Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: RME Converter Advice and MADI

  1. #11
    Administrator bigtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Prince George, BC Canada
    Age
    55
    Posts
    8,646
    Liked
    142 times
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big K View Post
    What CAT cable?

    The ADI8QSM connects to the Madi card using the build-in MADI board, featuring optical and coax I/Os.
    You don't need the 25 pins...

    -------------------------------------------

    .
    If you can believe it, I was looking at the picture of the PCIe card and the optical slots looked like cat5 slots. No wonder I've been confused for months. When I think of optical, I'm thinking ADAT and looking for those little plastic pins that you pull or the flip-ups. ROTF with relief. Got to get better glasses.
    Hybrid Mixing and Mastering

  2. #12
    ------------
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Munich / Germany
    Age
    52
    Posts
    819
    Liked
    8 times
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Yes, oglogloglogl...
    If you have miss-interpreted the Optical conns with CAT5, all the time, you must have had some great confusion in ya head how all that works together.
    ROFL..

    Your Q about ADI8QSM and M16..from the RME pages:
    The M-16 AD offers an outstanding AD conversion to MADI and ADAT formats in a compact 19" unit with only 2U height. The balanced analog inputs based on RME's reference design from the ADI-8 QS guarantee excellent S/N and THD specs across a wide analog level range. Three different hardware levels are available. Using up-to-date converter technology, the device not only works up to 192 kHz, but also reaches a real-world signal-to-noise ratio of 116 dBA - on all channels.

  3. #13
    Administrator bigtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Prince George, BC Canada
    Age
    55
    Posts
    8,646
    Liked
    142 times
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Rainer,

    Its hard to know if one sounds better than the other. The specs are close. Knowing about my requirements and needing a new PCIe MADI card anyway, which would you choose or what else?

    1. Two ADI8-QS-M
    2. one M-16 AD , one M-16 DA?

    Do you have any hands on with either or people that would know? I have no one to ask here or even compare. Too far away from any high end RME user here.

    The M series look clean and to the point and maybe cooler running in a bigger box.

    I'm thinking the fiber connection is the cleaner way to go know that I see it ROTF!


    Thanks for you help!

  4. #14
    ------------
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Munich / Germany
    Age
    52
    Posts
    819
    Liked
    8 times
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    I own the ADI8 QS, not M, and I am very happy with the sound. Since it is the same technology I suppose the sound will be the same, too. If there are features in either one you need or like go for that one. Together with Micstasy it is a pleaure to work with both.
    Pro M16: 1 box, 1 connection... but it is only DA or AD per unit, 1 unit down= studio down
    Pro ADI 8: if ever 1 unit needs repair or is being used outside the studio, there is still 1 left in the rack... 8x I/O in 1 box
    So, for 16 channels I/O it is 2 rack units for the ADI 8 I/O and 4 rack units for the M 16...
    For comparison it might be a good thing to join RME forum. I don't know anybody right away who using the M series, which does not mean that it wouldn't be great, too.
    If I refurbish my studio I might go with M 16 AD/DA MADI as well, but with coax cables.
    I find BNC connections more reliable and I have about 2 dozen in spare...
    :smile:

  5. #15
    Administrator bigtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Prince George, BC Canada
    Age
    55
    Posts
    8,646
    Liked
    142 times
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    Rainer, I'm days away from buying the ADI-8 QS converters. Might do the MADI too.

    Do you know anyone that has done an A/B on " Aurora vs ADI-8 QS "? There is a big difference in price between the two. One ADI-8 QS is the same price and the Aurora 16.
    What I like about the Aurora is its simplicity however, it appears to have built a large percentage of popularity around budget and the gearslutz seed planting too.

    The ADI-8 QS appears to be more advanced technology, more features and possibly a better power supply. Searching the entire www I'm finding so little on them, its weird. What I do find appears to be opinions from more reliable users that aren't being led by the follow-the-leader shilling. Its really apparent to me.

    All being said, I have no way to do the Aurora vs ADI-8 QS comparison so I'm going on gut. I'd rather pay a $1000 more for quality if the ADI-8 QS produces a noticeable difference. I'd rather have less bells and whistles like the Aurora but not at the cost of it being a more budget sounding converter.

    Thoughts anyone?

  6. #16
    Moderator TheJackAttack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    currently Billings
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4,442
    Liked
    59 times
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Neither of those options are "budget". Lol. Those are both industry standard until you move to Radar and Pyramix. In fact I'm a little surprised you haven't gone for the Radar.
    John Dutton
    Computers and DAW Pro Audio Forums Moderator
    Pro Horn player & Piano Technician
    Kranking out Kopprasch since 1977
    Der Teufelshund

  7. #17
    Administrator bigtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Prince George, BC Canada
    Age
    55
    Posts
    8,646
    Liked
    142 times
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    The Aurora is a budget compared to the next level. The $3000 price mark is the high end mid price point. So, from this point on, you either are buying high end budget or low end Pro. I'm now trying to figure out who is better at that mid high point right now. Its all perception when you read opinions. What one person thinks is the best and "high end" is someones low end, budget or overkill. Like the FF800. They sell thousands of them, and they are highend Firewire converters but I'm paying for the low end pre's and on a dead end road with firewire. The Orpheus is The high end converter compared. So looking at it from that POV, the FF800 is mid level.

