Apogee ensemble vs. symphony

[outcastrising]

Hi guys and gals,

I have been trying to wrap my head around all of this and I am getting ready to update my studio on Friday that's 12-15-06 and I am really not sure of what I want anymore.

At first glance the Symphony seems phenomenal (As I have always HATED latency and DREAM of tracking through plug-ins without stutters, clicks, pops, etc.) From what I understand Symphony does this. But the main issue is connections for me
1. buy Symphony Card and all rlevent cables etc.
2. buy a rosetta interface
3. don't forget to buy that attenuator i.e. central station
4. gotta get those mic pre's too
5. get ANALOG studio monitors
6. if you want more inputs you must upgrade (about a grand to tehe rosetta 800) then you gotta but the Breakout xlr cables (180 each)

So what I realized is this quickly creeps up past 5,000 easily

So now I am seriously CONSIDERING an ensemble
the reasons are:
For:
1. mic pre's its got 4 of em" and they should sound at least as good as the trak 2's if I am not mistaken (i would also imagine I can track with software monitoring or not per input?)
2. Hi-z inputs on the front awesome! and even more on the back!
3. Multiple outputs (I assume I can mirror the mains for my headphone amp (if i even need one now as its got 2 headphone outputs!)
4. Logic Pro integration via a buit into logic software control panel!
5. PRICE!

Against:
1. Potential latency issues! (this scares me i hate latency how low is the ensemble compared to the symphony?) How would it fare in the same symphony benchmark test on a mac pro? (I REALLY WANT TO KNOW THIS!)
2. Sound quality (from what i hear the rosetta 200 and 800 are better) but i think i could live with that
3. no vbus (you guys incorporating that into ensemble by chance?)
4. Firewire offset issue with the apple driver (I had an 01x and got rid of it because of this)

P.S. I REALLY wish you guys would make an ensemble for symphony!!!!!
Maybe an even BETTER one!

Well I really could use some answers and good guidance then I wil get out of everybodys hair LOL
seriously guys and gals, any kind of feedback would be GREATLY appreciated whenever i get stuff going I promise I will give back when I can!

Thanks

[Matthew Murray]

I'd say it all comes down to cash at this point, mon ami. You've narrowed down the pros and cons pretty good, and now you have to decide what you want to spend.

Ultimately if you go with the ensemble (and I can't speak from experience since I've never owned an ensemble), I'd imagine you your most serious limitation would be the onboard pres. They're supposedly very good, but very clean. And you'll only have one flavour of pre. If you were to buy standalone pres to interface with your rosetta, you'd be able to select a few great varied pres that give you a much broader palette to work with.

Something tells me the difference in conversion between rosettas and the ensemble is going to be minimal, though the rosetta is indeed supposed to be in a higher class. Perhaps somebody who has owned the ensemble can pipe up about the character/quality of the preamps that come onboard with that box.

But really, by going ensemble, you're forfeiting the low latency that comes with Symphony, and the freedom of different types of preamps.

The great equalizer here will be how many dollar bills you have in your jeans to devote to all of this. Isn't that what it always comes down to....

[hogo]

In my case I was considering a similar choice. IMO if you want to go above the prosumer level you gotta go with the symphony and a rosetta. The new drivers for symphony really bump it up nicely. Also, depending how serious you are, you're probably going to want an outboard mic pre anyways. If you want a nice vocal, you gotta look at every part of your vocal chain, and you might sacrifice more than you think by getting an ensemble just because you save some money on buying seperate pre's and such. It's about a thousand bucks more for a rosetta200/symphony combo plus a pre, over the ensemble. IMO, well worth it. Good luck!!

[Sergievsky]

Unless you really really need the portability Firewire provides, gotta go with a pci(e) system. Get the Symphony/Rosetta 800 and be done with it. If you need pres on a budget, get something like the Mackie onyx (the 8pre rackmount one) or something equivalent like the presonus digimax fs. They'll be good enough to do high quality audio, and you can add the boutique pres later on.

But don't skimp on the main system. Save up and get it later if you need to. Trust me on this, it might seem more money now but it will actually save you money later on.

[Schmacko]

When I was weighing the options, the Ensemble won over Symphony only because Apogee mentioned no plans for an Express card version of Symphony for laptops. Even though I do 99% of my work at my desktop, I like the flexibility to be portable.

As for the pres - they deserve a lot more credit than mentioned. In fact, during the most dissapointing growing pains of Ensemble ownership it was the pres which kept me from returning the unit to my dealer. They get regular use in my studio next to the Wunder's, 1073's, Portico's, UA's, and API's. Yes, the pres are on the cleaner side, but they've got a bit of balls to them. IMHO, I would describe them as clean with good bite, and tight low-end.

However, Ensemble still isn't where it should be in terms of development. And, it looks like it probably won't get there until OS X 10.5 is on the verge of release.

