💽 Get Your Tracks Mixed by Ed: edthorne.com/mixing 🎬 Best Interface For Mixing! This HP Amp is Insane!: th-cam.com/video/n0fyFRl2R24/w-d-xo.html 🎬 Scarlett 4th Generation vs 3rd Gen: th-cam.com/video/_LDDzsxp1a0/w-d-xo.html
Underground Raiload TV show in Chicago That’s great. I haven’t used one yet but I’ll look out for it. Rode are a popular brand and I would imagine will clear up a lot on the Podcasting circuit so I’ll look into reviewing one.
@@33yearsoldcarpenter buy whichever you can afford, i have the Scarlett and love it and i am sure i would love using the apollo also. With good plug ins and a good computer with at least 4 cores, i don't have any latency issues
@@EdThorne Ed ...to my ears i hear the UA is a little more thick sound but it goes a bit like to the edge of going distorted (kind of when you are way too close ti the mic effect) and is also way too much sensitive to pickup artifacts and that is for being so true\good in the Mic Preamp section ! The Scarlett is a bit thinner but not as bad that cant be fixed with ext gear or int plugins ! So, now that i know this thinning problem on the Focusrite, i will always add a bit of more body to the vocals i will record from now on !! Thanks for the video and alert me of this !
dnantis Hi, yeh, I didn’t quite get the gains matched in this video, my apologies. I did however get them identical in the video below and I think you can hear the same differences in the audio: th-cam.com/video/IkuuxFvNB_g/w-d-xo.html
People need to remember that there were albums recorded on old ADAT's and DIGI 001's . Many cheap off the shelf interface are now 24 bit, 96KHZ with better specs than those. The Shins first album was record on an old HP computer with a sound card. The gear isn't so important as much as the ability to make the most of what you have. And of course, great performances with emotion. If you have the money, then go ahead and buy the best you can afford. Otherwise, focus more on the music, instead of lusting over the latest sexiest UAD equipment.
Scary, you took my words out of my mouth almost verbatim. There is a 192KHz/24Bit 100 plugins frenzy out their with everyone thinking that's their edge. Wrong. Your music, passion, playing and compositional capabilities are your edge. I'll never forget an interview with The Spin Doctor's producer from the early nineties. They asked him how their drums sounded so good, what was the secret? His answer? "Aaron Comess is an excellent drummer". There you go.
very true after hearing this just shaprening up on your mixing skills can make all the difference as apose to spending that xtra money for something most may not use to its full potential
The funny thing about recording is the ones actually listening to the finished product would never say oh he use a Apollo interface or he used a Scarlett interface. If your a audio engineer you know how to make anything sound great 👍🏾
But the problem comes when you want a good translation from your DAW to out of the DAW to be same, and not sounding different. It's not a matter about quality anymore but colouration. And in Mixing/Mastering, that can be a hell to second-guess through because you want your mixes to sound exactly the same once they are bounced out.
@@wmurray003 bruh.... that's because it's lossless. You shouldn't be bouncing your mixes in mp3 anyways for whatever reason other than to test how your mix sounds under the stress test.
They sound the same to me... I mean honestly when you add drums and guitars and sythns... You'll never hear the "corona cough"... Scarlett is good enough...
Vid just recommended to me. Seems like a lot of hate on the focusrite interfaces. I own multiple Scarlett interfaces and they all function beautifully. I have lots of interfaces from multiple manufactures and the reality is that anything manufactured recently sounds pretty decent. Years ago I wouldn’t work on anything but apogee converters. But converter tech is so good now for so cheap that you can get a decent converter paired with usable preamps for a crazy inexpensive price. Just because the Scarlett is cheaper, doesn’t mean that isn’t usable for pro work. There are plenty of affordable interfaces out there working right now. Very few products in the modern pro audio marketplace are “night and day different” from a competitor, regardless of price. Understand signal flow and gain structure, by the best interface you can afford and put time into your craft. All that to say this- if you only have Scarlett money, buy a scarlet and get to work. Your interface decision isn’t going to make or break your career.
I wasted so much time and money in the studio splitting hairs. Then I realized that the regular customer has absolutely no idea about the sonics. Either they like the song or they don't.
hahahahaha you cant look at it that way man......music is to be felt too....thats what all the money for good gear come in at. To get rid of the rugged and harsh unnecessary subtle stuff. It pays off in the end.✨
On individual tracks there's not gonna be much difference but when your adding more tracks you'll be able to hear more. But I have a focusrite. No complaints.
It's worth it to me if you use their unison technology and if you like using their plugins without taxing the power from your computer. The Focusrite is amazing too; I used it for the first 6 years of my musical journey.
Unless you do a lot of recordings, mixing, mastering and I mean a lot...You can never hear the difference. A producer can make a song sound good with ANY interface, because his ears are well tuned and utilize the interface to their maximum potential. Vice versa, one who does not know how to mix and master can make a world-class interface sound equally crappy. Ultimately, everyone hears different stuff...and hearing takes experience.
Andrei Tarkovsky once said that art is never made under ideal conditions. When I mentioned this one day to Warren Chang he said “No, but it certainly is nice when you can.” 😉
I used to use the scarlet 2i2 and recently went to a friends studio, and I couldn't believe my ears. Long story short, I just received my Apollo Twin...if you do vocals...and you're serious...and you're recording with a scarlet...then you're not serious. Here's an example of what it sounds like. We cut this track in a day (obviously, we used it on the vocals). soundcloud.com/powerupthemachine/hollywood-movies/s-FKRUhnx1sVg No way in hell I'd get that quality on the scarlet. Believe me, I tried like hell for 2 days. After adding about 15 plugins and making my vocals sound ultra processed and it was about 1/10th of that quality I said 'fk this.' The quality of the plugins alone is worth the price of the Apollo. Do not underestimate the importance of the device that you're passing your sound through. It's the first factor that is going to determine the quality that you're going to hear in the end. That's what I learned.
@@EdThorne Everything we used came with the 'free' bundle when you buy the Apollo. We used (in this order) Autotune realtime, teletronix and pultec in the UAD and some reverb and delay in the DAW. We're going to re-record it this weekend. It's a little too 'autotuney' and there are other issues in there we want to fix before we officially release it. I've never been very proud of recording vocals, this Apollo twin just changed all that. As for pre-amps we didn't use any UAD pre-amps. I'm actually studying all the power of these plugins as we speak so we can REALLY tweak everything perfectly. They're simply amazing, and with this audio interface....pfft forget about it.
@@EdThorne They have a like 60% discount going on right now. I'm not sure if that's something they always got going on (like a lot of companies do), but I'm thinking of taking advantage of that.
I didn’t watch the video, just viewing comments about it. My question since you could tell the diff, did he show the interface as you listened to it or did he hide it from you and made you guess which interface you think it was. That would be more Legit in my opinion. Too often we say the brand is just better because it’s pricier, etc.
I got the focusrite and I made great recordings with it, it's scary to think how much better the recordings could be with the Apollo. I had a stand alone studio in a box recorder, people used to rave how great the recordings sounded and often would ask which studio I record at. I simply just added some effects and some EQ on the vocals. I was shocked how with the focusrite I didn't have to add EQ just a little reverb and gave me big studio quality recordings.
As someone that has owned both you’d be very underwhelmed and disappointed. The difference is minimal. Take a look at the Audient Evo4 or ID4 MKII. I consider it a step up from the Focusrite Scarlett and a good middle ground. I would consider it the best starting point or standard for budget friendly home studios that don’t need a ton of inputs and outputs. Otherwise just save up, get an Avalon 737 and then you’ll be left with no more questions about how the king of mic preamps sound and never need to consider another preamp ever again lol.
in a studio monitoring situation, it's pretty obvious. but given I don't make music, I 100% can still hear it in the final product. as can the audience. many people have recognized the wider range for the apollo when it's layered with other effects. for voiceover, it's very helpful if youre working with cinematic music. For reference, you display it at 8:40. Look at those waves. great review!
@@Leonidas909 Yeh, I didn’t quite get the gains balanced in this comparison. I did however get the balance right in this video and the sound differences are the same: th-cam.com/video/IkuuxFvNB_g/w-d-xo.html
I have gotten great results with the focusrite. I also have a i7 cpu so I don't get any latency when recording. I won't be using the apollo unless it's gifted to me.
I’ve used the Scarlett 2i2 for 5 years and I recently upgraded to the Apollo Twin Mkii... I’m not saying you can’t make great professional recordings with the Scarlett 2i2, because great records have been made on a tascam 244 four track, but I will say, I don’t regret upgrading to the Apollo and the plugins that you can only get on an Apollo Interface are truly amazing. I think if you’re looking to “open pandora’s box” and be inspired by new plugins and sounds, get an Apollo Twin. Otherwise stick to what you got and keep recording great music! (:
I was hoping there was going to be someone mentioning presonus here. That company doesnt get the love it deserves. Ive been using the 1818vsl along with Studio One for years and couldnt be happier with it.
@@gweeds334 When Presonus first started their products were all hand made in the USA and nothing short of STELLAR. The problem started when that quality made them popular and they moved everything over to China to make a few extra bucks and the sound quality dropped off radically. Still good...but not great like they were. Rockford Fosgate did the SAME thing before coming back with their tail between their legs and correcting the mistakes. I have an original blue tube pre which isn't expensive, but I really liked the sound of it. I figured if I wanted that sound but better I would buy the new blue tube model ...along with another Presonus "class A" pre they had for sale to check things out and BOTH of them sounded bland and vanilla....non musical and tight. Just didn't sound good, was average at best, and didn't have that magic I was used to. If you love your stuff it was probably handmade back in the day...or you just know how to mix tracks really well to try and put life back into them. I talked with one of their head engineers and the first thing he said to me was "Hang onto that thing!" and then told me the story about how things had changed and the older products were just better. The original blue tube I have is what they call a starved plate design, which is a cheap way to make a "tube preamp", but it also adds this flavor in the sound that you don't get with normal tube pres. I've heard it said that they sound almost like a transformer based pre that runs tubes so they have this blended sound which might be why I like it. I've had recordings on that thing that went right into a standard sound blaster sound card that would blow your mind when mixed right. Damn the numbers..does it SOUND GOOD? People ask me ALL of the time what I'm using and their stunned when I tell them. The sound is just phenomenal and stands up to the very best equipment I've ever heard, no lie. It just worked. But it's getting old and depending on how long it's been turned on the sound will change radically. That makes getting a vocal take during that small pocket of time where it's been warmed up just enough to come to life, but not so long that it starts to muddy up and lose transparency and vibrancy.....more difficult. It's possible that certain preamps are just temperamental. I want to get that Amazing sound consistently and the UA Apollo twin looks good. But Presonus's equipment now...meh. I had one of their interfaces too and it was crap.
With all due respect, you are very wrong. The value in the Apollo is in the Unison Preamps, UAD plugins, near zero latency whilst monitoring with the plugins, the ability to print these monitoring effects as you record, and it’s desktop controller functionality. I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the new Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
Asking anyone if they hear much of a difference on a TH-cam video is a little dumb, because of TH-cam's shitty compression. I'm sure I'd be able to hear a difference if plugged directly into my A7X's... But I just have a Scarlett interface and it works perfectly for my needs lol... I get that some people want really fancy interfaces, but imo it'd be a better idea to invest the money you'd be saving from getting a reasonably priced/functional interface in better studio monitors. I see a lot of people getting a $700+ interface and their studio monitors are maybe $400 each, or their headphones are $150. To me seems like priorities are a little backwards. Just my two cents though, I'm not an expert or anything. Also if CPU usage is a concern, just get a better processor. Ryzen processors are amazing. I haven't run into a CPU usage issue yet and I just have a 3700x.
The thing about the Apollos is that they have built-in CPUs that can run all Universal Audio plugins onboard, which saves up a fuck ton of CPU. As far as preamps go, both are very clean transparent pres with no character, and there's few differences.
