API A2D...demystified!

[BlueRadio]

From all of the threads that I've read, this is a really misunderstood piece of gear. I just got mine a week ago, and it is amazing. Facts:

1. It uses the same mic pres as the 3124, and they sound great. Normally bright and clean...but if you push em, that's where the thick, colored magic happens.

2. It will either accept a master, or "superclock" (any clock operating between 20-26Mhz), like an Apogee Big Ben, ect...

3. For those with no master clock...I currently have mine working as the master clock, via SPDIF to the MOTU 828mkII, and it is just fine. If you have multiple digita devices however, throw down for a master clock.

4. The 2:1 feature does not attenuate the output enough if you're REALLY driving the mic pres into the orange/beginning red...so if you are gung-ho analog drum slammin bastard, you'd better buy some in-line attenuators.

5. If you are working digital and you STILL love to overdrive the pres for kick/snare/ect, simply crank the mic pre to taste, and then start with the digital level knob ALL THE WAY COUNTER CLOCKWISE, and turn it up to a safe digital level in your DAW. This is NOT a gain knob, it is a variable resistor, a fader. Study your signal flow folks, it is not a level booster, it is simply opening the floodgates.

6. Last but not least, I put up a couple of KM184s on a 70' Gibson Hummingbird, through the A2D. Spaced pair action, 3 feet out, none of that colored-sounding XY crap. And...wow...hats off to API. Nice job.

[Zwinter]

Originally Posted by BlueRadio

2. It will either accept a master, or "superclock" (any clock operating between 20-26Mhz), like an Apogee Big Ben, ect...

I wanted to clarify the clocking capabilities of the A2D. It can, as the previous post said, be the master. If you the A2D to be the slave you need a superclock input between 20 to 26 MHz. What the previous post says that is inaccurate is that the Big Ben's can be the clock master. The Big Ben does not have a signal in the 20 to 26 MHz range. So, no, you can't use the Big Ben as a master.

[orksnork]

this is definitely on my short list of preamps to look at for purchase soon...

[C Heat]

Thanks BlueRadio. Nice of you to take the time to write that up.

I'm <this> close to picking up one of these.

[BlueRadio]

Originally Posted by Zwinter

The Big Ben does not have a signal in the 20 to 26 MHz range. So, no, you can't use the Big Ben as a master.

Correct you are. I just threw a name out there as an example without checking my stats. My bad, folks. But yeah, the mic pre is great fun. I haven't had a crack using it on drums yet...waiting for next session.

[BlueRadio]

Oh yeah one more thing...the converters...

Well, the converters are fine, just fine. Are they kicking my a$$ with awesome 2in tape, OMFG analog stereo panorama? Nah. But they sound very pretty. Pound for pound, this is a great unit.

Sometimes I think that people see a new product, and they literally think, "man, it would be pretty hip if I bashed this new piece of gear..." And I've seen a few posts bashing the converters, all while citing few reasons why they don't sound good.

I just can't help but think that it is getting knocked because API strayed from their retro black matte finish. If they would have come out with the API 3122 in all black with no A2D, I think that the response would be hugely different, while the price would probably be the same! Yeah, it literally "looks digital." But let's use our ears, not our eyes.

[Raggedy]

Originally Posted by BlueRadio

I put up a couple of KM184s on a 70' Gibson Hummingbird, through the A2D.

Damn, that's a BIG guitar... mine's only like 5'

[BlueRadio]

Yeah it is massive. I string it with piano wire and bridge cabling. Seriously.

[halfguard]

ive never seen people say the converters arent good on the a2d. how would you desribe them? im very close to buying the a2d........

[danasti]

Originally Posted by BlueRadio

Sometimes I think that people see a new product, and they literally think, "man, it would be pretty hip if I bashed this new piece of gear..." And I've seen a few posts bashing the converters, all while citing few reasons why they don't sound good.

I just can't help but think that it is getting knocked because API strayed from their retro black matte finish.

I haven't really seen this taking any bashing here or anywhere else for it's sonics. Neither for it's conversion, mic pres or feature set.

It's cool for what it is. It's great for people who don't have converters and pres. People who have really small portable setups. People who want to take a truely affordable step into "pro" quality from "prosumer".

It's not going to be much use to someone with a lunchbox full of API or APIish pres/eqs and a new pro level converter, IMO (unless they need a portable or a b room unit). But that certainly doesn't make it "lesser" than those solutions. Certainly, for some API owners, it looks to be a competitive stab at the Focusrite's, Mindprint's and the other prosumer stuff with built in A/D conversion. Good for API, good for the consumer and good for the listener because API sounds much better.

