Digi 002 converters vs. ISA 428 converters?

Discussion in 'Preamps / Channel Strips' started by StudioBurnout, Jul 8, 2004.

  1. Hey everyone,

    I'm new to this forum and this is my first post... I have a couple of questions, naturally...

    Looking at some past postings, the general consensus seems to be that the Digi 002 converters aren't bad, but they're not great. I'm thinking of getting the Focusrite ISA 428 to go with a 002, but I'm wondering if I should get the 428 with the optional A/D card. Is the conversion quality of the Focusrite A/D unit that much better than the 002's and is it worth $700?

    Also, not sure if this is a valid question, but are there word clock issues I need to be aware of in running the 428 A/D conversion into the 002 rack unit? Would the 428 be receiving word clock from the 002 through the lightpipe connection? Does the 002 even send word clock?

    Any thoughts or comments on the above would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!!
  2. Jonesey

    Jonesey Active Member

    Mar 25, 2003
    Western Pennsylvania
    The Digi 002 would be geatly improved with a good external clock source. I use an 8 channel AD ran into the adat interface of the Digi 002 and sync the Digi 002 to the adat interface. It made a great improvement. I'm using a Ramsa ad96 converter. I don't know how good the ad is in the focusrite but its a good chance its better than using the digi's internal clock.
  3. mark4man

    mark4man Active Member

    Apr 18, 2003
    Home Page:

    Looks like a 256X clock; & a S/N Ratio better than 120dBfs ‘A-weighted' ! ! !

    I read your post; & went to the Focusrite site to see for myself (as right now...I'm running a Layla 24/96 with a PreSonus mic-pre. I'm going to be upgrading to Rode mics in my studio; & was hoping to accomplish pro studio quality mic-pre & conversion in one fell swoop.)

    I have an inquiry in with them on the converter specs...I'll let you know.

  4. Duardo

    Duardo Guest

    The 428's converters are very good. I think you'd find them to be a significant improvement over the converters in your 002. I have them as well as an Apogee Rosetta, and while I haven't bothered to do an A/B comparison they sound good enough that I haven't felt a need to do so. I think they're definitely worth $700, considering you get eight channels. Since you're not paying for a power supply and chassis, which are fairly costly parts of a good converter, it's a pretty good deal.

    No, the 002 would be receiving clock from the 428 through the fiber optic cable, which is the way you'd want it to be since the 428's clock is better than the 002's. You'd just need to be sure to have the clock in Pro Tools set to the Lightpipe input rather than "internal".

    On a side note, the Lightpipe input on the 002 doesn't do 96kHz, even though the 428's card does, so you'll have to stay at 44.1kHz or 48kHz. I think the Focusrite converters sound better at 44.1kHz than the 002's converters do at 96, so it's not really a big issue.

  5. Thank you all for your input. It's *very* helpful!
  6. Johnjm22

    Johnjm22 Guest

    So is there any way to use better converters with the Digi 002 with out having to sacrafice 96K?

    I would really like to use some better converters but I don't want to use 48K, I want 96k.

    Also, would using an external clock source for my Digi 002 improve my recording quality?
  7. Duardo

    Duardo Guest

    The only way to use external converters with the 002 at 96K is through the S/PDIF port, and there you're limited to two channels. But you may be surprised...the 428's converters sound better at 44.1kHz than may others do at 96kHz.

    Using an external clock with the 002 may improve your recording quality, depending on the clock.

  8. Johnjm22

    Johnjm22 Guest

    Well if I can take 10 inputs at a time all in 24/96 I'll be happy.
  9. doulos21

    doulos21 Member

    May 26, 2003
    rme makes a converter that double samples wich is suppost to be compared to 96k sampling still running under 48k, but its pricey 1,700, and im not sure how great the benifits would be if it would be worth it or not, but thats the only way to get 96k quality under the 48k clock of the 002 in adat format.
  10. Duardo

    Duardo Guest

    There's no such thing as "96k quality" and "48k quality"...one converter either sounds good or doesn't, and the next one either sounds better, worse, or about the same. Sure, some may sound better at 96k than they do at 48k, but some may sound the same and some may sound worse. I think most people would find the converters in the ISA to sound better at 48k than those in the 002 do at 96k.


Share This Page