), you can use any card with 2 sets of adat lightpipe connectors, although if you don't use a scope card you only get ad/da for your money, no mixing, routing, effects and synths..A16 converter quality.........opinions?
yes, that only looks like a firewire connection. creamware cards have either the z-link connectors which look like firewire, or adat connectors. either way you get 16channels with the a16. if you don't want to use a scope card(the best investment you can make ), you can use any card with 2 sets of adat lightpipe connectors, although if you don't use a scope card you only get ad/da for your money, no mixing, routing, effects and synths..
), you can use any card with 2 sets of adat lightpipe connectors, although if you don't use a scope card you only get ad/da for your money, no mixing, routing, effects and synths..Yeah, Creamware A16U with Scope card seams like a nice idea although it's a bit higher investment I was planing to do from ADA8000 250€ to Creamware with Scope 1700€ 
So I can run the A16U from the Scope card? What kind os synths are ruling on this card? For what kind of music? Any useful plug-ins?
I have already the UAD and Powercore cards in use. Is there any chance that I would ran into conflicts?
BTW, thanks for your answers. Keep it coming regarding the A16U converter's quality.
from ADA8000 250€ to Creamware with Scope 1700€ So I can run the A16U from the Scope card? What kind os synths are ruling on this card? For what kind of music? Any useful plug-ins?
I have already the UAD and Powercore cards in use. Is there any chance that I would ran into conflicts?
BTW, thanks for your answers. Keep it coming regarding the A16U converter's quality.
God is the source of all sounds!
What about using those 1700€ for a much better 8 or 16ch converters and keep the 1820M€ as ADAT link?
all those magazine 'DSP card shootouts' found that Scope, PC and UAD coexisted perfectly (given a proper mobo with good PCI performance) and their bottomline usually was '...get them all if you can afford...'
a Scope card will greatly improve your flexibility in routing and it's generally considered to yield a better mix quality (via the DSP mixer) than native software mixing - quite some folks here use sequencers just for handling the files.
the routing flexibility may not be obvious immediately by reading the specs sheet, but it's a core function you hardly wanna miss once you've used it.
about the synths I can only warn you...
the card will catapult you directly into the hardware domain, regarding quality and substance of sound.
You WILL hear the VSTi stuff with different ears, whatever you try on Scope - be it CWA's trustworthy Minimoog or Prophet emulation, Zarg's Solaris 'all-synths-with-one-stone' or QuantumWave (-table madness), SpaceF's endless Blackbox/Silverdisk system or Wavelength's (occasionally...) sonic brutality... let alone the most versatile Modular synth, that may also serve as a ton of custom special FX...
as mentioned - it's in the routing - whatever source you have, send it into a synth's input, send the synth's output to your UAD, receive the UAD's output and send into another synth, say the Leslie or tube distortion of the Hammond emulation (just to give an example).
Af the end of the chain you still have the Scope mixer with insert, send and busses...
not that I want to suggest to mangle all and every kind of signal, but if a spontaneous idea pops up... just replug some virtual cables and listen in realtime
there's a problem though, with the Emu
there can be only one ASIO active. You cannot have (say) Asio 1-8 of Emu and 9-16 from Scope at the same time active.
So you have to decide...
with a Scope card as the sequencer's Asio driver you can only feed the Emu's output back into the system via it's Adat out. (I dunno about WDM and it's latency, but I wouldn't hold my breath on it...)
or vice versa, but the Scope card is more versatile and has much better FX, even the stock ones are in a different league than the Emu (I think it's still a version of their 10K chip I had on a SBLive)
cheers, Tom
a Scope card will greatly improve your flexibility in routing and it's generally considered to yield a better mix quality (via the DSP mixer) than native software mixing - quite some folks here use sequencers just for handling the files.
the routing flexibility may not be obvious immediately by reading the specs sheet, but it's a core function you hardly wanna miss once you've used it.
about the synths I can only warn you...
the card will catapult you directly into the hardware domain, regarding quality and substance of sound.
