Studio Upgrade: Carbon vs Apollo - Part 2
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- Part 2 of 2
Conclusion and an unapologetic look at the pros and cons of Pro Tools Carbon and Universal Audio Apollo. No complaint left unaddressed!
Link to Part 1 - • Studio Upgrade: Carbon...
#matthepworth #carbonvsapollo #studionu
Great follow up video Matt! Especially for a guy like me still clinging on to PT TDM looking for a logical path forward. Kudos to your unbiased opinions on both of these hardware platforms. Thanks for mentioning that the DI/Inst input on the Apollo is +10. I only bring this up because a few years back I purchased a Suhr Reactive Load box based on some of the TH-cam demos by a few revered artists and only found out later via research/investigation that the “majority” of the users in these video demos were using the Apollo units including Suhr themselves during R&D and QC. The end result was that you definitely need to physically “add” gain to the Reactive Load’s output depending on what interface/preamp combination you’re using whereas the Apollo is adding +10 out of the starting gate. Not sure if everyone was aware of this on either user or company side but it was odd to see the company update the box years later to feature the ability to boost the signal. A “Things that make you go hmm” moment?? TC
Thank you! Very interesting info about the Suhr/Apollo!
I’ve actually watched both videos a few times now as you point out good info not readily available on either manufacturer’s product pages. My biggest complaint with going with either Carbon or HDX is the limited selection of AAX DSP plugins. Considering HDX has been out for quite some time Im assuming Avid’s been challenging to work/partner with when creating plugins. This is a huge red flag for me. On the other hand, I’m still not thrilled with the whole “Console” way of tracking. I’m late to the game so I’m a bit stubborn.
@@armandodiaz3485 I'd hoped we'd see a bit of growth with Carbon joining the ranks, but it's definitely limited AAX development overall. I think AVID makes it a lot easier with the new SDKs, but it's also a small market, so difficult for many companies to justify the extra development and support/maintenance costs. I still think the last section of the second vid defines the two reasons where you should probably go with Carbon.
Thanks so much. Very helpful for decision making. Best comparison I’ve ever seen! Appreciated.
Awesome, thank you!
Just coming to view this now...a few months later. Overall really good comparison videos..thank you for the information. I would make one note, however. One CAN commit plugins on record in Pro Tools by assigning input to go to an Aux channel, placing the plugins on the Aux channel, and then recording the output of the aux channel to an audio track. Not as simple as clicking a button in Apollo...but still possible.
True, but this is much more difficult with Carbon than it was in Native, because of your I/O limitations for the Green monitoring situation. You'll eat up the number of monitorable channels really quickly (the cap is really low).
Matt you did such a common sense approach,you r such a great teacher also,you r on a different level,Luna fan also,fabulous work
Thanks so much!
Nice job. Two things to consider with UA, LUNA is Mac only, but they now offer nonDSP versions of some of their plugins with Spark.
Thanks! Carbon is also currently Mac-only, so that's why I hadn't listed that as a Con on Apollo.
Very well balanced. Thanks Matt.
Thank you, Karl!
Thanks for the excellent analysis, always good to know these things.
Thank you very much!
In your "cons" section around 7:30. you CAN have a master channel with inserts and Aux sends if you output your computer/daw to a stereo virtual channel
also I may have misunderstood you, but, every input can have a dedicated physical output (and mirror to monitor if you wish) I do this with my Apollo16. I use Console for routing not mixing though. so only thing being fed to monitor out with a fader is my master bus (virtual channel)
You're correct about the virtual channels as a return, but you have to be very careful because they're higher latency and uncompensated. I used to run that way (and did a vid on the benefits). In version 10 eight additional routes were added to the 16. Enough to cover the analog ins. That con may no longer be valid, other than being technically still correct (18 ins on x16 and "only" 16 routes)... 16 routes DOES cover the x8...
It's no TotalMix, but the con is less valid now and I probably should have cut that out.
@@MattHepworth Thanks for the reply and info re: higher latency on virtual channels. I never run inserts on my master virtual channel it's there so I can use the 4x Cue and 2x Aux on my daw/computer output
I'm not sure if there has been an update to this video, but UAD has now added native versions of the plugins which solves some of the DSP cons. Very exciting.
