![]() | All Advertisers |
| |||||||
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| UAD-"What Latency?" + other PT-LE latency results | BradG | So much gear, so little time! | 14 | 29th March 2006 01:52 AM |
| Apogee Mini-Me -> Latency Problems!! | bernband | Music computers | 7 | 5th March 2006 03:09 PM |
| Apogee Mini-Me -> Latency Problems!! | bernband | Low End Theory | 2 | 5th March 2006 02:04 AM |
| Digi 002 getting around recording latency... | angopop | Low End Theory | 5 | 1st June 2005 03:48 AM |
| Latency in Digi 002R as compared to MBOX | littledoodler | Music computers | 8 | 29th March 2004 09:55 PM |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 2,366
| Digi 192 Latency vs. Apogee Latency Both with HD I have read in parts of other threads that the 192 I/O works seamlessly with HD as you would expect, that you will get the best latency performance. In some of those threads I have read that when using Apogee Converters with the Apogee HD Card you will get more latency when recording. Can you shed some light on the performance perspective alone? I believe the general consensus is that Apogee and other like them are better than the 192 in sound quality. Not really wanting to debate that in this thread. I am looking at strictly performance/reliability. |
| | |
| | #2 |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 2,393
| The Apogees and many of the other 3rd party converters that have PT|HD i/o option cards do not share the same latency as the Digi 192 i/o. Therefore you have to manually compensate within PT in order to utilize outboard gear as i/o inserts in your mix. The Lynx Aurora however is identical to the Digi 192 i/o in terms of latency and operation. You get 16x16 analog and 16x16 digital via AES/EBU simultaneously at sample rates up to 192khz in a 1U rack configuration. The units sound great and are as close to the sound of a Prism ADA-8 as I've ever heard (0 coloration in sound). I have mine clocked to a Big Ben to accommodate multiple digital pieces in the studio (I like to keep everything locked to the same clock).
__________________ Joshua Aaron President/Chief Engineer AudioLot/AudioLot Studios High End Pro Audio Sales & Consulting Recording/Music Production/Mixing http://www.audiolot.com |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Gear maniac Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 174
| Anybody have any specs on this? How much more latent is the Apogee in this situation? Ben
__________________ http://www.myspace.com/disguisethesky or http://studilaroche.podomatic.com also, "Is it because record company exec's are pedophiles? Who knows." -triez |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 2,393
| It's actually the opposite. The Apogee is a much faster converter than the 192. The Lynx is as well but with the LT-HD card the converter speed is slowed down to exactly match the timing of the 192. Apogee has a tool on their site called AD-CALC. You can use that to gauge exactly what you'd need to do in order to have PT in perfect time when using i/o inserts.
__________________ Joshua Aaron President/Chief Engineer AudioLot/AudioLot Studios High End Pro Audio Sales & Consulting Recording/Music Production/Mixing http://www.audiolot.com |
| | |
| | #5 | |
| Lives for gear Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Norway
Posts: 2,848
| Quote:
ruudman | |
| | |
| | #6 |
| Gear addict Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: LA
Posts: 474
| what Joshua said....
__________________ Sean Ingoldsby Real Time Studios Ojai, California http://homepage.mac.com/seaningo/ "Dung beetles with ostentatious horns tend to have smaller testicles" source unknown, as read in Harpers Findings, Dec. 2006. |
| | |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
| |