First off: two thumbs up for an excellent review. It was informative, enjoyable to watch - a time well spent. Thank you for taking the time make it available. To answer your question: to my ears, the Apollo sounded better than the Scarlet. Even with my humble setup (macbook and presonus 4.5 monitors), there was a more "immediate presence" with the apollo sample than with the scarlet. If I were a professional, I would buy the apollo - or something at that level - no questions about it. But if budget is a consideration the scarlet would be a good choice.
I own both interfaces. You can get good, pro-quality recordings from both. The big difference for me is that Apollo has a thunderbolt interface. This allows me to track vocals or guitars in real-time with plugins. I mainly use my apollo as a "digital" amp locker. I have most of the amp sims and they are excellent. When I'm tracking I can not detect any latency. When I'm tracking vocals on the Appollo I have several legendary vocal amp/sims and they are really good. I can also add EQ, compressors, reverb, and track in real-time with no latency. Is the overall sound better? For me, I really can't tell, they both do a great job. However, the Apollo is much more than a simple interface.
Totally agree.I own both,too. Apollo twin do very great job in vocal and guitar tracking.Also I'm very satisfying in compose,arrange and mix with scarlett 2i2.
On listening to this presentation through a decent pair of headphones I found that hey both sound exactly the same to me. However I am seventy one years old and suffer from tinnitus and can't hear high frequencies anymore. I own a focusrite solo and am well pleased with it but as I need to upgrade to something with more flexibility, ie inputs. I had been thinking along the lines of the UA Apollo, but not anymore. Thank you for your insight. You have made my mind up for me, and saved me a few bob into the bargain!
Harry Saunders Hi Harry, I’m glad the video helped your decision. The Scarlett is great for the money. The Apollo is expensive for the Unison preamp emulations, monitoring and UAD plugins. Thanks for watching.
I truly love my Appollo twi n mkIi Thunderbolt.. Took my music to a new level. And when it works, its an easy interface to work with. However, right now its down, thunderbolt and pc can be a hassle. Worked beatifylly for 3 years though. Need to go to my pc specialist.
And I agree. insteaf of producing all theese useless promotion videos and fancy stuff, they should work harder with the basics. But again, when iit works, and if you can afford a few of their plugins, its heaven. I actully think other vendors should copy their concept so that we consumets get some more competion, in particular on tne PC side and UCB C
Thanks 🙂 I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the new Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
The main Apollo benefit for me are the UAD plugins. The sense of presence/space and rich tone would be very difficult to create on the Scarlett. Not sure you would notice this so much in a mix, but side by side on good monitors there is a clear difference between Scarlett and Apollo. Worth it for me. Especially for recording challenging instruments with huge range like acoustic guitar.
@@sylvesterheisenberg7682 check arturia mini fuse. That 100 $ interface just kills Scarlett preamp. Like the Scarlett sounds tiny compare to minifuse! So yes it's overhyped.
In terms of sound quality the uad is not at all worth three times the money. It is very easy to slightly process the vocals with an eq and have it sound the way it fits into your production. Even with a very expensive interface you have to process your vocals anyway to make it fit into your mix. Have you ever listened to the vocal tracks of very successful productions? They are processed like hell to pop out of the mix. The context changes everything.
What isnt being discussed here is that the output converters of any given interface are extremely important for mix decision making. I came from using MOTU interfaces and felt when I moved over to UAD that I could simply hear a bit more detail. This is something you cant really experience unless first hand. Also TH-cam's audio compression as well as the compression in the video render is going to seriously limit your ability to hear the difference in clarity between the units. My 2 cents. Great review thanks!
EarthCry I agree with you, definitely best heard in person. Do you think it’s worth while posting the raw audio files on my website for people to hear themselves?
@@EdThorne sure! While its likely difficult to do with vocals, trying to gain match the takes would help. Louder is always perceived as "better" to the inexperienced.
I tried, but not hard enough it seems 😀 I adjusted the output signal so they were the same level but the Apollo is just a fuller sounding device with more top end making it sound louder. A lot of people have been listening using their eyes too because the wave forms are different. I definitely paid much more attention to this on my following interface video (across ten devices - that was tricky). 😀
The scarlett is a fine interface if youre starting out or want a budget friendly interface. i recently got a use Apollo under $500 (youd never know it was used, in such good condition). As an audio engineer and musician, there are just some things the Apollo does that make it better than the Scarlett, especially the 0 latency aspect and plugins.
Need to compare the vocals volume matched ☺️ the differences are not that huge, but the main strength of the apollo is to smash a neve unison preamp on it. That's the reason of the price difference
Yeh, I didn’t quite get them levelled going in but tried to balance them going out. Yeh Manley VoxBox Unison is great too. Got a video exploring these coming soon. 🙂
@@EdThorne Hehe yeah I'm lurking on that one (manley) !! I did a comparison for myself a few years back when I got my apollo and still had my scarlett, so I could relate to your video. But also it's a nicer piece of hardware, it's stupid and wouldn't justify 500 of price difference (but the rest does) but it's "more inspiring"
I know what you mean, the difference in sound quality doesn’t justify the extra expense (as A LOT of people have illuded to in the comments) but as you say, it’s the Unison, near zero latency, free UAD plugins, LUNA and desktop functionality that make it awesome.
I couldn't hear a difference, and it was a slight difference, until I put on my hd280's. I guess if you want the best sound you can get you gotta spend more but I feel like if in the right hands the Scarlett can go a long ways.
I've owned both units and for my purposes the focusrite was far more simple to use and the results I've gotten are excellent. I found the plug-ins for uad extremely overpriced and I also prefer the simplicity of the focusrite workflow.... just my two cents.
That's totally understandable. The Console routing/monitoring aspect of Apollo can be confusing but it's absolutely brilliant when you get your head around it, I can't imagine life without it now :-)
If you have the money there, I say get the Apollo, you could hear that it had a much clearer sound overall and the plugins are way more advanced. I agree with what you said about not getting a cable with the Apollo for the money that is BS, and I bet the charge way over the odds just because it has there name down the side. I don't have the Scarlett with my setup I use the Roland Quad Core, the downside it it doesn't have two monitor outputs.
I've been hearing lots of "tests" on TH-cam regarding both audio interfaces and so far I didn't notice so much difference between them until I got to your video. In my opinion when we are recording instruments, you can't tell the difference so easily, but when it comes to Vocals it becomes really obvious that Apollo has a warmer and clearer sound, thanks for sharing!
Yeah, we hear the difference and lots of people thinks is not worth the price and all that shit... if they want to compare this interface just direct sounding I can say to them just buy a cheap Beringer um2 and done. I guess compare focusrite scarlett with older apollo twin make a little bit more sense because this X series ada converters almost the best... new/cheaper tech compare with very expensive soundcards and all that stuff... ohh and the "downside" is converters too good for default headphone amp & preamps I think... Great video btw. Keep it up!
You’re right, I didn’t quite match the input gains accurately but the output was adjusted accordingly. I think the perceived volume difference is simply the extra clarity and top end found in the Apollo.
Wrong test Clearly the apollo has more gain in the wave, you should know the difference between gain and volume and the advantages it has in terms of harmonics and source capture, so to even show that the apollo is superior in quality you should place it at least equal or with less gain
Blowing Beats Yeh, I didn’t quite get the gain right in this video, my apologies. I did match them almost perfectly in this video below and you can still hear the same difference/improvements in audio quality: th-cam.com/video/IkuuxFvNB_g/w-d-xo.html
When you compare, why do you have the UAD much higher in volume? It's evident from the waveforms, and gives a very false impression (people assume higher volume is better)
Yeh, I didn’t quite get the gains balanced in this comparison. They were however compensated for on the output so the volumes are almost identical. Be careful not to listen with your eyes. I understand the difference in gain may have influenced the sound but I matched the gains in this video and the sound differences are the same: th-cam.com/video/IkuuxFvNB_g/w-d-xo.html
Personally, I would for for the new Audient iD14mkii. It’s the best interface under $300 (imo) that I’ve reviewed on the channel): th-cam.com/video/TCW9HVfG03M/w-d-xo.html
Dang. They are pretty close, which is surprising for the price difference. When I listen to them over and over, I am not sure I can tell the difference.
The value in the Apollo is in the Unison Preamps, UAD plugins, near zero latency whilst monitoring with the plugins, the ability to print these monitoring effects as you record, and it’s desktop controller functionality. I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the new Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
The biggest difference is the extra features that appolo comes with. Our consumers are nubes so the sound quality will go unnoticed tbh but getting antaras and all those plug ins AND the ability to track my guitar through it makes it better
nobody talks about Behringer U-phoria umc 404. This is just a stellar low price audio interface with midas preams, christal clear sound recording, low latenci (really low latency), mono/stereo button, multiple outs, a/b monitors, single earphones out, pad, inst, line buttons etc... Stellar for 110Euros I paid for it!
Some have posted inaccurately about the specs of the two interfaces. 15dBu max o/p for the 2i2, and 20dBu max o/p for the twin. Likewise the 2i2 ha can handle 9dBu input level, while 25dBu for the twin. The 2i2 is similar to other usb powered interfaces in that it is low power and will not accommodate signal levels from pro outboard gear. Having an interface with low enough latency that one can monitor through the daw and not need a separate hardware (driver) mixer to handle headphone mixes. This really speeds up workflow. This is due to the Thunderbolt architecture in the twin. Likewise having DSP for headphone reverbs which don't force a higher I/O buffer is really helpful. As we are often needing a lot of plugins, having some that are DSP powered helps things. I would agree with others who have posted on this video that people sometimes try to replace an experience deficit with more costly gear purchases. However, the idea that someone who is wanting to approach the sound quality of Neve (UAD plugins) for example, wanting higher quality conversion, or engineers in a professional studio; are all compensating for something is ridiculous. There is a reason why historically the best albums have been recorded in professional studios: they have access to higher quality mics, preamps, consoles, monitoring acoustics. While one channel's worth of class A gear may not make the album way better, you can't deny the over all effect of Class A gear on all the tracks in a production. While the UAD is not really the same thing, at least it tries (preamp emulation, modeled plug-ins) and gets closer. There is also a reason why experience as an engineer or producer makes or breaks a recording. Some DAW users however view modeling of the harmonic characteristics of vintage gear or using vintage gear, as snake oil or unnecessary. Their productions tend to become bland and two dimensional. There is an art form in how the gear is used that isn't just dialing in compressor or eq settings. The UAD, while not quite the same as vintage gear, gives you more in this regard than a Scarlett interface. A Scarlett interface is cheaper and what I can say as an owner of the 18i8 is that there is nothing wrong with it. For the money, getting an 18i8 and having a system that has clean & quiet head-amps, no driver issues, and comes with some really useful Softube plugins is great, so long as someone doesn't expect the head amp to sound like a 1073.
The really huge difference comes in to play when using the unison feature of the, UAD when tracking. You get to record hrough the modeled Pre-amps. As well as complete latency free tracking with the plugins.
@@EdThorne The unison slot in the console makes the plugin in the recording. The rest you can choose. I choose not to. But if I start running out if DSP, I'll commit in protools, which basically dus an offline voice, then makes the existing track inactive.
A big lure for the apollo is the plugins; especially using them in 'Unison' mode with the unit - in essence turning your mic input into either an api, neve or other desk through the software. I've been using the neve pre on the unison input for everything and the tonal character difference is amazing. I also print a lot of pre recorded tracks through the same plugin and the character difference is night and day to me. DSP limitations are annoying although i'm happy to put up with them due to the quality of the plugins. Its the diminishing returns thing really.... Had a scarlett 18i6 for 6 years and loved it, but I couldn't go back now (annoyingly!). Great vid
Thanks Paul. I have a new series starting tomorrow diving deeper into the Apollo world. I’ll be exploring Unison, monitoring/printing fx and DSP management in much more detail. 🙂
Do to the situation I can't hit the studio so I recorded vocals in my house. ( Scarlett 2i2 and mxl990 mic) the mix ingenire at universal music preferred my setup that the one on the studio (enormous expensive) Scarlett its amazing for the price lol
@@EdThorne Definitely!! If you record in a quite room and don't abuse on the gain, you can get an amazing sound! Also a lot of times when the song is finish it is really hard to notice the difference.
