| Author
|
RME Vs. Apogee
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Sep 1, 2008 13:41
|
|
Kaz
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
90
Posts :
2268
Posted : Sep 1, 2008 14:35
|
Crap DACs make things like 192KHz sampling rates and 32bit sound a necessity even though theoretically the human hearing needs no more than 88.2KHz/18-20Bit for the THEORETICAL maximum amount of heard detail. If you can hear the difference between working in 32bit/192KHz and 24bit/88.2KHz on your system, it means that your DAC is messing up the details of the sound (or you are working with under 1% volume on your digital mixer, which should be at 100% to make sure the DAC converts at the maximum detail - volume control should be done on the analog signal where it does not degrade detail). This is just the most common issue in the "why you should get a better DAC" conversation.
While RME products are rather free of this problem (as opposed to M-Audio, Creative, etc), but comparing RME to Apogee is comparing two fundamentally different types of solutions. If anything, RME and MOTU should be compared (similar features down to the DAC chipset), and the ideal solution would be both. As for comparing between the two on a strict DAC level, I can sum it down very easily:
In the long run, RME tends to create more ear-fatigue than stand-alone DACs, and experts for the most part say that making a clear mix is harder on it - despite the seemingly accurate sound. The difference may be barely audible, but external DACs (and external solutions in general) have their pros.
BTW: The current king of entry level DACs is not Apogee or Benchmark at the moment, but rather Lavry, with the DA10, which blind tests have shown leaves all (>$1000) competition in the dust - including the most conservative "we don't need high end gear" types. And excuse my cynicism: if you believe the threads that are here, then RME is no better than a Soundblaster, since it sounds just like Apogee, and Apogee sound like Creative. The comparison is actually between Apogee alone, vs. RME /w internal mixing AND an Apogee clock. Not between both products - as Apogee clocking is considered MUCH more accurate.
Oh, and the output on the RME on the Apogee vs. Rosetta thread is NOT in the same level - the Apogee mix was about 1db lower in volume, and for the average listener: "higher volume = better sound" This is not a proper blind test - by working at different volumes you make sure that the louder one will receive a much warmer welcome than it deserves.
More to the point:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/low-end-theory/158750-apogee-duet-vs-rme-fireface-400-a.html
We all know psytrance studios are more or less 100% the same (especially in Israel, where everyone has Dynaudio speakers, RME ****face, and is running Cubase/Nuendo), this would probably NOT be a good place to ask around, as you will find a load of users saying "I've never used Apogee, but RME are better", which is about an expert opinion as it sounds.
  http://www.myspace.com/Hooloovoo222 |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Sep 1, 2008 15:10
|
Quote:
| kaz wrote:
And excuse my cynicism: if you believe the threads that are here, then RME is no better than a Soundblaster, since it sounds just like Apogee, and Apogee sound like Creative. The comparison is actually between Apogee alone, vs. RME /w internal mixing AND an Apogee clock. Not between both products - as Apogee clocking is considered MUCH more accurate.
|
|
Quote:
| subconscioumind wrote:
But don't swallow all of them, some of them have been done technically in a way that actually compromises the output..
But interesting and nice discussions around it sometimes. |
|
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
Kaz
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
90
Posts :
2268
Posted : Sep 1, 2008 15:25
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-08-30 08:15, Yuli wrote:
It's not that I have any idea at all about the apogee ( never heard it I admit ) but I seriously doubt that any of you hardcore technology masterminds will know to differentiate between RME and Apogee when done a blind test.
|
|
Are you willing to put your money where your mouth is?
http://www.myspace.com/Hooloovoo222 |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Sep 1, 2008 15:31
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-08-30 08:15, Yuli wrote:
It's not that I have any idea at all about the apogee ( never heard it I admit ) but I seriously doubt that any of you hardcore technology masterminds will know to differentiate between RME and Apogee when done a blind test.
|
|
Everybody could start with the wav vs mp3 test in this forum... so far most are only talking.
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
kajola
Kajola
Started Topics :
74
Posts :
498
Posted : Sep 1, 2008 20:57
|
Quote:
|
We all know psytrance studios are more or less 100% the same (especially in Israel, where everyone has Dynaudio speakers, RME ****face, and is running Cubase/Nuendo), this would probably NOT be a good place to ask around, as you will find a load of users saying "I've never used Apogee, but RME are better", which is about an expert opinion as it sounds.
|
|
haha..good point dude, thats why x artists sound as one...
http://www.facebook.com/djkajola |
|
|
|
|