One of the main "complaints", and a totally legit point that's been made is, "what about these converters in 2 - 8 years?"... It's valid! And the response of, "think of them as rentals..." Use the analog outs when they become the next 16 bit. Or, "hey! You have a vintage converter!" It doesn't matter cause the pres are basically worth what you pay for it anyway.

[hurricaneE]

[QUOTE=danasti;994836]I haven't really seen this taking any bashing here or anywhere else for it's sonics. Neither for it's conversion, mic pres or feature set.
QUOTE]

It seems to me they keep getting damned with faint praise: "Not bad," "pretty good," "A bargain." No one ever says "these converters are really good!"; there's alway some kind of qualifiation.

In my case, they were clearly better (more accurate and more robust) than the Lavry Blues I auditioned. Given the extent to which Lavrys are beloved around here, I'm surprised there aren't more people going on about HOW GOOD the A2Ds converters are (we know the pres are good).

Maybe other users would disagree with me about how good the converters are, but the comments are all so vague, I don't really know. Seems like folks are hedging their bets. -E

[BlueRadio]

Originally Posted by danasti

One of the main "complaints", and a totally legit point that's been made is, "what about these converters in 2 - 8 years?"... It's valid! And the response of, "think of them as rentals..." Use the analog outs when they become the next 16 bit. Or, "hey! You have a vintage converter!" It doesn't matter cause the pres are basically worth what you pay for it anyway.

Yes, it is true that the converters will be outdated...and I also agree; the pres are definetly worth the money. It is just funny to me that I keep seeing posts like "well are the pres true to the 3124? uh oh it has built in converters...that makes me nervous about the mic pres..." All of the literature on this item clearly states, they are 312 mic pres, the same as the 3124. So yeah I totally agree with what you have said. I feel like saying "helllllllooooo you're getting two 312 mic pres + a power supply/rack for 1700. And oh yeah some converters that are pretty cool, as a bonus."

[BlueRadio]

Originally Posted by hurricaneE

It seems to me they keep getting damned with faint praise: "Not bad," "pretty good," "A bargain." No one ever says "these converters are really good!"; there's alway some kind of qualifiation.

This statement really nails it, much better than I was saying it. I feel like people see a silver, digital looking box with some converters, they immediately forget about the mic pres.

I really do think that from a marketing (NOT engineering) standpoint, API really screwed up on the look of this thing. I'll be the first to say it, I almost wanted to get a 3124 instead because that black matte finish is just SEXY. But it wasn't in my budget, and my common sense got the better of me, thankfully. I love this thing.

[orksnork]

the 3124 always looked like a clutter piece in all the pictures...never actually seen one though....

too many knobs too close together

[hurricaneE]

Originally Posted by BlueRadio

This statement really nails it, much better than I was saying it. I feel like people see a silver, digital looking box with some converters, they immediately forget about the mic pres.

Gaah! FORGET the pres; the CONVERTERS ARE REALLY GOOD!








And the pres are great, too, duh. -E

[C Heat]

Originally Posted by BlueRadio

I really do think that from a marketing (NOT engineering) standpoint, API really screwed up on the look of this thing. I'll be the first to say it, I almost wanted to get a 3124 instead because that black matte finish is just SEXY. But it wasn't in my budget, and my common sense got the better of me, thankfully. I love this thing.

I for one actually REALLY like the look of the A2D. I think IT'S sexy.

Maybe not 'vintage' or 'old school' or 'retro', but that's not important to me. I don't have 'clients' who'll actually see my gear anyway

[wallace]

Originally Posted by BlueRadio

6. Last but not least, I put up a couple of KM184s on a 70' Gibson Hummingbird, through the A2D. Spaced pair action, 3 feet out, none of that colored-sounding XY crap. And...wow...hats off to API. Nice job.

Do you mind posting an MP3 of your recording?

[BlueRadio]

I wouldn't have minded at all, had I not deleted the recording already. It was just a mess around session. Don't worry though, I'll be recording more soon, and I'll be glad to post

-Jon

[cdog]

The API A2D is GREAT.

Everything about it.... the pres.... the converters.... the price.

Its a no brainer. A monkey could buy this.

[robot gigante]

I wouldn't worry about the converters being obsolete in 2-8 years. There are plenty of older designs that are great and still in use.

If it sounds good, it is good, bottom line.

[wallace]

Do you have to use the converter? This seems a little annoying to me, like they threw something in just move the unit into a higher price point. Can you bypass the converter or use other converters, or other preamps for that matter with the converter? That doesn't really help me in terms of creating a unified sound on a project if I'm using a different preamp.

I'm looking forward to your MP3 though.

