Planning on moving up to HD

[rems]

Thanks for the heads up on the 96 vs 192, Doc. I think I shouldn't worry since I will be using the Lavry for AD. Maybe I can even use the Lavry's wordclock out to slave the 96I/O (??)

I'm still looking for the compatibility on my computer with HD....

[NickH]

Hmmmm... not sure really on it all then. I just caled Apogee a few weeks back when a buddy told me that there was a patch that lets Pro Tools see them as 192's. I called Apogee and they said it was for the DA and AD 16X models. The Rosetta was coming out soon and he said it was really nothing to worry about. Also I did not really want to unrack them all and do the update.

Yes it is a utter PITA to do the update, but they do show up as 192 digitals afterwards and work great & it’s defo for the Rosetta as well, it even says so in the documentation... you can download the new update from the apogee website...

Cheers



N

[NickH]

Maybe I can even use the Lavry's wordclock out to slave the 96I/O (??)

You can just select AES ase the wordclock source and that will work fine or if the Lavry has a BNC wordclock out use that to the 96 wordclock in...

Cheers

N

[IntelDoc]

Yes it is a utter PITA to do the update, but they do show up as 192 digitals afterwards and work great & it’s defo for the Rosetta as well, it even says so in the documentation... you can download the new update from the apogee website...

Cheers



N

I will update them when I move into my new place and build out the studio. They work fine for now.

Thanks though,
Doc

[rems]

Like I said on my first post, I'm actually on the planning phase, so there is another alternative, the Digi003. For that, I would have to buy a firewire card, but that shouldn't be a big deal.

Since I only record 2 tracks at a time at most, do you HD users think it is overkill to get a HD system? I'm looking for a better sound using 96K, and a better internal mixer.

[Andres Gonzalez]

Since I only record 2 tracks at a time at most, do you HD users think it is overkill to get a HD system? I'm looking for a better sound using 96K, and a better internal mixer.

One of the real powers of HD is in mixing where the processing of EQ, Fx, etc, is done on the DSP cards. The software approach to processing has a real benefit in economy. For example, You can spend $1000 on a single channel HW compressor, but you can only use it on one channel at a time. Once you patch it in a channel, it is used and if you need another compressor you have to buy another one. The SW version has real economy. You spend that same $1000 on a single channel compressor plugin and you can use it on several channels at the same time--the only limit being the number of cards (like Accel) you have in your system.

If your mixes are going to be very complex, then I think that an HD system is not an overkill. But you can get good results on an LE system too. PT LE on a quad system provides a tremendous amount of processing power. However, I must admit, that my HD system "feels" different from my LE. Perhaps it is the difference between a laptop and an rack PC, but nonetheless, the HD system just feels industrial strength compared to my LE system.

-Andres

[Table Syrup Records]

All this talk about Interfaces, and the research I've been doing, I figured I'd mention something I learned today......

Lynx Aurora has a pretty slick interface which works with HD if you buy the HD add on card for it.
Google the name.... their site will be in the first few.

I wanna say it was $2500 + $350 for the HD add on.

A wee bit spendy.... but from what I'm told by some big dawgs in Minneapolis, it's better than the Digi stuff, and almost as good as Apogee.

Hmmmmm....

I still think a used 192 for $1800 is where I'll start.... then add the additional 8 in.

Hopefully someday the Apogee stuff, but I'll have to at least hear a Lynx Aurora for myself before making the decision.

[IntelDoc]

FWIW,
I was on the brink of buying the Lynx stuff but read numerous reviews and spoke to Darren at Vintage King who did multiple comparisons of all the converters. Conclusion.... The Apogee's were far superior to the Lynx and in fact the lynx sounded the least bit clear and the depth was non existent. It is cool and all that there are 16 channels, etc for 2500 bucks, but in my opinion, you can have great gear and great ears, but your converters are what matters in the DIGITAL realm. So with that I say spend the money on converters and build from there.

As for the Quad system. My HD 3 accel system runs on a Quad core, 4 gig system with a terabyte of space. I have a file server being built on a Unix platform that will house over 2 terabytes for a storage backup. Overkill, but guarantees that my clients work is backed up on a stable system and can be pulled at a moments notice via network back in. Point? The Quad is very powerful, and I had it on my LE rig before I went HD. I used it up actually at times with the high CPU plugs. It is sick though and really made a diff as far as things that I could do with my LE rig. Now with the HD rig I feel like I can control the Space Shuttle and the Hubble while playing with the WOPR in real time while it talks to H.A.L. So it is POWER AT YOUR FINGERS....

Highly recommend really thinking your strategy, long term goal, etc. Really think about what you want out of this, and what your clients will be.

Cool?

Hope this helps?

Doc