The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Lynx Aurora 16 vs Apogee Symphony Digital Converters
Old 5th January 2011
  #31
Lives for gear
 
BradLyons's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kats View Post
But that is EXACTLY what you said:


"Converters like Lynx are amazing in their own way, with no change in sound. What goes in is what goes in and what comes out is what comes out. There are many that want this kind of sound, that exactly what they are feeding or hearing is exactly what they are going to get."
Okay what I said and what I meant apparently didn't come out to be one in the same. I'll leave it at that since I'm not able to convey it to your preference.
Old 5th January 2011
  #32
Lives for gear
 
DeyBwah's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BradLyons View Post
Okay what I said and what I meant apparently didn't come out to be one in the same. I'll leave it at that since I'm not able to convey it to your preference.
For whatever it is worth, I understood what Brad meant... I mean, it's pretty obvious that what goes in isn't going to be IDENTICAL to what comes out since we're talking about analog and digital conversion. I gathered he meant compared to other converters, which definitely alter the signal with a signature sound, the Aurora has no signature sound. It's transparent(or at least attempts to be).

So mixerguy, you never answered my question.. can you describe how the Apogee is better than the Aurora?
Old 5th January 2011
  #33
Lives for gear
 
BradLyons's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeyBwah View Post
For whatever it is worth, I understood what Brad meant... I mean, it's pretty obvious that what goes in isn't going to be IDENTICAL to what comes out since we're talking about analog and digital conversion. I gathered he meant compared to other converters, which definitely alter the signal with a signature sound, the Aurora has no signature sound. It's transparent(or at least attempts to be).

So mixerguy, you never answered my question.. can you describe how the Apogee is better than the Aurora?
HA! Thank you :-) Yeah, that's what I meant. LOL
Old 5th January 2011
  #34
Lives for gear
 

LOL?

Really?

It sounds to me like you really meant that you represent both products and you will not say anything meaningful that might offend either company or customer that may have or might in the future buy one of these products from you.

They way you describe these products is some of the most ridiculous double speak I have ever read by a salesman. I find it offensive.

You actually have the gall to think it is funny?
Old 5th January 2011
  #35
Lives for gear
 
BradLyons's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kats View Post
LOL?

Really?

It sounds to me like you really meant that you represent both products and you will not say anything meaningful that might offend either company or customer that may have or might in the future buy one of these products from you.

They way you describe these products is some of the most ridiculous double speak I have ever read by a salesman. I find it offensive.

You actually have the gall to think it is funny?
Um, no that's not it at all..... and don't be so quick to make up your own theories ;-)

I just do not have the time to go into long diatribes about something that at the end of the day really doesn't change the world one way or the other. The fact is this---BOTH Apogee and Lynx have GREAT products, the fact is that they sound different from each other. Apogee does provide some added coloration, it's OWN character of sound---Lynx does not. This doesn't mean that Lynx is perfectly neutral, because it's not---there are other products that are perfectly neutral that also cost consideraly more money. HOWEVER Lynx builds a fabulous product and always have, I started using their audio cards back in 1998 was it---I can't remember. Anyway, their products are very clean, neutral, and provide little to no coloration. For most users, it is more than adequate----and for some, it may not be.

There are (2) schools of thoughts with converters----those that believe they should add their own character and those that feel it should not. Personally, I lean towards that of adding character, warmth, tone, whatever you want to call it. The fact is also this...there are many choices with converters today besides Apogee and Lynx. EVERY MANUFACTURER HAS THEIR GOOD AND BAD POINTS---just like every user has their own distinct needs, preferences, and choices. I've been using Apogee dating back to the early 1990's, it's my personal favorite. HOWEVER I've also been using Lynx since oh what, 1998 or so? My next setup is probably a Lynx Aurora 16 w/the AES16 card, but who knows---it may not be.
Old 5th January 2011
  #36
Ivo
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BradLyons View Post
Apogee does provide some added coloration, it's OWN character of sound---Lynx does not.
The OP asked about differences between Lynx Aurora and Apogee Symphony I/O. A couple of posters (including me) seem to be of the opinion that Symphony I/O simply sounds better than the Lynx and that (subtle) coloration is more something of the earlier Apogee models.