No update here, but yes, the new LUNA integration with DSP switching is great - th-cam.com/video/mTpFYIZVmR4/w-d-xo.html
Great info. I have 2 x16 apollos with plenty of external preamps (29). I looked at Carbob, and quickly dismissed changing my setup, for many of the reasons you give, but all because carbon can't do 32 channels.
Thank you! Sounds like you have a great setup!
Part 3? Using Apollo with ProTools and Console for Lowest Latency Tracking… please and Thank you.
I think you may find this answers a portion of that - th-cam.com/video/cr0NtrwCUOo/w-d-xo.html
Absolutely brilliant and very helpful thank you Matt!
Many thanks!
I have an x8p. I own but don't use Unison plugins as I still prefer my outboard preamps (although I might use them to color VIs). The x8p is still a great interface overall. I don't feel like I need a headphone amp. I also really enjoy the ability to mic an acoustic to get a good primary tone while also capturing a DI via the piezo pickup while also live tracking through the Ocean Way plugin (via the DI) on a stereo track in Pro Tools. The DB25 I/O also made setting up my patch bay a piece of cake.
Yes! Great use of its flexibility!
Wait what? 😅 if you didn’t plan to use the preamps on the x8p, why did you shell out extra cash to get it? Seems like it’s not worth your extra money, you would have been better off with an x6 or x16 with almost the same price +/-
@@jan_07 I found a used x8p cheaper than an x6 and the db25 I/O is quite handy.
@acmeyakko Definitely!
Loved the video Matt.
Could you please provide an outline of how you use an Apollo X as an expander.
I am thinking of doing something similar, but not with Carbon / Pro Tools. Possibly an X6 into a MOTU 828ES.
Scratch17, from the forum.
Hey there! The short answer is set the output for each input in Console to the corresponding ADAT out (above the fader). It'll pass whatever processing you're using that way and I use it as 8 channels of outboard.
Awesome as usual ... thanks Matt.
Thanks much!
I think were UA falls short is incorrectly timed automatic hardware insert delay compensation. I can’t use a lot of my hardware in parallel without having to figure out a routing scheme with time adjuster and DC user offset to get them in phase.
Now they made some of their plugins available in native as well. And they're free if you own them in DSP version.
Yes, a real surprise for most of us. You may also have interest in LUNA's DSP/Native switching, which I did a walkthrough and testing video on a couple weeks ago. I think UA has a target in their sites...
SUPER helpful as I have been contemplating these two for a while now. Thank you. (Apollo wins)
Thank you!
Running 4 DAWs and the Xtwin, X6 and X8 daisy chained and all is right in the world
For now
I’m also running the last intel iMac released and maxed so no silicone
For now
I’ll ride this wave because of the $$ investment and because it’s a pretty flawless system
For now
Sounds like a great setup!
Thank you very much for making great videos.
Cheers.
Thank you!
extraordinary job, honest and direct. I was all such knowledge on TH-cam were untainted as this. You mentioned "Apollo as an extension for Carbon", does this mean I could have both a Carbon and, say, an Apollo 4X on the same iMac? again, many thanks,
Thank you very much! Yes, you can use your x4 into Carbon using ADAT, for up to 4 channels using Cues. That'd give you 12 total mic pres.
@@MattHepworth Matt, do I need 1 or 2 optical cables to accomplish this?
That depends on what you want your Clock to be. You can use Apollo's clock and just use a single optical, or you can use Carbon for clock by sending optical out to Apollo and clocking Apollo to that.
@@MattHepworth My situation is that I've just added the Carbon, and I'd like for the Apollo X4 not just to sit there, it seemed sensible to be able to use those ports as inputs. Since I'm likely to use the Carbon as the main for everything, I think I'd like it to be Clock. I don't think I'd have any reason to go back out to Apollo.
So, you'll need two cables and set Apollo to ADAT for clock, leaving Carbon as the master.
Great and truly helpful videos!
Glad they're helpful! Thank you!
Matt you mentioned not being knocked out with the Carbon D-A, what about Apollo's D-A?
Yeah, Carbon DA isn't bad, but Apollo is considerably better, objectively, and subjectively more detailed and defined.
