A2D Conversion Quality still worth it?

[Andrew Kinsey]

Personally i prefer to use a dedicated AD converter than run into the AD of a preamp even if that pre is a API or a Neve.

Dedicated converters will usually sound better because they are designed specifically for performance all the way throughout the chain from the analog section, to the choice of converter chip, and clock design.

There are a few exceptions like the Weis ADC, and Lavry AD11 which have intergrated mic pre's but are primarily designed as converters. Even with these units however id still prefer to run API or Neve pre's and just use them for the conversion.

[musicl]

It's a digital out, i would have thought it wouldn't have made a difference.. For what it's worth, it's a great sounding conversion and all neatly integrated into one box.

[paul999]

Supposedly the API's test out as ruler flat frequency wise. They sound great to me. Definitely high end.

[API Sez...]

Originally Posted by Andrew Kinsey

......they are designed specifically for performance all the way throughout the chain from the analog section, to the choice of converter chip, and clock design.

EXACTLY the design criteria for the A2D!
The design of the converter section was specifically engineered to match the awesome output of the 312 mic pre. We used the best converter technology we could find (after consulting a few bitheads!).

[captainj]

I recently sold my Lavry AD10 and bought the API A2D since I needed the API pres. I was expecting a slight drop in conversion quality but to my surprise I like the API conversion just as much as the Lavry. Really happy with the A2D!
Both the Lavry and API are a big step up in quality from the converters in the RME Multiface II

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by SabreChris

The dynamic range of the A2D adc converters is 120db, which is equivalent to a Mytek stereo96. This is better than my ufx which is 115.

The newer mytek stereo192 is 123.

Is the a2d still worthwhile for its adc, or would the money be better spent on the mytek 192 and a couple channels of classic api? I havent heard the a2d and wonder how much the conversion quality comes into play concerning its well regarded sound.

Sound is much more important than specs. You seem to like specs!

I couldn't tell you the dynamic range of any AD/DA I've ever worked with. I could tell you which I preferred though, which were usable, which were great and which I'd rather avoid.

[SabreChris]

Specs are a pretty good indication of the generation of chip used. Based on specs and year of release, it would seem the A2D is on par with a Mytek Stereo96, but the reason I asked is because there is more than specs going on. The A2d might be better on paper but only sound as good as (say) my ufx.

If this was only about specs than I wouldn't need to post. I'm not sure why you feel a need to take a swipe at me. I'm trying to get a feel for how a unit that is approaching ten years old stands up to something like a UFX or Apollo. The plan would be to use it for its conversion as well as its pres.

[captainj]

Is the A2D nearly 10 years old? I thought it came out in 2007?

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by SabreChris

Specs are a pretty good indication of the generation of chip used. Based on specs and year of release, it would seem the A2D is on par with a Mytek Stereo96, but the reason I asked is because there is more than specs going on. The A2d might be better on paper but only sound as good as (say) my ufx.

If this was only about specs than I wouldn't need to post. I'm not sure why you feel a need to take a swipe at me. I'm trying to get a feel for how a unit that is approaching ten years old stands up to something like a UFX or Apollo. The plan would be to use it for its conversion as well as its pres.

I'm not taking a swipe at you. I was just responding to the situation where if someone disagrees with you based on how they think a unit sounds, you respond with the spec sheet. Specs are only a small part of the story. You could have a converter using a particular chip, but the analogue stage (NOT the preamp in this case, the analogue stage of the AD) might be poorly designed, hence the end result is poor, even though the specs show the chip has a particular dynamic range.

Hence the reasons arguing why a particular budget converter might be as good as a different not-so-cheap model because it's using the same conversion chip might be misleading. That's all I'm saying. I'd rather have a 15yo Apogee AD8000 than a modern Behringer or Presonus. I don't care what the specs are - they sound better to me!