quandary. I currently run Logic on a geriatric iMac with an Echo audio interface on Firewire that is probably getting close to ten years old. So, prosumer at best a decade ago. I’m mostly a one band man these days. So, I really only need a couple channels of quality ad/da. I’m ok for pres etc. I’d like to get something that will work with what I have, on the off chance I ever record another band, and going forward. I’d like a definite step up from the Echo, but probably don’t want to spend a few grand. Ross Martin? I started one of the ancient threads about him here. I just looked. His website hasn’t gotten any better. Should I just get a cheap Focusrite or Presonus and call it a day? Anything new out of AES? I’m intrigued by the Cranborne stuff but will wait and see what the word is once they’re out and about. But basically I’m looking for 2 channels of ad/da that’ll play nicely with my Firewire Echo on an old iMac without thunderbolt connections. I’d consider replacing the computer too as long as the Echo would still work. I hope this is clear, and thanks in advance for any advice. Cheers, Geoff Man you missed my converters. They would have worked great with that. I do have two chassis left. Dunno if I have enough parts to build the boards though.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Oct 19, 2018 20:44:56 GMT -6
What about a FireWire apollo silver face?
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 20, 2018 7:59:31 GMT -6
If you've got SPDIF I/O on the Echo the Tascam UH-7000 comes highly recommended from me, for this application.
You just need a couple of AES-SPDIF cables.
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Oct 20, 2018 19:19:19 GMT -6
Is the audience stuff worth looking into?
Cheers, Geoff
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 21, 2018 6:47:11 GMT -6
Is the audience stuff worth looking into? Cheers, Geoff The Audient stuff is OK but I personally don't think it's the best option.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
Post by ericn on Oct 21, 2018 10:09:02 GMT -6
Is the audience stuff worth looking into? Cheers, Geoff The Audient stuff is OK but I personally don't think it's the best option. My little Audient ain’t my RADAR V, but I’ll tell you what it see’s more and more work and it won’t keep you from making a great recording. That’s the thing there are very few AD/DA’s or interfaces made today that suck!
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 21, 2018 10:24:30 GMT -6
The Audient stuff is OK but I personally don't think it's the best option. My little Audient ain’t my RADAR V, but I’ll tell you what it see’s more and more work and it won’t keep you from making a great recording. That’s the thing there are very few AD/DA’s or interfaces made today that suck! That's true. The Audient interfaces are right down the middle of the road. Average latency, decent drivers, pretty good sound quality, no special features. But I've heard some great tracks coming off of those things by people that know what good music is.
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Oct 21, 2018 11:33:32 GMT -6
I’ll add that the Echo does have spdif, but I’d prefer not to use for this if I don’t have to. My stereo reverb hangs out there. But maybe if I add something that has a dedicated stereo out - the Echo doesn’t so I have to use outs 1 and 2 for my monitors.
Cheers, Geoff
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 21, 2018 11:46:19 GMT -6
I’ll add that the Echo does have spdif, but I’d prefer not to use for this if I don’t have to. My stereo reverb hangs out there. But maybe if I add something that has a dedicated stereo out - the Echo doesn’t so I have to use outs 1 and 2 for my monitors. Cheers, Geoff The Tascam UH-7000 is going to have a much better sounding DAC than the Echo interface, I can tell you that for a fact. I suffered along with some Audiofires for at least 7 years before I was finally able to upgrade. I thought the Tascam sounded even better than the silver Apollos.
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Oct 22, 2018 13:19:25 GMT -6
The Tascam UH-7000 has probably the best spec'd converters out there for a small desktop unit. I have heard of people having software issues, but that may be user error. Any box with this spec DAC is much larger and more expensive. There are some compromises with it, but it actually packs a lot of value. I've considered buying one myself.
|
|
|
Post by geoff738 on Oct 22, 2018 14:53:57 GMT -6
Would the little RME unit be a step up? Or not? Just in terms of conversion quality.
I have to dig a little deeper on the ins and outs of the stuff mentioned above. Workflow may be the deciding factor. The Tascam doesn’t let you bypass the pres for example. But from what I gather the pres are really good so maybe not a big deal. It also lacks inserts, but again not a deal breaker. The Echo also has Adat connections.
