Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > Pro Tools M-Powered (Win)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old 04-12-2005, 02:31 AM
tomdrums tomdrums is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 26
Default Re: M-Powered vs. LE

...And what about the USB iLok key?

Does that mean M-Powered PT can be used without the M-Audio hardware connected to PC, only having the USB key attatched?

Enabling mobile editing at PT, without carrying the interface about?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 04-12-2005, 04:47 PM
lnl lnl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 246
Default Re: M-Powered vs. LE

no...

according to digi m-audio hardware must be connected to open software, just like in PTLE.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-13-2005, 06:21 AM
tomdrums tomdrums is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 26
Default Re: M-Powered vs. LE

Shame

Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 04-13-2005, 08:14 PM
The Minsk The Minsk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 14
Default Re: M-Powered vs. LE

Quote:
Anyone else noticing the M_Powered M-Audio gear has mostly unbalanced ins and/or outs?
That can't be good

where u gettin this info? im not seeing it on either maudio or digidesign websites
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 04-14-2005, 09:05 AM
drunton drunton is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Chandler, AZ USA
Posts: 244
Default Re: M-Powered vs. LE

I got my 1814 the other day and have played with it a bit - including opening it up and looking at the silicon that they use.

First, to clear the air - the 1814 has unbalanced inputs, the outputs are balanced.

Feature wise, there are a lot of issues to look at.

1. People argue about +4 and -10 operation, but the bottom line is that with +4, most equipment ends up going through another cheap opamp. In general, you want to minimize your signal path, so for the "low end" gear we most have, the general concensus is to stick to -10.

2. They same can hold true for balanced, unbalanced - I would rather use a good transformer than count on a cheap opamp to do the conversion to balanced. Bottom line is that the A/D's used are unbalanced in - so it's going to go unbalanced somewhere - use good cables.

Regarding the chips - this thing is bus powered, so you only have +5V to work with (Since the mbox uses the same power - I bet it has the same type of architecture). The opamnps are National LMV722 - 10MHz low noise, generic stuff. The converters are all AKM - the same brand that focusrite uses in the Liquid Channel (on the 1814 Channel 1/2 are the AK5385 (192kHz) the others are AK5381)

The mic pre looks to be made with a typical Mackie configuration - 4560 opamps driving the LMV722. I don't know what the mbox or 002R "focusrite" pre's are - but they always sounded harsh and one dimensional to me compared to just about anything.

I have never opened up my 002R, and won't now - it's going up for sale shortly. But, chances are, with higher voltages available due to the plug-in power supply, it might use higher voltage opamps, which would give higher headroom. But the A/D's can't take any higher signal level, most all of them on the market these days are +5V operation anyway - so if the signal is going to be down at that level anyway, then why add another opamp to boost the signal level in between - again, go for the cleanest signal path.

There are basically 2 A/D companies that are used for general purpose audio - Crystal and AKM, so I don't expect there to be that much difference in the under $1k for 2 channels group. Even my Frontier Tango uses Crystal chips. And by the way, the AD192 converter for the Presonus Eureka looks just like the m-audio stuff - runs on 5V, but has slightly better opamps (TLO series)

The only thing I might consider doing is swapping the opamps for OPA2353's or TLO series stuff, but at 44MHz, the Burr Brown's could end up with some stability problems.

I feel, in the end, it comes down to your front end - get good mics and good pre's. Bottom line, compared to mbox - better latency, more portable, and more inputs. Compared to 002R - possibly some tradeoff in quality that may or may not be noticeable - but a heck of a lot smaller for on the go editing.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 04-16-2005, 05:16 AM
Aln Aln is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Plainview,N.Y.USA
Posts: 167
Default Re: M-Powered vs. LE

Quote:
For some cheap PT editing stations in the studio, I think I will go with a few m-audio 24/96 based systems over the Mbox.

Shane
you may want to consider the newer Audiophile 24/192 which has unbalanced i/o in a breakout cable and has much improved converters according to a recent SOS review.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
M-Powered 8 Essential -> M-Powered 8 Upgrade Snowblind Pro Tools SE and Essential (Win) 2 08-09-2011 07:05 AM
mac osx, m powered fast track, pro tools m powered singdance6 Pro Tools M-Powered (Mac) 2 12-22-2010 09:24 AM
Please Advise are Pro Tools M-Powered Essential the same as LE M-Powered? jeremiah0812 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 5 10-19-2010 10:10 AM
PT M-Powered with FW400 bus powered audio drive? bruceup Pro Tools M-Powered (Mac) 5 07-06-2006 01:32 PM
bus powered interface + bus powered enclosure ? technician Pro Tools M-Powered (Mac) 0 03-20-2006 05:34 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:24 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com