The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Digo002 Questions
Old 25th July 2005
  #1
Gear Nut
 

Digo002 Questions

I'm looking to upgrade my project studio and so far have been leaning towards LynxtwoC, but then I started looking into the Digi002 and it seems as though it might serve my overall purpose better.That is, an 8 track studio that could be expanded easily to 16, sounds good,and can be easily interfaced to other studios.

Here's some questions I've come up with,maybe someone can help me out.

1.) How do the Digi002 converters compare to Lynx,RME ect?

2.) How is the Digi002 for latency during overdubbing,it dosen't appear to have input monitoring capability?

3.) If I add an external converter using the lightpipe I/O will the lack of word clock be a problem,given two seperate clocks running simultaneously?

4.) If I use different converters for the second group of 8 tracks, will the fact that different convertes have different AD conversion latencies be a problem?

5.) Any issues inherent in the Firewire standard I should be aware of? I have an off the shelf emachines pc running at 2.4 ghz but it has a 1394 interface . I'll get rid of any programs I don't need like virus protection ect....

Any other comments on the pros and cons of the Digi002 in a small studio environment are welcome

Thanks
Johnny
Old 25th July 2005
  #2
Lives for gear
 
max cooper's Avatar
 

1) Not as good, IME. Fine until you upgrade; in other words, not embarrasingly bad or anything.

2) This depends on your computer (CPU, RAM, etc.) as you can set the hardware buffer size, DAE playback buffer and CPU useage limit separately. I get great results with a dual 2 Gig G5 with 6 Gigs of RAM.

3) I use a Rosetta 800 with my 002. It syncs thru the lightpipe when connected to the 800. (see attached screen shot.)

4) No more than any other kind of latency is a problem. There are ways around it, but latency is a general pain in the a**

5) Firewire seems to be fine. I've never had a problem. There's a laundry list of stuff to go over when you install PTLE. No big deal.

The 002's been fine. I've had few and far between problems. It doesn what it needs to do and doesn't bug me too much.

If you think you're gonna get an eight banger AD/DA right away, you're in a postition to consider Nuendo, etc. If I didn't have such a fortune invested in RTAS plugins, I'd consider it now. Digidesign limits stuff with PTLE that Nunendo doesn't. For example the rosetta has to connect via ADAT, so it'll only work as an eight in converter up to 48kHz. If I want to record at a higher SR, I have to go in thru the S/PDIF which limits input to two channels at a time. Not a big deal to me, but might be to you. There's other stuff. 16 aux buss channels only. I'll think of the others...
Old 25th July 2005
  #3
Lives for gear
 
max cooper's Avatar
 

****
Attached Thumbnails
Digo002 Questions-picture-7.png  
Old 25th July 2005
  #4
Gear Nut
 

Thanks Max

I'll be operating at 2.4 Ghz with probably 1 gig of ram,but my understanding is that the 002 has a "low latency" mode for oberdubbing.If I use that do you think I will be able to avoid using an external mixing board for monitioring?

One of the concerns I've had about using different AD converters is the different AD converison times resulting in time delay bewteen simultaneosuly recorded tracks. Has this been a problem in your experience?

I'm not looking to add the second a/d/a right away but the fact that I could do it pretty easily when neccesary seems like a big advantage to me.Even if the 002 doesn't sound "quite" as good as say a Lynx. If I do go to 96k I should be able to get 12 tracks out of the 002, which is likely to be enough for most of what I need it for.If not I'm stuck at 44.1,that doesn't seem so bad.
Old 25th July 2005
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Ziggy!!'s Avatar
 

Im no help, but just a thought. A Digi002 is far from the "high end" gear that is discussed here. Its bigger brother Protools|HD is even rarely discussed in here.

You question will get much better and more appropriate responses in the "music computer" section, since protools runs on computers...