You WILL hear the VSTi stuff with different ears, whatever you try on Scope - be it CWA's trustworthy Minimoog or Prophet emulation, Zarg's Solaris 'all-synths-with-one-stone' or QuantumWave (-table madness), SpaceF's endless Blackbox/Silverdisk system or Wavelength's (occasionally...) sonic brutality... let alone the most versatile Modular synth, that may also serve as a ton of custom special FX...
as mentioned - it's in the routing - whatever source you have, send it into a synth's input, send the synth's output to your UAD, receive the UAD's output and send into another synth, say the Leslie or tube distortion of the Hammond emulation (just to give an example).
Af the end of the chain you still have the Scope mixer with insert, send and busses...
not that I want to suggest to mangle all and every kind of signal, but if a spontaneous idea pops up... just replug some virtual cables and listen in realtime
there's a problem though, with the Emu
there can be only one ASIO active. You cannot have (say) Asio 1-8 of Emu and 9-16 from Scope at the same time active.
So you have to decide...
with a Scope card as the sequencer's Asio driver you can only feed the Emu's output back into the system via it's Adat out. (I dunno about WDM and it's latency, but I wouldn't hold my breath on it...)
or vice versa, but the Scope card is more versatile and has much better FX, even the stock ones are in a different league than the Emu (I think it's still a version of their 10K chip I had on a SBLive)
cheers, Tom
I am a little confused now. The Scope has it's own mixing realm? So far I mixed inside Cubase only or going through my Midas Venice 160 for more analog sound. This is what I want to do in the future, that is also why I need 8 more DA converters I do mainly metal bands and some they use the synths as well , but not many.
I will sell my 1820M if I go the Scope route. BTW, will I step into a trap with Scope card? You know, I get a few BASIC plug-ins and few BASIC synths but if I want the REAL stuff from CW than I have to pay for additional PRO software...
Are there any samples so I can hear the SCOPE synth sounds?
Another question - can I still normally mix my stuff inside the Cubase SX and fully use the Scope synths like I can use the VST synths?
I will sell my 1820M if I go the Scope route. BTW, will I step into a trap with Scope card? You know, I get a few BASIC plug-ins and few BASIC synths but if I want the REAL stuff from CW than I have to pay for additional PRO software...
Are there any samples so I can hear the SCOPE synth sounds?
Another question - can I still normally mix my stuff inside the Cubase SX and fully use the Scope synths like I can use the VST synths?
God is the source of all sounds!
oops, sorry for the confusion - but it's not entirely unexpected...
there IS a certain depth in the system, but actually it isn't complicated at all.
if you're familiar with your mixer and external gear, you'll quickly get what it's all about. You have (almost) exactly the same environment, just symbolized on screen with virtual patch cables, but there's one (convenient) difference: you can connect a single source to as many destinations as you like.
Makes it a breeze to A/B - just setup 2 or 3 chains parallel and mute 2 of them on the mixer (or use a virtual switch device - whatever you prefer).
the point with using a Scope mixer (that drives your monitors) and record the direct outs via Asio in a sequencer is that you get a precise image of what's recorded, regardless of the source.
The audio engine of Scope IS excellent and outperforms (probably) 99% of what's in the VST world.
You could also use the card strictly in a VST environment in the so-called XTC mode, and work as you're used to, but most Scope users prefer the SFP mode for flexibility and realtime processing.
Nevertheless you're not restricted, you can have both ways and even alternate between the modes.
For tracking bands 'live' you may also like the VDAT recording device (fakes a bunch of Adats). Check the SFP manual, it's downloadable from CWA's site.
If you consider a 6 DSP card then either the Synth & Sampler or Mix & Master package is included - the 14 DSP cards come with both, reducing the effective price significantly
You're likely to prefer the MM pack for production, but even the 'stock synths' are comparable to the top range of VSTi devices, no kidding.
