One can say it is a limitation of the measuring system. It looks like they have not updated their drivers for more than a decade. MacOS has been 64-bit OS since 2007 and Windows since 2009 (Windows 7!)
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Universal Audio Apollo Twin X Review (Audio Interface)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
One can say it is a limitation of the measuring system. It looks like they have not updated their drivers for more than a decade. MacOS has been 64-bit OS since 2007 and Windows since 2009 (Windows 7!)
ESS hump involves changing a few passive component values, There is no cost change!
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ow-to-fix-ess-hump-on-sgd1-and-la-qxd1.10502/
Doing the other side is quite a bit more challenging when it comes to measurements. I think we could mostly agree that playback is about getting digital bits turned into analog with as little distortion and noise as possible, then relying on separate components to amplify the signal. When it comes to mic preamps, they often behave differently with different microphones, have to support a huge range of gain (60dB), and many intentionally add EQ and distortion intentionally to "sweeten" the signal coming from the mic. That doesn't make it a worse mic preamp, it's just different.
Yup, I have an ADI-2 Pro (as well as a quad PCIe UAD card), and I owned an Apollo Twin in the past. They're very different feature sets. The UA actually has considerably more in the way of analog I/O (extra pair of line outs, mic preamps integrated, a DI...), but is slightly less performant in the AD/DA department. The RME is 2 in/2 out in analog, no mic pres, no hi-z DI, but has more digital I/O and a freakin' ton of headphone amp power.
I'm sorry, but I can't answer that. Our business relationship with ESS is bound by NDA.
The DAC in the Twin X is not an ES9038, so I'm not sure this is exactly the same issue. You can see in the Apollo x16 review that Amir did a while back that we do not have an ESS IMD Hump in that product .
They know. They aware.
For 901x there's no fix. It's set, done. But not an issue for them there are dacs with weirder characteristics in the past.
For 9038pro and q2m. There are fixes, there are different way to fix it, there are different causes. Best implementation will have no imd hump regardless. There need no fix after all. ESS will help you when you are their client. If you aren't, why would you expect they are going to tell us anything.
And 9028pro ?
Like I said no fix for 901x.
Also this fix is just like a patch fix not preventing from ground up. Better design will not exhibit imd hump regardless of what components in the i/v.
9028pro is same category as 9038q2m/pro.
He already has.Someone should get this man the rme babyface pro to test. Probably one of the best and most stable usb audio interfaces ever made. I'm thinking a lot of people on here would be very interested, including me
It's used to make music
I thought you already owned one,than I read your last sentence.Someone should get this man the rme babyface pro to test. Probably one of the best and most stable usb audio interfaces ever made. I'm thinking a lot of people on here would be very interested, including me
Borderline metaphorically criminal!
madDog
Member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2019
- Messages
- 59
- Likes
- 8
I can see that now, tnx for that. Its a shame that the headphone ports are not as powerfull as one would want, other then that, great review.
infinitesymphony
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2018
- Messages
- 1,072
- Likes
- 1,816
I think it's fair to say that if you are not recording or mixing your own music, you would be better served by something else, but if you are an audio engineer there are some cool features on offer with the Quad and Duo. You have a dim button for checking the mix at different fixed levels, a mono/phase button to check summing compatibility, mic preamps, and maybe most importantly for UA, built-in hardware DSP for their plugins. Some of those features are included in DAWs but it's nice to have them at your fingertips.
Um what?
I've been trying to think of how to write this for a while. Trying to cover a lot of ground, so please bear with me. And while I work for Universal Audio, I participate in this forum due to my personal interest more than my professional one.
The professional audio market is definitely different than consumer, and the goals are way more varied. In the consumer market, we would probably all be thrilled with a single product that had a world class DAC, simple driver support, a powerful headphone amp, and USB bus powered would be nice...
