HD IO Options

[Centurion]

192 vs 96. Reality please.

I mean, if I have a U87 going into a Manley VoxBox and then into a 96 versus a 192, will that be where it matters? Can I use the 96 for synths/drum machines and use a 192 for the vocals?

And although I am sure that this has been discussed before, who can actually hear the difference between a 192 and a 96 and please explain what you hear. And since the 96 is supposed to be so much better then the 888/24 then what does the MIX system sound like? Nothing great? Someone please put this in perspective as this delta is a large wad of cash.

Thanks to the experts.

[shadowbox]

I'll tell you what I know. I have the 192 and even at 48kHz/24-bit I would say it sounds as good as my Apogee AD-8000. Others would disagree. I haven't heard the 96 but would imagine that for synths and what not, it would be ok. Much better than a 1622 which a lot of people used for synths in a Mix system. The S/N ratio of most synths is such that the improved A-D converison doesn't really matter.

The really cool thing about the 192 is that it's a very versatile box. It's great having both the +4 inputs and the -10 inputs, along with the extra ADAT/TDIF/AES (with on the fly sample rate conversion). Depending on your set up you can almost use it as a patchbay. I have almost everything going directly through the 192 then depending on what input I need to use I can change it in the software. The 96 does this as well, but the 192 as a lot more input options.

[ctmartin]

I absolutely agree w/ Chris above...

Others have pointed-out that the components in the 192 are superior to the 96 -- converters, clock -- plus you get sample-rate conversion on in-coming digital signals, "soft-limiting", and as stated, lots of i/o options. I'm getting what I NEVER could have gotten from Mix / 888-24's... it's now MUCH easier to mix "inside the box" with these things, and the low-end is now a reality thanks to 192's. And this is just running at 44.1 & 48!!

-C

[Centurion]

OK, thanks for the info, but that does not really answer my question.

If the 192 is so superior then where would one use the 96? I will be tracking mostly electronic music with lots of synths and drum samples, but also need to have the killer vox there and have spent big dollars on a U87 and a Manley tube pre. I ordered (2) 96's to get 16 analog IO, so should I now get a 192 for vocals and the Kurzweil grand piano sound? Just how and what is the realistic, audible difference? Or should I just forget the 96's and do only 192?

[Mike Brosco]

I went with the 192 and the A/D expansion I/O card. This gives me 16 analog inputs that sound unbelievable. You should check the prices of the 192 with expansion card vs. two 96 units. I haven’t heard the 96 but I can tell you the 192 sounds beautiful.

[Lee Blaske]

Search back through the archives. There was a lot written on this subject back when HD was first released. Essentially, the 192 and 96 are worlds apart in terms of design, components, construction and hence, sonics.

Lee Blaske

[Centurion]

Yes, you are right about (2) 96's versus (1) 192 and the A/D extension. That is exactly what I just did. So now I will be getting a 192 with the A/D extension. No worries now, this is as good as they have to offer...

Now the only question is did I do the right thing going with the Manley VoxBox versus the GT Vipre.

[nukmusic]

Centurion, I asked this question a while ago planning to upgrade from Digi001....Like you, most if my music is done on keyboards and drum machines. One of the Sweetwater techs answered my question from a test he did. He said that the 192 sounds better than the 96, and the 96 sounds better than the 888/24. But reaaly didn't say by how much.

Docta'J
www.nukmusic.com

[nukmusic]

Also some said that 192 sounds as good as or if not better than the AD8000. Then I asked about just adding an AD8000 to Digi-001.......and a whole new debate started....lol [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]