The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
audient id22 or universal audio apollo twin?
Old 27th January 2014
  #1
audient id22 or universal audio apollo twin?

Looking to upgrade my interface. Right now I have a Mackie Blackbird running on a MacBook Pro 10.9 into Logic.

I do kind of singer songwriter sort of stuff. Guitars. Vocals.

Thinking of upgrading to either the id22 or apollo twin.

Thoughts?

Other recommendations of stuff I should be looking at?
Old 27th January 2014
  #2
Gear Head
 

Glad to see someone else has the same question! I am also looking to upgrade from a Scarlett 2i2 to either the Apollo Twin or the id22. Are the Forte or the Duet 2 worth considering? Main reason for upgrading is to get better preamps and AD/DA conversion, but the DSP functionality of the apollo is a plus too... Very interested to see what you all have to say on this.
Old 29th January 2014
  #3
Lives for gear
 

New audio interfaces also from SPL and Aphex. We live in interesting times
Old 29th January 2014
  #4
tough one...apollo has native thunderbolt and dsp...you can record guitars in low latency with the ENGL amps in the ua console...but you will spend more money on uad plugins...

the Audient apparently has very nice quality conversion and good Pres and inserts as well as full ADAT...

either would do the job nicely with a few more perks to the UA...
Old 29th January 2014
  #5
tough one...apollo has native thunderbolt and dsp...you can record guitars in low latency with the ENGL amps in the ua console...but you will spend more money on uad plugins...

the Audient apparently has very nice quality conversion and good Pres and inserts as well as full ADAT...

either would do the job nicely with a few more perks to the UA...
Old 31st January 2014
  #6
Here for the gear
 

Hello, before appearing the new Apollo Twin I decided to buy Audient iD22. iD22 is a very good sound card with perfect AD/DA, mic Pre's, solid body and very very good software ( the matrix in it is a great addition). I was really in love with this device before i buy it. Contains almost everything I need at this stage. What annoys me is that the Sends output signal is hard linked with the Mic/Line inputs. But it is acceptable when use outs 3 and 4 for send s to external gear. So all sound perfect until it comes Apollo Twin just before two weeks at NAAM! Apollo has everything that has iD22, but there are some futures from the future! iD22 is 2-3 years old device. Apollo Twin is brand new and this speaks for innovation! Both have perfect AD/DA, mic Pre's, solid body and very very good software but the Twin offers more: DSP/UAD-Plug-ins/Unison/Better design/Thunderbolt/ - All this speaks for itself! As objectively sounds, i'm Libra .. and I still have a dilemma in my head ... but the the percentages are in favor of the Apollo Twin!
Old 31st January 2014
  #7
Thanks for the replies.

Mostly I am interested in the quality of the preamps.

I am also considering the Apogee Quartet.

Any comment on preferences of the preamps of these three?
Old 1st February 2014
  #8
Here for the gear
 
ProToolsAddict's Avatar
 

I'm in the same boat, wanting to upgrade from my MBox mini. I really liked the ID22 until I saw the Apollo Twin.
I will buy the Apollo Twin because I have 2 UAD1 Pcie cards(that I can't use anymore) and some nice plugins.
This makes the decision easy for me.
Old 2nd February 2014
  #9
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by neogardguitar View Post
Thanks for the replies.

Mostly I am interested in the quality of the preamps.

I am also considering the Apogee Quartet.

Any comment on preferences of the preamps of these three?
I to am comparing the Apollo Twin with the quartet, and cannot decide. Do you think one or the other might be better? I will be recording drums. Specs and consensus is seeming that the apogee quartet is better. Any input?

Last edited by BoundlessRhythm; 2nd February 2014 at 06:05 AM.. Reason: had more to write without upsetting the forum
Old 2nd February 2014
  #10
Lives for gear
The ID22 and the Crimdon use discrete mic preamps. The Apollo uses chips for the preamps PGA2500, just like RME and Apogee.
Old 2nd February 2014
  #11
I would just go with the Apollo twin! I'm looking to get one eventually- mainly for the dsp and better portable pres. I mean, the recordings I make with my motu 8pre sound awesome ad it is, so I can't imagine, at least at this price point, the Quartet being worth the extra $ and minus the dsp than the Twin. Especially with thunderbolt and all that crazy shnaz. Affordable home studio gear gets better every year, and the Twin being as new and multi-functional as it is (not to mention from a great pro company), it seems like the obvious choice. Just anotha opinion!
Old 3rd February 2014
  #12
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vas_co View Post
Apollo has everything that has iD22
IIRC with the iD22 you can have the returns from outboard hit the AD converters directly, but not in the Apollo as they have to go thru the mic pres. But a (if not the) selling point of the Apollo seems to be that you can have lots of mic pres without having lots of mic pres, that shouldn't logically present a problem.
Old 3rd February 2014
  #13
Here for the gear
 

@hyper.real

you're right! In Apollo i have to switch cables every time when i chose to record Mic signal or line signal from outboard gear. I think the biggest dilemma is which converter and mic preamp is better? iD22 or Apollo Twin... miscend hinted at something about ID22 discrete mic preamps.
Old 3rd February 2014
  #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by miscend View Post
The ID22 and the Crimdon use discrete mic preamps. The Apollo uses chips for the preamps PGA2500, just like RME and Apogee.
Can someone explain to me the difference?
Thanks
Old 3rd February 2014
  #15
Lives for gear
 

'discrete mic preamps' - design typically based on transistors
'chips' - design based on off-the-shelf integrated circuits
Old 4th February 2014
  #16
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by miscend View Post
The ID22 and the Crimdon use discrete mic preamps. The Apollo uses chips for the preamps PGA2500, just like RME and Apogee.
The original Firewire Duet (2008) and Ensemble (2007) did use PGA2500 mic pre chips. The Duet 2 (2011) and Quartet (2012) use discrete mic preamps with a 0-75dB gain range and a stepped-gain architecture, meaning the preamp circuit is rearranged for minimum noise and maximum bandwidth depending on the gain setting.
Old 5th February 2014
  #17
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonSpacht View Post
The original Firewire Duet (2008) and Ensemble (2007) did use PGA2500 mic pre chips. The Duet 2 (2011) and Quartet (2012) use discrete mic preamps with a 0-75dB gain range and a stepped-gain architecture, meaning the preamp circuit is rearranged for minimum noise and maximum bandwidth depending on the gain setting.
Hi,
Having examined a Duet 2, I am slightly confused as to the claim of 'discrete mic pre amps'. I have attached 2 photos of the inside of a Duet 2 where it is evident that they are indeed high quality components, but not 'discrete' in the slightest.

Don -- do you have any comments on this?

Having also examined the Audient iD22, which features 8 discrete super low noise transistors in Class-A mic pre front end, this definitely stands up to its claims and delivers on all aspects.

I've spent many hours listening to all the audio interfaces at this price point, and would definitely recommend the superior sounding iD22.

Cheers,
Chris
Attached Thumbnails
audient id22 or universal audio apollo twin?-duet2_close.jpg   audient id22 or universal audio apollo twin?-duet2.jpg  
Old 5th February 2014
  #18
Lives for gear
 

I apologize, I'm not an electrical engineer and was playing a little fast and loose with the terminology. You are right, from the definition of discrete being transistor only, we are not. What I was trying to imply was that we are not using a one chip solution, but use several parts to build the mic-pre, and that has the advantage of an exceptionally wide (padless) gain range that is optimized at each gain level. I said "discrete" thinking "separate." Sorry for the confusion.
Old 6th February 2014
  #19
neogardguitar: Have personally used several Apogee products (excellent service and products in my experience), formerly owned an id22 and have no expertise with the Apollo although the initial reviews are interesting.

Currently use an MH ULN-2 exclusively for acoustic guitar. Really nice product, take a look.

Last edited by dadgad65; 6th February 2014 at 01:40 AM.. Reason: .
Old 6th February 2014
  #20
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by clw123 View Post
I've spent many hours listening to all the audio interfaces at this price point, and would definitely recommend the superior sounding iD22.
Thnx - appreciate your post.
Old 6th February 2014
  #21
Gear Nut
I'm no way an expert on interfaces. I've a very modest set up. In the past Ive owned an Edirol FA-66 and a Saffire pro 40. I got the Audient iD22 a couple weeks ago an I think its amazing. Aside from my guitar its the best musical item I've ever bought. I'm not savy enough to go into tech specs etc but it sounds great to me.
Old 6th February 2014
  #22
Hi, I have the Audient iD22 for a few days. I'm waiting to have some free time to test in detail to do a intensive review, but it will take a few days. Testing the Audient against the Apollo (standar model quad core), the preamps in the Audient are so much musical and fuller, Apollo pres sounds sterile compared. But for me the first great difference is in the DA conversion ... Audient blows away the UA. The DA conversion in the iD22 is so pristine that you can hear every minimal setting difference in a compressor, eq or effect and all the freq range is so detailed and transparent, Apollo tends to sounds a little bit good than real. Both are very great units but Audient is my clear winner.
Old 6th February 2014
  #23
Thanks for all the input.

Not sure I am any more enlightened.

As of today I am leaning towards the Audient.
Old 6th February 2014
  #24
Lives for gear
I've had the id22 since it was released and it's a great interface. The pres are very clean and quiet with plenty of gain and the headphone amp rocks.
Old 7th February 2014
  #25
Right now I'm using an FMR RNP.

Anyone have any thoughts on how the ID22 preamps would compare to the RNP?
Old 15th February 2014
  #26
Quote:
Originally Posted by neogardguitar View Post
Right now I'm using an FMR RNP.

Anyone have any thoughts on how the ID22 preamps would compare to the RNP?
I'd just sell the rnp and put the cash down on the iD22.
Old 15th February 2014
  #27
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoundlessRhythm View Post
I to am comparing the Apollo Twin with the quartet, and cannot decide. Do you think one or the other might be better? I will be recording drums. Specs and consensus is seeming that the apogee quartet is better. Any input?
Apollo Twin hands down. Either way you'll need 4-8 channels adat expansion to record drums. The consensus seems to be that the quality is about even, so with dsp, plug-ins, and thunderbolt (and the price tag), the Twin is clearly the winner IMO...as long as you are mixing in the box.

But the iD22 seems to be a strong contender. I'd say a clear winner over quartet as well.
Old 15th February 2014
  #28
The iD22 have so much better pres and AD/DA than the Apollo (specially DA), the unique advantage of the Apollo is the DSP but it means that you still need to spend more money in UAD plugins (because tha standard included sound so far outdated).
Old 15th February 2014
  #29
For me, it's the Twin vs. the iD22. Twin has it's obvious awesomeness, but it looks like iD22 has a leg up on it in terms of sound quality and i/o, which I am more interested in. You can always get a UAD card. So I'm leaning toward iD22. Now that Apollo is out and at such a great cost, I hope the UAD cards will come down in price.

My dilemma however is that I'm not sure about usb 2.0. I'm afraid the speed may be an issue. iD22's achilles heel.
Old 15th February 2014
  #30
USB 2.0 it's not an issue. I have tried it recording through the 2 pres with send/return inserts and 8 channels through the ADAT and have no problems One think that I loves is the independent DAC for the headphones so it means that you can use it as a third output for monitors (same quality).
๐Ÿ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 52 views: 12069
Avatar for BenJah
BenJah 25th September 2008
replies: 410 views: 104914
Avatar for chinesewhiteman
chinesewhiteman 8th August 2019
replies: 791 views: 158739
Avatar for Nigel
Nigel 11th July 2020
replies: 1296 views: 149543
Avatar for heraldo_jones
heraldo_jones 1st February 2016
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…
๐Ÿ–จ๏ธ Show Printable Version
โœ‰๏ธ Email this Page
๐Ÿ” Search thread
๐ŸŽ™๏ธ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump