ADI-8 Pro vs. AI-3



I've been looking at many different A/D/A converters and was wondering if people believe the $1500 difference in these two pieces of equipment are worth passing on the Alesis AI-3 and saving for the
RME ADI-8 Pro.


if you don't need 96 sample rate

you can pick up ADI-8 Pro for between 600-800 bucks

I use a Nuendo branded ADI-8 Pro AD/DA box
(Same as the RME) version
Bought off Ebay for last year less than 700
very happy with this one
converters are comparable to Apogee
and the drivers are great
turn it on leave it on
It stays on . never a problem
Unlike some of the Motu stuff
I used a Adat edit card a few years back in the same price range
as the AI3. the converters were crap


Originally posted by jhagertybhs:
What advantages are there in recording w/96 sample rate?
Ummmmm I am not going to touch that one.
I have an AI-3 that only lasted about a year now it doesnt work...........Converters were crap!


What about the differences between the RME ADI-8 and the Lucid 9624? Besides one's 8 channels the other is 2.


Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2001
What advantages are there in recording w/96 sample rate?
I would say the biggest and most noticable difference is that using plugin EQ's sounds a lot better with 88 or 96K. I personally prefer 88.2k because it's simple math to get it to 44.1 for CD's (as opposed to "fuzzy math"). ;) You get less digital artifacts that way. Anyway, the high frequency EQ sounds much more like an analog EQ when boosting. When boosting at 88 or 96 the high frequencies that you're trying to boost don't get chopped off by the anti-aliasing filter, and therefore it sounds better.

I just got a digi002, and did some comparisons with 44.1 and 88.2, and it is a noticable difference when using high frequency eqs. I think overall, aside from the EQ, it sounds slightly more open, but nothing that will change your world. It all gets chopped off on CD anyway. I still pray for the day that DVD audio catches on.