Hola. Where are you from ? I liked your songs. Subscribed:D Im from Romania, wife Colombian and we live in the UK. In working mad hours and this is my 2nd attempt to build a bedroom music studio and learn to produce my own songs. I have no paino or guitar skills, I like writting lyrics though. Some months ago bought an used Ableton Push 2 and Live 9 Suite. Few days ago upgraded to Live 10 Suite. Was checking Scarlet 2i2, Motu M2. I still have a good pair of Sennheisers so I wont investing in studio monitors yet. But Im looking at an audio interface and a decent microphone like Rode NT1a and others like yours. Any suggestions? Gracias.
japanluv Hi. I’m in London. Thanks for the sub and kind words on the music. The NT1 gets great reviews. Check out the Aston Origin/Spirit mics too. See my latest video for interface options 😀
Apollo uses Thunderbolt which Apple and Avid claim is as fast as a PCIE card straight to the logic board (motherboard) so I'd go with Thunderbolt over any USB interface.
Uh, except what does that have to do with recording exactly? Bus speeds over USB are pretty damned quick, let alone recording things doesn't really factor into this much. A well written audio driver will compensate for any delay and such. Sorry man, but that's just marketing hogwash. If USB were so poor, they wouldn't make USB recording interfaces. ;)
@@JayKaufman Thunderbolt 3 data transfer speeds are 40Gbps while USB 3.1 is 10Gbps you are straight tripping. USB is designed to transfer data in separate chunks while Thunderbolt is able to continuously transfer data, and be daisy chained to more Thunderbolt devices saving inputs. USB interfaces work with most computers it would be insane for manufacturers to not make them.
@@AlexanderKorotkov42 yes since i got my appollo twin thunderbolt2 for PC, i never ever have experienced any chooking whatsoever (apart from the expected DSP overload) , it has been brilliant. To get it to work, driverwise, can be both thrilling and disapointing, many can testify. And for how long will UAD support drivers, if intel or windows change specificationS, I dont know. My own unit mysteriously ceased to work the other day.. Well, could be a hardware issue, so wount blame UAD at this stage.
I got both and you can definitely tell the difference when using them. It’s all about how you using it, like I use Scarlett to make beats and then when I need to record artist I switch to the Apollo, it’s good and worth the money if you have it. But if you got the Scarlett just use what you got until it’s time to buy a new one when you saved enough, don’t let people get to u , whether having the expensive one making you better at what your doing. #KeepGrindin
I just want to add something for those wanting to use the Apolo as your main sound card on your home studio/gaming rig and even Skype calls. The Apolo isn’t compatible with some applications like the the scarlet is. I couldn’t use it with my talk back mic on video games and Skype calls or any video call applications. Neither application nor web based video call websites couldn’t recognize the interface but had no problem recognizing the scarlet. If your a producer who also games and streams and does conference call on the same pc. The Apolo May give you complications on applications not meant for Audio engineering. I’m not sure if they have updated their compatibility by now but for me it was a major draw back and it definitely added more value to the scarlet for those reasons.
This showed me what an amazing deal the focusrite is. If I had a money making studio I’d get the Apollo but I’d feel like I’m getting ripped off for sure, there’s not 500-600$ difference. The Apollo feels like it would be at home at 349$
guitar guy The Scarlett is great value for money, especially with all the extra software. The value in the Apollo though is the offsite plugin processing and expansive monitor signal processing potential.
@@EdThorne Thanks! I think your video very nicely shows the higher quality of the Apollo. The chatter I hear is that the engineering quality of the Babyface is the best and I was wondering if that translates into any obvious audio improvement. Maybe the comparison could be between the Apollo and Babyface. Keep up the good work!
No one covered Drivers and Latency. No one compared at different Audio Resolutions and Buffers. The UAD Windows Drivers are pretty $hitty for $800, but you will get at least 8-10ms Better latency than a FocusRite. Very big deal when you're trying to perform live... and that's before you start to make use of the DSP Plugins. That's where the UAD shines and justifies it's price tag IMO.
Keys By Mo Hi there, thanks for the comment. These are good points. What information about drivers would you want to know? Latency is almost a none issue these days, it’s milliseconds on both devices (if using the Scarletts Mix dial and not routing through the DAW) certainly not audible. UAD used to be Mac only so I can imagine their windows drivers are in their infancy and need developing.
@@EdThorne I wish i would have see the round trip Latency, as displayed in Ableton Pref>Audio b4 i purchased my Apollo Twin. It's a little higher than my FirefaceUC, but way better than any FocusRite/Audient in the low price range. This makes a difference to me as a live performer. Especially as i start to multi-track and use plugins as most mobile CPU's are way more sensitive to this before the crackles/pops show up.
I am an Apollo owner. IMHO, they are both perfectly usable, professional tools. Apollo IS more high-end, because it gives you all the fancy options you mentioned and grants you access to UAD's plugin-library (which is pretty expensive, but the plugins that the interface comes with are more than enough to get you by) which is remarkably above other companies in regards to modeling analog sound, so if you know what these old, analog boxes do and are going for that specific vibe, then Apollo is a great way of getting those sounds ITB without breaking the bank. However, I've used the Scarlett a few times and it works perfectly and sounds wonderful as long as you're using a decent mic (even a SM57). It is all about taste and needs. I don't see much functionality in Apollo for EDM artists and the like, but if you're going to be tracking a lot, those extra $600 are REALLY worth it.
When you talked about the specs, you didn’t talk about the spec that makes the apollo converters a professional interface. The converters in the focusrite have a maximum output of +10dbu, the Twin has a maximum output of +26dbu. This is fine if you only ever use your audio files in a consumer setting. The twin is a professional device with professional converters. Let me explain why this is important. The reference level for professional gear is +4dbu or 1.23 volts. This means that if you run audio recorded through the focusrite through any outboard gear you only have 6db of headroom between reference and clipping vs the Twin having 18-19db of headroom. So if you‘re not serious about the audio files you record, then use consumer equipment... it doesn’t sound terrible. BUT if you plan to ever use the audio you record in ANY kind of professional environment or you take audio seriously, get a professional interface with high quality converters.
Jason Cox, this is information I feel you will find in textbooks because you are the first to highlight this; this is news to me. Do you mind if I ask, what would be an easy way of identifying professional interfaces? I know most musicians/producers mostly use Apollo stuff, but could other brands like Audient, PreSonus etc.?
Listening through: computer -> optical -> Arcam rDAC -> CI Audio VHP2 headphone amp -> Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro 250Ω I would say the Apollo has a slightly "harder" sound than the Scarlett; also, what sounds to be the delayed bleed from the vocalist headphones is more apparent with the Scarlett. IMO the Scarlett is the more transparent. As with Hi-Fi equipment, it's easy to hear extra things in the music when one item is several times more expensive than the other; confirmation bias.
As with Hi-Fi equipment, it's easy to hear extra things in the music when one item is several times more expensive than the other; confirmation bias. What did you mean by this statement? I'm not understanding you.
There was actually a much bigger difference than I expected. I'm a beginner and I bought the Scarlett not long ago. I'm not disapointed, but when I'm beginning to get good at this I would definitely invest in the Apollo Twin, or something even better.
For the money, the Scarlett is great, it does a good job. It’s worth getting familiar with all the plugins that come with it. Enjoy the creative process 🙂
Gonna be honest, after having both interfaces, the Apollo blows the Scarlett out of the water Sonically. The plugins and converters took my mixes to another level. You’ll have to experience it for yourself, I felt like there wasn’t a difference until I actually had an Apollo in my setup.
I do agree but that air mode on the Scarlett with the best analog plugins in the world acoustica audio makes the over hyped Apollo sounds like plastic trust me mixing with the Scarlett and acoustica audio plugs make you don't Ned outboard gears
Considering the Scarlett is the budget sound card, and there’s a HUGE price difference, I’m not surprised. It would be a different story if it was using the Clarett range.
I have a 2nd gen Scarlett 6i6 and the main complaint is that I don't have a lot of headroom to work with. I use it for micing up Hammond organ (mono). That's for service use. When I patch Nord directly into the interface for recording (home) use It clips or even worse.. I get that there are ways to mitigate this but part of playing organ requires a change in volume.
@@Marijuana-Johnson recording keys in general is very good. It handles all of my stuff including my bass and synth patches. I believe this might be the best budget interface for personal use but if you need more channels definitely look at a Behringer
You would hear more difference between a cheap, ok, good or great interface by using an acoustic guitar, piano etc. There is where the different level mic pres will really make a different. Also need really good headphones to hear the difference or a really good sound system.
Bit depth, SR, S/N benchmark tech specs, the inputs and no way to describe the quality of actual circuitry, mean very little. Latency does mean a lot, but in the absence of clock accuracy and stability, none of it means much imo. In particular I really don’t like the Focusrite stuff, it’s no more than a cheap box with cheap circuitry a mediocre clock with kind of ok not really latency figures, but with a with a legendary name. In fact “Focusrite”, while pretty good was a step down from Neve. I don’t know the UA Apollo but having followed the evolution of UA I’d imagine it’s pretty good, but in terms of latency, the figures I’ve read (several years ago) didn’t or don’t get close RME Babyface Pro. It’s hard to match the babyface on any level including i/o breakout possibilities.
I have Scarlett 18i8 and Octopre because I have lots of small synths that I like to jam live on so I need lots of inputs, so I am a fan because of price level. I couldn't do all this in the "Pro" line of interfaces. From my understanding when they say "Pro" the difference is if your sound is going to be used in a professional setting. If you are looking to make a track that is going to be played through a banging club sound system or in a movie theater, then you will then notice the difference. So I think it is hard to tell the difference much in normal environments. I could be wrong, that is just my understanding.
Can you load let's say, waves plugins on the DSP of Apollo? No, you can't. Why mention it in a way that it helps you free the processing from your computer CPU? The only plugins you can run on that card are those made by UAD, and you can't run them any other way. That's it. The DSP on that card serves only that purpose. You endorsed or what?
@fartpoobox ohyeah I am no measurement machine, nor am I a professional reviewer. Each to their own, and let's enjoy the process of exploration together :)
What a comparison!!!.... You`d better compare UAD Apollo Twin to Prism Sound Lyra they are from the same league... shit scarlett manufactured in China presents very compressed thin sound with no bass, flat plastic sound of gen 3. The hopes and dreams of Scarlet 3gen are selling good, because there are worlds selling and marketing specs out there........ I was looking for the audio interface (not sound card as the host call it, these were soundblasters anyway ) and I found Universal Audio Apollo Twin USB... the sound is amazing dynamic range on output 118dB .... you can not even compare to this red shit. (I sold focusrite 8i6 3gen after month...)
Bear in mind this video is not a like-for-like comparison, but an explanation as to how and why a budget interface and a higher end interface are different. A few people have mentioned the Prisms, I need to check one out 😀
My opinion if upgrading from an entry level set-up is to upgrade your headphones first. Having pro headphones puts you on the same page of anything the client is hearing on their end and is the cheapest to upgrade when compared to mics or interfaces. You’re only looking for clean audio, everything else is processing.
Nice. At my studio I've been using the Focusrite Clarett 8pre for years with some outboard gear. It's an excellent unit for live rehearsals etc. Yet since the quarantine I've been marooned at home so just ordered the Apollo and I'm stoked to try it out for my living room setup.
Thank you so much for the detailed reviews and comparison. The Apollo has a cleaner and more open sound (as you noted). It's not just how one track sounds, imagine the difference when used to record 20 tracks (it adds up).
I think we get too obsessed with the sound sonically, to me getting a ‘great performance’ is the most important goal, if you can’t sing or play your instrument well no amount of expensive equipment will compensate, you can always tell. Let’s not all aim to sound like the over produced lifeless professional songs out there!
Hi! I already have an akg c414. Which mic could I pair it with to record a podcast? I have an apollo twin duo, bae dmp 1073 and the akgc414 mic to record music. I want to to start a podcast and need a mic for a co-host. How would u suggest I connect 2 mics and which ones? I though about getting 2 rode podmics and plugging straight into my apollo interface. But what can I do if i want to use the mic I already have? Thanks for your time and video!!
