Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[smj]

Just curious if a lynx aurora clocked with a Big Ben could hang with the AD-16x.

Obviously, the 16x is tops for AD conversion.  The thing is, I don't necessarily need 16 channels of DA-16x... more like two as I really only intend to mix itb.

Hence my question.  Would the difference between these two setups be THAT noticable?

Sean Meredith-Jones
http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

[PookyNMR]

I wouldn't say that the AD16x is tops for conversion, but it's very respectable.

If you need a clock to clean up your converter, then the answer should be obvious.  Buy the better converter rather than the converter that needs a fix to get it in the ballpark.

Just because you get the AD16x does not mean that you need the DA16x.  If you only need 2 channels of DA, you could do something like the Lavry Black or other 2 channel unit.  Your interface should have no trouble working with two different models.

[mixwell]

There are very noticeable differences between them. They are both excellent converters, and the difference is Left and Right, not "better" or "worse" so I think its really worth a shot to try both with your music and the rest of your equipment so as to make an educated choice about the purchase. The Lynx has no calibration setting and comes out of the box calibrated to -16DBFS, so any tests against the AD16x MUST BE MATCHED to -16DBFS, OR YOU WILL BE DOING A TEST UNDER FALSE PRETENSES!!!!

It erks the hell out of me when I hear, "the Lynx was fuller and had more frequency range" and "The AD16x sounded Pinched next to the Lynx" these are examples of people not talking into consideration that the Apogee comes STOCK set to -18DBFS [MORE HEADROOM LESS INPUT GAIN] so if you cannot properly cal these things to your monitor controller, its all a wash in my opinion, as calibration has everything to do with tone, dynamic range and the overall response.

The Big Ben brings the Lynx slightly closer to the sound of an AD16x, as it brings up the bottom a bit and does seem to give you some frequency headroom for transients, but the Big Ben does not substitute and/or replace the power supply and analog circuitry in "X" converter. To my ears the BB adds +/- 3dB of harmonic content to the Lynx's ruler flat response, so it does change the response with "synchrolock" OFF. Your better off just getting the AD16x if you like the sound of the AD16x, and if 16 AD/DA seems to fit your studio better, the Lynx Aurora is a deal thats hard to pass up given its performance.

If you only need 2-channels of DA for monitoring, there are plenty of them out there, I would recommend the Apogee Mini-DAC as a "turn-key" solution with an AD16x.

peace

[smj]

mixwell wrote on Mon, 25 August 2008 20:46

There are very noticeable differences between them. They are both excellent converters, and the difference is Left and Right, not "better" or "worse" so I think its really worth a shot to try both with your music and the rest of your equipment so as to make an educated choice about the purchase. The Lynx has no calibration setting and comes out of the box calibrated to -16DBFS, so any tests against the AD16x MUST BE MATCHED to -16DBFS, OR YOU WILL BE DOING A TEST UNDER FALSE PRETENSES!!!! It erks the hell out of me when I hear, "the Lynx was fuller and had more frequency range" and "The AD16x sounded Pinched next to the Lynx" these are examples of people not talking into consideration that the Apogee comes STOCK set to -18DBFS [MORE HEADROOM LESS INPUT GAIN] so if you cannot properly cal these things to your monitor controller, its all a wash in my opinion, as calibration has everything to do with tone, dynamic range and the overall response. The Big Ben brings the Lynx slightly closer to the sound of an AD16x, as it brings up the bottom a bit and does seem to give you some frequency headroom for transients, but the Big Ben does not substitute and/or replace the power supply and analog circuitry in "X" converter. To my ears the BB adds +/- 3dB of harmonic content to the Lynx's ruler flat response, so it does change the response with "synchrolock" OFF. Your better off just getting the AD16x if you like the sound of the AD16x, and if 16 AD/DA seems to fit your studio better, the Lynx Aurora is a deal thats hard to pass up given its performance. If you only need 2-channels of DA for monitoring, there are plenty of them out there, I would recommend the Apogee Mini-DAC as a "turn-key" solution with an AD16x. peace

Thanks a bunch Adam... that's very helpful.  I think I'll just save a bit more and get the AD-16x.

That said, if I'm running Nuendo and mixing itb, my concern is latency in tracking.  Several people have mentioned to use direct monitoring.... though that was when I was considering the Lynx Aurora.