In the pro space, there are many other things to consider. While the DAC performance is still important, it has to be balanced with many other features that are unique to recording workflows. And every company in this space likely has a different viewpoint, or even a different target customer. Consider the following:
1) Line Level ADC Performance - important for electronic instruments and external gear (keyboards, etc)
2) Mic Preamps with 48v Phantom Power - 60dB of clean gain, ideally settable/recallable with software
3) DI Performance - 60dB of gain for "Direct Input", i.e. very low level signals (passive guitar pickups, etc)
4) Input Voltage Acceptance - 24dBu, or 34V Peak, required for integrating outboard recording gear
5) Output Voltage Drive - 24dBu, again 34V Peak, required for integrating outboard recording gear
6) Independent Headphone Mixes - Separate DAC outputs, so performer can hear a different mix than the main mix
7) Low Latency Mixer and FX - performers can be sensitive to less than 3mSec of delay, analog to analog, with FX
8) High driver stability at low IO Buffer sizes - work well in a DAW with buffer sizes as low as 32 samples
9) No thumps or clicks, ever - they can end up in the audio, but also note that these devices are plugged into active monitors with full gain
10) Various metering modes
11) Multichannel Digital IO - helping to integrate with outboard gear
12) External Clocking - ability to sync to external clock sources and maintain performance
13) Multi-unit aggregation - DAWs can only see one device, so if you need more I/O, devices have to aggregate at driver or below
14) Thunderbolt - Can typically reach lower latencies than USB (not about bandwidth, USB3 is fine for that)
15) Potentially complex routing capabilities - often achieved through FPGAs or DSPs
16) Headphone amplifier - Ability to drive 300Ohm headphones to high level.
17) Form Factor - Has large implications on cost, heat, and performance
18) Environmental Factors - Is the device stable under extreme thermal loads like a live show in the desert
19) Reliability - If something goes wrong, will it take down the Super Bowl Half Time show.
20) User Delight - May sound funny, but maybe the most important. Does it have a sound? Is it nostalgic? Does it inspire?
21) Workflow enhancements - Can you record an album faster, reducing expensive studio time?
I could go on, but these were the ones that jumped to mind. For many in this forum, these probably don't matter, in the same way that if you enjoy looking at high-end photography, you don't need a Full Frame DSLR Camera. That said, I wanted to focus on some of the choices in a device like the Twin X.
First of all, it is truly a Pro Audio Device. As such, it should be able to fully support 20dBu or 24dBu. Most lower end audio interfaces don't support that. So, why does it matter? Mixing desks and outboard studio gear tend to run at these higher voltage levels. But there are side effects to a feature like this. It generates more heat, for example, which is tough in a small chassis like the Twin X. It also means that if you are only driving 4V, like a consumer desktop DAC, you are not operating the DAC and ADC at peak performance. It's still good as can be seen in the review, but performance is always better near Full Scale digital.
World class mic preamps with programmable gain. This is a basic requirement of a pro audio device, but the programmable gain also makes the setup recallable if someone needs to go back and re-record something. Saves time and is a major workflow enhancement. High quality Programmable Gain devices are expensive though, and hit the budget. Lower end devices can't afford that.
Low latency mixer and FX. While you can use the mixer in your DAW and track through it with effects, it is pretty common for that to either add a lot of latency or glitching the audio under heavier loads. Having an extremely reliable hardware based mixer with FX, means you don't have to worry about it. Just make music.
Probably one of the top appeals of the Twin X comes in that user-delight bullet. We can not only emulate famous mixing consoles from studios like Abbey Road with physically modeled DSP (think PSpice level of circuit modeling), but we can physically alter the input impedance of the mic preamps and DI to load the microphone or instrument in the same way those devices would have. Whether that is nostalgia or just good sound, it can be very inspiring.
Lastly, studio customers, whether high-end or project studio, see these devices as a big investment and as such, they should last a long time. Sometimes this means industrial level components, sometimes it just means buying from a company that has a good long term record with driver support. Those things can be a non-obvious part of price points.
I hope this was helpful. We're pretty proud of the products we make, and I hope that comes across without being a sales pitch. These products are focused on music creation and definitely have tradeoffs versus a pure desktop focused DAC at the same price. And I hope this doesn't come across as disparaging "lower end" music creation devices either. There are a lot of musicians out there that don't want to spend $899 on an audio interface and may not value some of our decisions as much as others.
The professional audio market is definitely different than consumer, and the goals are way more varied. In the consumer market, we would probably all be thrilled with a single product that had a world class DAC, simple driver support, a powerful headphone amp, and USB bus powered would be nice...
