Rosetta 200 vs Duet 2 Shootout

aheart · 2nd February 2012

Hi - I've read through the reviews and can't seem to find a shootout (Soundcloud files) of a Rosetta 200 vs. Duet 2.

I have a Rosetta 200 and an older Pro Tools setup and am thinking about switching over to PT10 and a Duet 2. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks

nst7 · 4th February 2012

I've never heard the Rosetta, but I have compared a Duet 2 with the new Mbox 3, and I think the Mbox 3 sounds better. Just mentioned that so you have another possible choice, especially since you're using Protools.

yotonic · 4th February 2012

Skip Pro Tools 10 and the Duet and just get a Lavry AD10.

Kaplans · 4th February 2012

@nst7

Could you perhaps elaborate on how you compared the duet 2 with the mbox 3 (pro?)?

In what way was the mbox 3 "better"...detail, wideness, depth, low/highs?

mattg082 · 4th February 2012

Are you using high end pres with it? I thought about selling my rosetta 200 and putting up a few hundered for a ensemble/apollo. Haven't really thought of the duet 2 though. Personally I would be a little weird about running my high end pres with a duet 2. I'm guessing it works alright with that as it has built in pres you can maybe bypass, and the line-level it accepts is up to par? The mbox 3 looks like a good candidate though if downsizing. I know of a few that traded out a r200 or 800 with a used ensemble that are happy.

nst7 · 5th February 2012

Kaplans,

My main tests were with the D/A side of things. I didn't have a mic to really test the preamps in each unit, but I did test the DI's briefly.

Both units had a very wide, nice soundstage with lots of detail. Width and localization was about the same. But the Mbox had a little more front to back depth.

Another big thing was that the Mbox had much more low end. Not just the lowest frequencies, but an overall fuller sound. The Duet 2 kind of sounded like someone had put a high pass filter on every track, even when listening to a 2 track stereo mix, like a commercial CD.

And the overall character was different. The Duet 2 was kind of clean, but sterile, whereas the Mbox sounded more pleasing to listen to and overall more "real" (less like a recording and more like someone was singing or playing in front of you).

Also, transient responce and dynamic range was better on the Mbox, and it had overall more "oomph".

There was one other thing, which didn't have to do with the D/A conversion, but rather the analog signal path and volume control. When I would turn the Duet 2 up louder, the more I went up, the imaging started to be compromised and it sounded kind of harsh and blaring. This is not uncommon with lower budget interfaces. But when I turned up the Mbox, it sounded amazing. It sounded even better up loud. I know there can be differences in the quality of the analog signal path as it goes through the volume control, so I think that's what I was hearing.

I heard the same differences in the headphone outs of each unit. Once again the Mbox headphone sound was much better (again, I believe, due to the analog components).

As mentioned before, I had tested the DI, and they were similar in detail, but there was more low end in the Mbox one.

gideon352 · 5th February 2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by nst7

I've never heard the Rosetta, but I have compared a Duet 2 with the new Mbox 3, and I think the Mbox 3 sounds better. Just mentioned that so you have another possible choice, especially since you're using Protools.

I feel the exact opposite.

The Duet 2 sounds better to my ears.

The Mbox 3 does sound a lot better than the Mbox 2, however.

2nd February 2012	#1
aheart Gear interested Joined: Feb 2012 Posts: 1 Thread Starter	Rosetta 200 vs Duet 2 Shootout Hi - I've read through the reviews and can't seem to find a shootout (Soundcloud files) of a Rosetta 200 vs. Duet 2. I have a Rosetta 200 and an older Pro Tools setup and am thinking about switching over to PT10 and a Duet 2. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DV Toolkit vs. Protools Academic	tigermuzik	Post Production forum!	4	21st September 2007 07:54 PM
So No More 456 Tape For my Vortexion CBL6 15 ips 1/4 2 TR	Bassmec	High end	4	23rd February 2007 06:13 AM
Any tips on mixing Vox with 2 track Instrumentals	Creative Apathy	Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production	12	1st February 2007 09:02 PM
Well, my Core 2 Duo is exceeding my expectations	Confusionator	Music computers	23	17th January 2007 01:58 AM
2 Inch Tape Machines... Size Matters?	the russian	Geekslutz forum	8	10th December 2006 05:05 AM

4th February 2012	#2
nst7 Lives for gear Joined: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,072	I've never heard the Rosetta, but I have compared a Duet 2 with the new Mbox 3, and I think the Mbox 3 sounds better. Just mentioned that so you have another possible choice, especially since you're using Protools.

4th February 2012	#3
yotonic Lives for gear Joined: Jun 2010 Location: NY Posts: 1,428 1 Review written	Skip Pro Tools 10 and the Duet and just get a Lavry AD10.

4th February 2012	#4
Kaplans Gear interested Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 16	@nst7 Could you perhaps elaborate on how you compared the duet 2 with the mbox 3 (pro?)? In what way was the mbox 3 "better"...detail, wideness, depth, low/highs?

4th February 2012	#5
mattg082 Lives for gear Joined: Oct 2009 Location: New Orleans Posts: 2,718 1 Review written	Are you using high end pres with it? I thought about selling my rosetta 200 and putting up a few hundered for a ensemble/apollo. Haven't really thought of the duet 2 though. Personally I would be a little weird about running my high end pres with a duet 2. I'm guessing it works alright with that as it has built in pres you can maybe bypass, and the line-level it accepts is up to par? The mbox 3 looks like a good candidate though if downsizing. I know of a few that traded out a r200 or 800 with a used ensemble that are happy.

5th February 2012	#6
nst7 Lives for gear Joined: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,072	Kaplans, My main tests were with the D/A side of things. I didn't have a mic to really test the preamps in each unit, but I did test the DI's briefly. Both units had a very wide, nice soundstage with lots of detail. Width and localization was about the same. But the Mbox had a little more front to back depth. Another big thing was that the Mbox had much more low end. Not just the lowest frequencies, but an overall fuller sound. The Duet 2 kind of sounded like someone had put a high pass filter on every track, even when listening to a 2 track stereo mix, like a commercial CD. And the overall character was different. The Duet 2 was kind of clean, but sterile, whereas the Mbox sounded more pleasing to listen to and overall more "real" (less like a recording and more like someone was singing or playing in front of you). Also, transient responce and dynamic range was better on the Mbox, and it had overall more "oomph". There was one other thing, which didn't have to do with the D/A conversion, but rather the analog signal path and volume control. When I would turn the Duet 2 up louder, the more I went up, the imaging started to be compromised and it sounded kind of harsh and blaring. This is not uncommon with lower budget interfaces. But when I turned up the Mbox, it sounded amazing. It sounded even better up loud. I know there can be differences in the quality of the analog signal path as it goes through the volume control, so I think that's what I was hearing. I heard the same differences in the headphone outs of each unit. Once again the Mbox headphone sound was much better (again, I believe, due to the analog components). As mentioned before, I had tested the DI, and they were similar in detail, but there was more low end in the Mbox one.