Great video thank you ! I’m curious would I be able to record tracks later in a session after I’ve started mixing without latency when using the carbon with pro tools ?
Thank you! You CAN, but you have to be careful. Carbon will bypass all native processing end to end for monitoring purposes, but you can have auxes or even tracks with input safe enabled that will make it not behave as expected. Be aware there are still some MAJOR timeline bugs being worked on with Carbon, but there is also a workaround. I mention this because you were concerned about in in your previous comment regarding Apollo. Check the threads in Carbon on the AVID DUC.
@@MattHepworth I thought idc in console was used only when using multi mic setup with different plug ins on each channel , as a way to correct phase caused by the diff latency between plug ins ?
In Console, yes, but the driver offsets in the timeline by the maximum amount of IDC (100 samples for short, 200 for medium, etc.). Check out the comments for that video as well, as we discuss in more detail. th-cam.com/video/qg9fb0iVFJw/w-d-xo.html
@@MattHepworth ok looking now thanks again Matt.
I wonder what your opinion would be now that a bunch of uad plugins are naive? I think it would be the same but also give uad more pros
If/when UA makes them switchable between DSP and Native from the GUI or record enabling, that'll be a HUGE pro for Apollo. LUNA does this now, BTW. Thanks for the great comment and question!
@MattHepworth that would be amazing! But I don't think it can be done in the architecture that it works in without using Luna. Just like carbon with pro tools.
It may never be done to be triggered via Rec enable, but it CAN be done, because Waves did it with SoundGrid DLS - Record enable/punch triggered the DSP (DLS) version to be active and utilized the low latency monitoring path. Taking off Record enable triggered the native version to be active and monitored through PT software. Apogee has a kind of similar concept where they have linked controls with the native version in PT and DSP version in Apogee's Maestro and it also utilizes a similar LLM path.
I'm curious why you were not satisfied with your HDX system? You mentioned it in passing towards the end of the video with no explanation. Thanks!
Hi there. Latency is far too high (1.9ms base without plugins), and the fan was too loud to be in the control room. It also underperformed. I got it to replace an HD4 Accel, but the HD4 Accel exceeded HDX in every way except lack of offline bounce.
@@MattHepworth Hmm, we use HDX and I believe it's a fixed .7ms round trip sans plugins. We even run a Livemix after it which adds 1.5ms to the chain and it's not noticable. Merging converters. Rack not in control room.
If you're using HDX with AVID HD I/O it's 1.9ms RTL with no plugins at 44.1kHz. It's 1.75ms RTL at 48kHz and an excellent 0.5ms RTL at 96kHz. AVID somehow came up with a measurement of 0.7ms at 96kHz for one of their charts, but it's actually even lower. HDX works great at 96kHz, but I'd need an HDX 2 rig at 96kHz just to have comparable latency and power to HD Accel 4 at 44.1 with 2-3 plugins. Carbon, fortunately, has far better latency. Of course, you have to rely on the hybrid engine and watch your DSP usage.
@@MattHepworth Gotcha. Yep, we always run 96k. And we use the Hybrid Engine with HDX (that came out maybe 9 months ago), works great. Carbon is great too.
You talk about some UAD plugins wich add 55 samples and cause more latency than other plugins for the Apollo, which do not add any latency! May I ask which plugins create more latency and which ones don´t?! Is there a list available somewhere? Thanks very much.
The only list I'm aware of is in the Resources tab at uadforum.com that I made.
@@MattHepworth Thanks Matt, I will have a look and by the way, I just purchased an x16 Heritage Edition. When my rack is finished I can start.
Awesome!
@@MattHepworth thanks, have a nice 4th July party
Thank you!
How about the AD/DA converter of Carbon vs Apollo ? Which brand has better conversions ?
Yes, I do cover that in this vid, but a bit moreso in Part 1. Thanks!
Useful information
Is there any other High End solution that isn't one of these two? I just had my Multi channel 4 X8P system stolen. I'm building a new setup based upon the best interface I can find.
Bummer. Sorry to hear that! A more high end solution would be HDX with DAD.
Did you figure it out? Depends how many channels you need but you may want to consider RME card or madi usb and hand pick your converters.
