Upgrading audio interface

[Arpangel]

Life is too short, I’m going to relegate my Behringer 1820 to portable duties, and I feel I need to get a better studio interface, things are starting to make something better a bit more justifiable, more recording of acoustic stuff here, more vocals, more interest from radio, I feel I don’t want things like an interface to be in question.
I’m budgeting for a new interface, and new monitors, I’ve made up my mind about a UAD Apollo, but which one? I need it to work with my MacBook Air, running Big Sur, and possibly my iMac, that’s running High Sierra, I’m guessing that’s out? Also USB, or Thunderbolt? I need 8 I/O
I’ve more or less decided on a pair of Neumann KH310's, combined with some room treatment, it’ll be minimal, bass traps, mirror points etc, but better than nothing.
Just need some pointers on the Apollo, which would be the most suitable.
This has to be done, it’s way over due, I’m not just talking about recording my own playing here, this is about other people too, so it's not just about my standards.

[MarkOne]

iMacs from 2011 onwards introduced the Thunderbolt interface, so it should depend on the age of your iMac and the UA drivers

For the number of I/O you are after it looks like you will need the Apollo X8 - Which is thunderbolt, so that kinda makes your decision for you.

Is there a particular reason you have decided on UAD? Is it the DSP? (I think the world is moving away from that these days) or is there another reason?

For maximum future-proofing I'd probably look towards a USB C interface. If I needed the sort of I/O you were after, I'd probably be shortlisting Focusrite (which I know you like) RME (Which I know you don't) and Audient. I've been really impressed with my little Audient iD14 for my tiny little set-up, it's preamps are IMO a little better than my old Focusrite Saffire 56 and my mobile Scarlett 2i4.

But if you have your heart set on a UAD, and want to know about interface compatibility, on your Macs click the apple logo, and then about this Mac, note the details and check on the UA website - But from what I can see the earliest OSX version listed is Catalina 10.15.

Whatever you decide I'd take a beat to look at the options out there.

[jaminem]

Do you need mic pre's or line inputs?
Depending on this you're looking at x6 or X8, unless you have an ADAT converter already, at which point an X4 will do you.

And its gonna be Thunderbolt but since you're Mac, no worries. Bug Sur is still supported, the min for the X stuff is Catalina so you are close to the cusp!

I know you hate RME but they provide support for earlier OS so there is an element of future proofing there if that's important to you....

[ajay_m]

Or do what I did in the other thread regarding the dm3s. I plugged in an at2020 yesterday into it and ramped the gain up to max and put a pair of headphones on and the background noise floor was unnoticeable. It was like having bionic ears, I could here birds singing a couple of hundred yards away that were inaudible otherwise. I've never owned preamps like these, they are superb.
Spec is online you have 106dB dynamic range in to out, and -126dB equivalent input noise at max gain. 0.01% thd and -100dB crosstalk.
I'm pretty confident this is as good as any of the boutique products. Quite a nice mixer thrown in there too

[Hugh Robjohns]

Spec is online you have 106dB dynamic range in to out, and -126dB equivalent input noise at max gain. 0.01% thd and -100dB crosstalk.
I'm pretty confident this is as good as any of the boutique products. Quite a nice mixer thrown in there too

I feel really mean typing this, but while I'm sure the mixer sounds and works brilliantly, those really aren't particularly impressive specs. Far better than most people will ever need, undoubtedly, but... technically... way below current state of the art!

The line in to Omni out dynamic range of the DM3 is given as 106dB and the D-A spec (which is often better than the A-D) is 110dB. Those figures put it almost at the bottom of my dynamic range reviews measurements table.
106dB dynamic range is better than the Behringer ADA8200 which measured 104.5dB, but below the Ferrofish A32 at 111dB. I personally reckon on 118dB dynamic range as the minimum threshold for pro-grade mastering purposes, and state-of-the-art is currently around 127dB-A (AES J17).

Equivalent input noise figures are affected dramatically by the source impedance, the measurement bandwidth, the applied gain, and any weighting factor used... and the Yamaha spec doesn't provide info for any of those parameters! Often a sign that the manufacturer is trying to hide something...

The theoretical goal (a perfectly noise-less preamp) is -131dBu for a 150 Ohm source, 20Hz-20kHz bandwidth, unweighted. State-of-the-art modern preamps providing 60dB of gain typically measure around the -129dBu mark (ie. introducing 2dB of self-noise). The Neve 1073 achieved -125dBu fifty years ago, and so the Yamaha is apparently 1dB quieter!

But a lot of good stuff was, and is, recorded through a 1073, so the DM3 will easily be good enough for most things!