[hurricaneE]

Originally Posted by wallace

Do you have to use the converter? Can you bypass the converter or use other converters, or other preamps for that matter with the converter? .

1) No.

2a) Yes.

2b) Yes. -E

[orksnork]

if you look around at various prices....the next price point you are talking about is barely there....

if you consider the price of the 3124....cut that in half....take away some of what could be considered a quantity discount on buying 4 pres instead of 2....the converters pricing is quite fair

and as far as them becoming obsolete....so will all your converters, with that sort of thinking...


as mentioned...this is being made as sort of a double-punch for those trying to bump up their shit....great preamps and converters for those who probably have neither...

[zakco]

Originally Posted by hurricaneE

In my case, they were clearly better (more accurate and more robust) than the Lavry Blues I auditioned.

Could you elaborate a bit? I have no reason to doubt the A2D converters but I'm curious how you define "accurate and robust"....?


-Z-

[hurricaneE]

Originally Posted by zakco

Could you elaborate a bit? I have no reason to doubt the A2D converters but I'm curious how you define "accurate and robust"....?


-Z-

I define accurate as "closer to the source."

By "robust" I meant something more intangible... exciting, I guess, and, more tangibly, punchy. I tend to think of API as punchy, so that might've been a kind of coloration, but, if it was, it wasn't (noticeably) tonal. -E

[zakco]

Your definition of "accurate" I agree with. How one comes to that conclusion (comparing to the source) is a bit difficult to quantify and requires a fairly scientific approach to prove or disprove. I'll assume you were careful in your methodolgy that led you to that conclusion.

The "robust" part I'm questioning though....the only way an "accurate" converter could be punchier than another is if the other was seriously lacking in some way. Otherwise the "punchy" one wouldn't be "accurate" it would be adding something.

I'm not sure I'm actually making sense here....maybe I'll quit while I'm ahead.
Does anyone understand what I'm getting at?

-Z-

[hurricaneE]

Originally Posted by zakco

Your definition of "accurate" I agree with. How one comes to that conclusion (comparing to the source) is a bit difficult to quantify and requires a fairly scientific approach to prove or disprove. I'll assume you were careful in your methodolgy that led you to that conclusion.

The "robust" part I'm questioning though....the only way an "accurate" converter could be punchier than another is if the other was seriously lacking in some way. Otherwise the "punchy" one wouldn't be "accurate" it would be adding something.

I'm not sure I'm actually making sense here....maybe I'll quit while I'm ahead.
Does anyone understand what I'm getting at?

-Z-

I'm not sure what you mean by a "scientific approach." My process was to

1) Listen (repeatedly) to mixes I'd made with the Lavry and A2D and then

2) Compare them to the same mix coming off the tape (and to each other). The converter that produce the mix that sounded MOST like the tape was the one I deemed the most accurate.

Notice I applied no math or science in my process.

I'm not saying the API is totally uncolored; I'm just saying it clearly did a BETTER job of capturing the tape, and I can't identify where it's coloring things. I can say it doesn't sound just like tape, but the difference is ephemeral (but real), hard to quantify, while the differences in the Lavry were quantifiable (added mids and low-mids, attentuated highs).

Because the A2D captured more of the highs, and because the mids and low-mids weren't accentuated, as was the case with the Lavry, perhaps that broader tonal range makes it sound more robust (more dynamic?) to my ears. Maybe it's doing something else (additive), but, if it is, I can't say what it is.

AH! I should make it clear, the A2D was more robust than the Lavry, not the mix itself. And now I'm thinking "robust" really should be changed to "dynamic," as the Lavry had a very rich sound, due in part to the added mids, but also due to a nice depth it had. -E

[orksnork]

actually i've read in other threads that the converters on the a2d QUITE have their own flavor...

*plays devil's advocate*

[hurricaneE]

Originally Posted by orksnork

actually i've read in other threads that the converters on the a2d QUITE have their own flavor...

*plays devil's advocate*

I've also read that they're just "pretty good"; and those comments, it seems, are inaccuaret, too Point me in the direction of those threads, would ya? I haven't seen 'em. Comments might help me hear verbalize what I'm hearing. Or not.

Again, I'm not saying the A2Ds are as good as tape, or even that they're the best there is (at least in their class). What I AM saying is that, to my ears, they're more accurate than the converters the perceived wisdom says IS best in class, and, given that, I think they aren't getting the respect I think they deserve (the damned-with-faint-praise comments I mentioned above).-E

[Ivandovich]

Can I use the A2D with a mbox2, through spdif? That would mean bypassing the Mbox converters?
That would also give me 4 simultaneous inputs, two a2d and two from the mbox?
Please inform me if I got this wrong.

Thanks