|
|
Post by jmoose on Jun 7, 2021 18:19:20 GMT -6
Both you and phantom make a good point there. Is the question really that I want more I/O or is it more that I want more I/O and another 500 chassis? I think the answer is kind of the latter plus the ability to do analog summing on 16 channels instead of just the 8 I can do with the 500ADAT. But looking at the MOTU 828es there's a great case to be made there. It checks the I/O boxes very nicely in a relatively low risk way. But man, the versatility of the Cranbornes is so appealing. If you really want to get into 16+ channels of analog summing, that's the goal line... Question is do you really want to be doing it with Cranborne or would you rather have something like a Dangerous 2 bus? In terms of both workflow and having it tied to an interface or not. Long term driver stability for Cranborne is absolutely a question. UAD? They're pretty established... been around a while and not going anywhere anytime soon. Hardware is one thing. Real hardware will survive multiple OS & interface changes. There are a few things in my racks that I've had for nearly 20 years. If you get 5-7 years use out of an interface I think your doing pretty good! Analog summing that's worth using can be a serious investment & long term commitment. Not to talk you out of it but just the experience. I'm using an SSL X desk which gives me 20 inputs at mix... there are IIRC 56 patch points on the console alone. Plus converters, plus outboard gear... all tied with a 192 point patchbay. Its taken serious time (and bucks) plus at least two patchbay revisions to get things where they need to be. One upshot is total routing flexibility. Can send anything anywhere and tackle any project that comes through. Another is that aside from the DAW & interface I'm 100% future proofed. The console & bays are fully independent, analog and not tied to the computer. |
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jun 7, 2021 18:21:07 GMT -6
Has anyone ever actually tried using an aggregate device on their Mac OS with any success? Maybe I'm just traumatized from the early days of digital but this seems like a recipe for disaster and I can't find many examples on the forums of people actually doing this. I’ve never had luck using an aggregate device. Others have been more fortunate. Also, I used to make angry posts about my frustrations with the Motu routing grid. But now I know it well, and it’s very useful. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107 
|
Post by ericn on Jun 7, 2021 18:30:56 GMT -6
Has anyone ever actually tried using an aggregate device on their Mac OS with any success? Maybe I'm just traumatized from the early days of digital but this seems like a recipe for disaster and I can't find many examples on the forums of people actually doing this. I’ve never had luck using an aggregate device. Others have been more fortunate. Also, I used to make angry posts about my frustrations with the Motu routing grid. But now I know it well, and it’s very useful. Is there a single interface routing / mixing utility that hasn’t had somebody threatening to throw the whole thing out? OK maybe PT HD/ HDX! |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 7, 2021 19:51:17 GMT -6
yeah you make a good point but isn’t the Cranborne capable of the same I/o routing via adat as with USB? I don’t remember but thought so. It probably is but here is the tough question, do I need to use software to switch the routing🤔! Reading back I’m not trying to sound like an a-hole. It’s just that in my gearpimp days you always had to go back to “the customer is always right”, now I can scream at the top of my lungs you don’t want to do that😁. It’s like the guy who bought a bunch of American DJ gear where I printed at the bottom of the invoice after explaining “you can only run this stuff for 15min then it needs to be cooled down.” Full Compass is in no way responsible for anything beyond the basic manufacturer’s warranty. No additional services or replacement shall be provided.” It all dies and the club owner expects us to provide a loaner rig because his DJ is a real “pro”. Your signature was your way of proving you agreed to the terms. God the only thing worse than DJ’s is DJ lighting. I think the thing that is maybe a bit of a mitigating factor is that the Cranborne 500r8 also functions as a standalone 500 series chassis, and a really good one. As well as a standalone line mixer. So that builds a bit of redundancy in there. However, it does not have the same capabilities of ADAT expansion as the 500ADAT. Not sure why not (maybe so they could sell both??) but the creators cleared that up on the Purple Website a few months ago. Still, I like that even ten years from now the 500r8 is a great lunchbox with top notch headphone amps and quality summing. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 7, 2021 20:11:14 GMT -6