    So, is the RME ADI-8 QS fitting in the low end upper quality, slightly less quality than the Radar, better resale than the Radar, less real estate needed.
    Is the Lynx Aurora More high end featuring less bells and whistles and the value all put into just what it is.

    I am looking at Radar but its got dated written all over it. (yikes, did I say that!) I feel an attack coming ). I get the same old (why did I do that again) feeling looking at Radar as buying into something like the Synclavier 20 years ago. Killer quality, totally boutique but not a good investment for a variety of reasons because you can't sell big when you want to upgrade, no matter how good it is, its not a logical addition to my chain for comparisons to touch on two.
    The power supply in Rader is where I would definitely see why I should buy this system though. I think its definitely the better product hands down than both RME and Lynx but although I want quality, I want to USE something that is more known for testing reasons here and more portable. The video I posted yesterday on Radar was pretty explainatory and impressive but not the converter for the system I'm completing here. Although I'm ranting quality, I'm sticking with more main stream gear that is globally more popular and definitely basing my decision on software that is solid like TotalMix. When the new converters come out, its easy to sell a Lynx or RME and upgrade.

    Its really coming down to a few companies now. I'd like to believe Lynx is the best choice and save $2000!, but it just seems a bit too white and shilled out to me but I would buy it in a heart beat if I am convinced its truthfully better than the new RME line. I wish someone out there has done the comparison between these two.

  8. #18
    ------------
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Munich / Germany
    Age
    52
    Posts
    819
    Liked
    8 times
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Both sound good, not much difference here. What RME does for me better:
    It has a internally switching powersupply for all voltages , thus better chances to sell to non-230 or non-110 volt countries.
    Digicheck and huge total mix, analog and digital limiter in the A/D path... RME drivers and reliability.
    Some of that might apply for the aurora, too, but I am quite happy with the RME. It gives me many years of trouble-free work.
    Is it worth the extra cash... for me, yes. Otherwise I had gone for something like Aurora.

    Should you buy RME ADI-8 QSM? NO!!
    Because if it ever messes up and needs repairing, you will be over me like a Buzzard over a dead cow in the desert....
    ;-)

  9. #19
    Moderator TheJackAttack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    currently Billings
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4,442
    Liked
    59 times
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    I've got no dog in the RADAR fight, but I have to say with the latest generation of RADAR items I don't think they are dated anymore. I know I used to feel that way. It has MADI, it has AES, it has ADAT, I just don't see anything dated about it when you can use it both as I & O. That said, I already have an HD24XR so I don't need another hard disk recorder but if I did and had the cash I think the RADAR is the peak.

    As it is, if the time comes I dump the FF800 I'll likely be going with Lynx or RME myself. Rainer, would that be a Red Pied or Black Pied cow?

  10. #20
    Administrator bigtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Prince George, BC Canada
    Age
    55
    Posts
    8,646
    Liked
    142 times
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    I don't think the ADA is a HD recorder, is it? It reeks of Pro Tools though. Maybe I'm missing something there? I'm basing my opinions on the same old history of RADAR's past though, John.
    I've always thought RADAR was an HD recorder and would never buy into anything like this in this day and age. To much like the old SoundScape, ProFools HD, Tascam DA 88 generation. All excellent but too much off the main direction of the world and online music distribution etc. Big topic from this point on...

    I'm 100% full steam ahead with only using a DAW that is all part of the bigger PC world. I want nothing to do with Apple computers this next 5 years for my main DAW. If its not using the main OS around a PC, I don't want it. I should make that point clear right off the bat. That ought to get some peoples panties in a knot lol.

    To be more definitive, PC = Hybrid -|- Apple = WWW
    German and hybrid and converters/ R&D from that area of the world is becoming more impressive day by day.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

LinkBacks (?)

  1. 11-14-2011, 08:44 AM

Similar Threads

  1. RME ADI-8 QS vs Lynx Aurora 8 AD/DA Converter
    By bigtree in forum DAW Pro Audio
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-18-2010, 04:23 AM
  2. Need some advice on preamps/ a/d converter
    By Joek in forum Pro Audio Gear
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-10-2007, 09:30 PM
  3. Michael, advice for a converter and monitors
    By Alécio Costa - Brazil in forum Mastering Engineers Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-23-2007, 04:35 PM
  4. RME ADI-2 192kHz/24-Bit Converter?
    By fortune in forum Home Recording Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-18-2004, 08:53 PM
  5. RME converter
    By MGP in forum Hybrid Recording Forums
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-28-2003, 10:00 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •