Sorry if this has been asked before, but do you think an used AD/DA 16X would be a good alternative these days?

Do you think it can offer good conversion, similar to the Apollo?

I would prefer to invest in a Symphony, but I don't have enough money for that right now.

At the crazy price the X series is going for, you would be crazy not to step into the Apogee world, hell it's got big ben clocks etc. But who am I to speak though, I don't use plugs period, so I would have no interest in the other.

I'm very happy with my combination of an RME Fireface 800 interface, connected to an Apogee AD16x + DA16x via ADAT optical. I then have the very flexible DSP software monitoring (totalmix) and the VERY stable drivers of the RME FF800, plus the nice conversion and the BB clock. I love UAD plugins, but I use a UAD2 card to do that. Sure it would be cheaper to perhaps move to the Apollo, but it's monitoring capabilities don't look nearly as flexible as what I can do using the FF800 as the heart of my system. Also I already had nice outboard pres to go with the system, and I only use the RME FF800 pres for talkback and scratch tracks. I'm sure there are folks out there that actually prefer the Apogee X series conversion in general, though I'll admit in my systems using all channels I'm limited to 48k tops but that's ok I mainly track at 44.1 anyway. I guess the main cool thing about the Apollo is to be able to track with the UAD plugins, but I have some hardware options for tracking already. That said until the Apollo can nicely support 4-5 stereo monitor mixes for tracking a full band in the studio live I can't use it.

Yes, I just saw one AD/DA 16X system on ebay at $2500:
Apogee AD16X and DA16X with Symphony Connection | eBay

Do you think it's a good idea to get these for a full band recording? Sometimes I forget that these converters were released in 2004 as well :/

I like your setup, do you use a Mac and Pro Tools along with the RME FF800?

Apogee AD16x is much better than Apollo as is the Rosetta.

Awesome, I need to check this by myself.

Can I hook up Pro Tools 10 to the AD/DA 16X? Can you shed some light on this?

I have read that you can only connect it to a 192 HD system (pardon my ignorance).

I use a symphony and 16x's almost everyday. Both sound great, go for it!

kp

you need to install an apogee x-hd card into the 16x to connect it directly to pro tools cards...not sure if it works with HDx 10 or 11 tho, shouldnt be hard to find out....

kp

thanks!
What DAW do you use along with the AD/DA 16X?

If you want, you can find them on GS even cheaper, as the ebayer if he is a GS and you might could buy even cheaper, I think its a good move to be honest, I use a mac pro tools. RME is good not sure the setup

If you can get by with 8 tracks for now, use a 002r with PT and run firewire and then adat to Apogee.

Pro tools 9 HD Tdm system.

I have a Digi 003+ actually. So can I connect via adat to the Apogee, would it bypass all conversion from the 003?

Yes, there's someone here is selling his AD 16X for $1100 and another one sold both AD and DA for $2000. It's a good deal, but then again I would prefer if these sellers could include the X-HD card. That would be really helpful.

Thanks

YES

Some people don't want to give up those cards.

I'm running my RME FF800 + AD16X + DA16X (via ADAT) system with Pro Tools 10 on a PC.

PT 10 does limit one detail with any 3rd party interface, in regards to live monitoring. PT10 will only allow proper muting/toggling of the record monitoring to one output pair. This being when you are using an interface that supports DSP type monitoring and you don't need PT to even pass signal when the record button is pushed. What this means is I can use my RME/Apogee setup to give me many stereo monitor mixes all with a separate blend of the live mics, however everyone is limited to sharing the one stereo pair in regards to what they hear of the tracks AFTER they are recorded being all the instruments and/or click. The only issue that can arrise if one musicians wants a louder click than everyone else. What I typically do then is use PT to output it's one stereo pair, but I make that one channel with nothing but click, than the other channel is a mono mix of the recorded tracks. Then I can use the RME mixer to give everyone their own level of click panned how they like it, a full stereo mix of the live tracking mics, then their own level of the mono premix of everything else once it goes to tape so to speak. Anyway, this makes it sound more complicated than it is and I only need to go to this extent if I'm recording a full band live with say 4-6 stereo monitoring mixes and folks want different levels of click track.