Just to be clear: When you say Apogee provides added coloration, are you talking about Symphony I/O? Or are you talking about earlier Apogee products?

best,

Ivo W.
Old 5th January 2011
  #37
Lives for gear
 
BradLyons's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivo View Post
The OP asked about differences between Lynx Aurora and Apogee Symphony I/O. A couple of posters (including me) seem to be of the opinion that Symphony I/O simply sounds better than the Lynx and that (subtle) coloration is more something of the earlier Apogee models.

Just to be clear: When you say Apogee provides added coloration, are you talking about Symphony I/O? Or are you talking about earlier Apogee products?

best,

Ivo W.
In general about Apogee, they do---that's their trademark sound, it's an analog sound.
Old 5th January 2011
  #38
Ivo
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BradLyons View Post
In general about Apogee, they do---that's their trademark sound, it's an analog sound.
OK thanks for clarifying. I take this as meaning 'in general about Apogee including the new Symphony I/O'. In which case we don't agree - which is OK, not trying to argue.

In my experience Apogee Rosetta & Lynx Aurora converters are in the same ballpark quality-wise and I could go along with you in agreeing that Apogee Rosettas sound slightly more 'analog' and Lynx 'cleaner'. As Joe Porto pointed out in his post the Apogee coloration is subtle. I'd like to add that I found the Lynx a bit leaning towards the bright side on D/A, but not on complete AD-DA throughput.

The Symphony I/O to my ears however sounds better than, and different from, both the Lynx and Apogee Rosetta. I think you could say that the difference in sound between Symphony I/O and Rosetta or Lynx is bigger than between Rosetta and Lynx - it really is a significant step up from both of these. To my ears it does not sound 'analog coloured' or 'typical Apogee' - in terms of sonic signature it could just as well have been a seriously upgraded Lynx converter as a new Apogee model. It is extremely detailed, but coupled with a fullness that I have not heard in other converters that focussed on a detailed sound.

OK I'll leave it at this before I start repeating myself...

cheers,

Ivo W.
Old 5th January 2011
  #39
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by BradLyons View Post
In general about Apogee, they do---that's their ("added coloration") trademark sound, it's an analog sound.
Brad - have you actually ever HEARD the Symphony IO? and directly compared to other converters, in a level matched comparison?
Old 5th January 2011
  #40
Gear Maniac
 
Gearhero's Avatar
 

So lynx is more digital sounding and apogee is more analogue sounding?
Old 5th January 2011
  #41
Lives for gear
 
BradLyons's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivo View Post
OK thanks for clarifying. I take this as meaning 'in general about Apogee including the new Symphony I/O'. In which case we don't agree - which is OK, not trying to argue.

In my experience Apogee Rosetta & Lynx Aurora converters are in the same ballpark quality-wise and I could go along with you in agreeing that Apogee Rosettas sound slightly more 'analog' and Lynx 'cleaner'. As Joe Porto pointed out in his post the Apogee coloration is subtle. I'd like to add that I found the Lynx a bit leaning towards the bright side on D/A, but not on complete AD-DA throughput.

The Symphony I/O to my ears however sounds better than, and different from, both the Lynx and Apogee Rosetta. I think you could say that the difference in sound between Symphony I/O and Rosetta or Lynx is bigger than between Rosetta and Lynx - it really is a significant step up from both of these. To my ears it does not sound 'analog coloured' or 'typical Apogee' - in terms of sonic signature it could just as well have been a seriously upgraded Lynx converter as a new Apogee model. It is extremely detailed, but coupled with a fullness that I have not heard in other converters that focussed on a detailed sound.