Both you and phantom make a good point there. Is the question really that I want more I/O or is it more that I want more I/O and another 500 chassis? I think the answer is kind of the latter plus the ability to do analog summing on 16 channels instead of just the 8 I can do with the 500ADAT. But looking at the MOTU 828es there's a great case to be made there. It checks the I/O boxes very nicely in a relatively low risk way. But man, the versatility of the Cranbornes is so appealing. If you really want to get into 16+ channels of analog summing, that's the goal line... Question is do you really want to be doing it with Cranborne or would you rather have something like a Dangerous 2 bus? In terms of both workflow and having it tied to an interface or not. Long term driver stability for Cranborne is absolutely a question. UAD? They're pretty established... been around a while and not going anywhere anytime soon. Hardware is one thing. Real hardware will survive multiple OS & interface changes. There are a few things in my racks that I've had for nearly 20 years. If you get 5-7 years use out of an interface I think your doing pretty good! Analog summing that's worth using can be a serious investment & long term commitment. Not to talk you out of it but just the experience. I'm using an SSL X desk which gives me 20 inputs at mix... there are IIRC 56 patch points on the console alone. Plus converters, plus outboard gear... all tied with a 192 point patchbay. Its taken serious time (and bucks) plus at least two patchbay revisions to get things where they need to be. One upshot is total routing flexibility. Can send anything anywhere and tackle any project that comes through. Another is that aside from the DAW & interface I'm 100% future proofed. The console & bays are fully independent, analog and not tied to the computer. The X-Desk is probably what I would get if I had the space for it and a bit more budget. The Dangerous has kind of been on my radar for a while but the reason I haven't gone that route (and why the X-desk is more appealing) is the way that I am using the summing. Here's the generalized version of what I do now followed but what I would do if I could. NOW (mix into everything from the beginning, so all track level stuff other than vox/bass compression is done via plugs... I don't do a lot track level) - Vocals analog out through hardware AudioScape LA2A and back into DAW analog in - Bass analog out through 4-710 interment input, built in 1176-lite and back into DAW analog in 500 CH7/8 - Drum Bus into SB4001 500 CH5/6 - 1st Inst Bus into RND 535 pair 500 CH3/4 - 2nd Inst Bus analog out into PRO VLA into RND 551 pair 500 CH1/2 - Analog sum mix analog out back into channels 1/2 for two channels of Chroma and then into the DAW via two analog inputs I mix into this until complete with the summed input labeled as "Band Bus". When I'm in the final mix stages I print the Band Bus and free up the 500 Chassis again. Then I mix as follows (typically, I've only actually done four or five mixes this way so far, kind of new)... 500 CH2/3 - Vocal through LA2A into Chroma, into RND551 500 CH1/4 - Bass through 4-710 1176-lite into Chroma into RND551 500 CH5/6 - Band Bus into RND 535 pair 500 CH7/8 - Analog sum mix analog out back into channels 7/8 for SB4001 and then into the DAW via two analog inputs HOW I'D LIKE TO DO ITPretty much the same except without the printing. Also, I don't have enough I/O to run anything on my main mix bus this way so that's still populated with UAD (mostly) plugs. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 7, 2021 20:50:23 GMT -6
Oh yeah, something that might not be obvious about the above if you're not familiar with how the 500ADAT works...
The ADAT outs on the 500ADAT are active all the time. So that means that at the same time that I'm getting my summed signal and sending it back to the DAW through two channels of the 500ADAT, all the other buses are getting inputted via the other 6 ADAT channels. So then I just arm those 8 tracks and mix into them using Console for the hardware monitoring or using the 500ADAT itself by just sending my summed channel out from it's headphone jack.
It's pretty cool what you can do with this unholy marriage of ADAT and 500.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jun 8, 2021 3:45:35 GMT -6
I would just grab something like a MOTU 16A with tonnes of line level I/O. Then you won't have to print anything if you don't want to.
