96 i/o + gear OR 192 i/o, opinions please

[Chris Coleman]

So, in a roundabout way, I'll end up with an HD system and the interface is the last link. Right now, the money's tight (when isn't it?) and a used 192 i/o at twice the price of a used 96 i/o is a big chunk.

Let me put it this way. I'm working on a 002Rack right now and I'd put those converters squarely in the "not horrible" category. If I go with a 96 i/o, that'll leave enough for a couple API modules or a shiny new mic (or, y'know, maybe paying some bills). Where does the 96 i/o fall in the sound-quality continuum between the 002R and the 192 i/o?

Thanks....

-=cc=-

[Shan]

Check out "Poor mans HD rig..." I think this is a good route to go these days when climbing up to HD. I also think we very well may see HD1 & 96I/O package upgrade deals in the near future.

This is a route I will probably do. There are a few in that thread who even started. Once you get that initial system out of the way, then expanding it will be a little easier.

Shane

[JFreak]

if the core card gets accell chips within the PCIe update, i will very seriously be considering a purchase currently it feels stupid that you cannot run accell plugs if you only have one card...

[crizdee]

Hi,

I would say that a good pre amp and a good mic would make a bigger difference that of a 96i/o and a 192i/o

I have a 192 and i rate the converters! i also have 2 96i/o for my synths and inserts and often record my big synths(Minimoog/Andromeda) though them and the sound is excellent.


Chris

[flymax]

I Gotta chime in...
I use the 96's and the 192...
the converters on the 192 are significantly better...

[Chris Coleman]

I use the 96's and the 192...
the converters on the 192 are significantly better...

I expected to get this kind of answer and, while helpful, it's not exactly what I'm looking for. I think it's widely agreed upon that the 192 is a better box overall, but how much better might be a better question.

I would certainly hope that the 96 i/o is enough to at least get semi-critical work done (no, not $3k mastering jobs - just tracking, overdubs, decent monitoring, and going to/from outboard gear).

Like I said, I'd rather load up on frontend gear (of which I've already got a decent collection going) than spend twice the price of a 96 i/o for a 5% difference.

Anyone else using the 96 i/o with success and decent results? Or will I just wish I had a 192 i/o if I get a 96 i/o?

Thanks again...

-=cc=-

[djejNYC]

I just upgraded form an 002r to an HD1 with a 96i/o and I think it sounds really great. I've been told that if I get a better clock then the 96 will sound even better. You know you should also look for an used apogee (Rosetta 800 or the 16x series) with an hd card, it would probably split the middle on price and sound as good as the 192. I've used the 192 a lot in a bigger studio and it definitely sounds better but I would go for an API first. Mostly because I don't have one and it will make a big jump over my SYteks (or at least a different sound).

[minister]

hi,

i use a 96 in B room, 192 in the A room , and 002 in the C room.

the only place i A/D convert is A. the only place where D/A is critical is A. mixing and editing get done on 002's and 96's, but not high $$ programs or music mixes. they are useful in those rooms for sure. and i am happy i made the decision to put 96 in B. i didn't need as many tracks, i didn't need expandability...(i don't think). so, yes, i would rank them A,B,C.

you know the problem with the 96 is it is not expandable like the 192... to me, that is a DEFINITE consideration. best case scenario is, you buy what you can afford now, and then upgrade the converters later, keeping the 96. you know, buy lavry's. mytek, prism, apogee.... and plug them into the 96.

hope that helps.

[hearttimes]

i have both the 96 and the 96i and they've both been perfectly great.

[Craig F]

the 192 has more flexibility than the 96.
If you need that flexibility (AES-TDIF transfers, extra card option, adjustable calibration in and out w/ 2 settings) get the 192