THD of 0.01% means the distortion artefacts are around -80dBFS, and that is obviously above the (24 bit) noise floor. Modern gear can generally achieve 0.001% (-100dBFS) without too much trouble, and some us even an order lower (0.0001% / -120dBFS). So again, competent, but nothing remarkable.

To be fair, -100dB crosstalk at 1kHz is pretty good... although as crosstalk is mostly capacitive and therefore rises with frequency, a more useful figure to quote would have been the crosstalk at 10kHz... which is likely to be less good (but not bad)!

So, having burst your bubble a bit (sorry), in the real world the mixer's performance is more than good enough for its intended applications and way better than anything even the pros had fifty years ago... and they made some really great records with what they had! Ball's in your court!

[sonics]

Unless you do need the DSP in the Apollo, I'd also steer you toward a MOTU, Audient or Clarett interface. I'll not type any more because of the likelihood of your requirement changing by next week!

[ajay_m]

Well, good point as some of the modern high-end gear really does have exceptional specs. But, um, the sound on sound review of the ferrofish a32 says you only got 105dB input to output unless I'm misreading your review. (You called this "disappointing")

I grew up in an era where a good reel to reel tape deck might have managed -70dB as I recall (later on sophisticated noise reduction did improve this) so to me any modern digital system has, as you say, pretty amazing specs.
Still, point taken. Some of these really high end convertors are pretty incredible. That said, microphone self noise and indeed ambient background on any recording involving mics is, I guess, gonna be the limiting factor.
And unfortunately my mk1 ears are definitely on the way out and sadly upgrades are not (yet) available. They now have an upper frequency response around 12KHz and a terrible noise floor due to tinnitus, so any modern system is way beyond my capability to discern limitations. What I do know is this new mixer is certainly much quieter in terms of digital hash which clearly crept in despite balanced cables everywhere. This indicates superb engineering for CMRR at least so I'm ok with a few dB here and there.
I was reading a fascinating article on a CERN project where they wanted voltmeters that had 8 digits of precision and built their own. Incredibly, the analogue to digital convertor chip at the heart of the design only costs £25. We certainly love in a golden age for precision audio processing!

[James Perrett]

I think I'm right in saying that Tony has used a Studiomaster Mixdown console. In which case he'll be used to an EIN of -129dB with a 150 ohm source. That's from a fairly budget mixing desk designed over 35 years ago.

It is hard to tell how good the Apollo preamps are because they specify them in a non-standard way in the manual.

[djangodeadman]

The point about the DSP in the Apollos is to be able to record (or monitor) through UAD plugins with very low latency, although you can, of course, utilise it when mixing. If you’re not going to be doing that, an Apollo may not be for you.

If you opt for an Apollo and need eight mic preamps, then you have to go for the X8P. It gives you eight mic preamps, while the X8 only has four. The X8P also has eight line ins via DB25. Each channel can be switched between mic and line, so you only get eight onboard inputs in total. It also has adat i/o for expansion to a total of 16 inputs.

[Arpangel]

Unless you do need the DSP in the Apollo, I'd also steer you toward a MOTU, Audient or Clarett interface. I'll not type any more because of the likelihood of your requirement changing by next week!

I’m not 100% committed to the Apollo, especially after reading your replies, the reasons I thought about it as a major contender are, I know people who have them, that are into my type of music, and, they like the sound of the Apollo, it does have one.
Also the plug-in's, they are an attraction for me.
But saying that, I also like the Focusrite Clarett, they sound good too, but all I’m looking for is the best sound quality I can obtain at a reasonable price, my budget is around £2,000 give or take.
As I said, this wouldn’t normally be an issue for me personally, but things are moving on musically and I need something better than the Behringer, for other peoples use, I don’t want it to be in question.
Hugh mentioned a lot of interesting things, and I’d like to make sure some of those boxes are ticked.
As some of you will know, I use mic amps by the late Mike Skeet and I’ve got used to them, they are a hard act to follow.
70dB of gain, virtually noiseless, I don’t think I’ve ever had to have the gain controls above 11 o’clock with any mic in normal use, they have stepped gain controls too, which I love.
I need good mic amps, as acoustic instruments are being used more, I’d rather have good built-in mic amps, than have to mess around with external ones, also, I need as many inputs as possible, as this may make it more feasible to rely less on my mixer.
I get the feeling that this won’t happen as usual, as always, I can never find the right combination of facilities and performance in one box.
The monitors are easy, I’m well familiar, and I know what they can sound like in a good room, very neutral, so that’s an incentive to install some treatment.

[Drew Stephenson]

Worth looking at the Audient EVO16. 8 mic pres as standard but expandable with their SP8 for another 8. Auto gain setting as well which might be useful if you're still running your place with the piano in a different room as the interface.

[Arpangel]

Worth looking at the Audient EVO16. 8 mic pres as standard but expandable with their SP8 for another 8. Auto gain setting as well which might be useful if you're still running your place with the piano in a different room as the interface.