The Shure SM7b is an industry standard podcast mic (Joe Rogan uses them): th-cam.com/video/LSWxdKakgu4/w-d-xo.html The new Earthworks Icon mic sounds awesome and may be a better option from what I’ve seen but I haven’t used one in person yet.
Cmon man... we’re talking pro and budget comparison... of course appolo sounds perfect. I tried a lot of ad da ... the best are RME and APPOLO. But for the budget - tascam us series (even 4x2) have best preamps. IMHO I don’t think we can compare these two equally. Also it would be better if you put smth else than vox for the comparison... ) thnx for this vid anyway man!
Thanks for watching and commenting. The video is to discuss HOW a budget and a more professional interface are different, not to directly compare the two. Yes, the Tascam US series sounds GREAT, I agree, probably best in its class. I reviewed this interface with 9 others (with guitar audio examples, as well as vocals) here: th-cam.com/video/x50dw_BfudU/w-d-xo.html
Meh... just a little more air. Nothing 1 minute of processing can't fix on the Focusrite. And in context of a full blown rock or pop mix, the difference is inaudible to the majority of listeners anyway. Not saying the UAD has some pro's though (latency and buffer related mostly) but even that can be bypassed, not worth 600 dollars more to me anyway.
I have both of the ones displayed in the thumbnail. I’ll be honest. The focusrite gives a more full distorted recording. The Apollo Twin gives a CLEAR clean recording. I prefer the rawness of the Focusrite
Ed Thorne Yes. I have both and the main diference to me is the time you save inputting things and monitoring with the Apollo. You can easily get and hear the sound you want prior to the actual recording with the UAD plugs inserted in the console. Regarding sound, i find the apollo outputs to be very open sounding BUT the Scarlet sounds more similar to the "real world". One could find an advantage there. (If you have more than one studio or setup, go with UA. You'll get the UAD plugins working for all of them)
Anyone who spends much more than around $100 on a 2 in, 2 out, audio interface is completely bonkers. Whatever perceived advantage the Apollo might have is easily swallowed up by other factors like decent connections, decent instruments and above all DECENT musical material. You can buy a 2 in/out Behringer for less than $50 and in practice you will hear no difference in sound, unless you are imagining things, and even if there was a difference (like less brightness) you can adjust the mix EQ. The only point of higher spec audio interfaces is where you need multiple inputs and/or outputs for live recording or performance. If you are running a home studio you do not need to spend much. Spend the spare money training yourself to understand music better.
A lot of people beg to differ. The value in the Apollo is in the Unison Preamps, UAD plugins, zero latency whilst monitoring with the plugins, the ability to print these monitoring effects as you record, it’s monitor mix versatility and functionality with the Console app, the UAD DAW (LUNA), and it’s far superior desktop controller functionality. I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the new Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
Please could you do a Audient ID44 & Apollo X comparison please! Many thanks for this video. Can hear the Apollo has for Thickness. It's a shame though the the DSP Chips only serve their UAD Plugins only :(
There is a little difference. In Comparison A and B when you put audio clips of Scar and UAD, the volume of the UAD is a little louder. Make the difference to lower the volume a little when the UAD sounds in that sector of the video and you will see that the ear practically does not detect the difference. The difference they have, you can emulate it 100% with equalization. As with many microphones and processors. There is a reference, but if you are not going to use all the DSP that the UAD brings, I am not too concerned about the difference. Hug from Argentina!
yes agreed. I took a music production mastering course and it included side chaining and compression, and when you consider the Dolby quality of the 70's, you need quality recording of course, and this is where the quality of the instrument, amp and microphone also figure, but the scarlett for its price point is so significant because it works well enough - and he then enhances the recording samples - reshaping them and manipulating them further during mastering. He used and recommended a scarlett 2i4 because he wanted to use equipment that was accessible to those taking the course. But he let us in on one thing, the library recordings which were a good stream of income for the studio where audio was recorded, it was recorded onto a flashdrive in an external recorder, before that it was CD drives, and before that it was an 8 track Reel to Reel, there is something about recording onto tape which still charms the ears. A quality which hasn't been matched as yet. Saying that however, many people just want to sing into the computer these days and earn good money sometimes doing so.and that's why quality is important, and if you have the resources I guess you 'd purchase a more expensive piece of kit. For people who don't value their own ability too highly - the scarlett is more than adequate, in fact excellent for recording into DAWs, because the results are usable and that is the only requirement of a good workflow ethic.
Bro... An Apollo twin isnt even a pro interface. Not even close its a consumer grade interface. When you talk pro youre talking Lynx, burl, apogee symphony
Lots of professional recordings have been made on Apollo interfaces so they can be considered professional. I didn’t say were the best and I would agree those devices you mentioned have technically better converters.
that noise in the background of your tests is your sinuses, when you change your voice as you sing you block the air ways in your big ass shnaz and it farts. happens to me when im sick i just take the whole audio delete it and retire till i feel better lmfao....and i honestly think for the money idk if the apollo is really worth it because people are going to use plug ins anyway, in the end itll most likely sound damn near the same. as long as you have a nice clear crisp sound thats all you need now a days
Yeh, that weird sinus thing was a post-Covid thing, it seems to have disappeared since. Learning some technique probably helped too, lol. The value in the Apollo is in the Unison Preamps, UAD plugins, near-zero latency whilst monitoring with the plugins, the ability to print these monitoring effects as you record, and its desktop controller functionality. Plus, the monitor routing flexibility is far superior. I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
I can hear the subtle difference. I like the sound of the apollo. The apollo makes the vocals sound a little more compressed and warm. As where the scarellet sounds a tiny bit more flat
Apollo does sound more rounded and warm. Almost like more information is being captured in a smooth way. I’ve never really liked Focusrite interfaces besides their Clarett series.
My 8i6 is great. I think whatever difference we're hearing between these two boxes is in their preamps, not their converters. I opted to save the money on and interface and spend the extra money on a used Blue Robbie and run it into one of the line-ins. On my Neumanns and Blue MixFis I cannot hear a difference between my Robbie on the Focusrite and my friend's nicer interface, leading me to believe it is just the Preamps that we're hearing in your video
Hi Michael, i am playing nayflute instrument and i have presonus studio one software in my laptop. I am blowing nayflute with backup music track in studio one. For better recording quality, could it be useful to supply focusrite Scarlett audio interface or Roland vt4 vocal processor ?
If your trying to do serious stuff, upgrading is pretty important. U can fill a room with good stuff but this decides how high that ceiling (quality) goes.
💽 Get Your Tracks Mixed by Ed: edthorne.com/mixing
🎬 Best Interface For Mixing! This HP Amp is Insane!: th-cam.com/video/n0fyFRl2R24/w-d-xo.html
🎬 Scarlett 4th Generation vs 3rd Gen: th-cam.com/video/_LDDzsxp1a0/w-d-xo.html
Underground Raiload TV show in Chicago That’s great. I haven’t used one yet but I’ll look out for it. Rode are a popular brand and I would imagine will clear up a lot on the Podcasting circuit so I’ll look into reviewing one.
Yeh count me in 🙂 TheEdThorne@gmail.com
Which is the best interface!
@@bradleyc79 did you mean “Railroad” ?
@@33yearsoldcarpenter buy whichever you can afford, i have the Scarlett and love it and i am sure i would love using the apollo also. With good plug ins and a good computer with at least 4 cores, i don't have any latency issues
As Ray Charles once famously said, "If it sounds good, it is good."
ECS Media LLC True words. Apologies for my voice 😜
@@EdThorne Ed ...to my ears i hear the UA is a little more thick sound but
it goes a bit like to the edge of going distorted (kind of when you are way too close
ti the mic effect) and is also way too much sensitive to pickup artifacts and that is for being so true\good in the Mic Preamp section !
The Scarlett is a bit thinner but not as bad that cant be fixed with ext gear
or int plugins !
So, now that i know this thinning problem on the Focusrite, i will always add a bit
of more body to the vocals i will record from now on !!
Thanks for the video and alert me of this !
dnantis Hi, yeh, I didn’t quite get the gains matched in this video, my apologies. I did however get them identical in the video below and I think you can hear the same differences in the audio: th-cam.com/video/IkuuxFvNB_g/w-d-xo.html
I believe the author of that quote was Duke Ellington and later used too by british engineer Joe Meek
agreed
biggest difference, you cant have a coffecup standing on the apollo twin, but works just fine for scarlet
Haha🤣 I think this is my favourite comment on this video 🙂
@@EdThorne haha thanks man xD its so true for me thought, i have so little space on my desk so my coffe usually stands on my scarlet
@@Musicbypinge That’s a recipe for a wet mix 😜🤣
@@EdThorne haha
And that’s why the scarlet wins 😂
People need to remember that there were albums recorded on old ADAT's and DIGI 001's . Many cheap off the shelf interface are now 24 bit, 96KHZ with better specs than those. The Shins first album was record on an old HP computer with a sound card. The gear isn't so important as much as the ability to make the most of what you have. And of course, great performances with emotion. If you have the money, then go ahead and buy the best you can afford. Otherwise, focus more on the music, instead of lusting over the latest sexiest UAD equipment.
Truer than true. In the end, buying and upgrading gear can become an obsession and making music is all but forgotten.
Scary, you took my words out of my mouth almost verbatim. There is a 192KHz/24Bit 100 plugins frenzy out their with everyone thinking that's their edge. Wrong. Your music, passion, playing and compositional capabilities are your edge. I'll never forget an interview with The Spin Doctor's producer from the early nineties. They asked him how their drums sounded so good, what was the secret? His answer? "Aaron Comess is an excellent drummer". There you go.
very true after hearing this just shaprening up on your mixing skills can make all the difference as apose to spending that xtra money for something most may not use to its full potential
Well said.
Faxx
Why do you look like the bad guy from the incredibles
😂 Fortunate DNA 😉
Lol im just foolin
Sheamus you mean
lool
The funny thing about recording is the ones actually listening to the finished product would never say oh he use a Apollo interface or he used a Scarlett interface. If your a audio engineer you know how to make anything sound great 👍🏾
is the apollo twin good without using the console and plugins? I need it for my Neunmann u87.
But the problem comes when you want a good translation from your DAW to out of the DAW to be same, and not sounding different.
It's not a matter about quality anymore but colouration. And in Mixing/Mastering, that can be a hell to second-guess through because you want your mixes to sound exactly the same once they are bounced out.
@@samuelng6441 think I go with a RME babyface. Heard only good things about it.
@@samuelng6441 In REAPER my bounces always sound BETTER once rendered down into a Wave file. I always find this odd.
@@wmurray003 bruh.... that's because it's lossless. You shouldn't be bouncing your mixes in mp3 anyways for whatever reason other than to test how your mix sounds under the stress test.
They sound the same to me... I mean honestly when you add drums and guitars and sythns... You'll never hear the "corona cough"... Scarlett is good enough...
I think the interface is no longer a limiting factor. Both sound good enough to record a hit (or a miss).
Try doing Dolby mix
Exactly! Spend the $ on your PC/Mac
Vid just recommended to me. Seems like a lot of hate on the focusrite interfaces. I own multiple Scarlett interfaces and they all function beautifully. I have lots of interfaces from multiple manufactures and the reality is that anything manufactured recently sounds pretty decent. Years ago I wouldn’t work on anything but apogee converters. But converter tech is so good now for so cheap that you can get a decent converter paired with usable preamps for a crazy inexpensive price. Just because the Scarlett is cheaper, doesn’t mean that isn’t usable for pro work. There are plenty of affordable interfaces out there working right now. Very few products in the modern pro audio marketplace are “night and day different” from a competitor, regardless of price.
Understand signal flow and gain structure, by the best interface you can afford and put time into your craft.
All that to say this- if you only have Scarlett money, buy a scarlet and get to work. Your interface decision isn’t going to make or break your career.
Once you upgrade, you'll notice the difference.