Or a Presonus Quantum 4848 if you don't need DSP routing/dsp monitoring.
|
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Jun 8, 2021 8:22:02 GMT -6
Hey man, Andertons just made a video with Cranborne 500ADAT and R8. And they are using the Apollo x4 as interface.
Have you asked them to do this? lol
|
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 8, 2021 12:33:36 GMT -6
I would just grab something like a MOTU 16A with tonnes of line level I/O. Then you won't have to print anything if you don't want to. Or a Presonus Quantum 4848 if you don't need DSP routing/dsp monitoring. Whoa, that's pretty cool. It's basically a Thunderbolt patchbay. I could keep the Apollo and just use the MOTU for mixing. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 8, 2021 12:34:29 GMT -6
Hey man, Andertons just made a video with Cranborne 500ADAT and R8. And they are using the Apollo x4 as interface. Have you asked them to do this? lol Can't wait to watch it! I'm telling you, there's something really elegant about this combo. |
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Jun 8, 2021 13:13:07 GMT -6
Hey man, Andertons just made a video with Cranborne 500ADAT and R8. And they are using the Apollo x4 as interface. Have you asked them to do this? lol Can't wait to watch it! I'm telling you, there's something really elegant about this combo. I jus watched it. He's not really using the Apollo for anything more than an example of an interface with Adat. But the Cranbornes really are a very interesting piece of gear. |
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Jun 8, 2021 18:22:14 GMT -6
Who said ADAT was dead?
|
|
|
|
Post by gwlee7 on Jun 8, 2021 18:25:32 GMT -6
I would just grab something like a MOTU 16A with tonnes of line level I/O. Then you won't have to print anything if you don't want to. Or a Presonus Quantum 4848 if you don't need DSP routing/dsp monitoring. winner winner chicken dinner. |
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Jun 9, 2021 0:30:45 GMT -6
I'm an Apollo user, but I think that CAST system is a game changer for easy studio setup and operation. I get people's concern about Cranbourne being a newer player, but it's about as much of a gamble as all the several guys on this board who've changed their interfaces how many times? We've all heard the stories about interfaces from Antelope, MOTU and Apogee losing support for one reason or another. I think the Cranbourne configuration is ideal for the hybrid approach.
I mean, if you like the flexibility of the 500 units now, why would you just up your cost getting something like the 16A when you'll still want the 500 units for mixing and summing? Yes, you'll have lots of I/O for patching, but the Cranbourne interface would already have that I/O and save at least one round of conversion.
And compared the Dangerous stuff, which I actually dream about sometimes, this Cranbourne stuff allows you to do more than just summing. It's sound will be up in the air, defined by what you stick in there, but you can always switch it out.
|
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 9, 2021 2:29:51 GMT -6
I'm an Apollo user, but I think that CAST system is a game changer for easy studio setup and operation. I get people's concern about Cranbourne being a newer player, but it's about as much of a gamble as all the several guys on this board who've changed their interfaces how many times? We've all heard the stories about interfaces from Antelope, MOTU and Apogee losing support for one reason or another. I think the Cranbourne configuration is ideal for the hybrid approach. I mean, if you like the flexibility of the 500 units now, why would you just up your cost getting something like the 16A when you'll still want the 500 units for mixing and summing? Yes, you'll have lots of I/O for patching, but the Cranbourne interface would already have that I/O and save at least one round of conversion. And compared the Dangerous stuff, which I actually dream about sometimes, this Cranbourne stuff allows you to do more than just summing. It's sound will be up in the air, defined by what you stick in there, but you can always switch it out. CAST really is as cool as it seems. And as easy. And, again, after doing another mix tonight and getting better at routing this system, I can't tell you how cool it is being able to have "always active" ADAT outs from my 500 unit. If you like parallel processing, for example, it's basically done for you. I can route my modules from one to the other with analog patches and then pick and choose which signals I want to send to the DAW. I'm not a "safety" guy, I like to commit. But I am parallel compression fan. So to be able to just do one more routing and say "what the hell, let's just crush this with the SB4001 and blend a bit in later" with zero additional steps is really cool. |
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jun 9, 2021 2:57:32 GMT -6
Are you using 96k?
