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
Mid vs High End. Really? Audio Interfaces
Old 26th May 2015
  #1
Lives for gear
Mid vs High End. Really?

So I'm wondering about great mid range interfaces like my own Echo 2, or RME, Audent, SPL, Focusrite and why they are so much cheaper than the high end stuff.

Due to limited personal experience, I can't fathom why sensible people are paying four times the price (or more?) of my Echo for a Lyra, for example. I don't believe the entire high end industry is a con or full of fools and snobs, I think I'm missing something. What is it?

Btw please don't ask me to try for myself as I'd love nothing more but I have no means to pay for it and I'm not about to play some faker with a vendor. I don't think it's ethical.
Old 26th May 2015
  #2
Deleted User
Guest
Actually there's no such thing as high end interfaces. Interfaces are a prosumer category. High end users buy converters, preamps, etc. separately.
Old 26th May 2015
  #3
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted User View Post
Actually there's no such thing as high end interfaces. Interfaces are a prosumer category. High end users buy converters, preamps, etc. separately.
Well you still need something to interface those converters to a computer.

Avid refers to Pro Tools HDX hardware as "interfaces" so I think that it's a fair usage.

https://www.avid.com/US/products/fam...ies-interfaces
Old 27th May 2015
  #4
Deleted User
Guest
Sure but that's not what he's talking about. He's comparing all in one interfaces and asking if mid grade stuff is better than low end, which it is somewhat, but none of it compares to high end stuff.
Old 27th May 2015
  #5
Lives for gear
Is the Lyra prosumer?

And what is it about high end separates that sound better? Clearly separates cost more, but when hooked up together to provide the same function, what is the sonic difference? I also appreciate that color in preamps costs money - for tubes, transisters and transformers, but assuming a high end clean preamp like an interface has, what is the difference?

Oh and I have personal experience of the low end stuff and I already know it does'nt sound as good as the mid range stuff.

Last edited by Shaolin; 27th May 2015 at 07:55 AM..
Old 27th May 2015
  #6
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
Why don't you want to try for yourself?

If you get a higher end DAC like the Emotiva DC-1, or Tascam UH-7000, ross martin, etc, you will immediately answer your own question. You can find any of these in the +/- $400 range.

There is a very large difference in audio. Echo sounds very weak in this comparison.

It's not "subtle" either. It's as obvious as changing mic preamps, speakers, whatever. It makes a difference and the money is well spent.

There is a myth on gearslutz that conversion quality "doesn't matter," but this is a huge load of BS.

Once you understand you'll be looking at Apollo, whatever, the nicer multi-channel interfaces for tracking and mixing. The low end stuff won't cut it any more.

It must be heard to be believed. No one but you can answer this question, typing about it really doesn't help anything.

I can't speak about the super high end mastering-grade stuff because I have not tried it.
Old 27th May 2015
  #7
Lives for gear
 
TheRealRoach's Avatar
Beyond sound quality, as many others have mentioned, you're also paying for some level of "future-proofing" because a lot of these units are pretty modular and only do one thing really well. So for example, if you bought a mid-level firewire interface 10 years ago, you're starting to get **** outta luck if you want to upgrade your computer since FW is going the way of the dinosaurs. Many high even stand-alone converters have swappable output cards so you can sub in AES, ADAT, MADI, etc.. and perhaps even protocols that haven't even been invented yet.
Old 27th May 2015
  #8
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaolin View Post
So I'm wondering about great mid range interfaces like my own Echo 2, or RME, Audent, SPL, Focusrite and why they are so much cheaper than the high end stuff.

Due to limited personal experience, I can't fathom why sensible people are paying four times the price (or more?) of my Echo for a Lyra, for example. I don't believe the entire high end industry is a con or full of fools and snobs, I think I'm missing something. What is it?

Btw please don't ask me to try for myself as I'd love nothing more but I have no means to pay for it and I'm not about to play some faker with a vendor. I don't think it's ethical.
I own a focus rite scarlett 18 thingy, an SPL Crimson, several RME interfaces and cards, PT HD systems, Prism ADA, Radar, Apogee (various ones) and a couple of Aurora Lynx.... the one thing I've noted; there is a correlation in price and "how good" the interface is.

