 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Country Specific / UK Mac Group / October 2007Audio upgrade suggestions
Until now I have been very happy with the 44.1 Kc/s, 16-bit audio on a beige G3. For non-demanding work I use the on-board A/D conveter and for the highest quality I use the converter in a Sony Prodat recorder and transfer the results by S/PDIF through a Pro-Tools PCI card.. I may soon be taking on a job for which 96k/24 bit is specified (quite unnecessarily, in my opinion, as the job is moderate quality mono). I need to be able to specify an up-to-date machine which does the job with the minimum of no-frills software. The end result should finish up on CDR or DVD of some sort and may also need to be transferred by ethernet to other machines for uploading to the Web. A Mini with an outboard converter has been suggested as a cheap option, but I am slightly unhappy about that solution. I think a desktop machine with a PCI card would give greater flexibility for any future changes in requirements. The increased cost of the machine would be partly offset by the reduced cost of a PCI card compared with an outboard firewire audio converter; and it would allow the use of two large HDs to give a backup system. I haven't got a clue what is currently available, having dropped out of the upgrade race at OS 8.6 - any suggestions?  Signature~ Adrian Tuddenham ~ (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply) www.poppyrecords.co.uk > Until now I have been very happy with the 44.1 Kc/s, 16-bit audio on a > beige G3. For non-demanding work I use the on-board A/D conveter and [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > I haven't got a clue what is currently available, having dropped out of > the upgrade race at OS 8.6 - any suggestions? The latest sound on sound magazine has some good 24 bit interfaces in it, you might want to check those out. Firewire ones. I'll try and solidify my opinions on the ones in there if I still have a copy of the magazine - I fear though it may have been tidied away by the magazine fairy. > I'll try and solidify my opinions on the ones in there if I still have a > copy of the magazine - I fear though it may have been tidied away by the > magazine fairy. She gets about a bit doesn't she? I had a visit earlier this month... SignatureDavid Kennedy http://www.anindianinexile.com > Until now I have been very happy with the 44.1 Kc/s, 16-bit audio on a > beige G3. For non-demanding work I use the on-board A/D conveter and [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > I haven't got a clue what is currently available, having dropped out of > the upgrade race at OS 8.6 - any suggestions? G4 Quicksilver 733 or similar? Dual boot OS 9/X, PCI, and around £100ish used. Later spec MDDs are noisier, and the os9 versions that little more chased as the last of the os9 boots, though start from around £200 Earlier graphites are a bit cheaper, but with quicksilvers being so cheap. SignatureJon B Above email address IS valid. <http://www.bramley-computers.co.uk/> Apple Laptop Repairs. > > I haven't got a clue what is currently available, having dropped out of > > the upgrade race at OS 8.6 - any suggestions? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Earlier graphites are a bit cheaper, but with quicksilvers being so > cheap. There are loads on eBay at the moment. I just got one that had been cleaned up for resale for just over the £100. It's a nice bit of kit. Just beware though that the early QuickSilver has the 128GB hard drive limit. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > > > I haven't got a clue what is currently available, having dropped out of > > > the upgrade race at OS 8.6 - any suggestions? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > It's a nice bit of kit. Just beware though that the early QuickSilver > has the 128GB hard drive limit. If he's moving from a beige that'll be a luxury lol SignatureJon B Above email address IS valid. <http://www.bramley-computers.co.uk/> Apple Laptop Repairs. > > > > I haven't got a clue what is currently available, having dropped out of > > > > the upgrade race at OS 8.6 - any suggestions? [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > If he's moving from a beige that'll be a luxury lol No. the beige G3 recognises up to 120GB. Signature~ Adrian Tuddenham ~ (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply) www.poppyrecords.co.uk > > There are loads on eBay at the moment. I just got one that had been > > cleaned up for resale for just over the £100. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > If he's moving from a beige that'll be a luxury lol <g>, I only mentioned it after bunging a 160GB into the one here, and being rather disappointed with the space available. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > It's a nice bit of kit. Just beware though that the early QuickSilver > has the 128GB hard drive limit. You can sling in a SATA card for not v much. I have a 500 GB SATA drive in mine. It's bootable; the disadvantage is that only the IDE drive (and then only the master) is available via TDM. Actually, my G4* is now surplus to requirements, so if someone makes me a reasonable offer... I'm even in Bristol in a couple of weeks and can bring it round. * E-mail me for specs. SignatureSak Wathanasin Network Analysis Limited http://www.network-analysis.ltd.uk > > It's a nice bit of kit. Just beware though that the early QuickSilver > > has the 128GB hard drive limit. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > * E-mail me for specs. If you end up spliting it I might be tempted in the sata card. SignatureJon B Above email address IS valid. <http://www.bramley-computers.co.uk/> Apple Laptop Repairs. > > It's a nice bit of kit. Just beware though that the early QuickSilver > > has the 128GB hard drive limit. > > You can sling in a SATA card for not v much. I have a 500 GB SATA drive in > mine. It's bootable; the disadvantage is that only the IDE drive (and then > only the master) is available via TDM. Actually, that might be an idea, I now have a spare 160GB SATA drive from my G5, which could go into the G4, so I could use the FW drive that's on the G4 as an Aperture Vault for my G5 Cheers. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > > > I haven't got a clue what is currently available, having dropped out of > > > the upgrade race at OS 8.6 - any suggestions? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > It's a nice bit of kit. Just beware though that the early QuickSilver > has the 128GB hard drive limit. Isn't it a volume partition size limit, though? Not that I've checked on this one. FWIW, based on my experience, I'd want a dual-CPU machine. And while Adrian might not need (and probably wants to avoid due to `no Classic') MacOS X 10.5, it might be worth thinking about getting a G4 of 1GHz or faster to permit 10.5 to be run, should that turn out to be a good idea. Rowland. SignatureRemove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking > > There are loads on eBay at the moment. I just got one that had been > > cleaned up for resale for just over the £100. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Isn't it a volume partition size limit, though? Not that I've checked > on this one. It is, I partitioned the drive in an external box first, but on the QuickSilver we have here, it did throw up some weird disk space/usage reportings in Disk Utility that I wasn't happy with. So I bunged the unit back into the external casing, just to be on the safe side. > FWIW, based on my experience, I'd want a dual-CPU machine. And while > Adrian might not need (and probably wants to avoid due to `no Classic') > MacOS X 10.5, it might be worth thinking about getting a G4 of 1GHz or > faster to permit 10.5 to be run, should that turn out to be a good idea. I believe 10.5 can be installed onto a G4 of 800MHz or faster. A lot could depend on Adrian's budget, and what is available at this time. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > > FWIW, based on my experience, I'd want a dual-CPU machine. And while > > Adrian might not need (and probably wants to avoid due to `no Classic') [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I believe 10.5 can be installed onto a G4 of 800MHz or faster. A lot > could depend on Adrian's budget, and what is available at this time. A G4 of 866MHz or higher. SignatureWoody www.alienrat.com > > > FWIW, based on my experience, I'd want a dual-CPU machine. And while > > > Adrian might not need (and probably wants to avoid due to `no Classic') [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > A G4 of 866MHz or higher. Well if you're going to get pedantic, it's actually 867MHz :-P (now that I bothered to check it). SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > > > > FWIW, based on my experience, I'd want a dual-CPU machine. And while > > > > Adrian might not need (and probably wants to avoid due to `no Classic') [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Well if you're going to get pedantic, it's actually 867MHz :-P > (now that I bothered to check it). No, sorry, I am being pedantic, it is *actually* any speed less than 866000000 Hz that will fail, so 866MHz is fine, just not 865.999999MHz I refer the learned gentleman to apples installer script code, Exhibit A: ------------------- // require 867Mhz+ if (system.sysctl("hw.cpufrequency") < 866000000) { return false; } return true; -------------------- so even the comment is wrong. SignatureWoody www.alienrat.com > > Well if you're going to get pedantic, it's actually 867MHz :-P > > (now that I bothered to check it). [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > so even the comment is wrong. Wow, OK, I concede, although it's not *me* that's wrong, it's Apple's own public information. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> >>> Well if you're going to get pedantic, it's actually 867MHz :-P >>> (now that I bothered to check it). [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Wow, OK, I concede, although it's not *me* that's wrong, it's Apple's > own public information. To add to this, the 867Mhz machines are not even 867Mhz, they are 866.66666(recurring)Mhz, Apple just round it up to 867Mhz (6.5*133.33333(recurring)Mhz). Ben. > >>> Well if you're going to get pedantic, it's actually 867MHz :-P > >>> (now that I bothered to check it). [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > 866.66666(recurring)Mhz, Apple just round it up to 867Mhz > (6.5*133.33333(recurring)Mhz). Stop - Stop - -STOP!!!! It's not my budget and the customer wants to buy a brand new machine. In part, this is to avoid any out-of-date software issues and to make any changes simply a matter of ringing up a supplier and ordering parts, rather than looking for what is available on eBay. I realise you had all assumed I would be doing this my normal way - but the customer wants to spend the money and have the job done quickly (leaving me bewildered with an up-to-date Mac and wondering how that happened). Signature~ Adrian Tuddenham ~ (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply) www.poppyrecords.co.uk <..