Thanks for the input guys, Geoff
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Oct 22, 2018 14:54:35 GMT -6
If you can get a used tc-BMC 2 it has a geat DA converter used one a long time myself. It uses the converters from the 6000 system, old but - comes near to my Lavry. I think age is not the issue design is the thing.
Its sad that tc discontinued the unit.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 22, 2018 15:20:34 GMT -6
Some ADAT boxes to consider: Clarett OctoPre, Presonus DP88, Midas XL48, maybe the Audient ASP8xx ones (they don't have DAC outputs which is a bummer)
the "little RME" is a great interface as far as I can tell. A producer friend of mine uses that as his main interface and he loves it.
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Oct 22, 2018 16:57:10 GMT -6
Would the little RME unit be a step up? Or not? Just in terms of conversion quality. I have to dig a little deeper on the ins and outs of the stuff mentioned above. Workflow may be the deciding factor. The Tascam doesn’t let you bypass the pres for example. But from what I gather the pres are really good so maybe not a big deal. It also lacks inserts, but again not a deal breaker. The Echo also has Adat connections. Thanks for the input guys, Geoff If you are talking about the RME ADI-2 Pro FS (basically a high-end DAC with two mic pres built in): The converters offer 124 dbA signal to noise. This is a very nice spec and would make a suitable mix/master monitoring, plus a killer home audio system. But at $2,000, you could buy an Apollo x6 and get that same spec and whole lot more. You could still connect that with your old unit.
|
|
|
Post by jtc111 on Oct 22, 2018 19:03:44 GMT -6
I've been toying with the idea of upgrading my Apollo Firewire and I made this comparison chart which might be helpful to some. If anyone wants me to add a unit that's not on the list, I'm happy to do so. I did add the unit mentioned in the last post before I put this up here. The others, except for the Apollo Firewire, are all have TB connectors.
|
|
|
Post by LesC on Oct 22, 2018 23:09:14 GMT -6
Would the little RME unit be a step up? Or not? Just in terms of conversion quality. I have to dig a little deeper on the ins and outs of the stuff mentioned above. Workflow may be the deciding factor. The Tascam doesn’t let you bypass the pres for example. But from what I gather the pres are really good so maybe not a big deal. It also lacks inserts, but again not a deal breaker. The Echo also has Adat connections. Thanks for the input guys, Geoff If you are talking about the RME ADI-2 Pro FS (basically a high-end DAC with two mic pres built in): The converters offer 124 dbA signal to noise. This is a very nice spec and would make a suitable mix/master monitoring, plus a killer home audio system. But at $2,000, you could buy an Apollo x6 and get that same spec and whole lot more. You could still connect that with your old unit. The RME ADI-2 Pro (and FS) doesn't have any mic pres. It's basically a USB-2 interface with stereo DAC and ADC, and a separate DAC for 2 headphone outs. It has AES/EBU and coax SPDIF, and an optical connection which can be used for SPDIF or ADAT. The ADAT allows access to channels 1 and 2 only. Only one SPDIF input can be used, either coax or optical. That's all I remember at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by LesC on Oct 22, 2018 23:12:15 GMT -6
By the way, the RME ADI-2 Pro (and FS) are thought of very highly in the hi-fi world, which I know doesn't carry a lot of credence around here. Sonarworks uses it as their reference DAC.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Oct 23, 2018 0:00:37 GMT -6
I've been toying with the idea of upgrading my Apollo Firewire and I made this comparison chart which might be helpful to some. If anyone wants me to add a unit that's not on the list, I'm happy to do so. I did add the unit mentioned in the last post before I put this up here. The others, except for the Apollo Firewire, are all have TB connectors.
Cool chart. Maybe ad antelope ones? ID ADAII would be cool to see too.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Oct 23, 2018 7:05:59 GMT -6
If you could stick Presonus Quantum and Focusrite Clarett on the list, those are the ones I use @jtc11
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 23, 2018 7:41:39 GMT -6
I've been toying with the idea of upgrading my Apollo Firewire and I made this comparison chart which might be helpful to some. If anyone wants me to add a unit that's not on the list, I'm happy to do so. I did add the unit mentioned in the last post before I put this up here. The others, except for the Apollo Firewire, are all have TB connectors.