Old 25th July 2005
  #6
Lives for gear
 
Gerax's Avatar
 

Quote:
I'm not looking to add the second a/d/a right away but the fact that I could do it pretty easily when neccesary seems like a big advantage to me.Even if the 002 doesn't sound "quite" as good as say a Lynx. If I do go to 96k I should be able to get 12 tracks out of the 002, which is likely to be enough for most of what I need it for.If not I'm stuck at 44.1,that doesn't seem so bad.
The maximum n° of simultaneous tracks you can record @96KHz (or 88.2) is 10, using the 8 analog inputs and the 2 ch Spdif input (provided that you have a dedicated AD converter). It goes up to 18 simultaneous inputs and outputs if you work at standards 44.1/48KHz.
I use the 002R on a self built custom PC (with specs taken from the DUC): apart for the fact that my machine is now aging and that the versions of PT got heavier and heavier on it I'm having no problem with the firewire bus or the likes (I had some minor with PT6.4, now I'm on 6.9 and everything is fine).
As Max Cooper pointed out get a healty dose of Ram and as fast a computer as you can, that'll allow you to run lower latencies and when needed higher tracks and plug in counts.

Hope this helps

L.G.
Old 25th July 2005
  #7
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerax
The maximum n° of simultaneous tracks you can record @96KHz (or 88.2) is 10, using the 8 analog inputs and the 2 ch Spdif input (provided that you have a dedicated AD converter). It goes up to 18 simultaneous inputs and outputs if you work at standards 44.1/48KHz.
I use the 002R on a self built custom PC (with specs taken from the DUC): apart for the fact that my machine is now aging and that the versions of PT got heavier and heavier on it I'm having no problem with the firewire bus or the likes (I had some minor with PT6.4, now I'm on 6.9 and everything is fine).
As Max Cooper pointed out get a healty dose of Ram and as fast a computer as you can, that'll allow you to run lower latencies and when needed higher tracks and plug in counts.

Hope this helps

L.G.
Hi Lorenzo

Thank you for the feedback.But doesn't the 002 operate at 96k with it's own converters.If so,then by adding an 8 input external AD through the ADAT I/O which would mean 4 additional inputs at 96K.Including teh SPDIF which I left out before wouldn't that actually make up to 14 simultaneous channesl of I/O possible?
Old 25th July 2005
  #8
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy!!
Im no help, but just a thought. A Digi002 is far from the "high end" gear that is discussed here. Its bigger brother Protools|HD is even rarely discussed in here.

You question will get much better and more appropriate responses in the "music computer" section, since protools runs on computers...


You are right the 002 is not exactly high end.The main reason I put it here is becasue one of the things I'd like to hear about is a comparison of the 002's converters with that of a Lynx2,which arguably could be high end.

The other reason is that I'd like to be able to upgrade into some higher end converters without getting rid of the thing.With the additional channels afforded by the ADAT I/O it looks like the 002 might be a good way to do that.So I'd also like to find out if there are any hidden problems associated with adding on say 8 channels of, a rossetta,or a lucid or,or whatever.
Old 25th July 2005
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Gerax's Avatar
 

No, it's not possible, because the S/MUX protocol for the ADAT ports on the 002 isn't supported .
Sorry but this is one of the major things (intentionally) overlooked by digidesign in its LE interfaces, as is the lack of a dedicated word clock .
At double SR you are stuck with its 8 analog and 2 SPdif inputs for a total of 10.

Quote:
So I'd also like to find out if there are any hidden problems associated with adding on say 8 channels of, a rossetta,or a lucid or,or whatever.
No issues that I know of: you just clock Pro Tools to the ADAT port in the HW setup panle and you're done. I did it many times with external converters and preamp. The best thing however would be to run all of the digital machines tied to a single word clock master, be it ADAT or Spdif in the 002 and WC to the other devices. Those who did it say they noticed and improvement in the quality of the 002 onboard converters too.

Hope this helps

L.G.
Old 25th July 2005
  #10
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerax
No, it's not possible, because the S/MUX protocol for the ADAT ports on the 002 isn't supported .
Sorry but this is one of the major things (intentionally) overlooked by digidesign in its LE interfaces, as is the lack of a dedicated word clock .
At double SR you are stuck with its 8 analog and 2 SPdif inputs for a total of 10.



