The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
RME Babyface vs Universal audio twin solo/duo
Old 27th February 2015
  #31
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Apollo, if you want to track with UAD processing.

The software controlled preamps, allow you to get a polished tone up front, before the signal hits the A/D.

Changed my workflow I can get a nice warm tone for my guitar without having to set up an amp and mikes.

UAD processing also has a nice impact on my mixes.

Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #32
Lives for gear
 
jweisbin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPhoenix ➡️
BTW.. Babyface does have compression. It's part of Total Mix FX. I don't know what the previous poster is talking about.
where?

Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #33
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandano ➡️
Here are my 2 cents on the Apollo Twin:

An artist for whom I mix uses an Apollo Twin and so I use it whenever I work from his home studio.


Good:

- The preamps sound clean (haven't done any direct comparisons though).

- It has all the features you need if the amount if I/Os doesn't limit you.

- The thing feels very high-quality, it's solidly built.

- Neat: A push on the knob mutes or un-mutes the currently selected output.


Not so good:

- The usability of the one-knob design sucks. I don't know why they built only one knob into this thing - probably because it looks fancy - but it sucks for one obvious reason: You can ever only control one thing at a time. Other interfaces have a gain knob for almost every input and output, so you can quickly turn down your speakers a bit, turn up your headphones at the same time, and turn down the gain on the mic preamp, too. With the Apollo Twin, you have to select the channel you want you change first. Select the speakers, then turn down the volume. Then switch the selection to the headphone output, then turn up the volume there. Then switch the selection to the mic preamp - you get what I mean. This design with the one knob is as unnecessary as it is a pain in the ass for your workflow. You want to turn up the mic preamp gain real quick while recording but oops - all you did is accidentally turn up the volume of the monitor speakers because you forgot the monitor output was still selected and you forgot to switch to the mic input first. It just sucks and there is no reason for it to be this way.

- Even though it basically is a 2-in/2-out interface and you would hence assume it is quite portable - it is not. It is heavy and bulky and a pain to carry around. It's too big for what it is. An RME Babyface or an Apogee Duet is much smaller and much more portable and yet it offers the same features and pretty much the same quality preamps and converters (please spare me with any arguments about the sonic superiority of the Apollo, because there really isn't much of a difference between all three of the above).

- The UAD plug-ins may be awesome, but it absolutely sucks that you can only use them with the UAD hardware. I would never ever make myself dependent on dedicated hardware for my plug-ins, no matter how good the plug-ins sound. Whenever I'm not in this artist's studio (and hence not connected to the Apollo), I can't use the UAD plug-ins. What a pain in the ass! This effectively leads to me not using any UAD plug-ins at all, because I need to be able to work on my projects on the road or at home or at a different studio where there might not be any UAD hardware. I recommend everybody: Don't invest in plug-ins that need dedicated external DSP hardware. Modern computers are fast enough to do the processing of your plug-ins natively and external DSP hardware just chains you to a certain location and is expensive on top of that. Before I'd buy a UAD card I'd rather invest that money into a new multi-core Mac.
Mmm, ok. And this multi-core Mac(assuming you're talking about a nMac Pro) won't chain you to a certain location?

Anyway, to each his/her own. I think pretty much everybody understands that today you buy a UAD system for the plugins and not the processing power it brings you. I'm glad UA decided on a hardware system that makes it impossible to crack so they get revenue from their hard work and garantees everyone a somewhat certain future... Camel Audio anyone?

KA
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #34
Lives for gear
 
5 Reviews written
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandano ➡️
Here are my 2 cents on the Apollo Twin:

An artist for whom I mix uses an Apollo Twin and so I use it whenever I work from his home studio.


Good:

- The preamps sound clean (haven't done any direct comparisons though).

- It has all the features you need if the amount if I/Os doesn't limit you.

- The thing feels very high-quality, it's solidly built.

- Neat: A push on the knob mutes or un-mutes the currently selected output.


