Universal Audio Apollo Twin X Review (Audio Interface)

[thefsb]

I get the reviews are heavily weighted toward playback. I'd like to see the other half given as much investigation. There is a fair number of people interested in that as an untapped audience for ASR.

Yup. That includes me.

For example, all the mics I use require the preamp gain set nearly at the max. Noise in that setting is therefore important to me.

 

[dfuller]

if you enjoy looking at high-end photography, you don't need a Full Frame DSLR Camera.

That is a very, very good analogy. And it'll gladly take a little bit of (inaudible) performance hit if I get the functionality I need.

 

[infinitesymphony]

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.

Wow, I never knew about the physical modeling aspect. That's really cool. The only other thing that comes to mind is Focusrite's Air feature, but that's a one trick pony.

All of the people I know who use UA DSP hit a point every year where they look at all-software workflows and say, "I'm tired of spending money and being locked into a hardware platform." Then after a week or two they say, "Nevermind, I can't give it up." That's addiction right there.

 

[temps]

What is the difference between the monitor outs and the line outs? I assume only the monitor outs are volume controlled? If that is the case what are the line outs used for?
Sorry have a very limited knowledge of the pro stuff....

Yes, only the monitor outs are controlled. I had looked at this unit to simplify my setup, ditch my external monitor controller, etc. but the volume knob can ONLY handle the monitor outputs 1+2 and can't be set to also control a subwoofer on line output 3.

I thought, no big deal, maybe I can use a MIDI controller fader and a fader group to set my volume levels in the UA Console... but neither one is possible. There are a number of feature requests from years ago on the UA forums for these features, and they still haven't added them.

I wouldn't be opposed to running a UA Apollo Twin X just for the preamp emulations, but then it has to go through two extra conversions because there is no Optical Out unless you spend double for the X4... the product stack is overall, very annoyingly structured. Prices are so high I assumed they were made in USA but no, made in China. To me they mostly just seem like very pretty, extremely expensive DRM dongles...

 

[GWolfman]

I do this normally. As I explained however, there is no way for me to test the ADC on this unit because it only exposes a 64-bit ASIO interface which my Audio Precision 32-bit app cannot see. UA products are the only ones so far that I have seen this limitation. For all others I have a dedicated section for ADC.

ASIO4ALL doesn't work with the AP, or does their software require their own driver? Measurements might be different (?), but it's both 32/64-bit.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Yup. That includes me.

For example, all the mics I use require the preamp gain set nearly at the max. Noise in that setting is therefore important to me.

Do you use lots of ribbons?

 

[Tks]

He said himself there is nothing to do about it.

I meant he probably wouldn't have opted for it's use. The other chips also don't have "a cure", but mitigation measures effective enough to make it seem like it never existed.

 

[Blake Klondike]

For pure raw performance the RME ADI-2 PRO is the better choice. However the internal DSPs are probably why one would buy it if one has an application on hand. And if one uses distortion based sound "enhancement" plugins the ESS hump probably is swamped in the plugins distortion anyway.

Are there any DSP options that would be desirable from a hi-fi listening perspective, or are they all just tube and console emulators?

 

[Blake Klondike]

Er, but what does it do? I'm a bit confused by the guitar and headphone adapters on the front and the microphone inputs.

It is for recording studio use-- records guitar, keyboard or microphone and converts analog to digital, and vice-versa. I have one and like the mic pre-amps a lot. People swear by the emulations of recording equipment at world-class studios that this product makes available, but haven't had any overwhelming experience with them. I think anyone using this as a DAC or headamp would be in the same position as I: already have it for recording and trying to get the best sound out of it to avoid buying a RME or similar!

 

[Blake Klondike]

For pure raw performance the RME ADI-2 PRO is the better choice. However the internal DSPs are probably why one would buy it if one has an application on hand. And if one uses distortion based sound "enhancement" plugins the ESS hump probably is swamped in the plugins distortion anyway.

Is the RME suitable for recording studio use or would you have to jump through hoops to get that functionality out of it?

 

[amirm]

ASIO4ALL doesn't work with the AP, or does their software require their own driver?

ASIO4All does work with AP software but from what I recall, it would not see UA products either.

 

[Pach]

Is the RME suitable for recording studio use or would you have to jump through hoops to get that functionality out of it?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the ADI-2 Pro wasn't designed specifically with studio recording and monitoring in mind, so it doesn't have monitoring features that devices like this Apollo Twin X has. However, I think you can use the ADI-2 Pro as a TOTL ADC, then connect a mic preamp, VU, compressor, etc. since the ADI-2 Pro doesn't have those features. But I believe a preamp is necessary if you want to record things using the ADI-2 Pro as an ADC.

 

[dfuller]

Is the RME suitable for recording studio use or would you have to jump through hoops to get that functionality out of it?

It's absolutely suitable for recording studio use. It's mostly useful for mastering though because it's very low channel count (i.e., if you're recording more than a couple channels or need I/O for analog inserts during mixing it's basically useless).

 

[Zensō]

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...

Other than the USB bus power, it sounds as if you’re describing the the RME ADI-2 DAC. Have you considered developing a product specifically for this market?

 

[Dave Tremblay]

Other than the USB bus power, it sounds as if you’re describing the the RME ADI-2 DAC. Have you considered developing a product specifically for this market?

That was kind of my point. While expensive, the ADI-2 appears to be a good product focused on that market. As to our plans, Its company policy not to talk about unreleased products, so I can’t comment, sorry.

 

[PeteL]

ASIO4All does work with AP software but from what I recall, it would not see UA products either.

i understand it's a 64 bits issue, but seams by the wording, a few times now it does suggest a UA "thing". Out of curiosity, is there other Thunderbolts interfaces that have drivers compatibles with your AP app?

 

[Dave Tremblay]

ASIO4All does work with AP software but from what I recall, it would not see UA products either.

ASIO4ALL is just an adapter, it still requires an underlying driver. If ASIO4ALL is being loaded as 32 bit from AP, it in turn will likely only be able to load a 32 bit underlying driver.

 

[Zensō]

That was kind of my point. While expensive, the ADI-2 appears to be a good product focused on that market. As to our plans, Its company policy not to talk about unreleased products, so I can’t comment, sorry.

Understood. I assumed so, but thought I’d ask. I, for one, would be very interested in a high performance UAD DAC/amp with onboard DSP targeted at the home market. I suspect many others would be as well.

 

[amirm]

i understand it's a 64 bits issue, but seams by the wording, a few times now it does suggest a UA "thing". Out of curiosity, is there other Thunderbolts interfaces that have drivers compatibles with your AP app?

I have not had any other TB products to test with it. I don't see a reason why AP would care what the physical interface is. It just wants a 32-bit driver.

 

[PeteL]

I have not had any other TB products to test with it. I don't see a reason why AP would care what the physical interface is. It just wants a 32-bit driver.

Thanks, I just found it odd that UA would be the only brand of all tested to not use a 32 bit driver, when we all have been living with 64 bits architecture for so long, so I thought it could be interface related, or come to think of it maybe more likely because of the included hardware based plugins.