I hate to be a downer in threads like these, but some perspective is needed before you spend tons of time researching stuff that won't gain you anything. None of these specs mean anything to the *sound* of the device. Something can measure well, but still sound terrible, while some other things might measure worse but sound divine.. In any case, manufacturer specs are usually *fudged* with de-embedded measurements that have heavy weighting or calibrations to give you optimal marketing buzzwords and remove all the inconsistencies present in a world that has no standard testing strategies and no interconnect standards. you see, any one of these could have their I/O impedances adjusted for "perfect" matching at a singular best frequency, at a best level, with certain liberties taken on shielding, etc. You're not going to get 124dB of dynamic range on something.. That's the ideal measurement of the ADC chip in an ideal arrangement.. At best you'll get more like 90-110dB with a perfectly noiseless setup with no ground ripple or other devices connected, etc. Connect a device with a higher noise floor and POOF, your 90-110dBc will end up at 70dBc, etc. I should know, I've seen and done these types of things. It's universal in the industries that rely on marketing to draw new customers. I know it's kind of a bummer to hear that most of these specs are bunk, but it's true. And it's not just a matter of "but I want what's best".. Because the best is only relative to how you use it. My advice? Ignore the specs. Find devices with the features you want that make your workflow easier. That matters a lot more than specs that you'll never obtain in the real world.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
Post by ericn on Oct 23, 2018 8:10:40 GMT -6
I've been toying with the idea of upgrading my Apollo Firewire and I made this comparison chart which might be helpful to some. If anyone wants me to add a unit that's not on the list, I'm happy to do so. I did add the unit mentioned in the last post before I put this up here. The others, except for the Apollo Firewire, are all have TB connectors.
I hate to be a downer in threads like these, but some perspective is needed before you spend tons of time researching stuff that won't gain you anything. None of these specs mean anything to the *sound* of the device. Something can measure well, but still sound terrible, while some other things might measure worse but sound divine.. In any case, manufacturer specs are usually *fudged* with de-embedded measurements that have heavy weighting or calibrations to give you optimal marketing buzzwords and remove all the inconsistencies present in a world that has no standard testing strategies and no interconnect standards. you see, any one of these could have their I/O impedances adjusted for "perfect" matching at a singular best frequency, at a best level, with certain liberties taken on shielding, etc. You're not going to get 124dB of dynamic range on something.. That's the ideal measurement of the ADC chip in an ideal arrangement.. At best you'll get more like 90-110dB with a perfectly noiseless setup with no ground ripple or other devices connected, etc. Connect a device with a higher noise floor and POOF, your 90-110dBc will end up at 70dBc, etc. I should know, I've seen and done these types of things. It's universal in the industries that rely on marketing to draw new customers. I know it's kind of a bummer to hear that most of these specs are bunk, but it's true. And it's not just a matter of "but I want what's best".. Because the best is only relative to how you use it. My advice? Ignore the specs. Find devices with the features you want that make your workflow easier. That matters a lot more than specs that you'll never obtain in the real world. Can I add if you want to know how it sounds actually get one in your hands and listen to the thing ?
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 23, 2018 8:28:15 GMT -6
I hate to be a downer in threads like these, but some perspective is needed before you spend tons of time researching stuff that won't gain you anything. None of these specs mean anything to the *sound* of the device. Something can measure well, but still sound terrible, while some other things might measure worse but sound divine.. In any case, manufacturer specs are usually *fudged* with de-embedded measurements that have heavy weighting or calibrations to give you optimal marketing buzzwords and remove all the inconsistencies present in a world that has no standard testing strategies and no interconnect standards. you see, any one of these could have their I/O impedances adjusted for "perfect" matching at a singular best frequency, at a best level, with certain liberties taken on shielding, etc. You're not going to get 124dB of dynamic range on something.. That's the ideal measurement of the ADC chip in an ideal arrangement.. At best you'll get more like 90-110dB with a perfectly noiseless setup with no ground ripple or other devices connected, etc. Connect a device with a higher noise floor and POOF, your 90-110dBc will end up at 70dBc, etc. I should know, I've seen and done these types of things. It's universal in the industries that rely on marketing to draw new customers. I know it's kind of a bummer to hear that most of these specs are bunk, but it's true. And it's not just a matter of "but I want what's best".. Because the best is only relative to how you use it. My advice? Ignore the specs. Find devices with the features you want that make your workflow easier. That matters a lot more than specs that you'll never obtain in the real world. Can I add if you want to know how it sounds actually get one in your hands and listen to the thing ? Unfortunately that's about the only way to gauge if something *sounds* good in your setup. A lot of guys naturally assume that these interfaces *sound* the same no matter what's hooked up, but the reality is that some input might sound great with a low impedance source, but sound terrible with a high impedance source and so forth.. Or some might have too much ground current and the noise floor hops up considerably when plugged up with another device but not with others. All said, one product might sound great in one person's setup, while that same product might not sound good in another person's setup. Some of that is evident in the threads here and over at GS where some folks swear by a certain product's sound quality, while others are saying it's terrible. I've gotten some of that with my own converter design too, but thankfully it's 99% good feedback.. There's tons of minuscule things that conspire to change the reality of a product's usability. I'd still suggest that pretty much any converter that isn't part of a "starter pack" at GC is probably much better than anything older than ten years, and it boils down to what features you need to increase your workflow as to which one you should try out first.. So start a spreadsheet of needs/wants based on features and choose from there.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,919
|
Post by ericn on Oct 23, 2018 8:40:34 GMT -6
Can I add if you want to know how it sounds actually get one in your hands and listen to the thing ? Unfortunately that's about the only way to gauge if something *sounds* good in your setup. A lot of guys naturally assume that these interfaces *sound* the same no matter what's hooked up, but the reality is that some input might sound great with a low impedance source, but sound terrible with a high impedance source and so forth.. Or some might have too much ground current and the noise floor hops up considerably when plugged up with another device but not with others. All said, one product might sound great in one person's setup, while that same product might not sound good in another person's setup. Some of that is evident in the threads here and over at GS where some folks swear by a certain product's sound quality, while others are saying it's terrible. I've gotten some of that with my own converter design too, but thankfully it's 99% good feedback.. There's tons of minuscule things that conspire to change the reality of a product's usability. I'd still suggest that pretty much any converter that isn't part of a "starter pack" at GC is probably much better than anything older than ten years, and it boils down to what features you need to increase your workflow as to which one you should try out first.. So start a spreadsheet of needs/wants based on features and choose from there. As usual I’m going to agree with you pretty much with one important distinction ( you guys should have all been in the car with us driving around Nashville listening to us discuss gear and design) to your last paragraph; that exception is unless your looking for a particular sound. The RADAR V has a sound, a sound I love, I could live with an old UA 2192 or Lavry. Technically yeah a new RME is probably a better converter, but I’ll keep the RADAR!
|
|
|
Post by svart on Oct 23, 2018 8:46:43 GMT -6
Unfortunately that's about the only way to gauge if something *sounds* good in your setup. A lot of guys naturally assume that these interfaces *sound* the same no matter what's hooked up, but the reality is that some input might sound great with a low impedance source, but sound terrible with a high impedance source and so forth.. Or some might have too much ground current and the noise floor hops up considerably when plugged up with another device but not with others. All said, one product might sound great in one person's setup, while that same product might not sound good in another person's setup. Some of that is evident in the threads here and over at GS where some folks swear by a certain product's sound quality, while others are saying it's terrible. I've gotten some of that with my own converter design too, but thankfully it's 99% good feedback.. There's tons of minuscule things that conspire to change the reality of a product's usability. I'd still suggest that pretty much any converter that isn't part of a "starter pack" at GC is probably much better than anything older than ten years, and it boils down to what features you need to increase your workflow as to which one you should try out first.. So start a spreadsheet of needs/wants based on features and choose from there. As usual I’m going to agree with you pretty much with one important distinction ( you guys should have all been in the car with us driving around Nashville listening to us discuss gear and design) to your last paragraph; that exception is unless your looking for a particular sound. The RADAR V has a sound, a sound I love, I could live with an old UA 2192 or Lavry. Technically yeah a new RME is probably a better converter, but I’ll keep the RADAR! Sure. Things like Radar were designed to sound like they do. Radar has always touted their sound as smoother like tape. Burl is another one that clearly designs to a specific sound. However, I'd say that most converters are simply trying to be the flattest and cleanest they can be to meet their pricepoint with the features they offer. Something like my converter or a Lavry were designed to have the widest and flattest bandwidths possible without significant aliasing products and have a very clean and clear reproduction. Some like that, some don't. It's horses for courses.
|
|