ok, we all know HD sounds better, but....

[andre tchmil]

By now everybody is convinced that HD sounds better.
But can someone tell me how the sound quality is of the 192io compared to the 96io.
Are there better convertors used,... etc.
I'm talking here at 44.1K or 48K of course.

[Lee Blaske]

Just do a search. There's been a ton written about this already, with some fascinating contributions from Digidesign engineers that worked on the project.

The 192 contains a lot of fancy, esoteric design work, and was fretted over by some pretty powerful engineers in the interface world. I believe Digidesign really set out to do a first class job.

I remember when I first took a 192 out of the box, I was startled at how much deeper and heavier it was than the 888|24 which was designed years ago. Usually, you expect hardware to get smaller and lighter.

Lee Blaske

[auckland yobbo]

Yes but the 96 is also deep and heavy - far more so than an 888. And it has TRS on the back for all of us Digi001 upgraders. That was a surprisingly compelling reason for me over the 192 - no new cables or adapters to buy. Oh, and that it's HEAPS cheaper.

[spong]

I started out with a 192 and a 96. I took the 96 back and got another 192. No only sound differences but the 192 is MUCH more versitile.

[rtcstudio]

Yes there is a big difference, at ANY sampling rate.

The 192 has better converters coming and going.

Again, as Lee said, there have been many threads/comparisons on this, and the vote was a simple one. If you want the best sound go with the 192.

I for one HATE the DB25 connectors, but that's what they decided to go with.

[andre tchmil]

yeah, yeah, I know the fancy extras on the 192io.
But the SOUND boys: is there a huge difference between the two at 48K ?
did anyone compared the two ?

[THETHRILLFACTOR]

The sound of the 96K interface improves when it is clocked externally. I'm running a 192K and a 96K clocked by Hedd 192 and it sounds great(very similar to the 192 interface). It sounds way better than the 888/24 at 44.1K/48K.