OK I'll leave it at this before I start repeating myself...

cheers,

Ivo W.
I'm not saying that one is better than the other, because they are DIFFERENT---at least to my ears because yes I have used them ;-) They are different, they sound different---and as you know sound IS subjective. The Symphony is clearly better than the Rosetta series, this IS the best that Apogee has made to date. I'm not talking about what is better, I'm talking about the difference in character of sound here.
Old 5th January 2011
  #42
Here for the gear
 

I need 32 D/A and only 2 A/D (for a mixing studio). At this point, I'm leaning towards the Lynx because as I understand it, I can only achieve 8 in, 24 out with the I/O system (in one chassis). Ideally, I could use the I/O system for 32 out and use another 2 ch. A/D, but I don't think that is possible, or is it? It seems like a "waste" to have 32 inputs when I really only need 2. Trying to get the biggest bang for the buck of course....
Old 5th January 2011
  #43
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by barber View Post
I need 32 D/A and only 2 A/D (for a mixing studio). At this point, I'm leaning towards the Lynx because as I understand it, I can only achieve 8 in, 24 out with the I/O system (in one chassis). Ideally, I could use the I/O system for 32 out and use another 2 ch. A/D, but I don't think that is possible, or is it? It seems like a "waste" to have 32 inputs when I really only need 2. Trying to get the biggest bang for the buck of course....
hi,

I have a symphony i/o and love it. In your situation, you could buy a chassis with 32 analog out, and use one of the 2 sp/dif inputs for another 2 channel ADC that you can buy to go with the symphony. you could get a burl or forsell adc or whatever and have the 32 apogee analog outs. . . that's what I would do in your position. . . good luck
Old 6th January 2011
  #44
Gear Head
 
seanastill89's Avatar
 

I don't know about anyone else but what I look for in a DA/AD converter is truthfulness, what goes in, comes out sounding as similar as physically possible to how it came in. Intentionally colouring the sound of the audio is not the job of a DAC/ADC, that should be left to EQ's and Compressors etc.

I get why they're doing it, it is a very nice attempt at injecting a bit of analog 'goodyness' into it but I lean in the other direction on this one.

Also, I reckon that your choice could go with your current set up, two studios of which I frequent here in Aus have totally different set-ups, one has all lynx auroras, a TON of outboard gear, at least two channels of every decent pre, compressor, eq or effects unit you can think of. All of this is controlled by a D-Command and h/w inserted into PT. This is the ultimate 'clean' setup, no sound manipulation occurs at any stage unless you want it to. I really like that studio.

The other studio is the exact binary opposite. Big old circa 1970 Neve desk with 1081 pres/eq's, in-desk 2254 compressors, all old, very very analog outboard gear and a patchbay that will blow a newbie's head clean of his/her shoulders. Practically everything is run through a Studer A820 then dumped to PT through Apogee AD16x's and back out through DA16x's. Total opposite to the other studio, but I love it equally, just for different reasons...but I digress.

My point being, what main 'sonic theme', if you will, are you going with throughout the rest of your studio? uber clean or old school analog?

Good luck man.

Sean
Old 6th January 2011
  #45
Lives for gear
 
BradLyons's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanastill89 View Post
I don't know about anyone else but what I look for in a DA/AD converter is truthfulness, what goes in, comes out sounding as similar as physically possible to how it came in. Intentionally colouring the sound of the audio is not the job of a DAC/ADC, that should be left to EQ's and Compressors etc.

I get why they're doing it, it is a very nice attempt at injecting a bit of analog 'goodyness' into it but I lean in the other direction on this one.

Also, I reckon that your choice could go with your current set up, two studios of which I frequent here in Aus have totally different set-ups, one has all lynx auroras, a TON of outboard gear, at least two channels of every decent pre, compressor, eq or effects unit you can think of. All of this is controlled by a D-Command and h/w inserted into PT. This is the ultimate 'clean' setup, no sound manipulation occurs at any stage unless you want it to. I really like that studio.