I believe PT11 continues with this same monitoring gotcha. It's Avid's way of somehow controlling how well PT actually works with 3rd party devices (and perhaps specifically ones with great DSP monitoring that can rival HD systems) as they really wan to sell you HDx systems as their way to give you ultra low latency monitoring. That said, with my RME setup my monitoring latency via the DSP in the interface is super quick at under 2ms which is comprable to an HD system but much cheaper. So point is, with some monitoring workarounds I can (with the RME FF800/Apogee combination) give a full band many stereo monitor mixes during tracking at near zero latency. Keep in mind the limitations of PT10/11 in this regard ONLY come up during overdub work but once its all fully tracked and ready to mix you can then output (and return) as many discrete stems as you have converters to do so. When I mix I can then use all 16 channels of Apogee in and out to route to all my outboard gear and back, giving me a nice flexible hybrid mix setup.

Hope that helps!

I use 002r just for a dongle only.....

Apollo is much better than Apogee AD16x or the Rosetta.

Its newer, has better internal tech...

If you're going into the Apogee world these days, just save the extra and go for the Symphony. No point going for outdated tech that has been surpassed by more modern units (Apollo, Symphony).

And we are not around corner of the Symphony being outdated? If it's not great vintage gear then all gear released today WILL be outdated within the next year or two.

Converter technology hasn't improved much since the AD16x days. They are great converters. Hell, I have an AD8000 and it STILL sounds great next to my Lynx Aurora and Dangerous converters.

Great bottom end.

Cheers

Once the new Mac Pro's land the PCI Express card will be EOL.
It would make sense for them to integrate Thunderbolt directly into the Symphony chassis- certainly would make it better for mobile recording rather than the existing setup needing the Thunderbridge box.

I'm just playing the waiting game right now- I bought my Rosetta's 2 weeks before they made then EOL so don't want to get caught out again.
That said, the Rosetta's sound great.

Never heard the Apollo but they hold their own against the Symphony hardware.

The Apogee 16x is a bargain right now, while there are newer, cooler converters and interfaces, the 16x still hold their own. I would not hesitate to invest in a 16x system. The price is to good to pass up if you can interface it with your system!

I agree with the Thunderbolt, firewire 800 is a hazard, I feel like on video shoots I need to duct tape the thing in, 400 was ok.
The Rosettas have held there own for as many years as they have been out, you just need a great clock with them. After the Symphony gets semi outdated I am sure I will get one, they will be cheap by then.
I am the type guy that does not need the latest tool on the market, sometimes I think my X series are a little to clean even at 44.1, that clock really makes a difference for sure.
But I do love my HEDD 192 for mixdown/mastering, by far a great investment, picked up one used for 2k, it's worth every dime and the knobs are the spice on the pie when needed.

I keep saying this, because there's this weird assumption of inferiority of quality in the UAD products because it comes with the extra processing, but the UA Apollo 16 is a great piece of kit, no qualifiers required. Think of the extra UAD processing as an extra cherry thrown on top, instead of the main reason to purchase it. If you can't get a good sound with this box, it ain't the converters' fault.

Only thing you'll want to remember here, is that as there's only one ADAT port on the 003, you'll be restricted to using only the first 8 channels from the Apogee box. Also, since the 003 doesn't support SMUX, you're stuck with lower sample rates (44.1, 48), which, while not a big deal for you now, could be at some point in the future, if you change your mind.

That is one cherry I don't care for, a few say that many engineers have turned to UAD plugs, I read more threads where more engineers have turned back to hardware, you cannot beat the sound of real hardware even if the difference is in the attack, release whatever. As I said before they have been trying to model guitar amps for years, the only thing they have improved on is less noise, the sound still still missing, for me in plugs? the sound is still missing.
I am sorta glad, I always want "that excuse" where I need my console and racks of hardware, love twisting knobs, and I might add I can build a mix faster on a console vs plugs.
I do understand some are on a budget and plugs is the only way out, do what you gotta do for sure.

OT but a Lucid ADA8824 is a good match for the 003 and can be found for $500.
Limited to 48k but they sound good. You can use the D to A side for monitoring or outboard when mixing. my .02

By all means, I'd prefer to have the hardware as well, but it's not going to stop me from using a tool if it's there, and does a good job, which some of the UAD plugins do. But have you actually used any of the newer plugs they've been releasing?.. I'm not going to say they replace hardware, but they do a more than credible job, and I would never badmouth a piece of kit until I had a chance to use it and test it myself. No offense meant to you and your preferred style of working, of course.