With the setup of the AD-16x, Rosetta 200, and FW interface... would the latency be low enough in tracking to negate the need for direct monitoring?

Sean Meredith-Jones
http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

[PookyNMR]

smj wrote on Tue, 26 August 2008 10:57

With the setup of the AD-16x, Rosetta 200, and FW interface... would the latency be low enough in tracking to negate the need for direct monitoring?

The latency amount depends completely on the quality of the drivers for the aforementioned interface.

Many interfaces now offer their own type of direct monitoring through a software controlled console panel.  IMHO, this is a far superior option than trying to do low latency monitoring through a DAW host.

[smj]

PookyNMR wrote on Tue, 26 August 2008 18:24

The latency amount depends completely on the quality of the drivers for the aforementioned interface. Many interfaces now offer their own type of direct monitoring through a software controlled console panel.  IMHO, this is a far superior option than trying to do low latency monitoring through a DAW host.

Ok this is the part I don't understand.... as this new system is in it's conception stage as I'm slowly changing over from an HDR setup.

What exactly do you mean by "drivers"... is that hardware you install in the computer or the I/O?  Can you suggest a good driver?

Sean Meredith-Jones
http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

[PookyNMR]

smj wrote on Tue, 26 August 2008 14:43

PookyNMR wrote on Tue, 26 August 2008 18:24 The latency amount depends completely on the quality of the drivers for the aforementioned interface. Many interfaces now offer their own type of direct monitoring through a software controlled console panel.  IMHO, this is a far superior option than trying to do low latency monitoring through a DAW host. Ok this is the part I don't understand.... as this new system is in it's conception stage as I'm slowly changing over from an HDR setup. What exactly do you mean by "drivers"... is that hardware you install in the computer or the I/O?  Can you suggest a good driver?

For a hardware audio interface that gets the digital signal into your computer, the manufacturer of that hardware needs to write a piece of software called a driver.  The 'driver' software tells the computer what the interface is and how to work with it, allowing the computer and its programs (Pro Tools, Logic, Nuendo, etc) to know how to access the interface device and the audio it's sending and receiving.

So, if the manufacturer of whatever audio interface you chose to use has done a good job of writing the driver software, you should get stable performance at low latencies.  If not, you will get poor performance at low latencies.

Does that explanation help?

[smj]

PookyNMR wrote on Wed, 27 August 2008 00:25

For a hardware audio interface that gets the digital signal into your computer, the manufacturer of that hardware needs to write a piece of software called a driver.  The 'driver' software tells the computer what the interface is and how to work with it, allowing the computer and its programs (Pro Tools, Logic, Nuendo, etc) to know how to access the interface device and the audio it's sending and receiving. So, if the manufacturer of whatever audio interface you chose to use has done a good job of writing the driver software, you should get stable performance at low latencies.  If not, you will get poor performance at low latencies. Does that explanation help?

Yes it does... thank you.  Some other questions if I may:

1) I think I could assume Apogee has it together in terms of the driver/latency relationship.  Supposing we used the firewire cards for both units, can you comment on the the Lynx vs Apogee Ad-16x from a latency standpoint?

2) The lynx unit is advertised to have it's own direct monitoring ability via it's software controlled console panel... I don't see anything written about the Apogee AD-16x... does it have that feature as well?

3) Is the firewire option adequate as far as an interface goes... or is there a better option?  I will be using a PC w/Nuendo.

Ok I'm done!  Thanks again!

Sean Meredith-Jones
http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

[PookyNMR]

smj wrote on Wed, 27 August 2008 08:57

Yes it does... thank you.  Some other questions if I may: 1) I think I could assume Apogee has it together in terms of the driver/latency relationship.  Supposing we used the firewire cards for both units, can you comment on the the Lynx vs Apogee Ad-16x from a latency standpoint? 2) The lynx unit is advertised to have it's own direct monitoring ability via it's software controlled console panel... I don't see anything written about the Apogee AD-16x... does it have that feature as well? 3) Is the firewire option adequate as far as an interface goes... or is there a better option?  I will be using a PC w/Nuendo. Ok I'm done!  Thanks again!

I have not used either the Apogee FW card option and only have minutes of demo experience with the Lynx.  But I know a number of folks who have both and have commented on each.  

1)  I would search any number of forums out there for what people are saying about Apogee drivers.  On various forums, I've been seeing a lot of negative comments about / problems with their drivers.  They're new at the interface game, so I suspect they thought it would be easier to code drivers than it is.  My personal opinion there is be cautious and my advice is research the drivers and your computer combo for any known problems and fixes.  