The other studio is the exact binary opposite. Big old circa 1970 Neve desk with 1081 pres/eq's, in-desk 2254 compressors, all old, very very analog outboard gear and a patchbay that will blow a newbie's head clean of his/her shoulders. Practically everything is run through a Studer A820 then dumped to PT through Apogee AD16x's and back out through DA16x's. Total opposite to the other studio, but I love it equally, just for different reasons...but I digress.

My point being, what main 'sonic theme', if you will, are you going with throughout the rest of your studio? uber clean or old school analog?

Good luck man.

Sean
Great post, Sean---and that was my point with some of my postings in that there really are (2) schools of thought with converters....and that's why when we talk about one line that has some "character" to it and another that is neutral that we really can't say that one sounds better over the other, because it really is subjective. Now we can say that "I like this over that" because that is a personal decision.

We should think back to when digital recording came to be that, quite frankly, it wasn't that popular with those used to analog recording. Initially the digital conversion was awful, just plain awful! Although Alesis ADAT's certainly weren't the first digital recorders---I'm going to use that analogy. The original ADAT was a 16-bit converter that was really the first affordable, professional medium that made digital recording available to the masses----but it was a very sterile sound. At that same time Mackie just blew up the market with their 8-bus series of consoles, again a new world available at a whole new price point. Here started a "war" in a sense---- My studio partner and I at the time invested in (5) blackfaced ADAT's plus a Mackie 56x8 console (32x8 plus the 24E). We then proceeded to add Apogee AD8000's to replace the ADAT converters, but still weren't exactly happy. So we ditched the console and bought a Studiomaster P7 40-ch console which certainly helped. We had a very good analog sound, what we were used to---even though it was a digital medium.....here's my point:

A GREAT CONVERTER ALLOWS YOUR GEAR TO DO WHAT IT WAS DESIGNED TO DO. While some converters are clean gain and others have their own character, a well-designed converter allows the analog gear to really shine through whether it has it's own coloration or not. IN those days the "clean" converters just didn't do it for me, they were too blah---I had to have the analog-sounding converters. HOWEVER these days clean-style converters are vastly improved that you CAN get a great analog sound if you have great analog sounding gear. BUT there are those that still want that analog-sounding converter, and those options do exist.

My point is----we have so many options today to choose from that are a fraction of the price that they were 10-years ago---and are FAR better than the choices then.
Old 6th January 2011
  #46
Gear Head
 
seanastill89's Avatar
 

Yeh I agree with you on the first iterations of converters, especially the clean and bright (read:tinny and face-ripping) ones. What you said was a perfect rephrase of mine and basically the point that I wanted to get across about a converter just allowing your other gear to do what it's meant to do.

Thanks for adding onto it. Oh and by the way, in the respect of clean vs. coloured mixed together, what's your opinion on the new Custom Series 75 by Neve? That's mixing a few schools of thought as well don't you think? But for the better.

Cheers,

Sean
Old 6th January 2011
  #47
Lives for gear
 
zak7's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BradLyons View Post
What I'm saying is that the Lynx, when compared to Apogee, is a fairly CLEAN sounding converter---that what goes in is what comes out. With the Apogee, that's not the case---it does have some added warmth to it.
well that is something that have to be tested.
is hard to know where is the coloration, because if the coloration is on the DA stage even if the AD is clean you may think the recording have color and vice-versa .

the only thing I found about the apogee converters that is clear is a bump in the low end that is actually cool.

I really have to check the new apogees, and yes I want consistency so I may want to have all my converters , for hw insert and summing to be the same.
Old 6th January 2011
  #48
Quote:
Originally Posted by zak7 View Post
well that is something that have to be tested.
is hard to know where is the coloration, because if the coloration is on the DA stage even if the AD is clean you may think the recording have color and vice-versa .

the only thing I found about the apogee converters that is clear is a bump in the low end that is actually cool.

