The Battle Of The Interface

[leadbelly]

I am also looking to spend 2000 on the interface side of this...

[fastlanestoner]

UAD Apollo all day! Apogee has decent conversion but I think it's kind of pathetic they've just come out with a 4 channel interface

[RightOnRome]

Originally Posted by leadbelly

I am looking to get a studio setup to replace what I have now. I am basically looking to get a new computer and interface and start a production studio. I will be doing a good amount of live recording as well as using virtual instruments. My track count can get up to about 60-70 tracks, but never track with plugins activated, except for an occasional reverb on a vocal.

I've been battling between the Universal Audio Apollo, Apogee Quartet, and some RME stuff, but am totally unsure as to what route to go.

I am going to be using Pro Tools 9 on a brand new computer. Besides the interface, any reccomendations on a computer? Do you thikn getting a new iMac and mazing out the RAM will be sufficient or should i go with a mac pro? I want to avoid latency and crashing as much as possible!!

Thanks
L

apollo ...do some reading ..there are tons of threads on it

[swafford]

Take a look at the Metric Halo interfaces.

[leadbelly]

Yeah the Apollo seems like a really good bang for the buck.

Couple of questions about it...

1. Does it integrate with a new mac and pro tools 9 or 10

2. Is it worth getting the quad?

3. How is the latency on these?

4. Do you think a supped up iMac will do the trick with this, or definitely go with a mac pro?

thanks guys!

[psycho_monkey]

Originally Posted by GaryWeinrib

Are there any interfaces worthy for a production facility? not sure
I think you need standalone converters for high end production.
At least all the production houses I've recorded at have RADAR converters
Prism, Lavry and so on

Avid IO is an "interface" rather than a pure converter. Quite a lot of pro studios have 192s. Ever used a Prism Orpheus? Is a RADAR a hard disk recorder or a standalone converter? How about a Lynx Aurora? That's a standalone converter, but does it become unsuitable for high end production if you add the USB interface option?

I think you're confusing matters somewhat. A converter being standalone is no guarantee of quality - you can get Behringer standalone converters. high end productions can also be done totally ITB using a stereo DA for monitoring - in which case any USB interface with good quality converters is suitable.

Reading between the lines, interfaces connected via FW or USB aren't always suitable for large IO counts - hence the reason we have PT HD, Apogee Symphony, RME AES and MADI PCIe cards, and at the lower end MOTU PCIe systems. But that doesn't mean "standalone converters" are any better or worse - merely that USB and FW isn't suitable for 24+ IO counts.

I'm really not intending to pick on you, but if you persist in making such blanket statements with no basis in fact..if it wasn't me, it'd be someone else!

[leadbelly]

i appreciate all your input...

i currently have a pt hd2 setup PCI-X using a 96 i/o. yes the quality is great, i love all of it, but the biggest problem I'm realizing is that I have been getting most of my work doing productions for artists as well as writing commercial sounding stuff and producing those songs. With all that being said, i cant run native instruments komplete, or any of the waves plugins i already have. Getting a new setup where i can record both live instruments with little latency, even with high track counts, as well as running virtual instruments and a bunch of plugins come mix time is most important to me now. im sure most will call me crazy for getting rid of a hd2 rig and switching to a "lesser" system, but i think its far from that for what i want to do.

with that being said, i have some good outboard pres and headphone amp, as well as monitors. I just really need an interface that will work well with pro tools, very very little latency, and sound good. i want a computer that can uphold track counts of 60-80 tracks, support a bunch of virtual instruments and plugins.

maybe that clears some stuff up. and yes, @GaryWeinrib ideally people wnat to go studios with the best equipment, but i am focusing more on good productions, songwriting and getting in artists do demos, not huge band recordings with 16+ tracks going at once. i really only record 4 tracks at once.

[leadbelly]

or what about the lynx with the USB card?

[nst7]

Leadbelly,

If you want to use a bunch of virtual instruments, the problem is Protools software. No interface is going to change that.

You need to either start using Vienna Ensemble Pro to host your VI's, or you need to wait for Protools 11, which will be 64 bit, and may improve things. But just getting a different interface and going native isn't going to help with VI's.

[Syncamorea]

Originally Posted by leadbelly

1. Does it integrate with a new mac and pro tools 9 or 10

2. Is it worth getting the quad?

3. How is the latency on these?

4. Do you think a supped up iMac will do the trick with this, or definitely go with a mac pro?

1) and 2) Yes

3) You don't need to monitor through the computer and DAW to monitor when recording. So the latency in and out of the Apollo is typically 1-2 milliseconds.

4) I've recorded and mixed 18 channels simultaneously with a 2.8GHz Macbook Pro, with quite a few plugs.

[Bunjji]

Originally Posted by FruesanHaug

why did the previous post crete a link for purchasing a firewire cable????...I didn't do that.

It does that for generic stuff . . . I don't know what is about

[Bunjji]

Uncheck "Automatically parse links" on the advanced reply

[nnajar]

Originally Posted by nst7

Leadbelly,

If you want to use a bunch of virtual instruments, the problem is Protools software. No interface is going to change that.

You need to either start using Vienna Ensemble Pro to host your VI's, or you need to wait for Protools 11, which will be 64 bit, and may improve things. But just getting a different interface and going native isn't going to help with VI's.

VE Pro is a good idea, but going to a new interface opens up the OP to reaper, logic or DP, etc....

HD2 limits I/o functionality on other software, doesn't it?

RME UFX is probably the best option here with apollo being a great option with a different feature set. Metric halo would be excellent too but much higher up the budget ladder (although I believe they're on special until the end of this week)......

[leadbelly]

thanks for the input... im leaning towards the Lynx as of now, also because future updates (going to an hd rig possibly) will be much easier with the lynx it seems, than the other options. im guessing id go with either the USB card of Firewire? Do you think this interface is comparable to the Apollo (not considering the plugins), but in terms of audio quality and latency?

thanks
L

[Bassmankr]

You are still looking at step 5 instead of the first few steps. First you realize that Pro Tools 9 HD can't handle your virtual instrument needs. One suggestion was to wait until Pro Tools 11, 64 bit comes out and see what it can do from the first user reports. If you can't wait for that option then you have to look at what DAW(s) will fit your needs now. Next is platform, at this point in time Windows 7 is getting much better performance for DAWs that run on both. You may however want to build a Hackintosh that can run both AND work with your old PT HD2 PCIx cards (there are threads on that that here). Next is I/O, how many channels? At what sampling rate? Will you be working hybrid? What's the max that you may expand to with this system? There are a few other things to get straight too BEFORE you even look at what interfaces will work for those needs.