Hey Matt just rewatched both these videos and it got me thinking, it’s a year later and Apple Silicon has had a few updates as well as Avid now being sold off. It will be interesting(or not…) to see the direction hardware takes from both Avid and UA. Wonder if either will chose to tackle the “comprises” both systems have?
Yeah, it'll be interesting. I just sold my Carbon earlier this week. With the changes in LUNA with DSP/Native switching and such I'm trying to make it an actual go. Timing is good, since I'm on a little looser time frames than normal...
Thank you Matt - I'm in a similar boat as you once were -- I skipped the HDX era and have been running the rubber off of my HD rig.... with the advent of Apple Silicon I'm about to make a big upgrade. I'm a longtime Apollo user as well and love the mixing workflow, plug-ins, and unison pres - but I would love to have the Carbon integration and eliminate the need for Console during my tracking sessions. As a hybrid user yourself, I'm hoping you can clarify this question. If I purchase an Avid Carbon for the low latency and Pro Tools integration/experience, can I expect to integrate my current X8p to get a total of 24 inputs into Carbon with: A the eight internal Carbon preamps, (b) 8 Apollo preamps from x8p (including unison) routed through ADAT outputs, and (c) 8 outboard mic pres going into x8p line inputs and routed to Carbon via 2nd ADAT outputs? Thanks so much for all your info on the Avid and uaudio forums, you're an asset to recordists like me worldwide.
No, unfortunately B and C are either or. x8 has 8 converters. You can run a second ADAT connection to Carbon and feed another 8 channels via other methods, though.
@@MattHepworth thanks for the quick reply and for the clarity. One more thought- If I were to replace the x8p an x16 to the equation instead, could I run 16 channels of my outboard pres from the x16 via two ADAT lightpipe lines at 44.1/48kHz and get 24 inputs into the carbon that way?
Still no, sadly. The x16 doesn't have ADAT.
I just got a twin X and I found the latency while software monitoring to be disappointing. Maybe I’m doing something wrong idk. But Comparing it to the Apogee symphony desktop and the apogee is lower latency
The latency is a little bit lower than Symphony from my testing. Make sure IDC is disabled in Console and re-launch the DAW. That'll reduce the latency.
Also, keep in mind the X series is optimized for 96kHz. Latency at 44.1/48 is disproportionally high. This is tied to the converters being much more efficient at 96kHz.
@@MattHepworth Really??? OK I'll give that a try. Thanks!
@@MattHepworth Yes that's the most surprising thing I seen in your video. I will definitely test that. This is just in time because I'm about to shoot the rest of my comparison video. This info will help!!! I appreciate it!
@Jack Spade I just sub'd to your channel and I hope to level up my vid quality to be more like yours. BTW, this link has some numbers I've measured - uadforum.com/community/index.php?threads/whats-your-uad-dsp-vocal-chain.59262
Could you Review the new Arturia interfaces vs Apollo? There are rumors that the Arturia sound way better than Apollo.
Sound is subjective, of course. Objectively, they are inferior to Apollo X series, but that's not the entire battle when it comes to converters, etc.
Thank you. Latency is my biggest concern, but what about DANTE?
Good question. I'm not aware of anything DANTE based that has similar latency within the DAW.
Avid MTRX studio w/ hdx card
@@TheThinker43 Is that only if recording with plugins? The new MAC chips can run 1000s of plugins and still record at 64 samples. Even at 96k.
What about RME and ABV? Don't really like being locked into Dante.
@@frankpaws it’s digilink / Dante/ Adat / with AD/DA pretty hard to beat its flexibility . But it’s expensive
great video, really helpful and concise. I hope there is somewhere where we can see how you're using your Symphony :-)
Thank you! I just feed ADAT to and from Symphony.
@@MattHepworth Which software are you using with your Symphony? I still have 3 Apogee AD8000 which I still love 🙂 Bob Clearmountain style haha
I just use them in stand-alone mode these days (just like you're doing with your AD8000). I used to have 3 of those as well, including an SE. The 8000s are still great sounding converters, even though they're 25 years old!
@@MattHepworth I'm not using mine in stand alone mode ;-) Pro Tools 7.4 baby. I use it for editing mainly and some mixing, but I use modern computers and Logic for writing. The SE version definitely had something extra but I couldn't afford those.