Not so good:

- The usability of the one-knob design sucks. I don't know why they built only one knob into this thing - probably because it looks fancy - but it sucks for one obvious reason: You can ever only control one thing at a time. Other interfaces have a gain knob for almost every input and output, so you can quickly turn down your speakers a bit, turn up your headphones at the same time, and turn down the gain on the mic preamp, too. With the Apollo Twin, you have to select the channel you want you change first. Select the speakers, then turn down the volume. Then switch the selection to the headphone output, then turn up the volume there. Then switch the selection to the mic preamp - you get what I mean. This design with the one knob is as unnecessary as it is a pain in the ass for your workflow. You want to turn up the mic preamp gain real quick while recording but oops - all you did is accidentally turn up the volume of the monitor speakers because you forgot the monitor output was still selected and you forgot to switch to the mic input first. It just sucks and there is no reason for it to be this way.

- Even though it basically is a 2-in/2-out interface and you would hence assume it is quite portable - it is not. It is heavy and bulky and a pain to carry around. It's too big for what it is. An RME Babyface or an Apogee Duet is much smaller and much more portable and yet it offers the same features and pretty much the same quality preamps and converters (please spare me with any arguments about the sonic superiority of the Apollo, because there really isn't much of a difference between all three of the above).

- The UAD plug-ins may be awesome, but it absolutely sucks that you can only use them with the UAD hardware. I would never ever make myself dependent on dedicated hardware for my plug-ins, no matter how good the plug-ins sound. Whenever I'm not in this artist's studio (and hence not connected to the Apollo), I can't use the UAD plug-ins. What a pain in the ass! This effectively leads to me not using any UAD plug-ins at all, because I need to be able to work on my projects on the road or at home or at a different studio where there might not be any UAD hardware. I recommend everybody: Don't invest in plug-ins that need dedicated external DSP hardware. Modern computers are fast enough to do the processing of your plug-ins natively and external DSP hardware just chains you to a certain location and is expensive on top of that. Before I'd buy a UAD card I'd rather invest that money into a new multi-core Mac.
I get your point, but the the satellites are very portable and plenty easy to bring anywhere, if you as a mixer want to use UAD. It's not a bad value either considering (duo for example) it comes with a nice suite. The waves equivalents(the JJP & CLA classics) would run you about the same price... I'm still on the fence as to whether I want to jump on the UAD band wagon, but it's certainly not a bad product and a pretty decent value.

Plus, if you're mixing something someone else recorded, who cares what they did with it(UAD processing, or otherwise)? Would you not start with a clean slate anyway, maybe just using their rough for reference if needed?
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #35
Lives for gear
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPhoenix ➡️