> > Stop - Stop - -STOP!!!! > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > (leaving me bewildered with an up-to-date Mac and wondering how that > happened). Ok, well, if it's a brand new machine, and there are no budget limitations (within reason I guess). Then why not just make it simple and get whatever Mac fits the bill, and get a FW audio input device? Here's one on the Apple Store: http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObjects/ukstore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=FB2AD0E C&fnode=home/shop_mac/mac_accessories/music_creation&nplm=TB671 If it's just for this one task, then perhaps a Mini might be best, or a low end iMac if you need keyboard and monitor. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > <..> > > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > If it's just for this one task, then perhaps a Mini might be best, or a > low end iMac if you need keyboard and monitor. I tend to lean in favour of an iMac. Superdrive mini £500, nice monitor £150, keyboard & mouse £30 (more if you want a mighty mouse), you've spent nearly £700, an iMac is £800, you get more than 2x the HD, it's faster, better graphics card (basically it'll keep it 'current' longer), more connectivity, better residuals. The mini's plus side is you could use a current monitor, and shove it in the draw when not in use. SignatureJon B Above email address IS valid. <http://www.bramley-computers.co.uk/> Apple Laptop Repairs. > > <..> > > > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > faster, better graphics card (basically it'll keep it 'current' longer), > more connectivity, better residuals. It is beginning to look as though that is the way I shall have to go. > The mini's plus side is you could use a current monitor I should have to buy monitors and keyboard because none of my beige stuff would fit. Signature~ Adrian Tuddenham ~ (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply) www.poppyrecords.co.uk > > > <..> > > > > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > I should have to buy monitors and keyboard because none of my beige > stuff would fit. It can take VGA CRT monitor (and is supplied with an adapter for such), but if you've got old Apple however many pin it was, you'd have to be running via multiple adapters and I'm not sure if that would work. SignatureJon B Above email address IS valid. <http://www.bramley-computers.co.uk/> Apple Laptop Repairs. > I should have to buy monitors and keyboard because none of my beige > stuff would fit. From playing with one, the new 'flat' keyboards are very nice to use and the iMac is a superb machine. It'll come with Leotard, so no Classic, but you could easily network your existing Mac with the iMac using your router (it is a 4-Ethernet one, isn't it?), and so keep the full functionality of your present software until you're ready to switch, at your leisure. Of course a second hand or refurb PPC iMac would be even cheaper, and they really are lovely machines. The snag with all these things is, no PCI slot. SignaturePeter > > I should have to buy monitors and keyboard because none of my beige > > stuff would fit. > > From playing with one, the new 'flat' keyboards are very nice to use I've tried them and hated them, but there you go. Really, really horrible as far as my fingers are concerned. But I've noticed that about Apple: every now and then, it comes out with a really bad keyboard. [snip] Rowland. SignatureRemove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking [snip] > > I tend to lean in favour of an iMac. Superdrive mini £500, nice monitor > > £150, keyboard & mouse £30 (more if you want a mighty mouse), you've [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > It is beginning to look as though that is the way I shall have to go. I'd *really* seriously consider getting a Mac with more than one CPU if I were you. Got a 1GHz G4 iMac here. Nice, but - well, the twin CPU G4 just didn't suffer from the sluggishness that the iMac's got, and I'm sure it's down to the multiple-CPU-ness of it. Internal expansion space ain't a bad thing to have, either. > > The mini's plus side is you could use a current monitor > > I should have to buy monitors and keyboard because none of my beige > stuff would fit. I'm one who's always deeply sceptical about the `latest new thing' in home computing. I've sworn by CRT monitors and at LCDs for a long time. Our next monitor - when the current one dies - will be LCD. Rowland. SignatureRemove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking In article <1i6uuy4.jhyua5103mcmpN%real-address-in-sig@flur.bltigibbet>, > [snip] > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > just didn't suffer from the sluggishness that the iMac's got, and I'm > sure it's down to the multiple-CPU-ness of it. More than one CPU is good. Then a rogue process (not unknown) can't shut you out. I just replaced a G4 Mini with an Intel one. I go for a Mini simply because the screen/keyboard tend to last longer than the Mac itself (well, my desire to keep it at any rate). [snip] > I go for a Mini simply