I really have to check the new apogees, and yes I want consistency so I may want to have all my converters , for hw insert and summing to be the same.
agree with zak!

Too bad that the Symphony can not be configured with 32 analog ch I/O plus AES .

so Mixerguy...how much better is the symphony against the Lynx?
Old 6th January 2011
  #49
Lives for gear
 

in the shootout i took a listen to....

the apogee, lynx, and new avid were all very good, and really only slightly different from one another.

the old 192 was slightly worse but even then only very slightly.

jon
Old 6th January 2011
  #50
do u think that lynx really hold himself against the Apogee ensemble ?
they are different for sure, but are any a bit better than the other?
Old 6th January 2011
  #51
Lives for gear
 
pete's Avatar
 

I just did a test in my studio running my mix (OTB) trough 192´s and symphony I/O back into protools to compare them - not that big difference to me to be honest...
Old 6th January 2011
  #52
Lives for gear
 
midnightsun's Avatar
 

I went from tape to my very first digital converters which were a RADAR II, so I was spoiled from the git go. I subsequently acquired TASCAM, MOTU, and PT, converters that I not like and got rid of. I picked up a Apogee Rosetta and a Cranesong Hedd for my stereo bus coming off the analog console. I got rid of the Rosetta and kept the Hedd. Then picked up a couple of Apogee AD16X and DA16X with symphony card. I really liked the Apogee converters and grew to like a Daw rather than the RADAR box. Finally I stepped into a PTHD system and tried a Aurora 16 side by side with the Apogees. I then purchased another Aurora 16 and sold the Apogees.

Apogee Symphony AD16X and DA16X were great but the Auroras worked better for me with PTHD. I havent thought about converters in a couple of years and am totally content with my Auroras and Hedd 192 ...
Old 6th January 2011
  #53
Ivo
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanastill89 View Post
I don't know about anyone else but what I look for in a DA/AD converter is truthfulness, what goes in, comes out sounding as similar as physically possible to how it came in. Intentionally colouring the sound of the audio is not the job of a DAC/ADC, that should be left to EQ's and Compressors etc.

I get why they're doing it, it is a very nice attempt at injecting a bit of analog 'goodyness' into it but I lean in the other direction on this one.
I want to put this into some perspective because in my opinion there's way too much talk about converter coloration in this thread, it's almost like we're discussing preamps. There are very few converter developers who actually aim for their converters to color the sound. On D/A conversion you never want this; to my knowledge no D/A converter is designed to do this. There are a few A/D converters (Cranesong HEDD, Burl Bumber come to mind) that can intentionally color your sound. I think that Lynx, Apogee, Prism, Digi all try to make very neutral and accurate converters. They might react differently when you drive 'em hard (with SoftLimit etc trying smooth digital overs into analog sounding limiting) but when your levels are OK they do not intend to color the sound.

But - neutral as they try to be, these converters don't all sound the same. And when you're discussing the small differences between high-end converters, it's hard to avoid terminology like 'cleaner', 'warmer', 'more punchy' - but these are subtle differences between converters that are close to neutral to begin with, it doesn't mean that one should pick one converter over the other to get a 'warmer sound'. Pick a different mic, pre, EQ, comp or whatever first - that's where the real difference in character lies.

In your example studios, the big old Neve desk vs summing ITB with a D-Command and clean outboard - these things make a big difference in sound, mojo, workflow, general studio philosophy etcetera. The converters don't - you could switch the Apogees and the Lynx between those studios and I bet it wouldn't change much.

For anyone that likes the character of analog gear but works digitally - make sure your converters are up to the task. I once owned a Digi 96 I/O - it wasn't good enough to work with my outboard, just going DA-AD degraded the sound. The usual suspects from the last couple of years (Lynx, Apogee, Digi 192) don't, they're all pretty much accurate enough, you can hook up your characterful vintage compressor and run your audio through it without worrying about what these converters will do to your sound.