I used to have a Scarlett as we all have done. Was good! But the Apollo is another world
Subtle difference but I agree the Apollo is a bit more pro sounding sometimes the accumulation of small advantages wins the game
I wasted so much time and money in the studio splitting hairs. Then I realized that the regular customer has absolutely no idea about the sonics. Either they like the song or they don't.
James Brown This is very true. And most people listen to music through their phone speakers or AirPods anyway 🤦🏼♂️
UAD has talk back mic and processes the plug ins independently of the DAW. That’s why it’s more expensive
@@ghostbaum tru
They don’t “realize” it , but better mixes don’t cause ear fatigue and are easier to replay.
hahahahaha you cant look at it that way man......music is to be felt too....thats what all the money for good gear come in at. To get rid of the rugged and harsh unnecessary subtle stuff. It pays off in the end.✨
I totally don't hear the 600£ difference
On individual tracks there's not gonna be much difference but when your adding more tracks you'll be able to hear more. But I have a focusrite. No complaints.
TH-cam is not tidal my friend :\
@@jhohanmusic True dat
It's worth it to me if you use their unison technology and if you like using their plugins without taxing the power from your computer. The Focusrite is amazing too; I used it for the first 6 years of my musical journey.
Unless you do a lot of recordings, mixing, mastering and I mean a lot...You can never hear the difference. A producer can make a song sound good with ANY interface, because his ears are well tuned and utilize the interface to their maximum potential. Vice versa, one who does not know how to mix and master can make a world-class interface sound equally crappy.
Ultimately, everyone hears different stuff...and hearing takes experience.
Andrei Tarkovsky once said that art is never made under ideal conditions. When I mentioned this one day to Warren Chang he said “No, but it certainly is nice when you can.” 😉
I used to use the scarlet 2i2 and recently went to a friends studio, and I couldn't believe my ears. Long story short, I just received my Apollo Twin...if you do vocals...and you're serious...and you're recording with a scarlet...then you're not serious. Here's an example of what it sounds like. We cut this track in a day (obviously, we used it on the vocals). soundcloud.com/powerupthemachine/hollywood-movies/s-FKRUhnx1sVg
No way in hell I'd get that quality on the scarlet. Believe me, I tried like hell for 2 days. After adding about 15 plugins and making my vocals sound ultra processed and it was about 1/10th of that quality I said 'fk this.' The quality of the plugins alone is worth the price of the Apollo.
Do not underestimate the importance of the device that you're passing your sound through. It's the first factor that is going to determine the quality that you're going to hear in the end. That's what I learned.
Nicholas Kent I agree Nicholas. The track sounds great. Did you use any pre-amps sims on the unison insert?
@@EdThorne Everything we used came with the 'free' bundle when you buy the Apollo. We used (in this order) Autotune realtime, teletronix and pultec in the UAD and some reverb and delay in the DAW. We're going to re-record it this weekend. It's a little too 'autotuney' and there are other issues in there we want to fix before we officially release it. I've never been very proud of recording vocals, this Apollo twin just changed all that. As for pre-amps we didn't use any UAD pre-amps. I'm actually studying all the power of these plugins as we speak so we can REALLY tweak everything perfectly. They're simply amazing, and with this audio interface....pfft forget about it.
@@EdThorne Thanks for the props by the way.
@@EdThorne They have a like 60% discount going on right now. I'm not sure if that's something they always got going on (like a lot of companies do), but I'm thinking of taking advantage of that.
Just had mine yesterday... My ears still don't believe it
The Apollo definitely was more clearer... I could tell and hear the difference... Whether or not it's a 600 pound difference I'm not convinced...
I didn’t watch the video, just viewing comments about it. My question since you could tell the diff, did he show the interface as you listened to it or did he hide it from you and made you guess which interface you think it was. That would be more Legit in my opinion. Too often we say the brand is just better because it’s pricier, etc.
TH-cam dude go to soundcloud
I got the focusrite and I made great recordings with it, it's scary to think how much better the recordings could be with the Apollo. I had a stand alone studio in a box recorder, people used to rave how great the recordings sounded and often would ask which studio I record at. I simply just added some effects and some EQ on the vocals. I was shocked how with the focusrite I didn't have to add EQ just a little reverb and gave me big studio quality recordings.
As someone that has owned both you’d be very underwhelmed and disappointed. The difference is minimal. Take a look at the Audient Evo4 or ID4 MKII. I consider it a step up from the Focusrite Scarlett and a good middle ground. I would consider it the best starting point or standard for budget friendly home studios that don’t need a ton of inputs and outputs. Otherwise just save up, get an Avalon 737 and then you’ll be left with no more questions about how the king of mic preamps sound and never need to consider another preamp ever again lol.
in a studio monitoring situation, it's pretty obvious. but given I don't make music, I 100% can still hear it in the final product. as can the audience. many people have recognized the wider range for the apollo when it's layered with other effects. for voiceover, it's very helpful if youre working with cinematic music. For reference, you display it at 8:40. Look at those waves. great review!
Thank you 🙂🙏
I don't get it, one wave is just louder than the other, which is bad A B comparison btw, people will always choose the louder sound.
@@Leonidas909 Yeh, I didn’t quite get the gains balanced in this comparison. I did however get the balance right in this video and the sound differences are the same: th-cam.com/video/IkuuxFvNB_g/w-d-xo.html
Yeah the pre amp in the apollo must have a little nip on dynamic range pick up, judging by the wave difference
Can't compression and EQ fix the Focusrite. You can make templates for your vocal chain channel. That's what I've done.
I have gotten great results with the focusrite. I also have a i7 cpu so I don't get any latency when recording.
I won't be using the apollo unless it's gifted to me.
I’ve used the Scarlett 2i2 for 5 years and I recently upgraded to the Apollo Twin Mkii... I’m not saying you can’t make great professional recordings with the Scarlett 2i2, because great records have been made on a tascam 244 four track, but I will say, I don’t regret upgrading to the Apollo and the plugins that you can only get on an Apollo Interface are truly amazing. I think if you’re looking to “open pandora’s box” and be inspired by new plugins and sounds, get an Apollo Twin. Otherwise stick to what you got and keep recording great music! (:
Are you using the Unison Preamps? th-cam.com/video/PM8V9rb9D_4/w-d-xo.html
I came from a shitty lexicon omega and i can hear a massive difference in audio quality even the frequency spread changes in span
All I’m going to say is, the best gear is the GEAR YOU HAVE. & I sold my apollo to get a presonus studio 26c.... 🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️
Fair point. Whatever gets you creating when inspiration occurs 👌
Absolutely! I love gear but that doesn’t make much difference if you’re not making music.
I was hoping there was going to be someone mentioning presonus here. That company doesnt get the love it deserves. Ive been using the 1818vsl along with Studio One for years and couldnt be happier with it.
@@gweeds334 When Presonus first started their products were all hand made in the USA and nothing short of STELLAR. The problem started when that quality made them popular and they moved everything over to China to make a few extra bucks and the sound quality dropped off radically. Still good...but not great like they were. Rockford Fosgate did the SAME thing before coming back with their tail between their legs and correcting the mistakes.
I have an original blue tube pre which isn't expensive, but I really liked the sound of it. I figured if I wanted that sound but better I would buy the new blue tube model ...along with another Presonus "class A" pre they had for sale to check things out and BOTH of them sounded bland and vanilla....non musical and tight. Just didn't sound good, was average at best, and didn't have that magic I was used to. If you love your stuff it was probably handmade back in the day...or you just know how to mix tracks really well to try and put life back into them.
I talked with one of their head engineers and the first thing he said to me was "Hang onto that thing!" and then told me the story about how things had changed and the older products were just better.
The original blue tube I have is what they call a starved plate design, which is a cheap way to make a "tube preamp", but it also adds this flavor in the sound that you don't get with normal tube pres. I've heard it said that they sound almost like a transformer based pre that runs tubes so they have this blended sound which might be why I like it. I've had recordings on that thing that went right into a standard sound blaster sound card that would blow your mind when mixed right. Damn the numbers..does it SOUND GOOD?
People ask me ALL of the time what I'm using and their stunned when I tell them. The sound is just phenomenal and stands up to the very best equipment I've ever heard, no lie. It just worked. But it's getting old and depending on how long it's been turned on the sound will change radically. That makes getting a vocal take during that small pocket of time where it's been warmed up just enough to come to life, but not so long that it starts to muddy up and lose transparency and vibrancy.....more difficult. It's possible that certain preamps are just temperamental. I want to get that Amazing sound consistently and the UA Apollo twin looks good. But Presonus's equipment now...meh. I had one of their interfaces too and it was crap.
The Apollos and Focusrites both work nearly identically as *interfaces.* The Apollos, however, also work as external CPUs.
With all due respect, you are very wrong. The value in the Apollo is in the Unison Preamps, UAD plugins, near zero latency whilst monitoring with the plugins, the ability to print these monitoring effects as you record, and it’s desktop controller functionality. I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the new Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
Asking anyone if they hear much of a difference on a TH-cam video is a little dumb, because of TH-cam's shitty compression.
I'm sure I'd be able to hear a difference if plugged directly into my A7X's... But I just have a Scarlett interface and it works perfectly for my needs lol... I get that some people want really fancy interfaces, but imo it'd be a better idea to invest the money you'd be saving from getting a reasonably priced/functional interface in better studio monitors.
I see a lot of people getting a $700+ interface and their studio monitors are maybe $400 each, or their headphones are $150. To me seems like priorities are a little backwards. Just my two cents though, I'm not an expert or anything.
Also if CPU usage is a concern, just get a better processor. Ryzen processors are amazing. I haven't run into a CPU usage issue yet and I just have a 3700x.
You raise a good point about the Monitor vs Interface expense.
The thing about the Apollos is that they have built-in CPUs that can run all Universal Audio plugins onboard, which saves up a fuck ton of CPU. As far as preamps go, both are very clean transparent pres with no character, and there's few differences.
First off: two thumbs up for an excellent review. It was informative, enjoyable to watch - a time well spent. Thank you for taking the time make it available.
To answer your question: to my ears, the Apollo sounded better than the Scarlet. Even with my humble setup (macbook and presonus 4.5 monitors), there was a more "immediate presence" with the apollo sample than with the scarlet. If I were a professional, I would buy the apollo - or something at that level - no questions about it. But if budget is a consideration the scarlet would be a good choice.
Thank you for the comments. I agree with your assessment there 🙂
I own both interfaces. You can get good, pro-quality recordings from both. The big difference for me is that Apollo has a thunderbolt interface. This allows me to track vocals or guitars in real-time with plugins. I mainly use my apollo as a "digital" amp locker. I have most of the amp sims and they are excellent. When I'm tracking I can not detect any latency. When I'm tracking vocals on the Appollo I have several legendary vocal amp/sims and they are really good. I can also add EQ, compressors, reverb, and track in real-time with no latency. Is the overall sound better? For me, I really can't tell, they both do a great job. However, the Apollo is much more than a simple interface.
Totally agree.I own both,too.
Apollo twin do very great job in vocal and guitar tracking.Also I'm very satisfying in compose,arrange and mix with scarlett 2i2.
if you are setup correctly you should not be detecting any noticeable latency with usb
Interesting take. I have the Scarlett and use numerous plugins during tracking with no detectable latency.
@@Sen-lx4kl I have been very impressed with the quality of the Scarlet. Amazing for the price.
On listening to this presentation through a decent pair of headphones I found that
hey both sound exactly the same to me. However I am seventy one years old and suffer from tinnitus and can't hear high frequencies anymore. I own a focusrite solo and am well pleased with it but as I need to upgrade to something with more flexibility, ie inputs. I had been thinking along the lines of the UA Apollo, but not anymore. Thank you for your insight. You have made my mind up for me, and saved me a few bob into the bargain!
Harry Saunders Hi Harry, I’m glad the video helped your decision. The Scarlett is great for the money. The Apollo is expensive for the Unison preamp emulations, monitoring and UAD plugins. Thanks for watching.
Ed Thorne or get an apogee and outclass both of them
lou dane I’ve recorded with an Apogee Duet and I found it a little dull. I’d prefer a Clarett or something brighter and juicier sounding.