Cool! I just helped my friend set up his PTHD8 rig with one, actually. In fact, it was one of my old ones! Enabled the Legacy port and BAM AD8000 back in action again as an PT interface! Symphony I/O just lets you switch modes to use directly on HDX (or TDM).
Here are my concerns. I only use pro tools for mixing, period. But with only 24 channels on carbon, that will really screw me over when it comes to mixing big multi track records. And that’s what’s driving me more towards Apollo. If I can link 3 x16’s together then I feel like immediately I need to go with Apollo
Are you mixing with outboard only? You can now add Carbon PRE units to expand Carbon, as well.
these are THE videos I've needed to help me make my decision. thank you for such a well explained stance for both!
Awesome! Thank you!
Great video, thanks.
Thank you!
Sorry to stalk you here Matt, but upto what version of Uad Console were you able to install on Win7 for ur Apollo Twin USB. The site says upto v9.14.5, is supported. But based off of forum posts I am skeptical.
Hey Paul, I'm not really sure. If I have a chance tomorrow evening I'll see about upgrading.
@@MattHepworth is ur WIn7 machine still running .. would love to find what Console version ur on.
Well done! Really useful and informative post. THANK YOU! #subd
Thank you very much!
Matt, you are working with sound. Use Protools and buy their hardware ! Use Apollo run Luna no yearly no mess ! Both use outboard gear ! I would move to New York and use Protools. I California we use Logic and Luna ! Your choice !
You're right. To an extent, it does not matter.
In the long run who's got the sound with the less problems ! Many small audio companies never can keep up and the industry changes all the time so who gives you the lest problems Apollo ! Analog can always be counted on for the tracking ! Some people like the movies use Zoom and Sound Devices straight to the chip and now many desks are catching up to that Idea making the computer just a mix after the fact ! Again less problems, more happiness !
You’re using outboard gear in Luna? How? Last I checked that wasn’t even possible yet. There is no I/O plug-in like logic for example
He's meaning as a front-end. For now, at least.
On the Apollo Twin MkII can you record in 96khz and then mix in 48khz?
Yes. LUNA fully supports switching sample rates within the session. With most other DAWs you'd need to save the session at the new sample rate instead.
@MattHepworth OK I have Luna but I primarily use Pro Tools ... So I could record in 96khz and save the session in 48khz and it should be fine with no issues? Thank you for replying by the way
Yes, but I guess the question is are you doing 96kHz for lower latency? If so, do you NEED to go to 48kHz for mixing for your sessions to run on your computer? If not, just stay 96kHz. If latency isn't your reason for tracking at 96kHz, then I'd probably just do everything at 48kHz instead.
@MattHepworth I always record in 48khz and haven't had latency issues only when trying to record with Auto tune via Uad so I record dry and add Auto Tune when mixing
I'd probably just stick to 48kHz.
Yes Latency, i will go with carbon.
Can't go wrong!
The carbons better but there aren’t any good AAX DSP plugins. There’s plenty of great UAD Unison plugins.
So few top shelf AAX DSP plugins. Definitely the biggest advantage of Apollo is the plugin selection.
With a bit of research there are quite a lot of good aaxdsp plugs. Also I think stock plugins is plenty to get an inspired performance and that's all you need for tracking.
True, but it's most of the core stuff that's missing. LA-2A, 1176, 1073, Pultec, in any recent incarnation. Yes, the BF compressors are useable. The Purple 1176 is high latency and should be avoided for tracking. Softube's 1176 is no longer available AAX DSP, and I'm not aware of a modern Pultec or LA-2A. Do I get by? Of course, but I'd prefer to work with end game plugins from the start.
Cool)
When you say the AD/DA conversion is better in the Apollo versus the Carbon, you don't explain why it is. I believe that's subjective on your part. This video makes me think you're an Apollo fan moreover than anything else.
Hi there, subjectively, I don't love the converters on either of them, honestly. I mentioned in the video that Apollo DA is objectively better (significantly better DA specs, in particular). Subjectively, I don't like either as much as any of my Apogee Symphonies, as far as converters go.
