Hugh's Digital Converter League table Update

[Hugh Robjohns]

For anyone who likes to track these things, I've just updated my league table of measured converters with my latest additions:

https://www.soundonsound.com/forum/view ... hp?t=79727

[Zukan]

Thanks buddy.

[g18llo]

For anyone who likes to track these things, I've just updated my league table of measured converters with my latest additions:

https://www.soundonsound.com/forum/view ... hp?t=79727

I wonder, is there any value in investing in one of these DACs, like the RME ADI-Pro II, and using that to mix on (I use headphones), rather than simply using my UAD Apollo Twin X? Anything going in, recording-wise, I don't use the Apollo, I'd use other pre-amps, the Apollo is just a "mixing device". Having read the list, and the associated reviews, one wonders if my best option is to get the RME, and a couple of nice pre-amps, and consign the UAD to A.N.Other marketplace.

[Drew Stephenson]

Bearing in mind the UAD is on the threshold of mastering-grade equipment anyway, I think I'd need a lot of spare cash in my pocket before I considered that as being the next upgrade option.

[g18llo]

Bearing in mind the UAD is on the threshold of mastering-grade equipment anyway, I think I'd need a lot of spare cash in my pocket before I considered that as being the next upgrade option.

£700-£800 second-hand, that's less than an Apollo Quad X or a Twin X with additional plugins. In the grand scheme of professional audio interfaces, I'd say £700-£800 is relatively inexpensive given the new UFX III is closer to £2.5k.

[tea for two]

to mix on (I use headphones), rather than simply using my UAD Apollo Twin X? ...Apollo is just a "mixing device".

In the grand scheme of professional audio interfaces, I'd say £700-£800 is relatively inexpensive given the new UFX III is closer to £2.5k.

Bearing in mind caveats points disclaimers as it were in Hugh's measurements lol.

If just for headphone out
then at 124dB A-weighted Headphone out measured under AES-17
an intriguing proposition is Audient id44mk2.
https://support.audient.com/hc/en-us/ar ... ifications

Its D-A line outs is 126dB A-weighted measured under AES-17 which would place it 2nd on Hugh's list of those interfaces currently available.
Given id44 mk2 price that's some going compared to Merging HAPI 126.3dB, Prism Sound Dream 124.5dB the top 2 D-A currently available in Hugh's list.

[BWC]

Bearing in mind the UAD is on the threshold of mastering-grade equipment anyway, I think I'd need a lot of spare cash in my pocket before I considered that as being the next upgrade option.

£700-£800 second-hand, that's less than an Apollo Quad X or a Twin X with additional plugins. In the grand scheme of professional audio interfaces, I'd say £700-£800 is relatively inexpensive given the new UFX III is closer to £2.5k.

I think what Drew's saying here is that, at any price, your money is probably better spent elsewhere in your setup.

[Drew Stephenson]

Indeed, it's not bad value, but you'd need to have a very well sorted room before you'll notice that kind of difference.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Bearing in mind the UAD is on the threshold of mastering-grade equipment anyway...

More importantly, the Apollo in my list is a first-gen model from 2012, and it was exceptionally good back then.

I'd be amazed if the newer models didn’t perform even better, and probably well above my nominal mastering grade.

[g18llo]

I think what Drew's saying here is that, at any price, your money is probably better spent elsewhere in your setup.

I monitor on headphones, as discussed in the original post, so there's nowhere else in the setup to upgrade other than said headphones, NDH30s, or the Apollo Twin X.

[g18llo]

Its D-A line outs is 126dB A-weighted measured under AES-17 which would place it 2nd on Hugh's list of those interfaces currently available.
Given id44 mk2 price that's some going compared to Merging HAPI 126.3dB, Prism Sound Dream 124.5dB the top 2 D-A currently available in Hugh's list.

The ID range doesn't have the crosstalk feature found in more expensive convertors; that's a very, very useful function for me as I do 99% of my work on headphones, the Neumann NDH30's.

I've owned some of the interfaces on that list, and I've auditioned a few others on it too, and what I found to be the biggest difference (that I could notice) between them was the width of the stereo field, the more precise position in said field that and some were less "granular" in their overall sound. At the time of auditioning these I normally used an interface with 16 in/out, or thereabouts, as I was recording external sources, so some of those units weren't fiscally practical. Now, I'm just using 2 in/out, so the idea of using a higher grade of convertor seems more appealing.

I'll be able to report back on the RME ADI-2 Pro as I've just bought one, the anniversary version.

[Drew Stephenson]

I'll be able to report back on the RME ADI-2 Pro as I've just bought one, the anniversary version.

Please let us know.

[tea for two]

I thawd aboot enquiring whether Hugh would like to measure Audient iD4 mk2 I have as there are no AES-17 measurements on Audient's site for it.
Butt I did nae think it was worth Hugh's efrort. I would've covered return postage and Hugh could've kept it months.

[AogL]

Hi Hugh
I believe you missed the Merging Anibus on the list.
What about the Lynx Aurora (n).

Best

[Hugh Robjohns]

I haven't had the Aurora(n) on my test bench. Sam reviewed that one.

I did review the original Anubis, but I didn't have suitable Ravenna hardware to access the digital I/O in a suitable format needed to perform AES17 measurements. Although I have no doubt it would have scored very highly.

[Martin Walker]

Hi Hugh
What about the Lynx Aurora (n).

Best

I reviewed the original Lynx Aurora for SOS way back in June 2006, and measured its D/A converter dynamic range as 115.5dBA

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/ly ... a-16-aes16

Martin