Universal Audio Apollo X16 Review

[temps]

You're spending far less per-channel for this than the Pro FS. The Pro FS has (at most) 4 analog outputs (if you include headphone outs) and 2 analog inputs - figure that's $500 per channel of outputs and $1000 per channel of inputs. In contrast... The x16 has no less than 16 ins and 16 outs at $3500. So, on a per-channel basis, the Apollo is quite a bit cheaper, and puts up roughly equivalent performance.

Another interesting device would be the Cranborne Audio 500s. It's a 8 slot 500 series lunchbox, but with 8 channels of AD/DA conversion. Soundonsound measured it and found it equivalent to the Lynx Hilo on both AD & DA (iirc). The ADAT version you have to use in conjunction with another interface is $1,600 or the USB interface version is $1,700.

 

[ElNino]

They're not. TB cables are always active, AFAIK. USB-C is a port/connector design, and Thunderbolt 3 just so happens to use a USB-C port and connector. Previous generations used mini DisplayPort.

Thunderbolt cables (even TB3 cables) don't have to be active. That being said, passive TB cables over 2 meters can't hit full TB3 transfer rates.

The confusion usually comes in because passive TB cables over 0.5m can't also support USB 3.1 speeds -- which sucks.

Mix in DisplayPort support, and the whole situation is a mess. If you want a cable that can do it all, it gets very costly. Apple sells a 2m "everything" cable that supports Thunderbolt 3 data transfer up to 40Gb/s, USB 3.1 Gen 2 data transfer up to 10Gb/s, DisplayPort video output (HBR3), and charging up to 100W for a whopping $129 USD, which sounds crazy but is actually price-competitive for all those features.

IMHO though it was a dumb idea to design a single port designed to carry everything without considering how expensive the cables would get.

 

[amirm]

We're at the limits of the AP's hardware here. Apparently you'd need to enable "high performance mode". Otherwise something around 120 dB of SINAD (depending on level) is all you ever get.

High performance mode is always enabled in my measurements.

 

[anmpr1]

Apple sells a 2m "everything" cable... for a whopping $129 USD, which sounds crazy but is actually price-competitive for all those features. IMHO though it was a dumb idea to design a single port designed to carry everything without considering how expensive the cables would get.

If the cable is good quality that is not a bad price, considering what's out there. It is my understanding that the interface was proprietary to Intel (requiring a royalty fee) until fairly recently. I don't understand that really, at least with open architecture PCs. I kind of thought everyone in PC land learned their lesson from the old IBM MicroChannel interface. Apple has always done whatever they want, price regardless, it seems.

 

[Labjr]

Something like this may be good for multi zone audio system if it weren't so difficult to implement.

 

[Francis Vaughan]

If the cable is good quality that is not a bad price, considering what's out there. It is my understanding that the interface was proprietary to Intel (requiring a royalty fee) until fairly recently. I don't understand that really, at least with open architecture PCs. I kind of thought everyone in PC land learned their lesson from the old IBM MicroChannel interface. Apple has always done whatever they want, price regardless, it seems.

These cables are close to science fiction in terms of what they deliver. OTOH, Amir had (I assume) a short passive cable, and the price for that was a bit past reasonable. But the active cables are remarkable in what they are. Price will, as always, be partly dependant on quantity. Active Thunderbolt cables are not ultra-mass-production items, and you will pay some premium because of that. I still remember (have the scars) from proprietary cables from a different era of computing. Try pricing things like early Myranet over copper, or SGI's ccNuma interface as seen in the Origin and UV systems. Start adding digits to the price.

I suspect that licensing is now more a matter of licensing the IP of basic blocks for inclusion on silicon, and the firmware to run on it. Nobody is going to want to go out and do a scratch design. Apple probably get a free pass on their silicon due to their contribution to the cause. Patents from Firewire will have expired. Apple kicked an own goal by asking too much for Firewire when it was vastly superior to what USB delivered at the time.

 

[Xyrium]

When we call these "active" are just talking about a tiny xformer at one end, or must one connect them to a power source?

Edit: Holy good grief...2M for $90...
https://magstor.com/products/magsto..._content=sag_organic&utm_campaign=sag_organic

 

[sam_adams]

Apple's original TB cable was an active design. The newer TB3 Pro cables with USB-C type connector are passive under one meter and active over one meter. They have to be active on lengths over one meter to maintain the 40 Gb/s bandwidth. And yes, Virginia, they are shockingly expensive for 'just' cables. But there are alternatives that work just as well without the Tim Apple Premium.

 

[amirm]

I got the Apple cable just to not have that be a source of any potential issues. But off-brand ones were not that much cheaper. I think it was $40 vs $30 or something like that.

My motherboard advertized Thunderbolt but fine print said you had to get some specialized card from them. This was very hard to find at good price. And there is an obscure, undocumented option you have to check in Bios called Enable GPIO 3 or some random thing like that. Even then, stupid thing would not work. I then realized it needs not one, but two PCI power cables! So I had to rip out my PC, go find long power cables that would reach this card as it can only be plugged into one slot on the motherboard. The MB company wanted me to update the firmware from their website yet the tool told me what was on the card was more up to date! Anyway, I thought it was a miracle that it all worked at the end. If you need TB on a PC, be sure to get it in the motherboard.

 

[Francis Vaughan]

When we call these "active" are just talking about a tiny xformer at one end, or must one connect them to a power source?

There is going to be a set of active line drivers and receivers. So they need to be powered. The chips are usually able to be pre-programmed to compensate for the exact impedance of the cable and its length, and even cope with the impedance glitch presented by the cable termination in the plugs.