@@MattHepworth what's in the difference? How do they sound better than the others? What makes them better besides minute spec differences?
@@MattHepworthwhat would you recommend if I got the carbon if I wanted that extra high end ad/da conversion what would i add to it or is it good enough to use and record quality projects and albums mostly hip hop not to many instruments and multiple mics etc
Apogee symphony vs lynx aurora
Pls
Which version of Symphony and which Aurora?
@@MattHepworth one moment
@@MattHepworth apogee 24x24 symphony vs aurora 24 tb3
Great vids (both parts). I was side eye'ing my X6, thinking about Carbon. Even though I'm a heavy Pro Tools user, it looks like I'll be staying with my X6. Thanks for helping me stay put. LOL
I totally get it. There's nothing that's perfect. Apollo works great. Carbon works better in some situations and much worse in others.
I know to pick for i can spend to convert to Id fo di and sumadores be like more , i know to take a mixed of recording in digitaly bands AND digitaly solo sings and acustic , and i think Apollo can make More option than carbón
But carbón looks Nice with recording a bands , apollo like be recording Solo singers and dúo , i know to take x8 o 16 i things no need more xlr , if not use instruments i can Made for virtual session
AND he took the time to correct and clarify statements in part 1, remarkable!
Thank you! I try to be as accurate as possible.
i love my metric halo uln8
The cone filtering about killed me when I was on my Apollo Silverface. What I noticed when I jumped to the Carbon was the monitoring. Not sure why, but I feel there was a huge leap in the quality of the monitoring between my Apollo Silverface to my Carbon. I can’t speak to Apollo X series.
I prefer Carbon DA to the Silverface as well. Of course, Silverface is over 10 years old at this point, though still a good platform.
Carbon converters sound really great. I’ve worked with Carbon, Apollo x16, Antelope Galaxy 64.
@@marklhollowayis it usable for recording and playback like top tier just gonna use to record rap vocals talking about the carbon don’t know if it’s worth it I use protools though
Matt, where are you getting the latency specs? I wasn’t able to find them. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!
@markham56 The latency numbers are a combination of data provided by the manufacturers and my own measurements. Which in particular? I may be able to point to you the data.
yes what about adding protools HDX thunderbolt 3 it seems that it would illiminate the latency issue your claiming with protools when running plugins ??
No, HDX will actually have higher latency. The AVID HD I/O interfaces produce 1.8ms RTL at 44.1kHz vs 0.8ms RTL of Carbon. The plugins are the exact same (AAX DSP), so you'll have 1ms MORE latency with an HDX system, which is why I sold my HDX system. It was higher latency than the old 2002 TDM...
Good video Matt
Thank you!
Hey thanks for sharing this video . I’m a long time pro tools user and always felt like my tracks never sounded quite right during playback when monitoring console while recording . I thought getting an Apollo x16 and twin x would solve the problem but it doesn’t because even though I’m monitoring console , the tracks being recorded into pro tools are at the mercy of the buffer size , and this results in tracks that are late during playback , resulting in frustration . I’ve been using pro tools since version 9 came out and don’t want to learn a new daw like Luna . I’m considering on getting the Carbon soon , my only question : do tracks being recorded with carbon remove the issue with buffer latency during recording and playback ? If so this would really be a game changer for me , I’m worried I’d buy the carbon and find out that there’s no latency during recording , but then find out that the latency comes during playback ! Lol sorry for the long comment , I’m just really let down by uad and their near zero latency hype I bought into . Imo it’s only near zero latency if the tracks being recorded play back at the same time they were recorded not milliseconds later .
Yes, with Carbon or Apollo the buffer is irrelevant. If you're seeing the issue of buffer size affecting where tracks are printed on the timeline with Apollo you need to disable the PT setting of Ignore Errors during recording. This is a known issue.
I personally keep IDC off in Apollo as well - see here for an explanation of why - th-cam.com/video/qg9fb0iVFJw/w-d-xo.html
@@MattHepworth thank you , I will check this out right now , I appreciate your input .
So Apollo can work efficiently as the only interface with Pro Tools? And how with ableton live?
Yes. I'd say sightly better with Live than Pro Tools, since Live has fewer restrictions.