Hopefully, it will be another good year and I can justify the purchase of a Symphony system too! ;p

[MattiMattMatt]

I have a FireFace and was considering moving up to an Ensemble until it appeared that that would be more of a move sideways than up, and a bumpy move at that. I do covet the Ensemble's preamps and integration with Logic, but I don't want to become an unwitting participant in what appears to be an extended beta test. I think I used to be more about the bleeding edge. Now I just want things to work.

Therefore, I'm staying put with the fireFace but am now eyeing the Symphony as the logical step up rather than the Ensemble.

however, I am very much hoping that Apogee does exactly what you suggest: create a more comprehensive "Ensemble-like" interface for use with the Symphony. I'm looking for the features of the Ensemble combined with the performance and stability of the Symphony.

Not that they're taking advice from me, but if they were, I'd advise Apogee to lower the price of the Symphony card itself to seed the market, and expand the choice of interfaciae (is that a word?). You know, give away the razor, charge for the blades. And make lots of blades.

The blade I'd want: A nice juicy all-in-one interface with Apogee's excellent mic pres and converters that connected to the symphony card. One simple robust box. I think that would appeal to a ton of people, including me.

of course, as Schmako suggested, after Apple releases 10.5, it may be that Ensemble owners will enjoy much improved performance.

-matt

[GCL]

I have a feeling that the low latency performance specs with Symphony and a Mac Pro are mostly due to the Mac Pro, and that a Symphony is needed IF you are recording many multiple tracks at once (as in an orchestra session). MOTU has done some informal testing on the Mac Pro and they are reporting incredibly low latency performance too. I think this will become evident after the new year and these systems are more prevalent. Please correct me if I'm wrong -- Ensemble/Mac Pro owners please speak up. How low can you set your buffers with a good dose of plug-in, VIs, etc.?

I owned a Rosetta 800 and 200 for quite a while (after moving away from a Pro Tools HD2 system), and briefly auditioned these with a Symphony card late last summer against my Ensemble, but this was on a Mac G5 Quad. There was no difference in latency that I could perceive, and I was not able to use lower buffers with the Symphony. BUT, like I said, this was on a Quad. (At this time, Apogee had not reported their Mac Pro latency numbers.)

Regarding other matters, to my ears the Ensemble sounded every bit as good as my Rosetta 800 & 200, and the Ensemble pres were better than my 2 Focusrite 430 MkI preamps into the Rosetta. Sorry, but that's the way it was for me. I did many recording tests of acoustic instruments and voice to check. So I moved away from my Cranesong Avocet and Focusrites and am just using an Ensemble, and boy, it does sound great.

But, latency is king, and if I can't get close with my Ensemble with a Mac Pro (waiting for the dual quad) then I'll probably be sorry I sold the Avocet and everything else, and go back to a Symphony system.

[Matthew Murray]

Originally Posted by GCL

I have a feeling that the low latency performance specs with Symphony and a Mac Pro are mostly due to the Mac Pro, and that a Symphony is needed IF you are recording many multiple tracks at once (as in an orchestra session). MOTU has done some informal testing on the Mac Pro and they are reporting incredibly low latency performance too. I think this will become evident after the new year and these systems are more prevalent.

I hope you're wrong. I just ordered a symphony set up mostly because of the latency specs. In threads that I read, Max from Apogee said that they also tested on a dual 2.0ghz G5 (which is what i have) and that the latency figures were similar -- a little higher, I think i remember something in the 2.8 range as opposed to 1.6. Still, totally inaudible. If I get this thing in here and find out my G5 is holding it back, I'm going to be real pissed off. You buy a card with that much DSP on it and with that high of a price tag, you're buying it to help support your computer's CPU, not rely on it.

[GCL]

Originally Posted by Matthew Murray

I hope you're wrong. I just ordered a symphony set up mostly because of the latency specs. In threads that I read, Max from Apogee said that they also tested on a dual 2.0ghz G5 (which is what i have) and that the latency figures were similar -- a little higher, I think i remember something in the 2.8 range as opposed to 1.6. Still, totally inaudible. If I get this thing in here and find out my G5 is holding it back, I'm going to be real pissed off. You buy a card with that much DSP on it and with that high of a price tag, you're buying it to help support your computer's CPU, not rely on it.

Matthew -- well I'm looking forward to your report. Jeez, if Max said results were similar on a dual 2.0ghz G5, then that's not good (where did you read that?). Everything I read about it (and after having talked with Apogee tech supp) suggests that having a Mac Pro is vital. If that's anywhere near true about the G5, then Apogee must not have been testing that G5 with a taxed system in the way of plug-ins and VIs, because no way was I able to get buffers at 128 or lower on my Symphony/Rosetta/Quad G5 system.