Do the naive native test yourself:
take an arbitrary VST synth and switch off all and every effect - delay, chorus, flanger, reverb etc...
now listen to the pure oscillator/envelope - pretty flat and boring, isn't it
as with eqs it's easy to take something away, but impossible to dial something into the sound that isn't there at all...
It's a common prejudice to assume if something is included for free, then it's no good. For the heavy side of the spectrum some of the free synths (or modular patches) may even be more appropriate than ultra-smooth oversampled filters.
in the music section of the forum it's usually mentioned which synths were used.
cheers, Tom
there IS a certain depth in the system, but actually it isn't complicated at all.
if you're familiar with your mixer and external gear, you'll quickly get what it's all about. You have (almost) exactly the same environment, just symbolized on screen with virtual patch cables, but there's one (convenient) difference: you can connect a single source to as many destinations as you like.
Makes it a breeze to A/B - just setup 2 or 3 chains parallel and mute 2 of them on the mixer (or use a virtual switch device - whatever you prefer).
the point with using a Scope mixer (that drives your monitors) and record the direct outs via Asio in a sequencer is that you get a precise image of what's recorded, regardless of the source.
The audio engine of Scope IS excellent and outperforms (probably) 99% of what's in the VST world.
You could also use the card strictly in a VST environment in the so-called XTC mode, and work as you're used to, but most Scope users prefer the SFP mode for flexibility and realtime processing.
Nevertheless you're not restricted, you can have both ways and even alternate between the modes.
For tracking bands 'live' you may also like the VDAT recording device (fakes a bunch of Adats). Check the SFP manual, it's downloadable from CWA's site.
If you consider a 6 DSP card then either the Synth & Sampler or Mix & Master package is included - the 14 DSP cards come with both, reducing the effective price significantly
You're likely to prefer the MM pack for production, but even the 'stock synths' are comparable to the top range of VSTi devices, no kidding.
Do the naive native test yourself:
take an arbitrary VST synth and switch off all and every effect - delay, chorus, flanger, reverb etc...
now listen to the pure oscillator/envelope - pretty flat and boring, isn't it
as with eqs it's easy to take something away, but impossible to dial something into the sound that isn't there at all...
It's a common prejudice to assume if something is included for free, then it's no good. For the heavy side of the spectrum some of the free synths (or modular patches) may even be more appropriate than ultra-smooth oversampled filters.
in the music section of the forum it's usually mentioned which synths were used.
cheers, Tom
I did some more search and couldn't find any satisfying 8ch. AD/DA in the 600€ range to connect by light pipe to my 1820M. It's really frustrating
What kind of PCI card would I need to get 16 I/O from A16U if I sell my EMU?
Id this the right card http://www.thomann.de/gb/creamware_home ... ansion.htm
And I still didn't hear enough feedback about the quality of A16U converters compared to EMU for example. Please help.
What kind of PCI card would I need to get 16 I/O from A16U if I sell my EMU?
Id this the right card http://www.thomann.de/gb/creamware_home ... ansion.htm
And I still didn't hear enough feedback about the quality of A16U converters compared to EMU for example. Please help.
God is the source of all sounds!
better than the emu.
a scope home would be great as far as i/o goes, but a scope project is a much better deal and much more usefull in the long run. the a16 has lightpipe connectors on it. it will work with any card with lightpipe i/o. a scope card is a worthy investment, however. it will do a lot for you, and with grammy quality(for grammy quality engineers) sound instead of demo quality like everything else priced less than protools hd.
a scope home would be great as far as i/o goes, but a scope project is a much better deal and much more usefull in the long run. the a16 has lightpipe connectors on it. it will work with any card with lightpipe i/o. a scope card is a worthy investment, however. it will do a lot for you, and with grammy quality(for grammy quality engineers) sound instead of demo quality like everything else priced less than protools hd.
Hmm, it's a big difference between the home and project card in $$$ as I see and the home card will not give me 16 I/O also. Is this right?
Will any of those Scope project cards give me 16I/O without any other I/O card?
Also can you explain what is the gain in different scope project cards? They are all very expensive. The FX is the only one bellow 900€.
1 light pipe gives 8 ch. max?
Sorry for so many questions. I just have to clear these things before opening my valet
Will any of those Scope project cards give me 16I/O without any other I/O card?
Also can you explain what is the gain in different scope project cards? They are all very expensive. The FX is the only one bellow 900€.
1 light pipe gives 8 ch. max?
Sorry for so many questions. I just have to clear these things before opening my valet
God is the source of all sounds!
Scope FX was a special offer once with the Mix and Master pack included - it's kind of NOS (new old stock), no problem if you can get it of course.
It's sold by Thoman for 777 Euro, add 2 Behringer 8000s and you have a 16 channel system for 1.300 - not too bad
if your budget is really tight you might consider a 2nd hand old A16 - the 18bit version, usuall 200-300 on eBay.
But as already mentioned, if the unit has been in heavy use (in particular with the fan deactivated), it may show some wear out.
It's an excellent buy if you can check that it's in good condition, or if you know it hasn't been used for a long time - due to it's 'inferior' specs...
another option would be 2 Adats with dead (or worn out) tape mechanics, if you have some space left in your racks - the meters look funky when active
since you mentioned that you record most stuff with a solid volume, there will be no problems (at all) with the least significant (converter) bits and a (say) Apogee device in front of a full driven guitar stack is a joke imho.
With a classical guitar or a violin that's a different story - of course
cheers, Tom
It's sold by Thoman for 777 Euro, add 2 Behringer 8000s and you have a 16 channel system for 1.300 - not too bad
if your budget is really tight you might consider a 2nd hand old A16 - the 18bit version, usuall 200-300 on eBay.
But as already mentioned, if the unit has been in heavy use (in particular with the fan deactivated), it may show some wear out.
It's an excellent buy if you can check that it's in good condition, or if you know it hasn't been used for a long time - due to it's 'inferior' specs...
another option would be 2 Adats with dead (or worn out) tape mechanics, if you have some space left in your racks - the meters look funky when active
since you mentioned that you record most stuff with a solid volume, there will be no problems (at all) with the least significant (converter) bits and a (say) Apogee device in front of a full driven guitar stack is a joke imho.
With a classical guitar or a violin that's a different story - of course
cheers, Tom
I would like to stay at least on the level of EMU converters, and I am trying to avoid ADA8000 as additional 8 DA beside the EMU.. but who knows if it would be a significant drawback on metal guitars, toms and back vocals.
BTW, I am not doing some demo productions although I use cheap EMU converters!
BTW, I am not doing some demo productions although I use cheap EMU converters!
God is the source of all sounds!
I assumed that you were talking business... seriously
imho that specs waving by EMU and some others is plain nonsense.
A converter should match it's application, nothing else
how it eventually 'sounds' may have entirely different reasons, starting with the mics cable and ending at the rooms acoustic character.
I just wanted to hint that certain applications offer some possibilities to spare cash, while everyone runs after specs hype.
no need to believe me, but I will not try to capture my DX7's 10bit converter at 24bits ...
cheers, Tom
imho that specs waving by EMU and some others is plain nonsense.
A converter should match it's application, nothing else
how it eventually 'sounds' may have entirely different reasons, starting with the mics cable and ending at the rooms acoustic character.
I just wanted to hint that certain applications offer some possibilities to spare cash, while everyone runs after specs hype.
no need to believe me, but I will not try to capture my DX7's 10bit converter at 24bits ...
cheers, Tom
I have ADA8000 in front of me. Just borrowed it from a local shop to test the sound of DA. Also someone mentioned some problems with phase in ADA8000... it would be the cheapest solution.
Anyway, I'll do some tests today and compare it to EMU.
So what you are saying is that the whole thing around expensive converters is just exaggerated and it doesn't make any sense? I wonder what is your bang for the buck converter in your rack and are you doing a home projects or pro production?
Anyway, I'll do some tests today and compare it to EMU.
