External ADDA Converters ?!?

[KaiXXX]

Hi everybody!

We're all trying to get maximum audio quality from our Digi001 systems.

Since we find ourselves obviously in the digital recording domain, the analog-signal to digital-signal (ad) conversion is a critical point. The digital clock is a very important factor, things like jitter come into play. images/icons/rolleyes.gif

Since the software we use (ProToolsLE) is basically the same as the "big" version, one thought comes to my mind: We could get the same audio quality with our 001 systems, like the HD/Mix guys! We just have to use an external ad-device & clock source which has the same quality like their hw. images/icons/tongue.gif

I do really believe that I'm not the first one who had this idea, so I'd like to read your opinions and experiences with additional devices.

Of course an Apogee AD8000 would be a nice addition to the 001, but it's really not within budget for everybody. Also a 2 channel device would do for most recordings. So the PSX100 ADDA is still pricy. I think some of you were talking about the Rosetta (it's only ad, though). But there are a lot of other (and often cheaper) converters.

What are you guys using and do you think it really makes a difference?

Thanks for your input! KaiXXX images/icons/cool.gif

[mattm]

well, the guys using mix systems with the stock digi converters (888|24 for example) are not getting audio quality much different from the 001. the HD hardware is a different story, being in a league of it's own, in my opinion.

on the home front, the RME ADI 8 represents excellent value for money as a 8 channel AD/DA box and sounds bloody good to boot. Apoogee haven't made a good converter since the 20 bit AD1000.

[peteri]

I'm sorry - I must disagree here.

When I upgraded from Digi001 to TDM, the interface that I managed to get at the time was a 882/16 (the pre-cursor to the 882/20 but 16 bit).

And this absolutely smoked the Digi001 24 bit convertors.

Please do the maths - the Digi001 retails (here in the uk) for around £700 now, for that you get 16x24bit convertors (in and out), 2 pre-amps, headphone amp, adat/spdif interface, Pci card, cable + Pro-tools software.

Now, thats a great value package I'm not knocking it, but the cheapest TDM interface costs about £1000 over here (the 882/20) - just for 16 20bit convertors and spdif i/o.

Even allowing for the TDM markup factor (if there is one - which I reckon there is a little bit of), just how much of the 882 cost is spent on the convertors relative to the spend on the 001 convertors?

I've moved a long way in my set up - from Soundblaster Live, Yamaha Sw1000G, Pulsar, Digi001, Mix+ and probably to HD - and EVERY time there has been a clear improvement in audio quality, not always relative to the cost, but always there.

Sure the older TDM interfaces improve with better clocking, and the newer ones are a lot better - that's progress, but there's still been some cracking music made on them, as there has/will be with the Digi001 I'm sure (and the M-box for that matter) - but the sad reality is the more money you spend the better convertors you get - even if the bit depth doesn't seem to support that, you also have to take account of things like the TDM interfaces being externally powered, this will also make a difference to the sound - as the designers have access to a much more stable powersupply.

I do agree with the RME interface though - superb value and something I intend to buy to extend my (intended) 96 i/o.

Just my 2p worth

Pete

[mattm]

just saying that to my ears, the difference between the 001 and the 888's isn't that significant. of course it's better but as many of us know, the gap is not that broad.

the difference between the 001 and HD or even 888 to HD is significant by comparison.

[GW]

Well, the price is always an issue - so why not Mini-Me???

http://www.apogeedigital.com/products/prod_minime.html

[gerax]

Originally posted by KaiXXX:

Since the software we use (ProToolsLE) is basically the same as the "big" version, one thought comes to my mind: We could get the same audio quality with our 001 systems, like the HD/Mix guys! We just have to use an external ad-device & clock source which has the same quality like their hw.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This is no new to the majority of 001 users, but keep in mind that the difference between 001 systems and HD isn't only HW based (even though it's the biggest difference): the new SW version is able to handle higher res files (up to 192 KHz), so the likeness between 001 and HD "could" only be valid for lower sample rates, and besides, I still think even in the lower sample rate region the HD will sound better since its architecture is radically different from TDM and 001; don't get me wrong this isn't another invitation to flame wars on sample rate, but a $900 all in one box, as much as I love mine, could never sound like a $4000 stand alone converter. The addition of a dedicated converter like RME will allow for a great sonic leap forward, but as long as Digi won't make PTLE able to handle 96KHz at least the production usefulness of 001 will remain attached to the low res field. Let's go and make some good music in this "low res field" now images/icons/grin.gif .

Cheers

L.G.

[STUDIO-DE-ARIEL]

Here Here

[-jj-]

Hi, have anyone tryed theese:
Marian Adcon (http://www.marian.de/english/adcon.htm) (8 channel 24 Bit/48 kHz)
Alesis Ai-3 (http://www.alesis.com/products/ai3/index.html) (8 channel 24 Bit)
Kronauer Genio (http://www.kronauer-digital.de/Products/X1/X1e.htm) (8 or 16 channel 24Bit)
?
I haven´t, but i´m going to by some of those in future... example Marian is VERY cheap... quality? who know... I don´t try to get better ad/da quality than digi001 ad/da conversion is. Just makes things to easier, I mean that i can use example analog inputs/outputs only in external FX and adat input to record stuff in (or the otherways). so i don´t have change plugs between recording and mixing ...EVER... images/icons/grin.gif

[KaiXXX]

Concerning RME, right now the ADI-8 AE seems to be the best value. Has anybody tried this one?

[Allen Hallada]

Originally posted by KaiXXX:
Hi everybody!

We're all trying to get maximum audio quality from our Digi001 systems.

Since we find ourselves obviously in the digital recording domain, the analog-signal to digital-signal (ad) conversion is a critical point. The digital clock is a very important factor, things like jitter come into play. images/icons/rolleyes.gif

Since the software we use (ProToolsLE) is basically the same as the "big" version, one thought comes to my mind: We could get the same audio quality with our 001 systems, like the HD/Mix guys! We just have to use an external ad-device & clock source which has the same quality like their hw. images/icons/tongue.gif

I do really believe that I'm not the first one who had this idea, so I'd like to read your opinions and experiences with additional devices.

Of course an Apogee AD8000 would be a nice addition to the 001, but it's really not within budget for everybody. Also a 2 channel device would do for most recordings. So the PSX100 ADDA is still pricy. I think some of you were talking about the Rosetta (it's only ad, though). But there are a lot of other (and often cheaper) converters.

What are you guys using and do you think it really makes a difference?

Thanks for your input! KaiXXX images/icons/cool.gif <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I would check out these converters from the top:
1.Cranesong HEDD 192
2.Apogee Trak 2 - get a preamp with a smoking converter.
3.Benchmark or Lucid - Exceptional value for high quality pro converters.

I like the HEDD192 and believe it delivers the same or maybe even better quality as the PTHD 192 converters at 16/44.1. Certainly gives you more options like the tape saturation effect.

Just a thought.
Allen
images/icons/smile.gif

[KaiXXX]

Mmh, the Cranesong seems pretty pricey, do you own one of these?

Where are all the Rosetta guys? images/icons/wink.gif

Everybody, what are your experiences?

images/icons/confused.gif

[mattm]

the HEDD is an amazing box, sounds marginally different to the HD interfaces but it is a lot of money to part with for two channels of AD conversion.

in the 'less than a few grand' market, i stand firmly by the RME ADI-8 family as they sound good and you get 8 ins and 8 outs for your money. i see little to no point to rushing into the myth-engulfed world of higher sample rate converters. there is far more to perceived sound quality than pure mathamatics. besides, the 001 won't do you any better than 48k.

~matt

[Allen Hallada]

Originally posted by KaiXXX:
Mmh, the Cranesong seems pretty pricey, do you own one of these?

Where are all the Rosetta guys? images/icons/wink.gif

Everybody, what are your experiences?

images/icons/confused.gif <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Yes I have the HEDD 192 unit and love it. I do mostly vocal and guitar work in this studio, but you can do alot with two channels of high end AD. If you want 8 channels you can have it in the 8 channel Cranesong Spider with 8 channels of high end preamp too. Great combo.
Good luck.
Allen images/icons/wink.gif

[APAULOS]

Where are all the Rosetta guys?

Everybody, what are your experiences?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I like the Rosetta, it's much cleaner than the 001. Right now I am using a TC Gold channel to press most of my tracks. It's Very detailed and bright. Nice pre's matched with nice A/D's for about $1700 new. It's kinda like the Trak2 but with some very nice Q's and compressors, and a great sounding Soft Clip. TC calls it the finalizer for the front end of your studio. I saw one on ebay last week for $1200. Not bad.

[KaiXXX]

Thanks for your input!

Allen, if you say "good luck", you're talking about the lottery I'd have to win, aren't you? images/icons/wink.gif

The Gold Channel looks very complicated to me, for a front end (mic pre, comp, maybe eq) I like the analogue approach: one knob for gain, not too many for the comp... but mainly on knob for the gain images/icons/grin.gif

I just read a comparison test in a magazine between Digi 888/24, RME Adi-8 DS, 96 I/O and 192 I/O.
Well, the 192 I/O "won" and the 888 was "last". The RME and 96 were pretty close, in some aspects the RME was favored to the 96.

Since the ADI-8 AE is the same as the DS (just a little higher noise floor) with a price even a bit less the PRO, I think it's definitely the box to go for right now.

Can anybody confirm this? images/icons/cool.gif

[smolski]

Anybody try the ART DI/O? I remember an ad that compared it to Apogee.

[mattm]

Originally posted by Allen Hallada:
Yes I have the HEDD 192 unit and love it.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">so you went with the HEDD, eh? i'm glad you like it images/icons/smile.gif

~matt

[Allen Hallada]

Originally posted by mattm:
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:<hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Allen Hallada:
Yes I have the HEDD 192 unit and love it.<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">so you went with the HEDD, eh? i'm glad you like it images/icons/smile.gif

~matt<hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Yea, I just about jumped on the PTHD 192 system and went this route instead. I really think I saved myself about 10k with this HEDD converter and didn't have to switch to a Mac. So far it is incredible quality and matches anything I've seen out there at 16 bit/ 44.1 or 24bit/48k. I just played a song for guy that did studio work in Nashville for 25 years and he said he couldn't tell the difference from the best studios he has worked in on the vocal tracks. I think people are going overboard on this 192k stuff, at least until we see some media that supports that sample rate.
Just a thought.
Allen images/icons/smile.gif

[KaiXXX]

What about all those "Digital Options"?

Focusrite, dbx, SPL... offer digital boards as an option (sometimes already built in) to their analog front ends. How do they compare to other converters? Some of these options are pretty expensive, so they shouldn't be too bad?!?