|
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 9, 2021 3:16:08 GMT -6
48k. Even before the 500ADAT I was recording in 48k but given that my Apollo only has one ADAT input, yeah... too many sacrifices at 96k for not enough reward. Might change if I could run more that four channels that way. |
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jun 9, 2021 4:43:00 GMT -6
Thats the reason ive avoided adat. I just cant do low sample rates and why im perplexed at a new system built around such a big limitation.
But not knowing the ins and outs. Do you lose channel count with the cranbourne at higher sample rates or is the limit the device its plugged into
|
|
|
|
Post by plinker on Jun 9, 2021 8:05:47 GMT -6
... the Cranbourne interface would already have that I/O and save at least one round of conversion. I'm confused: how do you go from DAW --> Cranbourne500 analog processing --> DAW without conversion?
|
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Jun 9, 2021 8:58:00 GMT -6
... the Cranbourne interface would already have that I/O and save at least one round of conversion. I'm confused: how do you go from DAW --> Cranbourne500 analog processing --> DAW without conversion? It has converters in it, but you're able to bypass the A to D. He explains in the video posted earlier, but I've posted this one at the section where it comes up. |
|
|
|
Post by phantom on Jun 9, 2021 9:19:37 GMT -6
Sure, but you'll still have to use your interface converter.
There's obviously no way of going from the daw (digital) to a 500 module (analog) without conversion.
The thing is that the 500ADAT has a converter inside. And a nice converter. So, doesn't matter your interface, you'll always get the same sound inside your DAW.
|
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 9, 2021 13:26:38 GMT -6
Thats the reason ive avoided adat. I just cant do low sample rates and why im perplexed at a new system built around such a big limitation. But not knowing the ins and outs. Do you lose channel count with the cranbourne at higher sample rates or is the limit the device its plugged into It's the limitation of ADAT. You can only send 4 channels of audio with a single optical line at 192. Actually, maybe even 2. So to do more than that you need more ADAT I/O. Most devices have two pairs of I/O so that you can do at least 8 channels at higher rates. For me I don't care at all. I fall squarely into 48k is plenty and, in fact, I like saving the hard drive space because I'm a hard drive pack rat, I never delete anything. But I also don't use a lot of high demand plugins and the music I work on is very analog based to begin with. I read this in a book the other day and it resonated with me... I'm not hi-fi at all, but certainly not lo-fi. I'm squarely in the mid-fi category in terms of my taste. |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 9, 2021 13:29:16 GMT -6
Sure, but you'll still have to use your interface converter. There's obviously no way of going from the daw (digital) to a 500 module (analog) without conversion. The thing is that the 500ADAT has a converter inside. And a nice converter. So, doesn't matter your interface, you'll always get the same sound inside your DAW. Right, that's the point. The conversion happens with 500ADAT so I could use anything that gives me optical I/O without concern for the conversion or clocking or whatever. I also want to point out that the headphone amp in the 500ADAT is fantastic. Every component is just really top notch. |
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Jun 9, 2021 22:22:40 GMT -6
I also want to point out that the headphone amp in the 500ADAT is fantastic. Every component is just really top notch. Is it all that different than the headphone amp in the Apollo x4? |
|
|
|
Post by gravesnumber9 on Jun 9, 2021 22:39:54 GMT -6
I also want to point out that the headphone amp in the 500ADAT is fantastic. Every component is just really top notch. Is it all that different than the headphone amp in the Apollo x4? Significantly. Way more headroom for one thing. But in general also a much more open sound. I’m terrible at these wine tasting adjectives haha. It’s very different and I think better. |
|