 

[sam_adams]

I got the Apple cable just to not have that be a source of any potential issues. But off-brand ones were not that much cheaper. I think it was $40 vs $30 or something like that.

My motherboard advertized Thunderbolt but fine print said you had to get some specialized card from them. This was very hard to find at good price. And there is an obscure, undocumented option you have to check in Bios called Enable GPIO 3 or some random thing like that. Even then, stupid thing would not work. I then realized it needs not one, but two PCI power cables! So I had to rip out my PC, go find long power cables that would reach this card as it can only be plugged into one slot on the motherboard. The MB company wanted me to update the firmware from their website yet the tool told me what was on the card was more up to date! Anyway, I thought it was a miracle that it all worked at the end. If you need TB on a PC, be sure to get it in the motherboard.

Even large-scale manufacturers of laptops and desktop PC computers have issues implementing not only Thunderbolt but USB-C on their logic boards. Where I work we deploy tens of thousands of devices from a well known manufacturer whose onboard TB and USB devices require a specific procedure to update the drivers and firmware—that if not followed correctly—will leave the TB and USB-C ports on the device inoperable. It is a real PITA for our techs. I know your pain.

 

[stunta]

I wish manufacturers like this would enter the consumer HT processor market at reasonable prices. With this kind of performance, they could have ASR and AVSForum members going gaga over it.

 

[Francis Vaughan]

I wish manufacturers like this would enter the consumer HT processor market at reasonable prices. With this kind of performance, they could have ASR and AVSForum members going gaga over it.

Nah. Sound United would buy them and close the business down. They wouldn't be putting up with real competition.
The problem of working out how to license all the various IP needed to make an AVR would be crippling. You can be sure that the cosy symbiotic relationship the current AVR manufactures have with the likes of Dolby, Dirac, Audyssey, and the rest, would not be conducive to real competition entering the market.

 

[xema]

Very good point and why is that pro gear is using rather older generation chips and despite that have very good specs ?

I was tear x16 down last year, there's a single 9028pro working in stereo mode for the monitor channels, with passive LPF for the extremely low noise.
And according to the amir's testing graphics, they obviously wrote their own digital filters and bypassed the ess' .

 

[Xyrium]

Even large-scale manufacturers of laptops and desktop PC computers have issues implementing not only Thunderbolt but USB-C on their logic boards. Where I work we deploy tens of thousands of devices from a well known manufacturer whose onboard TB and USB devices require a specific procedure to update the drivers and firmware—that if not followed correctly—will leave the TB and USB-C ports on the device inoperable. It is a real PITA for our techs. I know your pain.

I have several C connected devices at home. One is my Lenovo laptop which connects to a Lenovo monitor, and that connection not only charges the laptop, but also provides the video output at the same time. operation has been flawless.

One other worth mentioning is a Focusrite Clarett 4pre, also flawless through USB C, zero latency with a drum kit and guitar rig connected, into Reaper.

Perhaps the problems you mention with USB C were during the initial release?

 

[jaykay77]

The beautiful thing about a pro audio interface like this is its near complete flexibility. For example, you can arbitrarily route any number of inputs, irrespective of whether they're digital or analog, to any number of digital or analog outputs and vice versa; you can use the device as a clock master or slave it to some other thing that isn't as flexible (e.g., an AVR). I have a MOTU Ultralite that serves as a 2.1 DAC and input ADC for my miniDSP SHD Studio-based music setup. At the same time, it's also a mixer/passthrough for my AVR. Net sum is that my music setup runs completely independently of the AVR, while the AVR can use the much better amplification of the music setup for its front two main channels.

So for non studio you use it as a home theater bypass switch?

 

[AudioSceptic]

Thunderbolt cables (even TB3 cables) don't have to be active. That being said, passive TB cables over 2 meters can't hit full TB3 transfer rates.

The confusion usually comes in because passive TB cables over 0.5m can't also support USB 3.1 speeds -- which sucks.

Mix in DisplayPort support, and the whole situation is a mess. If you want a cable that can do it all, it gets very costly. Apple sells a 2m "everything" cable that supports Thunderbolt 3 data transfer up to 40Gb/s, USB 3.1 Gen 2 data transfer up to 10Gb/s, DisplayPort video output (HBR3), and charging up to 100W for a whopping $129 USD, which sounds crazy but is actually price-competitive for all those features.

IMHO though it was a dumb idea to design a single port designed to carry everything without considering how expensive the cables would get.

Perhaps someone can explain why, if TB cables need to be active with chips in order to achieve full speed, these chips (or their functionality) are not built into the ports? (Sorry about drifting OT.)

 

[Jinjuku]

I wish manufacturers like this would enter the consumer HT processor market at reasonable prices. With this kind of performance, they could have ASR and AVSForum members going gaga over it.

The amount of software development to support all the surround sound codecs... That almost did Emotiva's efforts in.

 

[Dave Tremblay]

Perhaps someone can explain why, if TB cables need to be active with chips in order to achieve full speed, these chips (or their functionality) are not built into the ports? (Sorry about drifting OT.)

Pushing it into the cable has the advantage of cable specific designs based on length. For example, we use active fiber optic cables in our studios to make the distance between our control and live rooms. It’s a flexible choice, but does push cost into cables.

 

[Veri]

And according to the amir's testing graphics, they obviously wrote their own digital filters and bypassed the ess' .

It is most definitely the bog standard Minimum Phase Fast filter, which is generally used in studio/pro applications for the lowest latency.
Compare with this graph, it's the exact same (filter 3 here: )