One major problem is that they rely on Apple's own FW drivers for audio rather than coding their own.  Other mfgrs have learned that you need to write your own core level FW drivers to get proper performance.  So the fact that they are still using the Apple drivers puts up a red flag for me.

2)  I have seen the Lynx control pannel and it is indeed very functional for direct monitoring.  I've only seen the Apogee FW card option setup in their advertisements.  But based on what I've seen there it does seem to have a console to do direct mixes, it just looks a little limited.  Mind you have I have the Metric Halo console application that I'm comparing everything to...

3)  The FW option could be adequate, depending on your needs.  Other popular options are the RME and Lynx interfaces where you can connect your converters via AES and use their more substantial software control panels and drivers which have a much more solid reputation.

[mixwell]

Ok, here's the deal;

The Lynx [when outfitted with the LT-FW card] will give you a "control panel" to allow the "hardware monitoring" capability, which basically spits the inputs [AD] right back through the outputs [DA] pre-software, as the software is really what induces the latency of Round Trip Audio [AD/DA through the input channel]

FW is an extremely limited format, as there is something like 4 ms of latency inherent in the technology, but it is workable, if not, I wouldn't have it in my project studio. Sure there is some residual latency with converter, {both Apogee and Lynx are FAST converters in this regard] due to DSP Nyquist filtering and such, but its SO residual you might never experience it.

The Driver, the Software, and the Computers speed, all deal with this issue of latency, and its all different, so its not easy to find the perfect marriage for Software and Hardware with you're chosen setup, but companies are trying: EXAMPLE, Apple/Logic and Apogee Symphony. Symphony is optimized for Logic so as to get the LOWEST THROUGHPUT latency available using PCI-e [which is DOUBLE the bandwidth of PCI and almost QUADRUPLE the amount of bandwidth in FW!] I still think either Lynx System or Apogee X-FW system is a professional means that will do the same thing respectively [with Hardware monitoring]

The Apogee PC FW drivers are horrid [unless you have the right FW chip set noted in the manual], I recommend against going Apogee FW [unless your on a Mac because the drivers actually work when you need them to]

With the FW system and AD16x, you'd only get 8 channels of hardware monitoring as the Apogee "fire-mix" software is only capable of monitoring 8 input channels, [kind of built for the Rosetta 800] but you can create as many sub mixes of those eight channels to any pair of 8 channels. Kind of limited but works never the less.

I think the BEST option with a PC/Nuendo rig would be the Lynx AES16 PCI card with either Lynx Aurora 16 and two Lynx 1605 AES cables, or the AD/DA16x system with Lynx 1603 cables. You'll be able to do hardware monitoring with the AES16 as well.

[brett]

smj wrote on Wed, 27 August 2008 15:57

Yes it does... thank you.  Some other questions if I may: 1) I think I could assume Apogee has it together in terms of the driver/latency relationship.  Supposing we used the firewire cards for both units, can you comment on the the Lynx vs Apogee Ad-16x from a latency standpoint? 2) The lynx unit is advertised to have it's own direct monitoring ability via it's software controlled console panel... I don't see anything written about the Apogee AD-16x... does it have that feature as well? 3) Is the firewire option adequate as far as an interface goes... or is there a better option?  I will be using a PC w/Nuendo. Ok I'm done!  Thanks again! Sean Meredith-Jones http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

1&3) apogee's firewire is not a good low latency solution. even the tecs at apogee steared me clear of it when asked this question. go with symphony. my latency with the symphony card is so low you don't notice it. i am using a mac pro 8 core with 8 gb ram logic 8. the buffers are at the lowest setting. no issues at all running complex mixes. there is a low latency button that turns off plug0in delay compensation and playing virtual instruments including triggering drums is nearly instant.


2) yes apogee comes with a hardware mixer built in and software interface to control it for true zero latency input monitoring. meastro...I only use it when tracking vocals.