because the screen/keyboard tend to last longer > than the Mac itself (well, my desire to keep it at any rate). I find that Macs and monitors last about the same time. Keyboards last longer - but wear to the point of `wanting replacing' at about the same time the Mac and monitor die. It's all designed to drop dead after a short life these days, as far as I can tell. Rowland. SignatureRemove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking > [snip] > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > longer - but wear to the point of `wanting replacing' at about the same > time the Mac and monitor die. OK. When wanting to replace my 1999 G4 450MHz tower in 2005, it was obsolete (for my use) but the Apple display of the same vintage was still fine. Then earlier this year ago it packed up and got replaced by a flat screen. I had to put up with the colours being more washy, but it uses a lot less power. Then Apple put the Core 2 Due in the Mini, and I've upgraded to that now as I get the cheap Leopard upgrade. I did consider an iMac, but then you have to get rid of the (still-just-fine) screen when you want to upgrade. > [snip] > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > It's all designed to drop dead after a short life these days, as far as > I can tell. I'm on my third keyboard, and second Marble Mouse (after using a normal Pro mouse for a year) on my G5, which is three and a half years old. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > > [snip] > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I'm on my third keyboard, and second Marble Mouse (after using a normal > Pro mouse for a year) on my G5, which is three and a half years old. Our 2G4 packed up at about 3.5 years old, IIRC. Died completely. The previous G4 lasted about as long and was judged unrepairable at any price by the Apple Authorized Service Provider (they replaced all working components with known good parts and failed to fix the fault, allegedly). One of the two G4s came with a HDD that failed shortly after delivery. I don't expect this 4G5 to last a lot longer. We've got a fair few 68k Macs around the place that still work wonderfully, mind. The monitor - well, that's not doing so badly. It's the second replacement under warranty, mind (the first two monitors both died after less than a year's service), and was a `reconditioned' unit that hadn't been reconditioned. Since the fault it arrived with was a mere dodgy power button, I decided not to send it back because if that is all that's wrong with it, it should *work* okay. Rowland. SignatureRemove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking [..] > > I'm on my third keyboard, and second Marble Mouse (after using a normal > > Pro mouse for a year) on my G5, which is three and a half years old. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I don't expect this 4G5 to last a lot longer. We've got a fair few 68k > Macs around the place that still work wonderfully, mind. Ok, so I've had to replace the PSU due to failure, and I have upgraded the graphics card and the hard drives, but the originals are still working fine. The only failure was still considerably less than the value of the machine. My 2G5 has been on almost 24/7 for the last 3.5 years, and I expect it to keep going a lot longer yet. > The monitor - well, that's not doing so badly. It's the second > replacement under warranty, mind (the first two monitors both died after > less than a year's service), and was a `reconditioned' unit that hadn't > been reconditioned. Since the fault it arrived with was a mere dodgy > power button, I decided not to send it back because if that is all > that's wrong with it, it should *work* okay. Blimey, what bad luck. I still have the Formac LCD monitor I got with the G5, also 3.5 years only, which is now on Emily's Quicksilver. The keyboards I just wore out. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > [..] > > The monitor - well, that's not doing so badly. It's the second > > replacement under warranty, mind (the first two monitors both died after [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Blimey, what bad luck. I still have the Formac LCD monitor I got with > the G5, also 3.5 years only, which is now on Emily's Quicksilver. My formac died at 2 years. Well, first the leg fell off the back. I phoned support and the guy said 'Oh, yes, the leg just *fell* off did it? Yes, right'. Most condescending sh.t I have had to deal with. I wasn't actually ringing to complain, I wanted to know where I could get another leg, so when it died, I tried the 3 year warantee (which is next to useless - very specific what it covers, ie, nothing that goes wrong) and when that failed I got a dell - proper make that lasts well. Much better screen, a lot cheaper. I won't get another formac again. SignatureWoody www.alienrat.com > > [..] > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > My formac died at 2 years. It was Formacs that died here. I'm never going near the brand again. The first Formac monitor we bought died just out of warranty. It had given good display when it had worked, so I put that down to bad luck (well, it died at about the time the G4 it was bought to run also died) and bought another Formac. But that one died in warranty... > Well, first the leg fell off the back. I > phoned support and the guy said 'Oh, yes, the leg just *fell* off did > it? Yes, right'. Most condescending