Auto gain setting? I’ll have to investigate, does it work?

[Drew Stephenson]

Auto gain setting? I’ll have to investigate, does it work?

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/audient-evo-16

[Arpangel]

Auto gain setting? I’ll have to investigate, does it work?

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/audient-evo-16

Drew, it sounds good, but, I did consider this before, and there was one major reason why I crossed it off my list, but I can’t remember what that was!
I know I need something that’s rack mountable, but I’m sure that wasn’t the reason.

[Drew Stephenson]

I know I need something that’s rack mountable, but I’m sure that wasn’t the reason.

I believe it comes with a rack mounting kit so that shouldn't be it.

[MarkOne]

So, also, having checked, the Apollo drivers aren't shown as compatible with High Sierra, but the Audient evo drivers are, so it would work on both your computers

Focusrite claret interfaces also report being compatible with High Sierra (but in rare cases they report a problem where their tech support has to talk you through some terminal commands)

[Bob Bickerton]

Happy Apollo user here, but there's been some good points made above about the NEED to go for an Apollo.

I first started down the UAD pathway 15 years ago, at a time when extra DSP for plug-ins was useful and UAD emulations were pretty much the best available. A lot has changed since then and whilst I do still rate their plug-ins very highly, the need for external DSP no longer exists.

I have a 2019 Apollo 8p. I'd regard the preamps and conversion as clean and certainly never an issue for anything I've thrown at it. If you want preamp 'colour' you can always use a preamp emulation on the way in (which I don't).

Which model depends on the number and type of inputs you want.

But in terms of quality of preamps and conversion, there's any amount of options out there and the truth of the matter is that most people will probably not notice the difference - especially if your room is not fully treated.

Here's the thing - a critical factor for your good self will be workflow!

I said I'd be happy to throw the Apollo preamps at anything, but I still have a Focusrite ISA Two across the first two channels simply because I like to have hands on for my main inputs (they sound good - better than the UAD preamps? - don't much care, because that's not the point)

The Console app for operating the Apollo is clean and sensible IMHO - a few quirks, but largely feels like an analogue-type GUI. Annoyingly UAD haven't made it obviously MIDI compatible, but you can operate it with a controller using a free app called UA MIDI Control.

And just to throw a Tyrannosaurus Rex into the chicken coup, if you were feeling brave, you might even try the free LUNA DAW that comes with the Apollo. That way everything will be in one place and you can operate the Apollo from there https://www.uaudio.com/luna.html They have a nice piano, Moog Mini emulations and I've just noticed they also offer the Spitfire orchestral sample libraries too.

Bob

[djangodeadman]

A lot has changed since then and whilst I do still rate their plug-ins very highly, the need for external DSP no longer exists.

This is true, if you are not using UAD plugins, but only partially so if you are. Around 30 UAD plugins are currently available in native format; the rest still require DSP to run. It is likely to be quite some time before all of their plugins are available as native and some may never be.

[sonics]

I’m not 100% committed to the Apollo, especially after reading your replies, the reasons I thought about it as a major contender are, I know people who have them, that are into my type of music, and, they like the sound of the Apollo, it does have one.

I'm going to disagree with any of these good-quality interfaces having much of a "sound". Granted, in blind tests I've done I have heard very small differences in tone and clarity. FWIW I actually prefer the PreSonus XMAX preamps to the Apollo. My favourites are the RME and Metric Halo, but I'd work with almost any of them quite happily.

I'm going to leave compatibility checks up to you, but do consider an RME Fireface. Also look at the PreSonus Studio 1824 (USB) or Quantum (Thunderbolt). Excellent and affordable interfaces, and particularly good with Studio One!

[James Perrett]

I'm going to leave compatibility checks up to you, but do consider an RME Fireface.

I think we've established over the last few years that Tony doesn't like RME.

[sonics]

I think we've established over the last few years that Tony doesn't like RME.

Yes, of course. That shouldn't stop us from recommending them in a thread like this, though!


With Arpangel, I've learned that anything is possible.

[Arpangel]

I'm going to leave compatibility checks up to you, but do consider an RME Fireface.

I think we've established over the last few years that Tony doesn't like RME.

There’s a little voice on one side of my head that keeps saying go on, give RME a go, they’ve moved on over the years, you may like them.
But there’s another logical voice that says look, you’ve had direct experience of RME you’ve owned it, you didn’t like it, so why are you taking a risk spending about two or three grand on something you know you didn’t like?
Bob, you’ve covered a lot in your reply, and thanks, but I think the Apollo isn’t going to cut it with my OS on both machines, the Audient looks good, and I’ve been thinking about how useful that auto level thing will be, it could be really handy.