Returning to the OP Lynx vs Symphony question - you could certainly work with the Lynx but I think Symphony is the better option, not because it has a certain sonic signature, but because it is better than previous generation converters in capturing/reproducing the sonic signature of the gear you connect to it.

hth,

Ivo W.

Last edited by Ivo; 6th January 2011 at 11:55 AM.. Reason: clarification and spelling
Old 6th January 2011
  #54
Lives for gear
 
midnightsun's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivo View Post
I want to put this into some perspective because in my opinion there's way too much talk about converter coloration in this thread, it's almost like we're discussing preamps. There are very few converter developers who actually aim for their converters to color the sound. On D/A conversion you never want this; to my knowledge no D/A converter is designed to do this. There are a few A/D converters (Cranesong HEDD, Burl Bumber come to mind) that can intentionally color your sound. I think that Lynx, Apogee, Prism, Digi all try to make very neutral and accurate converters. They might react differently when you drive 'em hard (with SoftLimit etc trying smooth digital overs into analog sounding limiting) but when your levels are OK they do not intend to color the sound.

But - neutral as they try to be, these converters don't all sound the same. And when you're discussing the small differences between high-end converters, it's hard to avoid terminology like 'cleaner', 'warmer', 'more punchy' - but these are subtle differences between converters that are close to neutral to begin with, it doesn't mean that one should pick one converter over the other to get a 'warmer sound'. Pick a different mic, pre, EQ, comp or whatever first - that's where the real difference in character lies.

In your example studios, the big old Neve desk vs summing ITB with a D-Command and clean outboard - these things make a big difference in sound, mojo, workflow, general studio philosophy etcetera. The converters don't - you could switch the Apogees and the Lynx between those studios and I bet it wouldn't change much.

For anyone that likes the character of analog gear but works digitally - make sure your converters are up to the task. I once owned a Digi 96 I/O - it wasn't good enough to work with my outboard, just going DA-AD degraded the sound. The usual suspects from the last couple of years (Lynx, Apogee, Digi 192) don't, they're all pretty much accurate enough, you can hook up your characterful vintage compressor and run your audio through it without worrying about what these converters will do to your sound.

Returning to the OP Lynx vs Symphony question - you could certainly work with the Lynx but I think Symphony is the better option, not because it has a certain sonic signature, but because it is better than previous generation converters in capturing/reproducing the sonic signature of the gear you connect to it.

hth,

Ivo W.

I couldn't agree more about about all of Ivo's comments except for choosing Symphony over Lynx. If a person is working inside of the digital realm and making multiple trips analog/digital and digital/analog in order to incorporate outboard gear, it only makes sense to have the cleanest converters you can get. I think most people would agree that Lynx is "cleaner" if you will, than Apogee. Though cost wasn't necessarily my consideration (I already had both A & L) the Apogees are about twice the price of Lynx.

I agree that sonically, there is very little difference between the two when considering all of the other variables. For me, the work flow and having converts that got along swimmingly with PTHD was the deal maker/breaker.
Old 6th January 2011
  #55
Lives for gear
 
mixerguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightsun View Post
I couldn't agree more about about all of Ivo's comments except for choosing Symphony over Lynx. If a person is working inside of the digital realm and making multiple trips analog/digital and digital/analog in order to incorporate outboard gear, it only makes sense to have the cleanest converters you can get. I think most people would agree that Lynx is "cleaner" if you will, than Apogee. Though cost wasn't necessarily my consideration (I already had both A & L) the Apogees are about twice the price of Lynx.

I agree that sonically, there is very little difference between the two when considering all of the other variables. For me, the work flow and having converts that got along swimmingly with PTHD was the deal maker/breaker.
This thread has digressed into what is the worst thing about GS these days - people who are posting opinions that they have heard or read on a forum .... as their own opinion, or as fact. (as if it was their opinion, but they have never actually used the gear.)