sh.t I have had to deal with. I find that kind of attitude to be utterly normal. The seriously annoyingly condescening types are a lot worse. > I wasn't actually ringing to complain, I wanted to know where I could > get another leg, so when it died, I tried the 3 year warantee (which is > next to useless - very specific what it covers, ie, nothing that goes > wrong) The Formac three year warranty got us two replacement monitors very quickly with no fuss at all. Okay, the first replacement lasted even less time than had the original, but on the other hand the monitor we ended up with was a much higher spec than the one we'd bought. >and when that failed I got a dell - proper make that lasts well. > Much better screen, a lot cheaper. I won't get another formac again. Nor me. Rowland. SignatureRemove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking > > Blimey, what bad luck. I still have the Formac LCD monitor I got with > > the G5, also 3.5 years only, which is now on Emily's Quicksilver. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > wrong) and when that failed I got a dell - proper make that lasts well. > Much better screen, a lot cheaper. I won't get another formac again. Ok, fair enough. Although I have a HP on my G5 now, which I'm rather happy with. The image probably isn't quite as sharp as the Formac, but it's brighter, and it was less than half the price. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> > > > Blimey, what bad luck. I still have the Formac LCD monitor I got with > > > the G5, also 3.5 years only, which is now on Emily's Quicksilver. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > happy with. The image probably isn't quite as sharp as the Formac, but > it's brighter, and it was less than half the price. We have a lot of the HP monitors at work (which isn't suprising as we have HP on site). They are ok for the price. SignatureWoody www.alienrat.com > > [snip] > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I'm on my third keyboard, and second Marble Mouse (after using a normal > Pro mouse for a year) on my G5, which is three and a half years old. I think my works keyboard is a good 3 year old +, though a few keys show the odd signs of being on their way out. My home keyboard is 4 years old and still going strong... SignatureJon B Above email address IS valid. <http://www.bramley-computers.co.uk/> Apple Laptop Repairs. > > I'm on my third keyboard, and second Marble Mouse (after using a normal > > Pro mouse for a year) on my G5, which is three and a half years old. > > I think my works keyboard is a good 3 year old +, though a few keys show > the odd signs of being on their way out. My home keyboard is 4 years old > and still going strong... I had the original Pro white keyboard, which is still in use, but the keys all went sticky, so it's on a low usage iMac at my in-laws. SignatureAndy Hewitt <http://web.mac.com/andrewhewitt1/> [snip] > To add to this, the 867Mhz machines are not even 867Mhz, they are > 866.66666(recurring)Mhz, I bet they're not even that. [snip] Rowland. SignatureRemove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking > I may soon be taking on a job for which 96k/24 bit is specified (quite > unnecessarily, in my opinion, as the job is moderate quality mono). I > need to be able to specify an up-to-date machine which does the job with > the minimum of no-frills software. The end result should finish up on > CDR or DVD of some sort and may also need to be transferred by ethernet > to other machines for uploading to the Web. I've had very good results with M-Audio PCI cards: a very basic 2496 and a Delta 66 with Omni Studio BoB <http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/Audiophile2496-main.html#_jmp0_> The Delta 66 replaced the 2496 and was very flexible and nice in many ways, but on my plain PCI-slotted Mac of the time, a 1.42 DP G4, the small control application (and/or the card) caused kernel panics far too often when changing configurations. Almost unusable. M-Audio are quite slow to update drivers, but there has been a new version since I eBayed mine. Personally I'd want a lot of reassurance before buying anything M-Audio again (oops I've have since bought a CO2 and some MicroTracks) maybe others have had more luck. Recently I was after an audio card (although for PCI-e) but found availability quite restricted for my needs which are mainly sound for picture. I almost went for an Apogee Symphony (with future-proofing in mind - ha) but when configured the prices got a little silly and they seem to be aimed squarely at musicians/studios. I then looked at FireWire interfaces where there is a huge range from which to choose. After poring over many possible I narrowed the field down to the Focusrite Saffire and the TAPCO Link Firewire 460. I needed one for a particular job, and typically for me , neither were available anywhere. I should mention that I was selecting on spec, rather than recommendation/personal experience. I bought a Mackie Onyx Satellite with which I'm quite happy, although if it's important to you, Phantom power on this an many other FireWire boxes isn't 48 volts due to FW power limitations, annoyingly the problem commonly remains when using a power adaptor. The Mackie has lovely mic preamps used in the TAPCO, and Focusrite has a good reputation. Stuart Signaturecut that out to reply |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.