Geez, $4000 latency solution 😢. Buy a pedal board and a splitter, go direct out on channel 2 with outboard effects to the headphones and latency is no issue, even in the middle of a heavy plug-in mix you can zero latency record. Where there’s a will there’s a way😊
I guess it depends on your needs. I work primarily with bands, but also with singer/songwriters. With the latter it's really easy to get a workable low-latency solution utilizing various onboard DSP mixer options or multing out to hardware monitoring, but with the former there's no other option in the digital realm.
@@MattHepworth a band with 8ch carbon, you’re doing some mic trickery 🫡. If it works great, still the Carbon is not recommended but, what do I know. It’s the advice of $4000 that has me bugging over latency. Hell, a m1 Mac will do justice @96k with slate or waves low latency plugins would crush, with optimized playback settings. I don’t use a carbon or Apollo so I really can’t compare.
@americatunedright1211 Carbon has 24 inputs and they're all used when tracking a band.
@@MattHepworth oh, so the digital in works with carbons dsp low latency recording with effects as well, good to know. Thanks. Interesting, are you clocking those pipelines too, using carbon?
@@americatunedright1211 They do indeed. I mostly clocked Carbon to my Apogees, though I also used it the opposite and it sounded fine.
uad isn’t what they were anymore. they just aren’t the best anymore. in 2022 their converters are crap. I am an apollo owner by the way. at this point there are also other companies plugins are better for a fraction of the cost without being tied to their hardware. lynx, rme, etc etc paired with plugin alliance is a good example. the fact is the have thr best marketing but the best conversion which in my eyes matters the most, they are at the bottom of the food chain. personally looking forward to leaving their ecosystem. shits overhyped in almost 2023.
There's still no LA-2A, 1176, 1073/1084, or lots of others that are at the UAD level that I've encountered. The X series conversion is good, though I still prefer my Apogees. Black and Silverface units are behind the curve in 2022 like you say, though.
@@MattHepworth While I once personally cared about those things I no longer do. For one, no one is listening to see if they can hear that in your music other than the engineers and even then many don’t care and it’s irrelevant. But I would have to argue that other than the uad pultec (specifically the latest revision) that there are other options that are damn close but I personally don’t care cause I really never use any of them other than a pultec anymore and if you really want them all spark has them. Also the x series conversion is decent but their still at the bottom of the totem when compared to as you mentioned apogee, lynx, rme, focusrite, antelope, etc etc etc but if ua doesn’t upgrade those interfaces soon and present more viable options they are going to see a fair amount of users leave the platform on the same level that avid is now. But only time shall tell.
@@nine27how is carbons conversion?
when you say 100 plugins at zero latency, so you mean when tracking thru the Apollo mixer?
Yes. Over 100 UAD plugins add zero latency in Apollo Console.
Maybe there was a software update, but on my Apollo x8p, I’m able to route each input to its own output.
Only up to 8 channels can be routed, and none of the auxes. You can create routes with Cues as well, but they'll eat your assignable outs. You also have no returns, unless you use a virtual, but virtuals aren't delay compensated, so, no good for tracking. No loopback capabilities, either. Apollo is not bad by any means, but it's pretty restrictive compared to other devices at comparable price points (and even some budget options like MOTU, RME, PreSonus).
What about Metric Halo ULN-8?
Metric Halo makes good equipment. I'd be perfect happy using it.
Actually, some quick research indicates the conversion latency is quite high (converter latency alone AD and DA are 2.4ms at 44.1kHz). This would not make it comparable to Carbon or even Apollo. It would fall outside of the acceptable range for some users.
Not true the current MH has an insanely low latency with a mixer that crushes every other cue mixer option. From their website:
"Ultra-low converter latency
Converter latency reduced by 85% compared with previous generation
Round-trip through Converters + Mixer + DSP + Monitor:
≈ 0.9ms @ 44.1k
≈ 0.2ms @ 192k"
I'm very happy to see that about the mkIV! Sub 1ms. Near that of Carbon. Very nice. The MH plugins are also excellent. I've used the channel strip for a decade.
Just bought 3 Apollos and ADAT giving me 28 channels . Ur info is outstanding . Tnx I’ve subscribed .
Thank you! Awesome setup!