Apogee HD-X card............?

[Rail Jon Rogut]

Yes,, correct. You DO NOT need ANY Digi interface. They hook straight up to ProTools. And sound better !!! Can't beat that.....

Right.. the question is how transparent will it be to the end user when replacing a 192.. will it have similar features and support ADC correctly?

Rail

[surroundguy]

So far I have read a lot of handwaving and poor grammar claiming the Apogee is better, but I would like to understand in detail WHY. Does anyone know why Apogee claim their interfaces are better? jitter is one thing, but is there something specific to their A/D design?

Digigeek, thanks for your input. When you did your listening test, was it blind testing where you compared notes afterward? or did you know which interface you were listening to?

If the Apogee HD-X isn't a supported configuration and you call Digi tech support, what are they going to say? what is the official Digi policy?

[DigiGeek]

Digigeek, thanks for your input. When you did your listening test, was it blind testing where you compared notes afterward? or did you know which interface you were listening to?

Double blind off the board. Only the assistant knew what was what. All votes were written on a piece of paper as #1,2,3 etc. and then the big reveal.

[Chap]

ok, I helped beta test the Apogee X series. Naturally, I put them up against 192s, Troisi's (which sound as good as the Lavrey). The new X series is a vast improvement over the 192 and an improvement over previous Apogee products. It was the equal or preferred choice over the Troisi's in blind listening tests. What people use on a sound stage and in the studio are different tools (ever go to a studio that records to a Nagra?) Many studios, large and small, are using Apogee so use your ears before you post. I did and have placed my order for the new X series.
chap


and- I do not work for Apogee, neither does Digigeek. It's a small company whoose employees are busy making and designing products, not posting. Thanks.

[Duardo]

So far I have read a lot of handwaving and poor grammar claiming the Apogee is better, but I would like to understand in detail WHY. Does anyone know why Apogee claim their interfaces are better? jitter is one thing, but is there something specific to their A/D design?

It's hard to state definitively why, as most of the high-end converters on the market spec out close to perfect. The clock is a big part of it, as well as the analog circuitry...specifically their anti-aliasing filters, which is what actually put Apogee on the map in the first place. The power supply also makes a big difference. Regardless, it's all about how they sound. When I did my listening test with the pervious generation of the AD16, we didn't know which one was which. There were a few of us there, though, and we all agreed that the AD16 did sound more true to the analog signal than the 192. We all agreed that the difference was subtle, however, as I stated earlier. The 192 is by no means a bad converter. The difference between the AD8000 and the 888|24 was not subtle.

It's a small company whoose employees are busy making and designing products, not posting.

Max from Apogee will actually chime in on forums once in a while.

-Duardo