[smj]

mixwell wrote on Wed, 27 August 2008 19:16

Ok, here's the deal; The Lynx [when outfitted with the LT-FW card] will give you a "control panel" to allow the "hardware monitoring" capability, which basically spits the inputs [AD] right back through the outputs [DA] pre-software, as the software is really what induces the latency of Round Trip Audio [AD/DA through the input channel] FW is an extremely limited format, as there is something like 4 ms of latency inherent in the technology, but it is workable, if not, I wouldn't have it in my project studio. Sure there is some residual latency with converter, {both Apogee and Lynx are FAST converters in this regard] due to DSP Nyquist filtering and such, but its SO residual you might never experience it. The Driver, the Software, and the Computers speed, all deal with this issue of latency, and its all different, so its not easy to find the perfect marriage for Software and Hardware with you're chosen setup, but companies are trying: EXAMPLE, Apple/Logic and Apogee Symphony. Symphony is optimized for Logic so as to get the LOWEST THROUGHPUT latency available using PCI-e [which is DOUBLE the bandwidth of PCI and almost QUADRUPLE the amount of bandwidth in FW!] I still think either Lynx System or Apogee X-FW system is a professional means that will do the same thing respectively [with Hardware monitoring] The Apogee PC FW drivers are horrid [unless you have the right FW chip set noted in the manual], I recommend against going Apogee FW [unless your on a Mac because the drivers actually work when you need them to] With the FW system and AD16x, you'd only get 8 channels of hardware monitoring as the Apogee "fire-mix" software is only capable of monitoring 8 input channels, [kind of built for the Rosetta 800] but you can create as many sub mixes of those eight channels to any pair of 8 channels. Kind of limited but works never the less. I think the BEST option with a PC/Nuendo rig would be the Lynx AES16 PCI card with either Lynx Aurora 16 and two Lynx 1605 AES cables, or the AD/DA16x system with Lynx 1603 cables. You'll be able to do hardware monitoring with the AES16 as well.

Thanks again Adam for a very informative response.

To be honest, I don't know what 4ms of latency feels like.  With my Tascam MX-2424... I don't notice any latency issues nor do my band mates.  I can't say for sure whether a FW setup causing 4ms of latency would be taking a step back or forward compared to my current rig.

Still, I might go with the Lynx AES card anyway.

That said... my direct monitoring path would then be:

A/D converters ---> AES PCI card ----> D/A converters????

Ok... one other (stupid) question.  Can the analog outs of whatever D/A converter I choose be plugged directly into my monitors... or do they have to hit my console first?

Sean Meredith-Jones
http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

[smj]

brett wrote on Thu, 28 August 2008 18:59

[ 1&3) apogee's firewire is not a good low latency solution. even the tecs at apogee steared me clear of it when asked this question. go with symphony. my latency with the symphony card is so low you don't notice it. i am using a mac pro 8 core with 8 gb ram logic 8. the buffers are at the lowest setting. no issues at all running complex mixes. there is a low latency button that turns off plug0in delay compensation and playing virtual instruments including triggering drums is nearly instant. 2) yes apogee comes with a hardware mixer built in and software interface to control it for true zero latency input monitoring. meastro...I only use it when tracking vocals.

Thanks Brett,

Being a future PC/Nuendo user, it doesn't appear I can use the Apogee Symphony stuff as there doesn't seem to be any mention of PC/windows support on their site... is that correct?

Sean Meredith-Jones
http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

[brett]

smj wrote on Sat, 30 August 2008 08:33

brett wrote on Thu, 28 August 2008 18:59 [ 1&3) apogee's firewire is not a good low latency solution. even the tecs at apogee steared me clear of it when asked this question. go with symphony. my latency with the symphony card is so low you don't notice it. i am using a mac pro 8 core with 8 gb ram logic 8. the buffers are at the lowest setting. no issues at all running complex mixes. there is a low latency button that turns off plug0in delay compensation and playing virtual instruments including triggering drums is nearly instant. 2) yes apogee comes with a hardware mixer built in and software interface to control it for true zero latency input monitoring. meastro...I only use it when tracking vocals. Thanks Brett, Being a future PC/Nuendo user, it doesn't appear I can use the Apogee Symphony stuff as there doesn't seem to be any mention of PC/windows support on their site... is that correct? Sean Meredith-Jones http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

unfortunately no, there is an appogee/logic partnersip with apple going on there. your best option would probably be a lynx specific card with an AES to the apogee stuff. RME is also a good option for pc although it has been a long time since I used a pc for studio work.