I truly love my Appollo twi n mkIi Thunderbolt.. Took my music to a new level. And when it works, its an easy interface to work with. However, right now its down, thunderbolt and pc can be a hassle. Worked beatifylly for 3 years though. Need to go to my pc specialist.
And I agree. insteaf of producing all theese useless promotion videos and fancy stuff, they should work harder with the basics. But again, when iit works, and if you can afford a few of their plugins, its heaven. I actully think other vendors should copy their concept so that we consumets get some more competion, in particular on tne PC side and UCB C
Smashing review Ed they both sounds great to my ear and I agree the Apollo has a little more depth yet an almost transparency in the detail.
Thanks 🙂 I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the new Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
The main Apollo benefit for me are the UAD plugins. The sense of presence/space and rich tone would be very difficult to create on the Scarlett. Not sure you would notice this so much in a mix, but side by side on good monitors there is a clear difference between Scarlett and Apollo. Worth it for me. Especially for recording challenging instruments with huge range like acoustic guitar.
I agree Daniel. Thanks for watching 🙏
heck, you don't even need good monitors to hear the differences... they were quite apparent to me, just listening on my laptop speakers
@@dustinthiessen The conversion in UAD apollos interfaces is far superior too :)
Thanks for the comments. Im paranoid about how much scarlet advertises youtubers I've been trying to see the differences cause it's clearly over hyped
@@sylvesterheisenberg7682 check arturia mini fuse. That 100 $ interface just kills Scarlett preamp. Like the Scarlett sounds tiny compare to minifuse! So yes it's overhyped.
In terms of sound quality the uad is not at all worth three times the money. It is very easy to slightly process the vocals with an eq and have it sound the way it fits into your production. Even with a very expensive interface you have to process your vocals anyway to make it fit into your mix. Have you ever listened to the vocal tracks of very successful productions? They are processed like hell to pop out of the mix. The context changes everything.
What isnt being discussed here is that the output converters of any given interface are extremely important for mix decision making. I came from using MOTU interfaces and felt when I moved over to UAD that I could simply hear a bit more detail. This is something you cant really experience unless first hand. Also TH-cam's audio compression as well as the compression in the video render is going to seriously limit your ability to hear the difference in clarity between the units. My 2 cents. Great review thanks!
EarthCry I agree with you, definitely best heard in person. Do you think it’s worth while posting the raw audio files on my website for people to hear themselves?
@@EdThorne sure! While its likely difficult to do with vocals, trying to gain match the takes would help. Louder is always perceived as "better" to the inexperienced.
I tried, but not hard enough it seems 😀 I adjusted the output signal so they were the same level but the Apollo is just a fuller sounding device with more top end making it sound louder. A lot of people have been listening using their eyes too because the wave forms are different. I definitely paid much more attention to this on my following interface video (across ten devices - that was tricky). 😀
so you're saying crappier interfaces compress well and better ones don't?
@@ghostbaum I don't think either of them do compression on their own. The quieter sound isn't compressed, it just didn't capture as much data.
The scarlett is a fine interface if youre starting out or want a budget friendly interface. i recently got a use Apollo under $500 (youd never know it was used, in such good condition). As an audio engineer and musician, there are just some things the Apollo does that make it better than the Scarlett, especially the 0 latency aspect and plugins.
Need to compare the vocals volume matched ☺️ the differences are not that huge, but the main strength of the apollo is to smash a neve unison preamp on it. That's the reason of the price difference
Yeh, I didn’t quite get them levelled going in but tried to balance them going out. Yeh Manley VoxBox Unison is great too. Got a video exploring these coming soon. 🙂
@@EdThorne Hehe yeah I'm lurking on that one (manley) !! I did a comparison for myself a few years back when I got my apollo and still had my scarlett, so I could relate to your video. But also it's a nicer piece of hardware, it's stupid and wouldn't justify 500 of price difference (but the rest does) but it's "more inspiring"
I know what you mean, the difference in sound quality doesn’t justify the extra expense (as A LOT of people have illuded to in the comments) but as you say, it’s the Unison, near zero latency, free UAD plugins, LUNA and desktop functionality that make it awesome.
I couldn't hear a difference, and it was a slight difference, until I put on my hd280's. I guess if you want the best sound you can get you gotta spend more but I feel like if in the right hands the Scarlett can go a long ways.
Very true 🙂
I use Scarlett nothing wrong with it
I've owned both units and for my purposes the focusrite was far more simple to use and the results I've gotten are excellent. I found the plug-ins for uad extremely overpriced and I also prefer the simplicity of the focusrite workflow.... just my two cents.
That's totally understandable. The Console routing/monitoring aspect of Apollo can be confusing but it's absolutely brilliant when you get your head around it, I can't imagine life without it now :-)
@@EdThorne The quality in UAD is certainly there! I plan on buying a UAD Ox Box for my tube amps very soon.....cheers!
They have sales every now and then.
Also, there is the Twin X Heritage Edition, which comes with lots of additional great premium plugins.
got an apollo twin mk2 a few weeks ago. upgraded from an older native instruments audio 6. the difference is undeniable.
Hey brotha I have the same interface what, about it did you notice ?
^^
If you have the money there, I say get the Apollo, you could hear that it had a much clearer sound overall and the plugins are way more advanced. I agree with what you said about not getting a cable with the Apollo for the money that is BS, and I bet the charge way over the odds just because it has there name down the side.
I don't have the Scarlett with my setup I use the Roland Quad Core, the downside it it doesn't have two monitor outputs.
I've been hearing lots of "tests" on TH-cam regarding both audio interfaces and so far I didn't notice so much difference between them until I got to your video. In my opinion when we are recording instruments, you can't tell the difference so easily, but when it comes to Vocals it becomes really obvious that Apollo has a warmer and clearer sound, thanks for sharing!
Thanks Fellipe. Yes, I agree, I think it's more obvious on vocals. Thanks for watching :-)
Yeah, we hear the difference and lots of people thinks is not worth the price and all that shit... if they want to compare this interface just direct sounding I can say to them just buy a cheap Beringer um2 and done. I guess compare focusrite scarlett with older apollo twin make a little bit more sense because this X series ada converters almost the best... new/cheaper tech compare with very expensive soundcards and all that stuff... ohh and the "downside" is converters too good for default headphone amp & preamps I think...
Great video btw. Keep it up!
@@polgar_tamas Thanks Tamás.
The huge difference is sgen you track latency free through the UAD unison preamp plugins.
Not sure if this was a good review because I can clearly see the levels on both arent even. Apollo twin is louder than the Scarlett
You’re right, I didn’t quite match the input gains accurately but the output was adjusted accordingly. I think the perceived volume difference is simply the extra clarity and top end found in the Apollo.
I listened on headphones. They both sound great. To me the cheaper one has a better over all sound. I can work with that
Wrong test Clearly the apollo has more gain in the wave,
you should know the difference between gain and volume and the advantages it has in terms of harmonics and source capture, so to even show that the apollo is superior in quality you should place it at least equal or with less gain
Blowing Beats Yeh, I didn’t quite get the gain right in this video, my apologies. I did match them almost perfectly in this video below and you can still hear the same difference/improvements in audio quality: th-cam.com/video/IkuuxFvNB_g/w-d-xo.html
When you compare, why do you have the UAD much higher in volume? It's evident from the waveforms, and gives a very false impression (people assume higher volume is better)
Yeh, I didn’t quite get the gains balanced in this comparison. They were however compensated for on the output so the volumes are almost identical. Be careful not to listen with your eyes. I understand the difference in gain may have influenced the sound but I matched the gains in this video and the sound differences are the same: th-cam.com/video/IkuuxFvNB_g/w-d-xo.html
Which one has better audio quality? M track 2x2 or Presonus Itwo ???
Personally, I would for for the new Audient iD14mkii. It’s the best interface under $300 (imo) that I’ve reviewed on the channel): th-cam.com/video/TCW9HVfG03M/w-d-xo.html
Dang. They are pretty close, which is surprising for the price difference. When I listen to them over and over, I am not sure I can tell the difference.
The value in the Apollo is in the Unison Preamps, UAD plugins, near zero latency whilst monitoring with the plugins, the ability to print these monitoring effects as you record, and it’s desktop controller functionality. I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the new Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
"I don't hold the answers but I know that this feels right......"
I woke up to these vocals repeating in my head lol
Ha. Awesome. You can hear the full song here (with much better vocals): open.spotify.com/album/3WZWJfHlOkTDy9faRObW8j?si=olQ0Lg64T1mzoNZQVzPmbw
The biggest difference is the extra features that appolo comes with. Our consumers are nubes so the sound quality will go unnoticed tbh but getting antaras and all those plug ins AND the ability to track my guitar through it makes it better
I agree. Glad you like it
What specs and measurments should I look for when comparing ADC's ?
nobody talks about Behringer U-phoria umc 404. This is just a stellar low price audio interface with midas preams, christal clear sound recording, low latenci (really low latency), mono/stereo button, multiple outs, a/b monitors, single earphones out, pad, inst, line buttons etc... Stellar for 110Euros I paid for it!
Use Scarlett 4i4 just starting DAW. But did a research. So far solid guitar strait, then with plugins. Studio One Professional. And no hookup issues.
Some have posted inaccurately about the specs of the two interfaces. 15dBu max o/p for the 2i2, and 20dBu max o/p for the twin. Likewise the 2i2 ha can handle 9dBu input level, while 25dBu for the twin. The 2i2 is similar to other usb powered interfaces in that it is low power and will not accommodate signal levels from pro outboard gear.
Having an interface with low enough latency that one can monitor through the daw and not need a separate hardware (driver) mixer to handle headphone mixes. This really speeds up workflow. This is due to the Thunderbolt architecture in the twin. Likewise having DSP for headphone reverbs which don't force a higher I/O buffer is really helpful.
As we are often needing a lot of plugins, having some that are DSP powered helps things. I would agree with others who have posted on this video that people sometimes try to replace an experience deficit with more costly gear purchases. However, the idea that someone who is wanting to approach the sound quality of Neve (UAD plugins) for example, wanting higher quality conversion, or engineers in a professional studio; are all compensating for something is ridiculous. There is a reason why historically the best albums have been recorded in professional studios: they have access to higher quality mics, preamps, consoles, monitoring acoustics. While one channel's worth of class A gear may not make the album way better, you can't deny the over all effect of Class A gear on all the tracks in a production. While the UAD is not really the same thing, at least it tries (preamp emulation, modeled plug-ins) and gets closer.
There is also a reason why experience as an engineer or producer makes or breaks a recording. Some DAW users however view modeling of the harmonic characteristics of vintage gear or using vintage gear, as snake oil or unnecessary. Their productions tend to become bland and two dimensional. There is an art form in how the gear is used that isn't just dialing in compressor or eq settings. The UAD, while not quite the same as vintage gear, gives you more in this regard than a Scarlett interface.
A Scarlett interface is cheaper and what I can say as an owner of the 18i8 is that there is nothing wrong with it. For the money, getting an 18i8 and having a system that has clean & quiet head-amps, no driver issues, and comes with some really useful Softube plugins is great, so long as someone doesn't expect the head amp to sound like a 1073.
Great thing about the 18i8 is that you you can bypass the AD converter's and choose your own via the digital input.
The really huge difference comes in to play when using the unison feature of the, UAD when tracking.
You get to record hrough the modeled Pre-amps. As well as complete latency free tracking with the plugins.
Yes. Do you monitor with plugins, and do you record/write any of these when recording?
@@EdThorne The unison slot in the console makes the plugin in the recording. The rest you can choose. I choose not to. But if I start running out if DSP, I'll commit in protools, which basically dus an offline voice, then makes the existing track inactive.