BTW.. Babyface does have compression. It's part of Total Mix FX. I don't know what the previous poster is talking about.
No it doesn't. It has EQ, where as the UFX for example also has compression in Totalmix. Apparently the FPGA in the Babyface cannot cater for the compression algo.
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #36
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by KorgAddict ➡️
Mmm, ok. And this multi-core Mac(assuming you're talking about a nMac Pro) won't chain you to a certain location?
Well first of all, I wasn't necessarily talking about a Mac Pro, it could also be a quad-core MacBook. But more importantly, even if we were talking about a Mac Pro, then there is still a difference: You will find a powerful Windows or Mac computer anywhere - in any studio, in anybody's home, everywhere. So you could use your DAW and plug-ins anywhere you go. For iLok-dependent software this is entirely true, for other plug-ins or DAWs it is not always entirely true since it might sometimes be a hassle to get your plug-ins verified on a new machine, but even that is still a big difference to UAD where you need to have a specific piece of hardware in place or nothing goes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KorgAddict ➡️
I'm glad UA decided on a hardware system that makes it impossible to crack so they get revenue from their hard work and garantees everyone a somewhat certain future...
Sure, but there are also a lot of people who will dismiss UAD plug-ins for the very reasons I listed above. One major studio I work for didn't invest in UAD plug-ins because the engineers advised against it for the lack of flexibility and portability. They still have a couple of Apollos because it's just a very good interface, but they don't invest in the plug-ins because there are plenty equivalent alternatives out there that do not chain you to one specific piece of hardware. Whether I buy UA's 1176 emulation or Softube's 1176 emulation or Native Instruments' 1176 emulation doesn't make a difference (yes yes, someone will of course say now that they don't sound the same and blabla, but spare me with that, I've used them all extensively and there are even videos on youtube proving that they more or less phase-cancel each other with the right settings dialed). All three sound good, but the latter two are native and thus more flexible and hence better for me as a user.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KorgAddict ➡️
Camel Audio anyone?
Camel Audio was almost certainly bought by Apple my friend. I don't know if they are such a good example to prove your point that plug-in companies who don't force you to use useless external DSP hardware aren't making enough money
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #37
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by chinesewhiteman ➡️
I get your point, but the the satellites are very portable and plenty easy to bring anywhere, if you as a mixer want to use UAD. It's not a bad value either considering (duo for example) it comes with a nice suite. The waves equivalents(the JJP & CLA classics) would run you about the same price... I'm still on the fence as to whether I want to jump on the UAD band wagon, but it's certainly not a bad product and a pretty decent value.
Ok, the satellites are kiiiiiinda portable. It's still no fun to carry them around unless you have a car. But in New York City I don't get around by car and the less hardware I have to take from place to place, the better. And Yes, it's not a bad value, but why do UA have to FORCE you to use their hardware - that's what I don't like. It's cool that you CAN use their hardware to take load off of your system whenever you're in the studio and have the UAD hardware around, but why couldn't they give the engineer the freedom to run the plug-ins natively if needed. I don't know how long you've been doing this, but I've seen so many situations where it caused so many inconveniences for engineers that UAD requires dedicated hardware.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chinesewhiteman ➡️
The waves equivalents(the JJP & CLA classics) would run you about the same price... I'm still on the fence as to whether I want to jump on the UAD band wagon, but it's certainly not a bad product and a pretty decent value.
That's exactly the point: Equivalent alternatives in terms of both quality and price exist aplenty. You have a lot of companies in the same price league, and you have a lot of companies that offer more affordable plug-ins at still the same quality. Don't just think Waves, also think all the other plug-in companies out there. I don't even want to name any because there are so many companies offering such great plug-ins. If you don't have the chance to demo UAD plug-ins against other plug-ins, read reviews. You will find that UAD plug-ins are always being praised, but the exact same goes for so many other plug-ins. At the end of the day, you as an engineer or producer make all the difference in the world. I can make you the exact same sounding mix (well, almost at least) on UAD plug-ins, stock plug-ins, Waves plug-ins, Softube plug-ins, Slate plug-ins, or whatever you give me. The truth is that the vast majority of plug-ins out there are great plug-ins and only the minority of plug-ins are bad. It's harder to find a bad EQ plug-in out there than a great one.

I'm not saying don't do it, but definitely think twice how much the UAD plug-ins are worth to you for the price of having to have that satellite with you wherever you need to work. You get the same quality plug-ins elsewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chinesewhiteman ➡️
Plus, if you're mixing something someone else recorded, who cares what they did with it(UAD processing, or otherwise)? Would you not start with a clean slate anyway, maybe just using their rough for reference if needed?
Sure, but I'm talking more about your own work and how flexible you are working from wherever you are.
Old 27th February 2015
  #38
Lives for gear
 
EastWest Lurker's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
There are a handful of UD plug-ins that I am not convinced there are native alternatives that sounds as good. For instance, i would buy a UAD card if only to have the EMT Plate 140 and Cooper Time Cube.

That said, I continue to use an RME audio interface because I just don't trust UA (yet, at least) to consistently deliver stable, low latency drivers over many OS updates the way RME has.
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #39
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandano ➡️
Camel Audio was almost certainly bought by Apple my friend. I don't know if they are such a good example to prove your point that plug-in companies who don't force you to use useless external DSP hardware aren't making enough money
Tell that to Windows users. Apple buying them is the equivalent of Camel Audio going south...

My point was only to say that it's all good if you don't like the platform because it doesn't fit your needs, and i don,t give a damn really. But to «advise against it» because of your personal reason, well...

KA
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #40
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by KorgAddict ➡️
Tell that to Windows users. Apple buying them is the equivalent of Camel Audio going south...
I'm afraid I don't understand at all what you mean by that. And I also don't understand what this has to do with the original point you were making about Camel Audio, which was you were implying they went out of business because they didn't make enough money because too few people paid for their plug-ins. I told you that you were wrong because they were bought by Apple and they certainly got a very lucrative deal financially. So I don't really understand what your statement above has to do with it all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KorgAddict ➡️
My point was only to say that it's all good if you don't like the platform because it doesn't fit your needs, and i don,t give a damn really. But to «advise against it» because of your personal reason, well...
KA
I didn't just state an opinion. I didn't just say "I don't like the UAD platform". I gave arguments that are based on facts. I explained that a disadvantage of the UAD system is the lacking portability of your work because you always need a UAD box with you or otherwise you can't use any of your plug-ins (fact). I also explained that for most UAD plug-ins you can get equal-quality native plug-ins for a similar price from other companies (also a fact). In fact, since a lot of UAD plug-ins are made by third party plug-in companies anyway (such as Softube or Sonnox), you can even just buy the exact native copy of the UAD plug-in for a lot of plug-ins.

Take my original post. Under "Not so good" I gave three detailed arguments against the Apollo, namely:

(1) The one-knob design sucks for usability.
(2) It is much heavier and clunkier (and thus not very portable) than other interfaces in the same quality league with a similar I/O offering (RME Babyface or Apogee Duet).
(3) UAD plug-ins come with the disadvantage of running on UAD hardware only.

Can you disprove any of these arguments?

The OP can do with this information whatever she or he likes. I was merely adding that I personally would not invest in plug-ins that require dedicated DSP hardware to run. Sure, I didn't have to add that, but I did. The OP was asking about opinions after all. You gave yours, I gave mine.

I feel you're arguing with me just for the sake of arguing right now. The OP was asking for information and opinions about the Apollo and I gave him both. Your posts, on the other hand, are mostly about attacking my posts and don't contain much usable information for the OP at all. All he knows from what you posted and from your signature is that apparently you feel very strongly for UAD plug-ins.
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Reverb's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandano ➡️

(1) The one-knob design sucks for usability.
(2) It is much heavier and clunkier (and thus not very portable) than other interfaces in the same quality league with a similar I/O offering (RME Babyface or Apogee Duet).
(3) UAD plug-ins come with the disadvantage of running on UAD hardware only.
These are very fair critiques. I would add ( and I think its been mentioned) the bloated cost of the UAD plugins generally and their weak PC driver support.

For some people none of these things matter or outweight the benefits of having access to UAD plugins for tracking and mixing.

As someone who is on PC and prefers truly native plugins, it's problematic and weighs heavily against buying an Appollo.
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #42
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandano ➡️
I'm afraid I don't understand at all what you mean by that. And I also don't understand what this has to do with the original point you were making about Camel Audio, which was you were implying they went out of business because they didn't make enough money because too few people paid for their plug-ins. I told you that you were wrong because they were bought by Apple and they certainly got a very lucrative deal financially. So I don't really understand what your statement above has to do with it all.



I didn't just state an opinion. I didn't just say "I don't like the UAD platform". I gave arguments that are based on facts. I explained that a disadvantage of the UAD system is the lacking portability of your work because you always need a UAD box with you or otherwise you can't use any of your plug-ins (fact). I also explained that for most UAD plug-ins you can get equal-quality native plug-ins for a similar price from other companies (also a fact). In fact, since a lot of UAD plug-ins are made by third party plug-in companies anyway, you can even just buy the exact native copy of the UAD plug-in for a lot of plug-ins.

Take my original post. Under "Not so good" I gave three detailed arguments against the Apollo, being:

(1) The one-knob design sucks for usability.
(2) It is much heavier and clunkier (and thus not very portable) than other interfaces in the same quality league with a similar I/O offering (RME Babyface or Apogee Duet).
(3) UAD plug-ins come with the disadvantage of running on UAD hardware only.

Can you disprove any of these arguments?

The OP can do with this information whatever she or he likes. I was merely adding that I personally would not invest in plug-ins that require dedicated DSP hardware to run. Sure, I didn't have to add that, but I did. The OP was asking about opinions after all. You gave yours, I gave mine.

I feel you're arguing with me just for the sake of arguing right now. The OP was asking for information and opinions about the Apollo and I gave him both. Your posts are mostly about attacking my posts and don't contain much usable information for the OP at all. All he knows from what you posted and from your signature is that apparently you feel very strongly for UAD plug-ins.
I don't want to be an ass and argue about nothing. I'm just presuming Camel Audio been bought because of financial problems, like eMagic were when Apple bought them.

Yes, I feel strong about UAD and I'm an ex RME Babyface user. Both have + and -. I just had a feeling reading that you were imposing your preferences on people. All that is positive about the BF can be unimportant to someone and all that is negative(in your view) about the Twin can be unimportant to someone else compared to the advantages of the Twin/Console combo that the RME doesn't have. Let's agree to disagree, as we say...

KA
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #43
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by KorgAddict ➡️
I don't want to be an ass and argue about nothing. I'm just presuming Camel Audio been bought because of financial problems, like eMagic were when Apple bought them.
I don't want to be an ass either. Although to add one last thing to this off-topic point: I think it's a bit naive to believe that Apple would buy a company if that company is ****ed. There must obviously be some great value in that company for Apple to even show any interest at all, let alone for them to get out their check book. If a company is really, really in trouble, then nobody buys them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KorgAddict ➡️
Both have + and -.
Wouldn't you add most to the quality of this thread then if you elaborated a bit on these + and - they both have in your experience? I don't have much experience with the Babyface for example and would be interested in what other people have to say about it, too.
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #44
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandano ➡️
I don't want to be an ass either. Although to add one last thing to this off-topic point: I think it's a bit naive to believe that Apple would buy a company if that company is ****ed. There must obviously be some great value in that company for Apple to even show any interest at all, let alone for them to get out their check book. If a company is really, really in trouble, then nobody buys them.



Wouldn't you add most to the quality of this thread then if you elaborated a bit on these + and - they both have in your experience? I don't have much experience with the Babyface for example and would be interested in what other people have to say about it, too.
Babyface:
-Great drivers +
-Nice portability +
-Breakout cable -
-TotalMix FX very limited, 90's way of doing recording -

Twin/Console:
-Great Thunderbolt performance +
-«Rounder» sound/better preamps +
-Tracking through Console with UAD FXs and Unisson, without latency=21st century way of doing recording in the digital domain +
-Bulkier and not bus-powered, if you're on the move -
-More expensive platform -

eMagic were bought when in trouble, Steinberg were bought when in trouble, Cakewalk were bought when in trouble. All great companies with great people. With all the money they have, Apple can't buy a company that is not for sale. There,s a difference between the value of the people working for a software company and its financial health. Apple are buying the brain power. That's my view.

KA
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #45
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by KorgAddict ➡️
Babyface:
-Great drivers +
-Nice portability +
-Breakout cable -
-TotalMix FX very limited, 90's way of doing recording -

Twin/Console:
-Great Thunderbolt performance +
-«Rounder» sound/better preamps +
-Tracking through Console with UAD FXs and Unisson, without latency=21st century way of doing recording in the digital domain +
-Bulkier and not bus-powered, if you're on the move -
-More expensive platform -

eMagic were bought when in trouble, Steinberg were bought when in trouble, Cakewalk were bought when in trouble. All great companies with great people. With all the money they have, Apple can't buy a company that is not for sale. There,s a difference between the value of the people working for a software company and its financial health. Apple are buying the brain power. That's my view.

KA
Totalmix is powerful
Usb is more prevelant than tb
And preamp quality is opinion based
Your post was just a bunch of opinions you atrempted to legitamize by adding. + or - to
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #46
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Karloff ➡️
Totalmix is powerful
Usb is more prevelant than tb
And preamp quality is opinion based
Your post was just a bunch of opinions you atrempted to legitamize by adding. + or - to
Boy, tough crowd
Didn't say TM is not powerful but compared to the Twin, it's more limited. Since the OP is comparing the two, and that the Twin is Mac-only, all current Mac have TB, so USB being more prevelant, even if true, is probably not important for the OP. Re the preamp, absolutely it's only my opinion. So, if people can give them, I'll give mine. Only way for the OP to judge is try both for himself...

KA
Old 27th February 2015
  #47
Lives for gear
 
🎧 5 years
Post number 3 by the op states he doesnt have a new computer with TB
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #48
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Karloff ➡️
Post number 3 by the op states he doesnt have a new computer with TB
Oh, ok. Why is he/she asking about the Twin, then? Babyface all the way then... if it was me.

KA
Old 27th February 2015
  #49
Lives for gear
 
kaboom75's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
You can get PCI-e cards that add Thunderbolt II sockets to PC computers. All you need is a PCI -e slot or PCI-e mini slot.

I need an interface for a mic and maybe sometime later a couple of analogue hardware desktop synths. I've made my mind up to get a Babyface everyone raves about them.