[mixwell]

smj wrote on Sat, 30 August 2008 02:26

mixwell wrote on Wed, 27 August 2008 19:16 Ok, here's the deal; The Lynx [when outfitted with the LT-FW card] will give you a "control panel" to allow the "hardware monitoring" capability, which basically spits the inputs [AD] right back through the outputs [DA] pre-software, as the software is really what induces the latency of Round Trip Audio [AD/DA through the input channel] FW is an extremely limited format, as there is something like 4 ms of latency inherent in the technology, but it is workable, if not, I wouldn't have it in my project studio. Sure there is some residual latency with converter, {both Apogee and Lynx are FAST converters in this regard] due to DSP Nyquist filtering and such, but its SO residual you might never experience it. The Driver, the Software, and the Computers speed, all deal with this issue of latency, and its all different, so its not easy to find the perfect marriage for Software and Hardware with you're chosen setup, but companies are trying: EXAMPLE, Apple/Logic and Apogee Symphony. Symphony is optimized for Logic so as to get the LOWEST THROUGHPUT latency available using PCI-e [which is DOUBLE the bandwidth of PCI and almost QUADRUPLE the amount of bandwidth in FW!] I still think either Lynx System or Apogee X-FW system is a professional means that will do the same thing respectively [with Hardware monitoring] The Apogee PC FW drivers are horrid [unless you have the right FW chip set noted in the manual], I recommend against going Apogee FW [unless your on a Mac because the drivers actually work when you need them to] With the FW system and AD16x, you'd only get 8 channels of hardware monitoring as the Apogee "fire-mix" software is only capable of monitoring 8 input channels, [kind of built for the Rosetta 800] but you can create as many sub mixes of those eight channels to any pair of 8 channels. Kind of limited but works never the less. I think the BEST option with a PC/Nuendo rig would be the Lynx AES16 PCI card with either Lynx Aurora 16 and two Lynx 1605 AES cables, or the AD/DA16x system with Lynx 1603 cables. You'll be able to do hardware monitoring with the AES16 as well. Thanks again Adam for a very informative response. To be honest, I don't know what 4ms of latency feels like.  With my Tascam MX-2424... I don't notice any latency issues nor do my band mates.  I can't say for sure whether a FW setup causing 4ms of latency would be taking a step back or forward compared to my current rig. Still, I might go with the Lynx AES card anyway. That said... my direct monitoring path would then be: A/D converters ---> AES PCI card ----> D/A converters???? Ok... one other (stupid) question.  Can the analog outs of whatever D/A converter I choose be plugged directly into my monitors... or do they have to hit my console first? Sean Meredith-Jones http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

You can patch two channels of DAC right into your powered monitors no problem.

Just remember any attenuation in your listening environment, must happen ITB, Which....is not the best way to work [YMMV] So I think patching the stereo outputs of your ITB mix to two channels on the console, might work for you....There is no wrong answer here, so depending on how you like to work, and what your console can do and its master section and AUX return compatibility, this patch can be made any which way the wind blows....

We have an ACA stereo input on our patch bay, [Active Combining Amplifier] which is another way into the 2-buss summing amplifier in our console. So lets say I have two channels of Stereo program material from the computer I want to play along side...say: the JH-24 tape machine patched into the 24 channels on the console. I now have to use the ITB fader to control signal strength, whereas patching into the input channels gives me another way to boost or lower the signal, post converter.

With that said, it would seem a monitor controller with an on-board DAC right before the speaker attenuation makes the most sense if your going with the AD16x, if you plan on mixing to a stereo pair ITB. I myself find using two channels of DAC to record and mix my projects unsatisfactory. If you have a console, perhaps you should use the console, instead of the computer. Just use the computer like a tape machine.  

For 2-channels of DAC, you could also go with the Mini-DAC and attach it to the Lynx AES16 which is going to give you 16 Digital outputs, that you have yet to decide on, so you could patch AES signal to the Mini DAC there and you would do that with the multi-way AES cable for the AES16 on top of the 1603 Lynx AES cable for the AD16x.

Side note: Symphony is Mac Only, Optimized for Logic. And I disagree that the Apogee zero latency software is not useful and I would still recommend it..I think its just that the drivers suck for PC with Apogee fire wire card....If you have the wrong chipset that is......On a Mac its the beez kneez.....I'm using it right now to listen to my GTR going direct without opening Logic. As well, with the AES16 Hardware monitoring, you can sub mix virtually ANYTHING! It will do the same: SPIT inputs right back out the DA, pre software.