In the pro space, there are many other things to consider. While the DAC performance is still important, it has to be balanced with many other features that are unique to recording workflows. And every company in this space likely has a different viewpoint, or even a different target customer. Consider the following:
1) Line Level ADC Performance - important for electronic instruments and external gear (keyboards, etc)
2) Mic Preamps with 48v Phantom Power - 60dB of clean gain, ideally settable/recallable with software
3) DI Performance - 60dB of gain for "Direct Input", i.e. very low level signals (passive guitar pickups, etc)
4) Input Voltage Acceptance - 24dBu, or 34V Peak, required for integrating outboard recording gear
5) Output Voltage Drive - 24dBu, again 34V Peak, required for integrating outboard recording gear
6) Independent Headphone Mixes - Separate DAC outputs, so performer can hear a different mix than the main mix
7) Low Latency Mixer and FX - performers can be sensitive to less than 3mSec of delay, analog to analog, with FX
8) High driver stability at low IO Buffer sizes - work well in a DAW with buffer sizes as low as 32 samples
9) No thumps or clicks, ever - they can end up in the audio, but also note that these devices are plugged into active monitors with full gain
10) Various metering modes
11) Multichannel Digital IO - helping to integrate with outboard gear
12) External Clocking - ability to sync to external clock sources and maintain performance
13) Multi-unit aggregation - DAWs can only see one device, so if you need more I/O, devices have to aggregate at driver or below
14) Thunderbolt - Can typically reach lower latencies than USB (not about bandwidth, USB3 is fine for that)
15) Potentially complex routing capabilities - often achieved through FPGAs or DSPs
16) Headphone amplifier - Ability to drive 300Ohm headphones to high level.
17) Form Factor - Has large implications on cost, heat, and performance
18) Environmental Factors - Is the device stable under extreme thermal loads like a live show in the desert
19) Reliability - If something goes wrong, will it take down the Super Bowl Half Time show.
20) User Delight - May sound funny, but maybe the most important. Does it have a sound? Is it nostalgic? Does it inspire?
21) Workflow enhancements - Can you record an album faster, reducing expensive studio time?
I could go on, but these were the ones that jumped to mind. For many in this forum, these probably don't matter, in the same way that if you enjoy looking at high-end photography, you don't need a Full Frame DSLR Camera. That said, I wanted to focus on some of the choices in a device like the Twin X.
First of all, it is truly a Pro Audio Device. As such, it should be able to fully support 20dBu or 24dBu. Most lower end audio interfaces don't support that. So, why does it matter? Mixing desks and outboard studio gear tend to run at these higher voltage levels. But there are side effects to a feature like this. It generates more heat, for example, which is tough in a small chassis like the Twin X. It also means that if you are only driving 4V, like a consumer desktop DAC, you are not operating the DAC and ADC at peak performance. It's still good as can be seen in the review, but performance is always better near Full Scale digital.
World class mic preamps with programmable gain. This is a basic requirement of a pro audio device, but the programmable gain also makes the setup recallable if someone needs to go back and re-record something. Saves time and is a major workflow enhancement. High quality Programmable Gain devices are expensive though, and hit the budget. Lower end devices can't afford that.
Low latency mixer and FX. While you can use the mixer in your DAW and track through it with effects, it is pretty common for that to either add a lot of latency or glitching the audio under heavier loads. Having an extremely reliable hardware based mixer with FX, means you don't have to worry about it. Just make music.
Probably one of the top appeals of the Twin X comes in that user-delight bullet. We can not only emulate famous mixing consoles from studios like Abbey Road with physically modeled DSP (think PSpice level of circuit modeling), but we can physically alter the input impedance of the mic preamps and DI to load the microphone or instrument in the same way those devices would have. Whether that is nostalgia or just good sound, it can be very inspiring.
Lastly, studio customers, whether high-end or project studio, see these devices as a big investment and as such, they should last a long time. Sometimes this means industrial level components, sometimes it just means buying from a company that has a good long term record with driver support. Those things can be a non-obvious part of price points.
I hope this was helpful. We're pretty proud of the products we make, and I hope that comes across without being a sales pitch. These products are focused on music creation and definitely have tradeoffs versus a pure desktop focused DAC at the same price. And I hope this doesn't come across as disparaging "lower end" music creation devices either. There are a lot of musicians out there that don't want to spend $899 on an audio interface and may not value some of our decisions as much as others.
Similar threads