A big lure for the apollo is the plugins; especially using them in 'Unison' mode with the unit - in essence turning your mic input into either an api, neve or other desk through the software. I've been using the neve pre on the unison input for everything and the tonal character difference is amazing. I also print a lot of pre recorded tracks through the same plugin and the character difference is night and day to me. DSP limitations are annoying although i'm happy to put up with them due to the quality of the plugins. Its the diminishing returns thing really.... Had a scarlett 18i6 for 6 years and loved it, but I couldn't go back now (annoyingly!). Great vid
Thanks Paul. I have a new series starting tomorrow diving deeper into the Apollo world. I’ll be exploring Unison, monitoring/printing fx and DSP management in much more detail. 🙂
Do to the situation I can't hit the studio so I recorded vocals in my house. ( Scarlett 2i2 and mxl990 mic) the mix ingenire at universal music preferred my setup that the one on the studio (enormous expensive) Scarlett its amazing for the price lol
Mezus music It’s fantastic for the money!
@@EdThorne Definitely!! If you record in a quite room and don't abuse on the gain, you can get an amazing sound! Also a lot of times when the song is finish it is really hard to notice the difference.
Hola. Where are you from ? I liked your songs. Subscribed:D Im from Romania, wife Colombian and we live in the UK. In working mad hours and this is my 2nd attempt to build a bedroom music studio and learn to produce my own songs. I have no paino or guitar skills, I like writting lyrics though. Some months ago bought an used Ableton Push 2 and Live 9 Suite. Few days ago upgraded to Live 10 Suite. Was checking Scarlet 2i2, Motu M2. I still have a good pair of Sennheisers so I wont investing in studio monitors yet. But Im looking at an audio interface and a decent microphone like Rode NT1a and others like yours. Any suggestions? Gracias.
japanluv Hi. I’m in London. Thanks for the sub and kind words on the music. The NT1 gets great reviews. Check out the Aston Origin/Spirit mics too. See my latest video for interface options 😀
@@japanluv hola are you talking about my song or eds? Haha
Apollo uses Thunderbolt which Apple and Avid claim is as fast as a PCIE card straight to the logic board (motherboard) so I'd go with Thunderbolt over any USB interface.
Uh, except what does that have to do with recording exactly? Bus speeds over USB are pretty damned quick, let alone recording things doesn't really factor into this much. A well written audio driver will compensate for any delay and such. Sorry man, but that's just marketing hogwash. If USB were so poor, they wouldn't make USB recording interfaces. ;)
Jay Kaufman and you prolly believe 4G is faster than 5G too
@@JayKaufman Thunderbolt 3 data transfer speeds are 40Gbps while USB 3.1 is 10Gbps you are straight tripping.
USB is designed to transfer data in separate chunks while Thunderbolt is able to continuously transfer data, and be daisy chained to more Thunderbolt devices saving inputs.
USB interfaces work with most computers it would be insane for manufacturers to not make them.
@@AlexanderKorotkov42 yes since i got my appollo twin thunderbolt2 for PC, i never ever have experienced any chooking whatsoever (apart from the expected DSP overload) , it has been brilliant. To get it to work, driverwise, can be both thrilling and disapointing, many can testify. And for how long will UAD support drivers, if intel or windows change specificationS, I dont know. My own unit mysteriously ceased to work the other day.. Well, could be a hardware issue, so wount blame UAD at this stage.
I got both and you can definitely tell the difference when using them. It’s all about how you using it, like I use Scarlett to make beats and then when I need to record artist I switch to the Apollo, it’s good and worth the money if you have it. But if you got the Scarlett just use what you got until it’s time to buy a new one when you saved enough, don’t let people get to u , whether having the expensive one making you better at what your doing. #KeepGrindin
Well said 🙂
why you dont just use the apollo for beats too?
I just want to add something for those wanting to use the Apolo as your main sound card on your home studio/gaming rig and even Skype calls. The Apolo isn’t compatible with some applications like the the scarlet is. I couldn’t use it with my talk back mic on video games and Skype calls or any video call applications. Neither application nor web based video call websites couldn’t recognize the interface but had no problem recognizing the scarlet. If your a producer who also games and streams and does conference call on the same pc. The Apolo May give you complications on applications not meant for Audio engineering. I’m not sure if they have updated their compatibility by now but for me it was a major draw back and it definitely added more value to the scarlet for those reasons.
The Apollo can be used for Loopback. Set inputs one and two to record outputs 1&2.
Which is better for recording guitar and vocals Motu M2, SSL 2+, Audient id14 mk2, Focusrite 2i2 3 gen?
Answers within: th-cam.com/video/W8JFMyJKHfY/w-d-xo.html
Not really a huge difference,but mixing could tell more my opinion I guess...
Chris Dizzy which is why the prices shouldn’t justify it, people really do get cheated out their money sometimes
I think the Apollo is a rip off ,
there is a difference that i could hear but the scarlett was right up there and since I have the 18i20 I feel pretty damn good about it
The Scarlett’s are great 😀
This showed me what an amazing deal the focusrite is. If I had a money making studio I’d get the Apollo but I’d feel like I’m getting ripped off for sure, there’s not 500-600$ difference. The Apollo feels like it would be at home at 349$
guitar guy The Scarlett is great value for money, especially with all the extra software. The value in the Apollo though is the offsite plugin processing and expansive monitor signal processing potential.
The scarlet don't compare lol
Ed, good comparison, thank you - would love a similar comparison between Scarlett and an obviously 'pro' unit like a Babyface Pro FS.
Thanks Steve. I suspect there’d be no comparison. The Apollo is already in another league in comparison. I’ll look into it though, thanks 🙂
@@EdThorne Thanks! I think your video very nicely shows the higher quality of the Apollo. The chatter I hear is that the engineering quality of the Babyface is the best and I was wondering if that translates into any obvious audio improvement. Maybe the comparison could be between the Apollo and Babyface. Keep up the good work!
No one covered Drivers and Latency. No one compared at different Audio Resolutions and Buffers. The UAD Windows Drivers are pretty $hitty for $800, but you will get at least 8-10ms Better latency than a FocusRite. Very big deal when you're trying to perform live... and that's before you start to make use of the DSP Plugins. That's where the UAD shines and justifies it's price tag IMO.
Keys By Mo Hi there, thanks for the comment. These are good points. What information about drivers would you want to know? Latency is almost a none issue these days, it’s milliseconds on both devices (if using the Scarletts Mix dial and not routing through the DAW) certainly not audible. UAD used to be Mac only so I can imagine their windows drivers are in their infancy and need developing.
@@EdThorne I wish i would have see the round trip Latency, as displayed in Ableton Pref>Audio b4 i purchased my Apollo Twin. It's a little higher than my FirefaceUC, but way better than any FocusRite/Audient in the low price range. This makes a difference to me as a live performer. Especially as i start to multi-track and use plugins as most mobile CPU's are way more sensitive to this before the crackles/pops show up.
I am an Apollo owner. IMHO, they are both perfectly usable, professional tools. Apollo IS more high-end, because it gives you all the fancy options you mentioned and grants you access to UAD's plugin-library (which is pretty expensive, but the plugins that the interface comes with are more than enough to get you by) which is remarkably above other companies in regards to modeling analog sound, so if you know what these old, analog boxes do and are going for that specific vibe, then Apollo is a great way of getting those sounds ITB without breaking the bank. However, I've used the Scarlett a few times and it works perfectly and sounds wonderful as long as you're using a decent mic (even a SM57). It is all about taste and needs. I don't see much functionality in Apollo for EDM artists and the like, but if you're going to be tracking a lot, those extra $600 are REALLY worth it.
All valid points 👌🙏
When you talked about the specs, you didn’t talk about the spec that makes the apollo converters a professional interface. The converters in the focusrite have a maximum output of +10dbu, the Twin has a maximum output of +26dbu. This is fine if you only ever use your audio files in a consumer setting. The twin is a professional device with professional converters. Let me explain why this is important. The reference level for professional gear is +4dbu or 1.23 volts. This means that if you run audio recorded through the focusrite through any outboard gear you only have 6db of headroom between reference and clipping vs the Twin having 18-19db of headroom. So if you‘re not serious about the audio files you record, then use consumer equipment... it doesn’t sound terrible. BUT if you plan to ever use the audio you record in ANY kind of professional environment or you take audio seriously, get a professional interface with high quality converters.
Jason Cox This is great information, thanks Jason. I will look into this in more detail for future comparison videos. 🙏
Jason Cox, this is information I feel you will find in textbooks because you are the first to highlight this; this is news to me.
Do you mind if I ask, what would be an easy way of identifying professional interfaces? I know most musicians/producers mostly use Apollo stuff, but could other brands like Audient, PreSonus etc.?
@@tonylancer7367 I have a video comparing nearly ALL the home studio level interfaces available coming 👌
@@EdThorne You're blessing man, thanks so much. I never actually understood the noise around UAD, but you made me understand.
@@EdThorne This is the best video I've seen that explains it well: www.puremix.net/video/how-to-set-proper-recording-levels.html
Listening through: computer -> optical -> Arcam rDAC -> CI Audio VHP2 headphone amp -> Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro 250Ω I would say the Apollo has a slightly "harder" sound than the Scarlett; also, what sounds to be the delayed bleed from the vocalist headphones is more apparent with the Scarlett. IMO the Scarlett is the more transparent. As with Hi-Fi equipment, it's easy to hear extra things in the music when one item is several times more expensive than the other; confirmation bias.
As with Hi-Fi equipment, it's easy to hear extra things in the music when one item is several times more expensive than the other; confirmation bias. What did you mean by this statement? I'm not understanding you.
I love the leather chair farts that made their way into the recordings
There was actually a much bigger difference than I expected. I'm a beginner and I bought the Scarlett not long ago. I'm not disapointed, but when I'm beginning to get good at this I would definitely invest in the Apollo Twin, or something even better.
For the money, the Scarlett is great, it does a good job. It’s worth getting familiar with all the plugins that come with it. Enjoy the creative process 🙂
Ed Thorne ; Thanks, I will! :-)
Gonna be honest, after having both interfaces, the Apollo blows the Scarlett out of the water Sonically. The plugins and converters took my mixes to another level. You’ll have to experience it for yourself, I felt like there wasn’t a difference until I actually had an Apollo in my setup.
Yeh, when you get mixing and adding effects, which amplify the difference it really becomes clear the Apollo is better.
I do agree but that air mode on the Scarlett with the best analog plugins in the world acoustica audio makes the over hyped Apollo sounds like plastic trust me mixing with the Scarlett and acoustica audio plugs make you don't Ned outboard gears
Considering the Scarlett is the budget sound card, and there’s a HUGE price difference, I’m not surprised. It would be a different story if it was using the Clarett range.
@@roadreg1820 Video with the Clarett is coming soon :-)
Ed Thorne yes!! Looking forward to that 🤩
It is time to seriously question your financial ability when you just realized Scarlett is the budget option
What do you mean by this?
I have a 2nd gen Scarlett 6i6 and the main complaint is that I don't have a lot of headroom to work with.
I use it for micing up Hammond organ (mono). That's for service use. When I patch Nord directly into the interface for recording (home) use It clips or even worse.. I get that there are ways to mitigate this but part of playing organ requires a change in volume.
Does it actually clip fat?
How good is it for recording keys in general? Should I look into something else
@@Marijuana-Johnson recording keys in general is very good. It handles all of my stuff including my bass and synth patches.
I believe this might be the best budget interface for personal use but if you need more channels definitely look at a Behringer
You would hear more difference between a cheap, ok, good or great interface by using an acoustic guitar, piano etc. There is where the different level mic pres will really make a different. Also need really good headphones to hear the difference or a really good sound system.
Bit depth, SR, S/N benchmark tech specs, the inputs and no way to describe the quality of actual circuitry, mean very little. Latency does mean a lot, but in the absence of clock accuracy and stability, none of it means much imo. In particular I really don’t like the Focusrite stuff, it’s no more than a cheap box with cheap circuitry a mediocre clock with kind of ok not really latency figures, but with a with a legendary name. In fact “Focusrite”, while pretty good was a step down from Neve. I don’t know the UA Apollo but having followed the evolution of UA I’d imagine it’s pretty good, but in terms of latency, the figures I’ve read (several years ago) didn’t or don’t get close RME Babyface Pro. It’s hard to match the babyface on any level including i/o breakout possibilities.
I have Scarlett 18i8 and Octopre because I have lots of small synths that I like to jam live on so I need lots of inputs, so I am a fan because of price level. I couldn't do all this in the "Pro" line of interfaces. From my understanding when they say "Pro" the difference is if your sound is going to be used in a professional setting. If you are looking to make a track that is going to be played through a banging club sound system or in a movie theater, then you will then notice the difference. So I think it is hard to tell the difference much in normal environments. I could be wrong, that is just my understanding.
Can you load let's say, waves plugins on the DSP of Apollo? No, you can't. Why mention it in a way that it helps you free the processing from your computer CPU? The only plugins you can run on that card are those made by UAD, and you can't run them any other way. That's it. The DSP on that card serves only that purpose. You endorsed or what?
Thankyou for saying this. Was more than confused.
The apollo sounds more immediate and upfront. Definitely more engaging and convincingly realistic
@fartpoobox ohyeah I am no measurement machine, nor am I a professional reviewer. Each to their own, and let's enjoy the process of exploration together :)
What a comparison!!!.... You`d better compare UAD Apollo Twin to Prism Sound Lyra they are from the same league... shit scarlett manufactured in China presents very compressed thin sound with no bass, flat plastic sound of gen 3. The hopes and dreams of Scarlet 3gen are selling good, because there are worlds selling and marketing specs out there........ I was looking for the audio interface (not sound card as the host call it, these were soundblasters anyway ) and I found Universal Audio Apollo Twin USB... the sound is amazing dynamic range on output 118dB .... you can not even compare to this red shit. (I sold focusrite 8i6 3gen after month...)
Bear in mind this video is not a like-for-like comparison, but an explanation as to how and why a budget interface and a higher end interface are different. A few people have mentioned the Prisms, I need to check one out 😀
@@EdThorne Universal Audio is still superb, Prism is not worth of it`s price no features as UAD
My opinion if upgrading from an entry level set-up is to upgrade your headphones first. Having pro headphones puts you on the same page of anything the client is hearing on their end and is the cheapest to upgrade when compared to mics or interfaces. You’re only looking for clean audio, everything else is processing.
Nice. At my studio I've been using the Focusrite Clarett 8pre for years with some outboard gear. It's an excellent unit for live rehearsals etc. Yet since the quarantine I've been marooned at home so just ordered the Apollo and I'm stoked to try it out for my living room setup.
That’s great, Justin. I’m sure you’ll love it 👌
Justin Garcia hows it been? I’m in the exact situation! Is it worth it
Apollo rules. Consider getting a satellite unit if you need more SHARC processing power.
That was really interesting, thanks so much for taking the time to make this video. The A/B comparison was especially interesting. Very helpful 👍
You’re more than welcome. Stay tuned for a part two later this year 🙂🙏
Thank you so much for the detailed reviews and comparison. The Apollo has a cleaner and more open sound (as you noted). It's not just how one track sounds, imagine the difference when used to record 20 tracks (it adds up).
Exactly this 👌
We need more information about usb pre 2 please if you have it
USB pre 2? Which make? Loads are called that.
I can hear the difference on phone speakers. Apollo all the way but one can not complain if they have a Scarlett.
Lucian Moon Yep 👌
microphones is where a hear the major differences not AI
Don't you think he used the same mic?
Reset your ears
SM7b with both interfaces.
Ive practiced hard on the guitar and Ableton, and im ready for this amazing thing!
Kristoffer2791 Awesome. I have a video demonstrating the UAD guitar amp sims coming soon👌
Practice makes a man perfect. Carry on.
I think we get too obsessed with the sound sonically, to me getting a ‘great performance’ is the most important goal, if you can’t sing or play your instrument well no amount of expensive equipment will compensate, you can always tell. Let’s not all aim to sound like the over produced lifeless professional songs out there!
FAB Very true 👌
Ed thanks for your content
@@aunt.t4862 You're more than welcome, thank you for watching :-)
Hi! I already have an akg c414. Which mic could I pair it with to record a podcast? I have an apollo twin duo, bae dmp 1073 and the akgc414 mic to record music. I want to to start a podcast and need a mic for a co-host. How would u suggest I connect 2 mics and which ones? I though about getting 2 rode podmics and plugging straight into my apollo interface. But what can I do if i want to use the mic I already have? Thanks for your time and video!!
The Shure SM7b is an industry standard podcast mic (Joe Rogan uses them): th-cam.com/video/LSWxdKakgu4/w-d-xo.html The new Earthworks Icon mic sounds awesome and may be a better option from what I’ve seen but I haven’t used one in person yet.
Cmon man... we’re talking pro and budget comparison... of course appolo sounds perfect. I tried a lot of ad da ... the best are RME and APPOLO. But for the budget - tascam us series (even 4x2) have best preamps. IMHO
I don’t think we can compare these two equally. Also it would be better if you put smth else than vox for the comparison... ) thnx for this vid anyway man!
Thanks for watching and commenting. The video is to discuss HOW a budget and a more professional interface are different, not to directly compare the two. Yes, the Tascam US series sounds GREAT, I agree, probably best in its class. I reviewed this interface with 9 others (with guitar audio examples, as well as vocals) here: th-cam.com/video/x50dw_BfudU/w-d-xo.html
Meh... just a little more air. Nothing 1 minute of processing can't fix on the Focusrite.
And in context of a full blown rock or pop mix, the difference is inaudible to the majority of listeners anyway. Not saying the UAD has some pro's though (latency and buffer related mostly) but even that can be bypassed, not worth 600 dollars more to me anyway.
More toys = more $$$...The Focusrite meets most people's needs unless they are operating a recording studio
I have both of the ones displayed in the thumbnail.
I’ll be honest.
The focusrite gives a more full distorted recording.
The Apollo Twin gives a CLEAR clean recording.
I prefer the rawness of the Focusrite
Great, if you're going for the distorted sound...
Give me 10 seconds with an EQ and I make the Scarlett recording sound like the Apollo...
I hear you. But what about you the Unison preamps, free UAD plugins with zero latency monitoring and a desktop controller, Oh, and Luna. 🙂
Ed Thorne Yes. I have both and the main diference to me is the time you save inputting things and monitoring with the Apollo. You can easily get and hear the sound you want prior to the actual recording with the UAD plugs inserted in the console. Regarding sound, i find the apollo outputs to be very open sounding BUT the Scarlet sounds more similar to the "real world". One could find an advantage there.
(If you have more than one studio or setup, go with UA. You'll get the UAD plugins working for all of them)
Anyone who spends much more than around $100 on a 2 in, 2 out, audio interface is completely bonkers. Whatever perceived advantage the Apollo might have is easily swallowed up by other factors like decent connections, decent instruments and above all DECENT musical material. You can buy a 2 in/out Behringer for less than $50 and in practice you will hear no difference in sound, unless you are imagining things, and even if there was a difference (like less brightness) you can adjust the mix EQ. The only point of higher spec audio interfaces is where you need multiple inputs and/or outputs for live recording or performance. If you are running a home studio you do not need to spend much. Spend the spare money training yourself to understand music better.
A lot of people beg to differ. The value in the Apollo is in the Unison Preamps, UAD plugins, zero latency whilst monitoring with the plugins, the ability to print these monitoring effects as you record, it’s monitor mix versatility and functionality with the Console app, the UAD DAW (LUNA), and it’s far superior desktop controller functionality. I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the new Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
The lack of midi i/o on the AUD is unfortunately a deal breaker for me
Please could you do a Audient ID44 & Apollo X comparison please! Many thanks for this video. Can hear the Apollo has for Thickness. It's a shame though the the DSP Chips only serve their UAD Plugins only :(
Andre Brown Hi Andre. That’s on my to do list when I can get hold of one 😀
There is a little difference. In Comparison A and B when you put audio clips of Scar and UAD, the volume of the UAD is a little louder. Make the difference to lower the volume a little when the UAD sounds in that sector of the video and you will see that the ear practically does not detect the difference. The difference they have, you can emulate it 100% with equalization. As with many microphones and processors. There is a reference, but if you are not going to use all the DSP that the UAD brings, I am not too concerned about the difference. Hug from Argentina!
yes agreed. I took a music production mastering course and it included side chaining and compression, and when you consider the Dolby quality of the 70's, you need quality recording of course, and this is where the quality of the instrument, amp and microphone also figure, but the scarlett for its price point is so significant because it works well enough - and he then enhances the recording samples - reshaping them and manipulating them further during mastering. He used and recommended a scarlett 2i4 because he wanted to use equipment that was accessible to those taking the course.
But he let us in on one thing, the library recordings which were a good stream of income for the studio where audio was recorded, it was recorded onto a flashdrive in an external recorder, before that it was CD drives, and before that it was an 8 track Reel to Reel, there is something about recording onto tape which still charms the ears. A quality which hasn't been matched as yet.
Saying that however, many people just want to sing into the computer these days and earn good money sometimes doing so.and that's why quality is important, and if you have the resources I guess you 'd purchase a more expensive piece of kit.
For people who don't value their own ability too highly - the scarlett is more than adequate, in fact excellent for recording into DAWs, because the results are usable and that is the only requirement of a good workflow ethic.
totally agree that the level was a bit higher. could've just been a more confident take but it is misleading.
You're a 100% right. Thank you for sharing your voice of reason 🫶
Hugs back TO Argentina 🌸🤗
The focusrite just shits and dies after s year or so
It's a simple soldering fix but a pain in the ass
That’s a shame. What would you consider replacing it with/upgrading to?
I've had my 2i2 for about 7 years now, and it's fine.
Sorry you had issues with yours though, that sucks.
Bro... An Apollo twin isnt even a pro interface. Not even close its a consumer grade interface.
When you talk pro youre talking Lynx, burl, apogee symphony
Lots of professional recordings have been made on Apollo interfaces so they can be considered professional. I didn’t say were the best and I would agree those devices you mentioned have technically better converters.
that noise in the background of your tests is your sinuses, when you change your voice as you sing you block the air ways in your big ass shnaz and it farts. happens to me when im sick i just take the whole audio delete it and retire till i feel better lmfao....and i honestly think for the money idk if the apollo is really worth it because people are going to use plug ins anyway, in the end itll most likely sound damn near the same. as long as you have a nice clear crisp sound thats all you need now a days
Yeh, that weird sinus thing was a post-Covid thing, it seems to have disappeared since. Learning some technique probably helped too, lol. The value in the Apollo is in the Unison Preamps, UAD plugins, near-zero latency whilst monitoring with the plugins, the ability to print these monitoring effects as you record, and its desktop controller functionality. Plus, the monitor routing flexibility is far superior. I glossed over the Unison feature a little bit in this video but there’s more info about it in this video reviewing the Apollo Solo: th-cam.com/video/lYDFQP3kBcE/w-d-xo.html
I can hear the subtle difference. I like the sound of the apollo. The apollo makes the vocals sound a little more compressed and warm. As where the scarellet sounds a tiny bit more flat
I agree. Thanks for watching 🙂
Apollo does sound more rounded and warm. Almost like more information is being captured in a smooth way. I’ve never really liked Focusrite interfaces besides their Clarett series.
My 8i6 is great. I think whatever difference we're hearing between these two boxes is in their preamps, not their converters. I opted to save the money on and interface and spend the extra money on a used Blue Robbie and run it into one of the line-ins. On my Neumanns and Blue MixFis I cannot hear a difference between my Robbie on the Focusrite and my friend's nicer interface, leading me to believe it is just the Preamps that we're hearing in your video
Mike Baum I suspect you’re right. It may be a combination of the two factors.
Hi Michael, i am playing nayflute instrument and i have presonus studio one software in my laptop. I am blowing nayflute with backup music track in studio one. For better recording quality, could it be useful to supply focusrite Scarlett audio interface or Roland vt4 vocal processor ?
I have both. The focusrite works perfectly, but it feels like a toy once you get your hand on the UAD.
If your trying to do serious stuff, upgrading is pretty important. U can fill a room with good stuff but this decides how high that ceiling (quality) goes.
I have the best music content check me out