| Author
|
The mother of all DAC s thread
|
Fragletrollet
Fragletrollet
Started Topics :
111
Posts :
1748
Posted : Feb 7, 2009 12:55
|
|
~d2~
Inactive User
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
751
Posted : Feb 7, 2009 22:10
|
If you use the M-audio clock you will affect the sound. If it had a cheap clock then you are likely to get jitter issues. So would be best to use the clock in the SSL.
The SSL has no monitoring controls. The M-audio had a pair of analogue outputs and a monitor level control. So if you use them you will be using conversion.
That would be the weak link.
 |
|
|
Kane
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
1772
Posted : Feb 7, 2009 23:23
|
Yep..using the SSL's clock will definitely sound better. And digital doesn't mean completely transparent either..you have line induced jitter and the quality of the data being sent still depends on the firewire (i assume) receiver as well as the ADAT transmitter.
 You believe in the users?
Yeah, sure. If I don't have a user, then who wrote me? |
|
|
|
Fragletrollet
Fragletrollet
Started Topics :
111
Posts :
1748
Posted : Feb 8, 2009 00:14
|
|
~d2~
Inactive User
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
751
Posted : Feb 8, 2009 01:36
|
I would defiantly monitor off the SSL but I am not sure it has a dedicated monitor control. I am pretty sure it doesn't. But you could get a monitor control unit.
You do get a lot for your money with the SSL. I am not sure how the converters stack up to the big names. Gealslutz might be a good place to inquire.
If I needed that many inputs then the SSL would be top of my list inquiries as well....but then I would need to upgrade to PT HD and SSL do a dedicated box for that. Thats a moot point though. |
|
|
|