No issues that I know of: you just clock Pro Tools to the ADAT port in the HW setup panle and you're done. I did it many times with external converters and preamp. The best thing however would be to run all of the digital machines tied to a single word clock master, be it ADAT or Spdif in the 002 and WC to the other devices. Those who did it say they noticed and improvement in the quality of the 002 onboard converters too.

Hope this helps

L.G.
Interesting,that is very helpful to know. It sounds like what you are saying is that the ADAT interface is simply not usable at 96k. It sounds like If I want 18 simultaneous channels then I am limited to 44.1 khz. Is that correct?

Which begs the next question. How do the 002 converters compare to higher end converters like Lynx, Lucid, Apogee, ect....... at 44.1khz.

Thanks again
Old 25th July 2005
  #11
Lives for gear
 

Regarding PTLE and HD and the person who said LE isn't "high end".

Aside from the HD plug in stucture...would't LE track just as good (at 44.1)as HD if your using Apogee conversion and clocking LE through the apogee internal clock?

I thought the HD system was desirable due to it's expandablilty at higher sample rates, summing, and the plug in structure. But if we're simply tracking at 44.1/24bit on both systems, using apogee conversion, and external dynamics and summing - outside of what I mentioned, what's the advantage of HD at this point?
Old 25th July 2005
  #12
Lives for gear
 
Gerax's Avatar
 

Well...as much as I find myself comfortable with my LE system I have to say that TDM (or HD) and LE are quite different beasts. It's not only expandability that makes HD what it is; I guess you know that the processing structure is different, that LE is native (CPU based) while HD is DSP cards based; processing power is managed by DSP chips that do not have to handle OS and graphic tasks as well...HD isn't limited to 32 tracks as LE is (for the moment, although I sense that this will change with the next release), LE has no surround, as several other features.
This doesn't mean that in the right hands an LE system isn't capable of pro results. As for the fact that the tracking thru external dedicated converters would make the two sytem sound the same...I haven't done a direct AB comparison, so I cannot comment on this; clearly a dedicated AD and DA of better quality would highly improve the performance and sound quality of any 002 system (if you consider the fact that an Rosetta 800 alone costs more than the 002R which also gives you monitoring, firewire connectivity, preamps...), but the issue is that I belive TDM and LE have different ways of data management: the mix buss architecture is different: 32 bit fixed for one and 24bit floating point for the other...that yelds different summing and I guess a different sound...you be the judge.

L.G.
Old 25th July 2005
  #13
Lives for gear
 
blackcatdigi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerax
No, it's not possible, because the S/MUX protocol for the ADAT ports on the 002 isn't supported .
Sorry but this is one of the major things (intentionally) overlooked by digidesign in its LE interfaces, as is the lack of a dedicated word clock
Regarding S/MUX:
Not only on LE but (AFAIK) ALL Digi HW. Major suckage.
Old 25th July 2005
  #14
Lives for gear
 

Right Gerax, I know what your saying. Obviously there are features of the HD system that make it worthwhile.

I'm posing my question from a pure tracking POV though. IE would there be any difference in sound fidelity if I track with 002 using external summing and dynamics and quality conversion as opposed to HD.

OR, what if I tracked in this manner in 002 and then mixed and summed these tracks in HD - would there be any difference?
Old 28th July 2005
  #15
Gear Maniac
 

[QUOTE=johnnyrock]Thanks Max

I'll be operating at 2.4 Ghz with probably 1 gig of ram,but my understanding is that the 002 has a "low latency" mode for oberdubbing.If I use that do you think I will be able to avoid using an external mixing board for monitioring?

Yea, there is a low latency mode but, it shuts of any plugins or sends on that channel. The low latency mode is definitely useable, but my problem is that i can't give a singer a little verb to make them feel comfortable(itb). Unless I do some silly ass routing
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