" I think most people would agree that Lynx is "cleaner" if you will, than Apogee."
is the most ridiculous statement I have ever read here.

Have YOU ever done a blind, level matched comparison between Lynx Aurora 16 and a Symphony IO (or 16x, for that matter...)

If you had, in a good listening environment, It is my guess that you'd think that the Apogee 16x or Symphony IO absolutely are MUCH BETTER than the Aurora 16. (in my opinion, as I HAVE ACTUALLY DONE THAT TEST)



unlike some salesguys who have such strong opinions..... who probably havent done proper comparisons. They just wanna sell stuff.

Or (generally speaking) poser posters who havent ever even touched the gear they have such strong opinions about.



OK well I'm going back to work. Using real hardware. in a real studio. on real commercial projects.

Old 6th January 2011
  #56
Ivo
Gear Nut
 

Jon,

Good to see we agree on a lot of points - but one of the things I'm trying to get across in this thread is that the 'traditional Apogee color' (that's not that big a deal to begin with) is to my ears not present in their new Symphony I/O converter. So if you say:

Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightsun View Post
I think most people would agree that Lynx is "cleaner" if you will, than Apogee.
... I think:
Most people that are going by the internet/gearslutz reputation of Apogee vs Lynx - yes
Most people who have compared Rosetta's vs Lynx - probably (I would)
Most people who have compared Apogee AD-X vs Lynx - not so sure
Most people who have compared Apogee Symphony I/O vs Lynx - I don't think so

BTW are we talking about the same Apogee converters? Because you say 'the Apogees are twice the price of the Lynx' (Apogees plural) which makes me think you could be talking about an AD/DA16 combi, the Symphony I/O being one box for AD/DA.

I guess I'm with Mixerguy in sofar that based on the tests I've done, I have come to the conclusion that the Symphony I/O sounds better than the Lynx Aurora series converters.

cheers,

Ivo W.
Old 6th January 2011
  #57
Gear Nut
 
naths101's Avatar
 

well this thread is quite entertaining!
Brad, sorry to see everyone having a go at you... I know what you've been saying and I agree.


Quote:
Originally Posted by seanastill89 View Post
Also, I reckon that your choice could go with your current set up, two studios of which I frequent here in Aus have totally different set-ups, one has all lynx auroras, a TON of outboard gear, at least two channels of every decent pre, compressor, eq or effects unit you can think of. All of this is controlled by a D-Command and h/w inserted into PT. This is the ultimate 'clean' setup, no sound manipulation occurs at any stage unless you want it to. I really like that studio.

The other studio is the exact binary opposite. Big old circa 1970 Neve desk with 1081 pres/eq's, in-desk 2254 compressors, all old, very very analog outboard gear and a patchbay that will blow a newbie's head clean of his/her shoulders. Practically everything is run through a Studer A820 then dumped to PT through Apogee AD16x's and back out through DA16x's. Total opposite to the other studio, but I love it equally, just for different reasons...but I digress.

My point being, what main 'sonic theme', if you will, are you going with throughout the rest of your studio? uber clean or old school analog?

When it comes to my 'sonic theme' I'm of the 'old school analog' mind which has determined the various converters, outboard, etc I own.
I'd buy the burl mothership in a heartbeat but since I'm not made of money I decided a few years ago to go for the lynx, however, I have recently been considering the switch to symphony.
But in the meantime I'll be ordering the Burl B2 for my 2bus duties as it 'colours' the sound... or should I not use that word?


hey sean, where in oz are you and what studios are these? cheers
Old 7th January 2011
  #58
Lives for gear
 
DeyBwah's Avatar
 

I think a bit of the confusion in this thread comes from people talking about Apogee converters instead of specifying WHICH Apogee converter. And by people, I largely am speaking for myself lol. When I was speaking of Apogee vs Lynx, I was thinking of the Rosetta and Aurora. Foolish considering the thread title says Symphony, but I was jumping around multiple threads and missed/forgot the title. The Symphony is a newer generation of converters which uses the latest technology and knowledge of components, so I don't think it makes much sense to compare the Aurora to the Symphony. Also the price point is nearly double.

That being said, I'm still curious as to how the Symphony is WAY better than the Aurora. What's different? Better stereo image? Depth? Clarity? Analog/color?

Regardless, for my studio, I can't afford to lay down $6000 for a Symphony when I have the Aurora. That's why I was asking in what way the Symphony was better than the Aurora, because it seems that the gains would be marginal as we're talking about converters here which, when you pass a certain threshold, as many in here agree, you'd get exponentially larger gains investing in better microphones or preamps.

That's where I'm at at least. The bottleneck in my studio isn't my converter. It's microphones, monitoring, and 2-bus compression(sans).
Old 7th January 2011
  #59
Gear Head
 

ok then.. keep it up friendly

Quote:
Originally Posted by mixerguy View Post
this thread has digressed into what is the worst thing about gs these days - people who are posting opinions that they have heard or read on a forum .... As their own opinion, or as fact. (as if it was their opinion, but they have never actually used the gear.)

" i think most people would agree that lynx is "cleaner" if you will, than apogee."
is the most ridiculous statement i have ever read here.

Have you ever done a blind, level matched comparison between lynx aurora 16 and a symphony io (or 16x, for that matter...)

if you had, in a good listening environment, it is my guess that you'd think that the apogee 16x or symphony io absolutely are much better than the aurora 16. (in my opinion, as i have actually done that test)



unlike some salesguys who have such strong opinions..... Who probably havent done proper comparisons. They just wanna sell stuff.

Or (generally speaking) poser posters who havent ever even touched the gear they have such strong opinions about.



Ok well i'm going back to work. Using real hardware. In a real studio. On real commercial projects.

Kfhkh
can you share one of you real mixes with us? A sample of your work with the symphony in case that you have it in your "real" set up... In that case i can share with you guys a sample of a single (btw a hit in my country) that was made with aurora 16.. 100% positive.. Are you ok? Everybody wins..

A couple of days ago i was talking about what to buy lynx or apogee with one of the best producers in my country and told me.. Have you ever listen to this song.. (i was like.. Sure) ok that was recorded and mixed on my ssl and used aurora 16 (not just 1 i guess 4 or 5)

thanks!
Old 7th January 2011
  #60
I've owned almost every Apogee product they have ever made (AD800se, Trak2, Rosetta 800, AD/DA16x) except for the symphony.

I also own a Mytek 8x192, a Lynx Aurora 16, and now a MH ULN-8

To be honest, the reasons why I have parted with certain converters has more to do with feature set and reliability. Also, cost has played a role in it. I'm selling my Mytek, but ONLY because I need the money to fund my ULN-8 purchase. I ONLY bought the ULN-8 because I have some orchestral multitrack recording coming up this year and I need to fly with my converters/pres. I only got rid of my AD8000se because I didn't have an easy way to keep it integrated into my PTHD studio.

Now, that said, after using each one of them for a long period of time I do become quite aware of how each one of them sound. My Mytek, and my Lynx sound different, and I'm not sure I could describe the difference (without sounding stupid). I prefer the Mytek, but the Lynx will remain due to it's very unique and cost effective feature set.

If I was starting out from scratch right now, I'd seriously look at the Symphony because of it's feature set. The fact that you can use that thing with a card bus card and a laptop is pretty amazing. We are entering into a time where price/feature set are in some ways more important than the small difference in sonic quality.

That being said, If I get a chance I'll post some different files recorded with the ULN-8, vs. my Trak2 (which I love) vs. my Lynx Aurora. I'm sorry, but you have to use real instruments to do this, and that aint so easy.

OP: go with what your budget allows! some day you will have to retire!
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
barryjohns / So much gear, so little time
4
DRC / So much gear, so little time
0

Forum Jump
Forum Jump