Also, there's no DSP on the Symphony card (a la Pro Tools), but it's rather having to do with throughput, etc. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[Matthew Murray]

There's DSP on the card that deals with passing audio, sorry, maybe we shouldn't use the term DSP, I don't know. I'll try to track down the threads where they were talking about performance on a G5 ... I know it wasn't *the same*, but I know the latency was still quite low and quite impressive. Otherwise I wouldn't be going this route. Now you have me nervous :-)

I'll report back...

Originally Posted by GCL

Matthew -- well I'm looking forward to your report. Jeez, if Max said results were similar on a dual 2.0ghz G5, then that's not good (where did you read that?). Everything I read about it (and after having talked with Apogee tech supp) suggests that having a Mac Pro is vital. If that's anywhere near true about the G5, then Apogee must not have been testing that G5 with a taxed system in the way of plug-ins and VIs, because no way was I able to get buffers at 128 or lower on my Symphony/Rosetta/Quad G5 system.

Also, there's no DSP on the Symphony card (a la Pro Tools), but it's rather having to do with throughput, etc. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[Matthew Murray]

Hey, found it.

we did test with a G5 dual 2.0. Latency was essentially the difference of one buffer setting minus a few hundred microseconds, so I am sure you will be very pleased with the performance.

That was from Max. Full post is here:

http://gearslutz.com/board/showpost....7&postcount=50

So you up the buffer setting by one notch, and latency is essentially the same. Works for me.

[redpony]

The only real issue I have with my Ensemble is that I can't use the thing at 88 or 96k without crashing. Dual G5 2 ghz. I track at 48k and export to 96. And one of the headphone jacks went, even though I don't use them and plug into a dedicated headphone amp system (they worked during installation).

The system gets a little unresponsive when my logic projects start growing. For example, stopping and starting the transport from the keyboard. Oddly, no such problem using my Logic Control.

So, yeah, still flakey, but sounds better than the Motu 2408 mk2 I was using. And I like the pres quite a bit. I was using the pres on a Soundcraft M12 previously, and I prefer the Ensemble pres on things like acoustic versus my Phoenix DRS-2.

I use 256 buffers when tracking and haven't had any problem with latency, but I'm not doing any grid based electronic music.

[nativeaudio]

Originally Posted by Matthew Murray

Hey, found it.



That was from Max. Full post is here:

Gearslutz.com - View Single Post - Symphony drivers with 2ms Latency?

So you up the buffer setting by one notch, and latency is essentially the same. Works for me.

I think that reference above was made before the new high performance drivers were available.

Moving up one step in terms of buffer settings may represent a difference of 2.9 milliseconds (example: if you go from 64 to 128, that means an extra latency of at least 128 samples more [64 * 2]). 128 samples @ 44.1 kHz = 2,9 ms). A difference going from 32 to 64 means at least 1.45 ms extra latency (possibly more, if the OS needs more time when higher buffer settings are used).

I believe using Firewire instead of PCI adds circa 1 ms latency (but I'm not sure).

[Schmacko]

I betting that if or when Ensemble's development achieves the performance which the designers sought to achieve, the disparity in software monitoring latency between Symphony and Ensemble setups will be miniscule. Therefore, the advantage of stepping up to Symphony will be 1) the i/o throughput capabilities even at high sample rates 2) the higher quality AD/DA, and 3) Simply, the ability to have connected 96 channels of conversion, reliably, on a native system.

[GCL]

Originally Posted by nativeaudio

I think that reference above was made before the new high performance drivers were available.

Well let's hope that's the case. I know that I could not get buffers lower than 128, and that was on a Quad G5, a much more capable Mac than the dual 2Ghz one they tested. We shall all see soon enough -- I'm hoping for the best. However, if Apogee was doing their tests on Mac Pros with many audio tracks being simultaneously recorded, but with minimal system stress from plugs and VIs, then it's misleading to suggest that you can acheive buffers of 32 across the board in real world applications, unless all you want to do it track a large session.

I want to be able to use a boatload of plug-ins and VIs, and track at 64. That, my friends, you can do with a Pro Tools-based system, if Apogee wants to keep drawing that comparison.

[outcastrising]

Thanks for all the feed back!!! It has made my decision all the easier.
I am gonna go with the SYMPHONY system.
My setup will be as follows:

MacPro 2.66, 4GB RAM
20" cinema display with ergotron arm
Apogee Symphony PCIe card
Apogee Rosetta 800 w/X-Symphony Card
Apogee Mini MP (Per my conversation with max i want clean, transparent pre's he says they are underrated and I believe him besides if i want color at th these latencies I'll use a preamp plug-in )
Dynaudio BM5a Studio Monitors (per almost everyone on this forum! besides i am in a 13x 13 room anyways)
Presonus HP4
SM Pro Mpatch 2 (GREAT SOS review BTW says its passive without the PSU and for $150! I will use this to switch between my presonus HP4 and BM5a's plus its got an attenuator for my BM5a's!)
Monster Studio Pro 1000 cable pretty much in and out of everything.
Rode NT 2000 Condenser Microphone

When I said i'll give back to this community I was'nt Joking I should have everything setup and have it run through its paces by January 1st I will report back with all of my experiences and pics of my studio if you'd like.

