i got rid of my saffire 56 time for the upgrade... im stuck between the 2 only thing keepin me from the apollo is the fact that its a tabletop not a rack unit..

anyone have experience with either one?
any one have and info on why one out weighs the other?

just looking for peoples personal input.

 

Last edited: Nov 19, 2016

Its simple...
What you need more?
Expandability (more ins and outs) or a little UAD processing power?

 

i've been seeing this kinda of stuff all over the internet, never really understood how it works, if you care to explain please, that would be great!

sorry if i'm hijacking your thread.

 

Since you receive a like from The poster...
UAD have their own plugins, some are The best, some come free, but there always promotions.
It do not use the processing power of your computer and use the processing of The unit. There are charutos in their site that show how many plugins can run with each unit.
I prefer to expand my processing power with computer slaves with VEP, só i can use my hackintosh with Windows plugins
Cheers!

 

Go for RME Interfaces.

 

192 have problems with latency i check to buy that but i read the latency is high, and the apollo doentsa have good sound and their plugins are expensive, go with Motu, RME, Audient or Apogee

 

+1 for RME (I have a fireface UFX)
They have THE STABILITY and good compressors and eq for each channel or aux + 2 revebs/delays.
Old units still have upgrades for newer OSs (its rare).
Also the only company that make their own chips (all others use the same). They just works well indeed!

 

i have also a hackitosh , do you use your hackitosh as main computer and a windous as slave with VEP? I m interesting on that setup , is confortable that setup for work on production?

 

I have the Apollo Twin Usb
I use it With Rode Nt4 Mic
Windows 10,

Should say that the sound is perfect.
And the material is very well made. Made for long term.

But, if you are looking for plugins, that's is crap.
Really it shouldnt guide your choice.
Those plugins are scam, so expensives for what....

So if you're looking for the best préamp at less than 2000 $, choose this Apollo

If you're looking for plugins, pass your way and buy hardware compressors and others, instead of softwares.

When i'm looking comments here by users that dont have it and say the sound is not clear, or that there is latency and other crap and nonsense, i just want to say: if you dont have a material, dont talk about it.

This préamp is so well built, working so well with so low latency, with so clear sound (coupled with my fantastic mic too), that i never had such good material in my hands as musician.

 

I have never used RME, but I own the Twin and it does sound great. I've owned several other interfaces along the years, including a Digi 002, Tascam US1641, a couple of M-Audio units, a few M-Boxes and others, but the Twin sounds better.

There are a couple of features that make it worth considering:

- Their pres are rigged with Unison technology, which basically makes the plugin change the impedance of the input on the Twin to match the one on the hardware counterpart of such plugin. Of course, the plugin needs to be coded to provoke such change. Unison plugins include a lot of Marshall amps, and channel strips like the Neve 88RS, Neve 1073, Api Vision, Manley VoxBox, and Universal Audio 610.

- Latency is down to 2ms, and you can actually record and "print to tape" with this interface. Needless to say, you can monitor your signal with any UAD plugin you want without taxing on latency.Of course, you can decide to add processing after the fact, but it's liberating to stick to decisions in the recording stage, at least for me.

- Some of UAD plugs are one of a kind. They are licensed emulations of hardware, and I f Neve or Manley put their names there,it won't be for underperforming software.

The hardware unit per se is a solid piece, with sturdy buttons, jacks and knob (yes, one big one). Drivers and related software are flawless and expandability comes in the form of one ADAT input. I've used a Presonus Digimax D8 and now a Universal Audio 4710d preamp without a hiccup.

The downside is that the Twin's DSP power is kind of limiting. You won't really cover a big mix with a Dual Core DSP chip, but I'm happy to bounce some tracks and I mainly focus on saving processing for the two-buss. The sound of a Neve 33609 compressor or a Ampex tape machine on the mix bus is really worth it and these two are the closest thing I've found to the sound of quality hardware.

UAD plugins are on a crazy sale now, and they hold discounts and coupons throughout the year. With careful planning you can get lots of stuff from free to affordable.

BTW, Rod Steward's album "Another Country" of 2015 was produced entirely on an Apollo Twin.

 

Last edited: Nov 19, 2016

The free plugins are interesting to boost the préamplification.
I use few of them, depending if i need it for voice recording, or folk guitar Takamine or classic guitar.
Those free plugins are good use to pick my classic guitar.
But it is just bonus, not essential at all.

Why: because i have much better inside my computer that is already so powerful that i dont need at all to discharge my processor.
It never work at more than 25% on 2 processors, when i have 4 already, and i could overclock them easly if needed.
Instead, when registering, i downclock my processor (so my vents are totally silents), when i'm registering near my computer.
And because the sound is already good enough.

If i should need good plugins before going in my Apollo, i should prefer to buy a true hardware, made for it, instead using my Apollo to do job that it is not made for, and meanwhile vasting tons of money on useless plugins, or near useless.

 

Last edited: Nov 19, 2016

You really know what you're talking about. I can feel it.

 

Well, a few months ago, I ran a blind test here among UREI 1176 emulations and a couple of things were conclusive to me:

1. UAD legacy plugins sound as good as commercial plugins, not better. Waves was actually the winner.
2. No matter the plugin, they can all be tweaked to do the job.

That being said, and based on lengthy discussions with some audiosexers here, the revered sound of analog comes from high quality and well maintained hardware, nothing under 2K, except a couple of developers that produce at low scale and on demand.

Then comes software. UAD plugins have varying degrees of analog flavor, however one can understand that idea. Unfortunately, the real sonic gems are those plugins that cost the big bucks. I own U-He Satin, the Slate tapes, I've used the Waves incarnations of tape, but until I bought the Ampex and Studer plugins, I didn't know what I was missing. Spending 2K on hardware or $200-$300 on quality software is a clear decision. Until I can afford and justify the cost of hardware, I stick to UAD.

The alternative is Acustica Audio. Man, they rock.

 

Apollo Plugins are very very expensive.
That is why, while spending money on this hardware (still 600€), I wont spend money for their plugins....
When, meanwhile, if i needed something like those plugins, to discharge my computer... i would buy instead Usefull hardware, not 2k$ but cheaper, like Hardware compressors, or others.

But i dont need those actually when my computer, my apollo and my rhode are working fine, and good enough for my needs.

If i had, money to spend, actually, and i dont have,
i would buy first a better Yamaha Piano (2k €), a better folk guitar (handbuild by an artisan near my city, cost 2/3 k €), a battery surface paddle (the roland that cost 700 €), an electronic cello/violin.

This money would be worth spending, if i had it, better than in plugins.

 

That's the thing. If you can't spend the dough for high quality hardware (I can't either) you're better off with software than affordable hardware. The ideal cost-effective hibrid studio has the best possible hardware input (here's where inexpensive pres can be useful within their tolerances -especially because one gets to need a variety of sound colors). Here the cost of inexpensive compressors like the RNC 1773 are really the ticket. However, it can be argued that there's nothing wrong with capturing the raw audio from the pres and processing it later. Then comes in-the-box mixing, and finally, analog two-bus processing. Here's where affordability will be a waste of money. A quality summing box, compressor or saturation box will have high quality transformers. These don't come cheap and you can't cut corners. If you want this extra boost in quality and sound heaven, you need to invest in a quality mastering service of buy the stuff. This is where your average 1176 plugin will not give you the extra quality bump. For processing the two-bus mixdown, I have Slate VBC, FG-X, and several others. In my experience, either Acustica or UAD plugins will get you the closest to acoustic land. My favorite: UAD Neve 33609 compressor. I'll try to buy it before the end of the year. BTW, the UAD SSL-G compressor sounds smoother to my ears than Waves's version.

 

rme stuff looks amazing its just a tad out the price range tho

 

Work as a dream!
I have 1 6 core hackintosh as master, 1 6 core + 1 4 core with windows as slaves. I really powerful. I have others in standby.
I have 4 monitor (one switchable) and control them with with the free Microsoft Remote Desktop (but you can work with one video, keyboard and mouse and control all the slave. The downsize is that you cannot use Nebula in the slaves because it use the video of the master, also some plugs that require advance graphics card will not work in the slave. The advantage is that slaves can have crappy video cards.
VEP is VERY. Mostly an old computer will do the job. The search for power is over.
The best of both worlds.
Its not easy like a plugin, but if you do presets for stacks its just fast, mostly good for CPU hungry plugs.
VEP 5 do not work with vst3.
Cheers!

 

What made you ditch the saffire 56?

 

firewire ports died

 

Studio 192 all day for the money latency is a non issue with a decent computer. UAD plugins are fine but the Apollo itself is nothing special. I Just demo'd an RME UFX + - Rock Solid Everything it's as good as my Prism Atlas for less money. Side by side hard to tell the difference and that's saying a lot Prism Interfaces are among is the best in the world. The Prism might be a little warmer, the UFX + is just clean. Add a few Slate Digital Plugins and it crushes the Apollo. That being said i listened to the Studio 192 at a friends studio, it's like a poor mans UFX + i saw him running 16 tracks all with multiple plugins no dropouts in sight. latency is fine on the S192. Just sayin'