Is there a correlation between value and price? less so. You pay double th money but you don't get double the goods. My ADAs cost me thousands - and they ARE still better than any of the cheaper interfaces I have.... but not in a blindingly obvious way. The Scarlett and Crimson are pretty good; especially given the low end price point!
Old 27th May 2015
  #9
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaolin View Post
Is the Lyra prosumer?

And what is it about high end separates that sound better? Clearly separates cost more, but when hooked up together to provide the same function, what is the sonic difference? I also appreciate that color in preamps costs money - for tubes, transisters and transformers, but assuming a high end clean preamp like an interface has, what is the difference?

Oh and I have personal experience of the low end stuff and I already know it does'nt sound as good as the mid range stuff.
Well if you're going for clean/sterile preamps and converters, then I would expect small differences between $1000 worth of gear and $10000 worth of gear. Sterile is sterile, right? But personally I wouldn't use sterile gear unless I was doing audio for video/film.
Old 27th May 2015
  #10
Moderator
 
narcoman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted User View Post
I wouldn't use sterile gear unless I was doing audio for video/film.
I do film.

We defo dont aim at sterile.

Clean. Pure. Maybe

but not sterile. Not in a converter!!!
Old 27th May 2015
  #11
Gear Head
Im sorry but can you please explain to me what you guys mean by sterile?? im assuming you mean a flat uncolored response but that doesn't feel right.
Old 27th May 2015
  #12
Lives for gear
Thanks for the replies so far. It's following the usual GS format - clarifying the actual question in the top few posts, followed by view A (in this case converters make a big difference) swiftly followed by position Z (the differences are not so big).

Few other interesting points on the way too regarding color, compatibility, sterility/color (not sure on that one either...to me sterile means inadequate and lacking as opposed to clean being neutral and accurate)

I never expected a consensus or the answer on a plate so it's all good so far.
Old 28th May 2015
  #13
Deleted User
Guest
Yeah by sterile I just meant clean. How clean can clean get? To me the point of all expensive recording gear is color.
Old 28th May 2015
  #14
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
well there's good clean and bad clean, just like good dirty and bad dirty. to the connoisseur of each there is plenty of variety. a Sytek sounds a lot different from an Audient, a DAV, a Millennia, etc

the notion that clean signal capture does not have nuance and detail to its quality is false. this is true for conversion as well, and EQ, on and on, etc.
Old 28th May 2015
  #15
Lives for gear
 
rhizomeman's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaolin View Post
So I'm wondering about great mid range interfaces like my own Echo 2, or RME, Audent, SPL, Focusrite and why they are so much cheaper than the high end stuff.

Due to limited personal experience, I can't fathom why sensible people are paying four times the price...I think I'm missing something. What is it?
I went from a MOTU 828, to a Duet 1, to a ULN8. The ULN8 sound quality is noticeably "better" than the others - more detail, better balance, more realistic, etc... That's what you are missing - outstanding fidelity.

If you never try higher end stuff, it's fine to just stick with what works for you. No big deal. I was able to get a great deal, which is the only reason I could afford to upgrade.
Old 28th May 2015
  #16
I went from Echo Audio Layla24 to NI Audio Kontrol1 to XoneDB4 to RME UFX. So I started mid to low to somewhat high-end. During this time computers have gotten better. However what I noticed was that recordings with Layla were great (keep in mind I do not make money in this industry).

Buying a laptop forced me into a USB interface (booo!). It was a sad day because Layla had hardware routing flexability which was actually a surprise to me after the fact. At that time I was disappointed with the size of the projects I could work with but this was due to my computer. When I bought the Laptop I got sucked into the idea that a cheaper interface wouldnt be much different. I was wrong.

Recording vocals on the NI Kontrol was very difficult. I could never easily set gain levels and the gain always introduced noise. I didnt have much cash so I stuck with it for a while. 3 years ago I bought the Xone:DB4. I wont go into too much detail with this mixer because it is a high end DJ mixer with an internal sound card.

2 years ago I saved and said I would do things right. So I saved for the RME UFX and have been super pleased ever since. Routing is phenominal. Meaning I didnt have to use audio jack to get 3 audio application to send audio to each other. The drivers actually helped decrease DPC readings. Apparently this has something to do with writing the vendor ID in the drivers. I wont get into that aspect too much because this falls beyond my real knowledge but it makes sense (search Gearslutz). When recording with mics I dont have gain or noise problems. Now if you ask me if the audio recorded from a synth on all 4 interfaces sound different - I couldnt tell you. I had crappy monitors for a while. I had bought Adam A7's shortly before getting the DB4.