Last edited by kaboom75; 27th February 2015 at 10:51 PM..
Old 27th February 2015 | Show parent
  #50
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaboom75 ➡️
You can get PCI-e cards that add Thunderbolt II sockets to PC computers. All you need is a PCI -e slot or PCI-e mini slot.

I need an interface for a mic and maybe sometime later a couple of analogue hardware desktop synths. I've made my mind up to get a Babyface everyone raves about them.
Maybe so but there, but will they work for existing TB devices?

Universal Audio stated that they need a TB framework from Microsoft before they can develop drivers.

For the new MOTU interfaces they are concentrating on USB drivers for Windows, citing lack of suitable TB hardware.

Old 28th February 2015
  #51
Gear Maniac
 
Paschalis I.'s Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
I own the RME Babyface and I;ve got to say tha it rocks.

Low latency, easy install, fantastic drivers that never crash on Windows 7.

Great stuff!
Old 2nd March 2015 | Show parent
  #52
Lives for gear
 
jweisbin's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaboom75 ➡️
You can get PCI-e cards that add Thunderbolt II sockets to PC computers. All you need is a PCI -e slot or PCI-e mini slot.
Only for very select motherboards. AFAIK only Gigabyte and Asus certain models support TB add-on cards, and these have to be made by the same manufacturer as the board and be compatible, because the board needs a special header for the card, plus you have to route your video card output through the card.
Old 18th April 2015 | Show parent
  #53
Quote:
Originally Posted by djazz ➡️
I thought per the computer requirements listed on the UA site, you can use an older Mac with a Thunderbolt to Firewire converter and still use the Apollo.
I haven't been able to locate the FireWire to thunderbolt cables. Everyone says they are there (as do computer searches) but, when you go to purchase them the inputs-outputs are actually FireWire 800-400 not thunderbolt.
Old 18th April 2015 | Show parent
  #54
Tac-2 ZOOM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanson ➡️
AD/DA interface. Which one?
SO everybody, I'm recording Vox, Claps, piano, gtr etc. into my DAW. I compose, produce, use a lot of virtual instruments and plugs, and mix in my native DAW. Setup 32bit float/96KHz.

I need superior sound quality like the million dollar studios BUT I only have a low level budget. Fortunately technology has come a loooong way and are now presenting high quality AD/DA interfaces.

BUT, which one is the ultimate superior interface on this low level budget plan and which one, only one, can kick the ball out of the park like nobody else? I'm talking bout sound quality and trust on what you hear is correct.

You see, I have been using a Digi003fac for much to long and it has completely hold me back from advancing to the million dollar sound. Yes, I'm going for it on a low level budget.

Is it the: UA Apollo Twin, the m-audio, the RME, the SPL crime, the Audient, the DUET 2, the Zoom TAC-2 etc. Which one is my Captain America, my superman my goto friend I can rely on in every situation when tracking, mixing and bouncing? Which one has it all and are the one who will survive the others by many "decades"? Sound quality is the key. Clock, converters etc.
I just got the Zoom TAC-2, replacing an older Duet. No comparison. The Duet quality (both sound and build) is leaps and bounds better. There were no reviews on the ZOOM so, I thought I'd take a chance on it but, the quality is just not there. I plan to make a demo video before sending it back. I'm leaning towards the RME BABYFACE SNOW addition or possibly another DUET. Can't see that there is a difference between the RME BLUE or SILVER???
Old 18th April 2015
  #55
Lives for gear
 
zvukofor's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
No difference in Babyfaces except color.
BTW, there is Babyface Pro coming soon - no more breakout cables, 4 analog inputs...
Old 16th July 2015
  #56
Lives for gear
 
Motor For Music's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Personally I don't see what the OP has to debate, if he's on a PC he has to go RME. On a mac he can go either way. for me the aplollo twin offers more to the recording session, tracking through plugins with near zero latency is a must at any point in the recording process. You diont need to change biffers back an forth to lower latency this can be an issue with a big mix at the final stages.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 52 views: 28670
Avatar for Samuelito
Samuelito 20th February 2010
replies: 2558 views: 493834
Avatar for Nickerz
Nickerz 6 hours ago
replies: 61 views: 14178
Avatar for Transistor
Transistor 21st February 2015
replies: 29 views: 19006
Avatar for lonelypioneer
lonelypioneer 8th November 2021
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace 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…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump