ADA 8000 Purchased.

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Sun Aug 13, 2006 5:45 am

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: scope4live on 2006-08-13 08:38 ]</font>

Hysteric · Post by **Hysteric** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:33 am

Hi,
I'd be interested to know how well the ADA8000 works with Creamware cards. I've been looking at these myself.

Post by **garyb** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:38 am

they work very well.

Hysteric · Post by **Hysteric** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:00 am

Thanks, I have never used ADAT before and although I have downloaded the manual for the ADA8000 am still unsure whether a sync card is needed, I only plan on bringing in stand alone synths nothing that really needs to be synchronised except by midi but am not sure whether I have this concept down or not, any help would be appreciated.

husker · Post by **husker** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:20 am

The ADA8000 is great, and works perfectly with my Pulsar and Pulsar 2. No sync plate necessary. I have the Pulsar as master.

cheers.

Hysteric · Post by **Hysteric** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:34 am

Thanks for that, I'm off to buy another toy.

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 3:12 am

All I need now is a SFP Monitor mixer,.........any ideas gent's?

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:20 am

I`ve heard that the ADA8000 has lower quality converters than the A16.

Is this true, did someone compare them?

Whats about noise level...

I have to add that I have a Behringer mixer and its not that bad and always did its job very good.
So I am not a Behinger hater at all...

husker · Post by **husker** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 12:15 pm

Yes, they are lower qual than the A16, but it is a lot cheaper.

The ADA8000 uses the Alesis ADAT chipset and converters, so it's basically a clone of the Alesis 8 channel ADAT converter box...

Noise level is good, I don't have measurements though.

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:26 pm

I have tested them today, and there is a difference, but I'm using this 4 live work so it won't be as noticable as in recordings. I'll use the A16 Ultra 4 that stuff, if I ever get some time.

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 2:21 pm

and there is a difference

how would you describe the difference...

unclean sound, rolled off highs?

or just sound slightly other compared to A16...

husker · Post by **husker** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 3:47 pm

The differnce is subtle. I can't hear the difference between running my Andromeda A6 via the ADA8000 to scope to ADA8000 to monitors VS straight to monitors, so it's pretty transparent to my ears...

Other ears may have a different opinion

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 4:04 pm

That is a beautiful synth my friend. Those boys did a great job on it 4 live players too. Nice ribbon also.
It is subtle, I agree, but I A/B with vocals, and acoustic instruments where the difference is the most obvious.

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Mon Aug 14, 2006 6:04 pm

so a converter focussed on the source to be recorded can spare a lot of cash...

I've also heard that Behringer's (technical) designs have improved significantly, yet the 'brand factor' remains pretty low and that's the most difficult thing to get out of the head (imho).
Aside from that quality differences are more likely due to powersupply, analog parts (caps in particular) and clock stability.

cheers, Tom

husker · Post by **husker** » Tue Aug 15, 2006 12:48 am

On 2006-08-14 19:04, astroman wrote:
so a converter focussed on the source to be recorded can spare a lot of cash...

Of course...why would it be any different? It's about results, not technical theories or brand bias

Shroomz~> · Post by **Shroomz~>** » Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:33 am

well it's about build quality too & behringer cut most of their costs at the build stage. Their gear is great value for money functionally, but have a really good look at the build quality. I used to have a composer compressor of theirs & I can honestly say it was one of the worst desiged & built pieces of gear I've ever had construction wise. Sonically it did it's job though.

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Tue Aug 15, 2006 6:38 am

I think I remember someone once noting, that the ADA8000 likes to be master.

helldriver · Post by **helldriver** » Tue Aug 15, 2006 6:57 am

I have an ADA8000 and it works perfect. Even its AD Converters are in the same league as the pulsar 2 converter. it also works perfect in master and slave mode.
what can I say, it´s recommendable
the only drawback is that it´s not functioning with higher oversampling rates than 44,1 and 48khz.

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Tue Aug 15, 2006 4:35 pm

Exactly why it is a steal 4 live conversions. I believe that after extasy, and alcholoic beverages, my 40 year old Silvertone tube amp would sound good. My crowd will not be very critical , and wondering ,,,.....is that 96k?

kylie · Post by **kylie** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 6:26 am

husker wrote:Yes, they are lower qual than the A16, but it is a lot cheaper.

The ADA8000 uses the Alesis ADAT chipset and converters, so it's basically a clone of the Alesis 8 channel ADAT converter box...

it's even cheaper when you remember that you get 8 mic preamps for free. they might not be high level, but there sure are some situations where they're good enough.
you could even use them as preamps only and feed 2 of them to your a16u

maybe someone has already tested the motu 8pre and can tell us what you get for roughly double the price? (apart from double sampling rate, as it does s/mux, no analogue line out except the stereo main out, and the ieee1394 interface)

-greetings, markus-