There was no earth shattering difference for the brief period between the NI Kontrol and UFX after buying the Adams. I never really tested for sound and didn't care. Driver performance and routing IO flexibility were top of my list.

So if you ask me, yes there is a difference but focus primarily on what fuctionality you need. If you do not need all the ins and outs go for a RME babyface. It is still not cheap but if routing audio and or recording a couple of channels is all you need with solid driver performance, it is worth every penny If you end up having to need 8 analogue ins as a future requirment you can then expand through ADAT.

If you are happy, then stick with what you've got...I miss Layla and would have kept her if it wasn't for a damn computer change. Funny thing is that I am now thinking of ditching my laptop for a rack system....sigh....I hope this helps. Echo was always a hidden gem of a company with little hype and great value.

Last edited by LucidSFX; 28th May 2015 at 02:38 AM.. Reason: Clarification
Old 28th May 2015
  #17
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaolin View Post
Is the Lyra prosumer?

And what is it about high end separates that sound better? Clearly separates cost more, but when hooked up together to provide the same function, what is the sonic difference? I also appreciate that color in preamps costs money - for tubes, transisters and transformers, but assuming a high end clean preamp like an interface has, what is the difference?

Oh and I have personal experience of the low end stuff and I already know it does'nt sound as good as the mid range stuff.
The difference can usually be simplified to the word "real".

Certain gear just makes things sound like they're coming to life in front of your eyes. You feel like you can hear the entire sound exactly how it was meant to be... and not just a representation of that sound.
Old 28th May 2015
  #18
Lives for gear
Thanks again for the replies. All interesting. The trend seems to suggest that mid range stuff is not that far off high end except for various types of character, future proofing, connectivity etc and that high end separates do bump up costs. But these features typically matter to a commercial studio. (I get color from Nebula, as I can't afford 20 different pres, eqs etc. Compromise? Probably.)

Monkeyxx you stand alone at this point I'm afraid. You said the differences are not subtle. You also said that there's different kinds of clean. You've said you just need to hear for yourself and you'll know. I really wish I could, but had to start this thread instead.

I'd love to read about other peoples' journey up the ladder. What they noticed as they went up is really useful to those debating whether to spend cash. Did they, for example, find like LucidSFX that maybe it was the monitors that were the weak link? My suspicion is that that is quite common. Blaming the converters instead of room monitors preamp etc. I think we can accept that these can easily obscure the benefits of top gear, but details would be illuminating.

Last edited by Shaolin; 28th May 2015 at 12:33 PM..
Old 28th May 2015
  #19
Deleted User
Guest
Nebula is great but no substitute for a real pre. If I were you I'd get at least one real pre (I.e. not bundled into an interface.)
Old 28th May 2015
  #20
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaolin View Post
I'd love to read about other peoples' journey up the ladder. What they noticed as they went up is really useful to those debating whether to spend cash. Did they, for example, find like LucidSFX that maybe it was the monitors that were the weak link? My suspicion is that that is quite common. Blaming the converters instead of room monitors preamp etc. I think we can accept that these can easily obscure the benefits of top gear, but details would be illuminating.
Sure... I think my experiences so far may be helpful. I'll try to touch every major part of my journey thus far. I'll stick to just my "sound difference" observations

I started with an MAudio MobilePre.
In general, it's considered a sh-tty interface for lack of a better word. Spec wise it's garbage. It's cheap. I had an AKG Perception 100 mic with it... stock preamps. In retrospect, I got an amateur sound out of the interface. HOWEVER... once I recorded in a naturally good sounding room... I got some really good recordings out of it... despite how "inferior" the mic and interface are. One song I tracked is still one of my favorite recordings. It doesn't sound hyper realistic... but it's true that when you get the acoustics correct then almost anything will work and be enjoyable. That's the word... the resulting recording was enjoyable.

I then upgraded to a MAudio Firewire410. I noticed the preamps had more gain and were less grainy. There was less noise in my recordings. I had to do a little bit less work.

