Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

I've had the Avid HD I|O (w/ 8-channel A/D card added) for many years, and there's certainly nothing wrong with it -- it's clear and detailed and covers the sonic gamut rather well -- *however* I do feel that there's still room for improvement.

I've considered sending it away for the popular Black Lion upgrade, and perhaps that's ultimately the answer to the question I'm asking, but I'd also like to know if there are other ProTools-friendly interfaces that are clear upgrades.

I'd prefer not to get into something like an Antelope product which has a lot of connectivity issues, and a less-than-ideal routing matrix. Simple integration with PT is important. As is 16+ channels of input and a good amount of digital inputs.

Going into 2023, are there any obvious convertor upgrades to consider?

Re: Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

MTRX is the obvious one to me... DAD quality and routing and monitoring flexibility. seems a whole step up vs throwing money at an old box.

Don't run Digilink myself. They souded great in demos. OTOH as much as I like shiny stuff, will it really make a difference? can you borrow/loan/trial stuff? To see?

Re: Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

I'm a big fan of Apogee Symphony II

Re: Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

#1 element is if you require Digilink. If that's what you mean by integration with PT. That's actually the only real integration possible, everything else works outside PT's realm. But it significantly narrows down the field of interfaces.

Does MTRX Studio have enough I/O for you? No AES but 16 analogue and 16 ADAT. Plus Dante.

IMO upgrading the HD IO is a waste. And that's nothing against Black Lion or the HD IO itself. It just doesn't make financial sense to me.

Re: Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

That was the obvious one to me as well but if memory serves it lacks the I/Os I'd need. I'll take another look.

Re: Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

Yes, a strong contender. A few friends have been happy with theirs.

Re: Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

Digilink is what I meant, yes. No AES might be a dealbreaker. I'd have to see if there are alternate ways to deal with digital.

Re: Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

It was for me too.

I wrote this shortly after buying the MTRX back in 2020.
It is still one of the best purchases I've made.

https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/hom...y-to-avid-mtrx

You *could* add a Rednet D16R to the MTRX Studio if you need AES, but I am still glad I went for the full fat MTRX.

Re: Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

Obviously the box needs HD option card, but as added bonus you can use it via TB with a laptop. And because it is a 32x32 box (depending on cards installed), it connects to hdn/hdx card via single cable.

Re: Interfaces considered a "step up" from the Avid I|O?
 

In conversion quality it is pretty subtle against other pro level converters.

For me, the advantage to the MTRX is as a digital audio hub, esp for people who have lots and lots of channels in various formats.

Being able to aggregate dozens/hundreds of Dante, MADI, AES, Analogue channels was previously unheard of.

It is a great product but perhaps with a limited audience (post production, large audio facilities).