Thanks a whole lot!!!
Peace.

[Ashermusic]

Originally Posted by outcastrising

Thanks for all the feed back!!! It has made my decision all the easier.
I am gonna go with the SYMPHONY system.
My setup will be as follows:

MacPro 2.66, 4GB RAM
20" cinema display with ergotron arm
Apogee Symphony PCIe card
Apogee Rosetta 800 w/X-Symphony Card
Apogee Mini MP (Per my conversation with max i want clean, transparent pre's he says they are underrated and I believe him besides if i want color at th these latencies I'll use a preamp plug-in )
Dynaudio BM5a Studio Monitors (per almost everyone on this forum! besides i am in a 13x 13 room anyways)
Presonus HP4
SM Pro Mpatch 2 (GREAT SOS review BTW says its passive without the PSU and for $150! I will use this to switch between my presonus HP4 and BM5a's plus its got an attenuator for my BM5a's!)
Monster Studio Pro 1000 cable pretty much in and out of everything.
Rode NT 2000 Condenser Microphone

When I said i'll give back to this community I was'nt Joking I should have everything setup and have it run through its paces by January 1st I will report back with all of my experiences and pics of my studio if you'd like.

Thanks a whole lot!!!
Peace.

Sounds like a great setup.

I do think that the Mackie Onyx mic pres would serve you better than the Apogee Mini MP which I have tried and did not care for but that is subjective. Or you could get a pair of Rane MS 1b mic-pres which Roger Nichols thinks so well of for half the price of the Mini MP.

[GCL]

Originally Posted by outcastrising

Monster Studio Pro 1000 cable pretty much in and out of everything.

Sounds great, but don't get taken by the Monster BS. Way overpriced and not as good as Mogami, which you can get for WAAAAAYYYYYY less.

[Watersound]

Originally Posted by outcastrising

At first glance the Symphony seems phenomenal (As I have always HATED latency and DREAM of tracking through plug-ins without stutters, clicks, pops, etc.) From what I understand Symphony does this.

Am I missing something? I was not aware that you can monitor through your host daw's plug-ins with Symphony, but if so, how would I do it in Digital Performer?

[outcastrising]

An update to what I finally ended up with....

MacPro 2.66, 4GB RAM, 2TB of Hard Drive
23" cinema display with ergotron arm
Apogee Symphony PCIe card
Apogee Rosetta 800 w/X-Symphony Card
Apogee Mini MP Mic Pre
Dynaudio BM12a Studio Monitors (went through the BM5a, and BM6a mk2 before settling on these)
Presonus HP4
SM Pro Mpatch 2
SM Pro DI4v for guitars
ALL Mogami cable
Rode NT 2000 Condenser Microphone
Shure Beta87A
Fatar CMS61 (yes the old thing from 1995 LOL)
NI Kore
I will be adding one more thing that will go on top of the fatar.... A euphonix MC Control! (I cannot wait till March! )

Thank you to everyone in this forum I am sincerely grateful for your advice
Now if anyone has any questions for me please by all means shoot em to me!

[emkay]

Originally Posted by Sergievsky

Unless you really really need the portability Firewire provides, gotta go with a pci(e) system. Get the Symphony/Rosetta 800 and be done with it. If you need pres on a budget, get something like the Mackie onyx (the 8pre rackmount one) or something equivalent like the presonus digimax fs. They'll be good enough to do high quality audio, and you can add the boutique pres later on.

But don't skimp on the main system. Save up and get it later if you need to. Trust me on this, it might seem more money now but it will actually save you money later on.

In my opinion you got that part right, but I think your logic in getting great conversion first, and then only Mackies as pres is a little backwards.
He shouldn't skimp on the pres.
A great converter will do a great job of converting poor, average or great pres and they will sound exactly as they should--poor--average--or great
So to quote you-"Don't skimp on the main system"-tune your room tfirst,, get great pres and mics next and then the best conversion you can afford last.

[trakk]

Maybe someone can help me out related to this Ensemble vs Symphony deal. I create my tracks primarily ITB, then add bass/gtr/vox overdubs and will never be recording more than a stereo pair at a time.

What are my limitations going to be if I use an Ensemble vs Symphony? Specifically related to using outboard gear like: a) bypassing Ensemble's mic pre's in favor of an outboard pre and comp when tracking, b)outboard compression & eq at mix. From what I read on here, there's something at stake and I'm trying to get my head around it. THANKS