So what you are saying is that the whole thing around expensive converters is just exaggerated and it doesn't make any sense? I wonder what is your bang for the buck converter in your rack and are you doing a home projects or pro production?
God is the source of all sounds!
it's not about expensive converters - it's about isolated(!) specs - the EMU just happens to be an excellent example with their 'mastering grade 192khz converters found in an expensive ProTools...'statementPurusha wrote:...So what you are saying is that the whole thing around expensive converters is just exaggerated and it doesn't make any sense? ...
I have nothing against EMU, still have their Orchestral Proteus
I know that good gear HAS to be expensive because it's about the complete package (a converter chip is just a few bucks)
the all defining limit for such a device is the precision of the clock - you can easily sacrifice ANY affordable 24 bit converter's last 4 bits UNLESS you have an extra stable clock. That simple.
The correctness of those bits is pure chance - I've once read the clock precision required for a full 20-bit resolution...
that does NOT mean that this or that 24 bit converter doesn't give good results (or 'sounds' good) - but it does mean that the result IS NOT defined by the bit resolution.
They may use a different circuit design, different caps, there may be high quality transformers included, the supply voltage is extra stable etc - you will find a million points to influence the sound, but it's just not in that last quartett of bits
cheers, Tom
I agree. But I also think that over-all hi-end gear isn't worth 5 x more money than the middle range stuff. It has the 5 x higher price because the company knows that there are people who make a lot of money and will always buy the most expensive stuff even if it's just a little bit better than the same thing which cost 5 x less $$$.
Anyway, let's stay on the track here. Who else thinks that the A16 Ultra has better sounding converters than the EMU and is a great bang for the buck?
Anyway, let's stay on the track here. Who else thinks that the A16 Ultra has better sounding converters than the EMU and is a great bang for the buck?
God is the source of all sounds!
that would be a good idea indeed - the only pain with these tests is to get the levels identical - usually 0.5 db isn't perceived louder, but more detailed, transparent... etcPurusha wrote:I have ADA8000 in front of me. ...
Anyway, I'll do some tests today and compare it to EMU...
from what has been published here the A16U stacks up quite well against the RME, the latter with only a slight advance - both these units have BNC connectors for a professional studio clock - the EMU lacks those...
cheers, Tom
As far as I can see EMU has BNC connectors in the sync card. Also I heard only great reports about the EMUs internal clock.astroman wrote:
from what has been published here the A16U stacks up quite well against the RME, the latter with only a slight advance - both these units have BNC connectors for a professional studio clock - the EMU lacks those...
cheers, Tom
God is the source of all sounds!
-
areptiledysfunction
- Posts: 137
- Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 4:00 pm
- Location: Durango, CO
I know Behringer gear gets slagged on a regular basis by lots of folks, but I have used a bit of it over the years and my experience with Behringer gear is as follows:Purusha wrote:I agree. But I also think that over-all hi-end gear isn't worth 5 x more money than the middle range stuff. It has the 5 x higher price because the company knows that there are people who make a lot of money and will always buy the most expensive stuff even if it's just a little bit better than the same thing which cost 5 x less $$$.
Anyway, let's stay on the track here. Who else thinks that the A16 Ultra has better sounding converters than the EMU and is a great bang for the buck?
Ultramatch 2000-worked perfectly for years
Ultramatch Pro 2496-died after 1 month
Eurodesk (forget which one)-very bad noise out of two of the preamps and fader levels were inconsistent on many channels, to the point of being ridiculous.
Ultralink Pro-sonically veiled. I gave it away and felt guilty like I should have paid the guy to take it.
Powerplay headphone amp-caught on fire
BCF 2000-USB port shorted out and fried my motherboard USB port.
I have heard of people having good luck with Behringer gear. I am not one of them. Before you spend your money on the Behringer converter, consider what your time is worth if it dies and you are in a session, plus the time it will take to box it up and return it.
I agree that some audio gear seems to be overpriced, but I have also had fewer problems with audio gear that has a good reputation. with a few exceptions, you usually get what you pay for, IMHO.