Then I up/sidegraded to an Echo Audiofire4. I noticed the preamps were even cleaner. The mic felt a little more difficult to clip. The resulting sound was a little crispier but nothing to write home about. The BIG BIG difference was the DA conversion! I almost cried... b/c it felt like a blanket was lifted off my old instrumentals and I could finally hear the sounds properly. I figured out it was the DA making the difference by listening to already recorded sounds that I knew very well... and hearing different characteristics about them that I seriously never heard before. The tail ends of my favorite crash sounds were absolutely horrible.... so it helped me most with mixing.

Then I grabbed my first external preamp.. a Project Studios VTB. I liked it... it gave whatever I put in it more "balls" from the tube. Made things sound stronger and more aggressive. The biggest thing I noticed was I could NOT clip my voice w/ the same AKG Perception mic that I had always had clipping issues. So... I could give the gain more juice without being afraid of clipping my vocals. That really helped with performance. I didn't have to worry nearly as much.

Then I upgraded to RME UCX. Oh my god... this was the biggest overall preamp difference. The UCX sounded super clean whether it was 40db or 63db of gain. That was insane. Also... the voice begin sounding more real... it felt like the person was right in the room with me. I didn't feel like I was listening to a recording.. I felt like I was listening live. The definition of the preamps was a huge improvement. The DA was similar to the Audiofire4... but a little darker... and a little more accurate. The Audiofire4 was perhaps a little bright. I could mix on both though. I would never ever want to mix on the cheaper old MAudio stuff I used (I'm sure they've improved since then as technology has advanced).

Now... I shelled out and bought a WarmAudio Tonebeast, run into Warm Audio WA76, and into a Black Lion Audio Sparrow Red. My f-cking god. This stuff isn't considered "highend" with exception for maybe the Sparrow depending on who you ask.... but the units are very good quality at a budget cost. The difference now is that not only is the sound real..... but it feels like I can hear "around" the sound if that makes sense. Like... imagine looking at a painting and it's in 2D. Now... imagine looking at that same painting in 3D. That's the difference. When I hear the voice... it sounds like I can hear behind the vocal too. It has more weight & depth. This is subtle... you have to know what you're looking for and be experienced to notice it. But.... it's the difference between good budget quality and professional major studio. I feel like I can dial up EXACTLY what I want my voice to sound like... this is how my voice should sound on everything. It's the best I've ever sounded... and I'm not even in a good recording environment. So.. granted, there is background noise that I don't like... but the voice itself sounds exactly how I want it to sound. No combination of UCX preamp + UAD 1176 plugins has gotten be this sound... though it's certainly comparable.




So my final observations are:

1) Room acoustics are king. If you have good acoustics... any equipment you record with will sound good enough to use and be enjoyable. Even the cheap stuff isn't SOO bad that it yields a bad result in a good room. They're not THAT inferior
2) The difference as you go up the chain are related to noise, clean gain, tone, definition, clarity, "real"ness.
3) Performance is huge. Cheap still may not perform quite as good, as I explained above.
4) Just realize lastly that if you were to do a shootout with all of this gear... there's no way you can pick out which one is which. So.... try not to worry about all of this too much. The most important things to worry about are acoustics and mixing skills. That's what really yields enjoyable songs. Don't go out trying to break the bank to upgrade. BUT.... If you can afford to do so... upgrading is worth it, b/c you do get improvements in your sound if you are experienced enough to notice.
Old 28th May 2015
  #21
Lives for gear
Also... I doubt any of the current interfaces on the market are so bad that you can't get a very good sound in a good room. You can probably get a great sound w/ a great mic in a great room too. Nothing on the market should be that behind the teams... everybody is using higher quality chips now... it's just the designs are different.
Old 28th May 2015
  #22
JAT
Lives for gear
There are plenty of external factors that have to do with how well you hear the differences between music hardware. The most important thing is yourself and your ear training. It is a matter of experience - until you know what to listen for and to, even fresh young ears can't differentiate good from better. It doesn't matter if you can hear from 18 Hz to 22 kHz if you don't recognize what is considered "better." Mastering is often considered the most stringent talent, but often the good mastering engineers are old farts who can no longer hear the top end like a youngster or dog. But they know what they can hear and know how to use the info that does trickle in to make a better recording.

Another factor is the listening environment, including speakers, room, etc. Even the best mastering engineer cant hear what ain't there or is hidden under room reflections. Which is why they have impressive speakers, tuned rooms etc. If your speakers start going all s***** under 100 Hz until they disappear at 55, you are going to have problems w/ the bass.

There is a difference between a basic interface w/ cheap transformerless preamps and a discrete, high-end stereo channel. But not as much as you would think, which causes a lot of problems if you 'never heard the difference. "It was like a veil was lifted" might as well be veal. But you'll never understand the difference either if you never use good hardware.

In the industry, people use expensive stuff as a way of signaling I'm a pro. And many of them can use their expensive tools and toys to make a sonic difference, subtle but real, that does show up in the final product.
Old 28th May 2015
  #23
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaolin View Post
Thanks again for the replies. All interesting. The trend seems to suggest that mid range stuff is not that far off high end except for various types of character, future proofing, connectivity etc and that high end separates do bump up costs. But these features typically matter to a commercial studio. (I get color from Nebula, as I can't afford 20 different pres, eqs etc. Compromise? Probably.)

Monkeyxx you stand alone at this point I'm afraid. You said the differences are not subtle. You also said that there's different kinds of clean. You've said you just need to hear for yourself and you'll know. I really wish I could, but had to start this thread instead.

I'd love to read about other peoples' journey up the ladder. What they noticed as they went up is really useful to those debating whether to spend cash. Did they, for example, find like LucidSFX that maybe it was the monitors that were the weak link? My suspicion is that that is quite common. Blaming the converters instead of room monitors preamp etc. I think we can accept that these can easily obscure the benefits of top gear, but details would be illuminating.
I'm not sure what you mean by mid-end. To me, the Echo stuff is low end, I think it has a lot of problems.

When you step up to something like an Audient, Apogee, whatever, you are getting closer to what I consider "high end."

I think you have made the wrong conclusion. If you re-read the thread people keep saying things like "outstanding fidelity" "realness" "sense of space" in regards to better conversion. Not just me.

If you're happy with where you are, that's fine. I just want you to know there's a lot of room for improvement if you ever want it. Some listeners are more picky, or less picky than others.

However the monitor speakers, room treatments you mentioned are just as critical. Equally critical--but conversion is still a big factor, not to be ignored.

I'm a very picky listener, so that's where my point of view comes from.

By the way my journey was something like Aardvark Q10, to Audiofire12, then to Apollo, Emotiva DC-1, and Tascam UH-7000 as my current main system.

My entire rig changed at the same time, not just the conversion. But going from the Echo to the Emotiva on the same speakers was a revelatory experience. I could hear so much more.

This is why I would recommend a high end DAC to any person that's serious about audio. My current recommendation would be the Tascam UH-7000, or the Emotiva DC-1. Either one is in a price range that most people can realistically afford.

If you re-read the thread, other people are saying the same thing.
Old 28th May 2015
  #24
Lives for gear
Guys, again, thanks for the input. I think I'll reread more than a few times. I am satisfied with my Echo but acutely aware that I might have hit a glass ceiling. I will listen to the Echo again and decide if I can hear 'real'. That grabs me.

Monkeyxx, when you mention Audient, do you think that their new ID14 is step up from the Echo? I could deinitely consider that and then maybe add in a pre like the GAP 73 or WARM for color (someday). I'm also not averse to the Tascam and will check it out, thanks.
Old 28th May 2015
  #25
Lives for gear
Echo is not low end... that's silly. They have great internal design for the price. I don't know about the 2, but I can tell you the Audiofire sounded great and is right there w/ my RME in terms of DA. And the AD/preamps are fine.. not low end at all. Also the drivers are rock stable, more stable than other brands. Good quality company, it's a shame they stopped production.

The only thing I forgot to mention in my blurb is that monitoring plays just as much of a role in your recording also. The better you can hear your results, the better you can mix. I've upgraded that several times along the way too.. from MAudio BX5 to Yamaha HS50m to JBL LSR 4326. Right now I'm on Sennheiser HD 650 headphones, mixes are coming out great. When I'm able to buy a new pair of monitors it'll be something closer to higher end.. b/c it's super important. If you can't hear what you're doing.. how do you know if it's good quality?
Old 28th May 2015
  #26
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaolin View Post
Guys, again, thanks for the input. I think I'll reread more than a few times. I am satisfied with my Echo but acutely aware that I might have hit a glass ceiling. I will listen to the Echo again and decide if I can hear 'real'. That grabs me.

Monkeyxx, when you mention Audient, do you think that their new ID14 is step up from the Echo? I could deinitely consider that and then maybe add in a pre like the GAP 73 or WARM for color (someday). I'm also not averse to the Tascam and will check it out, thanks.
I really do think the Audient would be a step up. And the iD14 is at a very appealing price point for that type of quality.

Subjectively, the Burr Brown DA and AD chips are some of my most favorite components in this kind of gear, the Audient uses them. The Tascam UH-7000 does as well. The DAC on the Audient (iD22 in my case) hangs in there with the Tascam, I just find the Tascam to be slightly more transparent and natural. It would be easy to do mixing work on either one.

If you can step up to the iD22 you are getting a little more quality and features. But the iD14, I suspect it would be a big learning experience for you to hear something like that in your own room. I would expect it to sound pretty high end based on my experience with Audient gear.

If you have some good headphones you can expect a jump in quality there too.
Old 28th May 2015
  #27
Lives for gear
ooh. I think I can manage a genuine listen to the id14. Try to a/b with my Echo.
Old 28th May 2015
  #28
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted User View Post
Sure but that's not what he's talking about. He's comparing all in one interfaces and asking if mid grade stuff is better than low end, which it is somewhat, but none of it compares to high end stuff.
I could not disagree more.

IMO, the most important aspect of recording and mixing is a properly treated room and an excellent pair of monitors. I'm not talking about some Auralex foam and some $700 dollar monitors but true treatment like that offered by GIK and high end monitors like Focal, Barefoots, et al.

Great sounding records were made in the 80's using digital converters that pale in comparison to today's offerings. While I haven't used the "low end" boxes mentioned in the thread starter, I have used the Steinberg UR22 and was blown away by the quality of conversion, so much so that I sold my Apogee Rosetta 800 and DA16x and replaced them with a Steinberg UR824. My mixes and recordings since switching to the UR824 are clearer sounding and far more revealing than the old Apogee's.

The bottom line is that if you don't have a great room, aren't recording excellent sounding instruments and don't understand how to mix, expensive convertors won't make a bit of difference because in my experience, it just doesn't matter much, if at all.
Old 28th May 2015
  #29
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike P View Post
I could not disagree more.

IMO, the most important aspect of recording and mixing is a properly treated room and an excellent pair of monitors. I'm not talking about some Auralex foam and some $700 dollar monitors but true treatment like that offered by GIK and high end monitors like Focal, Barefoots, et al.

Great sounding records were made in the 80's using digital converters that pale in comparison to today's offerings. While I haven't used the "low end" boxes mentioned in the thread starter, I have used the Steinberg UR22 and was blown away by the quality of conversion, so much so that I sold my Apogee Rosetta 800 and DA16x and replaced them with a Steinberg UR824. My mixes and recordings since switching to the UR824 are clearer sounding and far more revealing than the old Apogee's.

The bottom line is that if you don't have a great room, aren't recording excellent sounding instruments and don't understand how to mix, expensive convertors won't make a bit of difference because in my experience, it just doesn't matter much, if at all.
I don't know if you've tried high end converters like Burl or UA 2192, but they're much better than the low/mid grade units you mentioned.

But even bigger than the difference between all-in-one-interface converters and dedicated converters is the difference between interface preamps and dedicated preamps.
Old 28th May 2015
  #30
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted User View Post
I don't know if you've tried high end converters like Burl or UA 2192, but they're much better than the low/mid grade units you mentioned.
Benchmark, too. I ended up either selling or sending back all of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted User View Post
But even bigger than the difference between all-in-one-interface converters and dedicated converters is the difference between interface preamps and dedicated preamps.
I use dedicated mic pre's and compressors and haven't used any of the current integrated offerings. The new Focusrite Clarett looks appealing due to the ISA mic pre's but I would imagine that with proper gain staging, the "right" mic choice, etc., very good results could be achieved from the mid-level boxes.
Topic:
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
Forum Jump
Forum Jump