Nov 21, 2005 09:48 pm IF your not running any outboard gear such as multitrack tape decks, or a digital multi-track you probably dont need it.
It just adds another card which carries the wordclock i/o and a couple other hook ups for MTC and such.
emu interfaces and synchronization
Posted on Nov 21, 2005 05:31 pm
trek
Member Since: Nov 18, 2005
i was looking at possibly getting the emu 1820, but there are two different versions - the 1820 and the 1820M. The only difference I can see is that the 1820M comes with another card for synchronization. What is synchronization and how important is it? Also, would any recommend these cards/interfaces?
[ Back to Top ]
Nov 21, 2005 09:48 pm IF your not running any outboard gear such as multitrack tape decks, or a digital multi-track you probably dont need it.
It just adds another card which carries the wordclock i/o and a couple other hook ups for MTC and such.
Nov 22, 2005 05:38 am The big difference between the two is the ADACs. The 1820M has the better converters. I don't know the name, the spec, or the sound differences, but I do know the 1820M "sounds" fantastic. I've not used the "sync" portion myself yet, but I have used the 2nd midi port, so that's another consideration... But check out the difference in the Analog-Digital-Analog-Converters (ADAC). I think EMU has all the specs on their web site, but you have to go between 2 separate pages:
www.emu.com/products/prod...mp;product=9871
for the 1820M and
www.emu.com/products/prod...mp;product=9870
for the plain 1820. Click on the "Specifications" link on each page for the juicey details...
Nov 22, 2005 06:23 pm The ONLY differance between the two is the extra card that comes with the 1820M for adding the sync signal i/o. There is absolutely no differance otherwise. The converters are identical and everthing else is identical to the standard 1820.
Nov 25, 2005 05:36 pm No no, au contraire... I beg to differ:
"The E-MU 1820 features: Premium 24-bit/192kHz converters - 112dB signal-to-noise ratio for pristine recording and playback of your tracks"
"The E-MU 1820M features: Mastering grade 24-bit/192kHz converters - the same A/D converters used in Digidesign's flagship ProTools HD 192 I/O Interface delivering an amazing 120dB signal-to-noise ratio"
from the EMU website. I was looking for the actual chip IDs used in the two, but can't find the info...
Nov 25, 2005 06:52 pm I've seen the cards and there is no differance in the chips on either one. They are identical, same exact numbers. Cant tell ya what they are but they were identical.
I spoke with someone who uses the plain 1820 and he as well expressed the 1820 is exactly the same card with the same chips. He was shown this by a salesman.
Oh well, it might all be hogwash anyway. I honestly dont buy them being the same exact converter's used on the PT HD system. IF that were the case the card would be much more expensive.
Nov 25, 2005 09:09 pm Yeah, I didn't buy it for the converters - it was on sale for $100 off when I bought it. I was ignorant of the "fact" that it uses the same ADC converter as the PT HD (the DAC is different from PT stuff anyway). My ears probably can't "hear" a difference, anyways... Besides, there's more to converting than just the ADC used, anyway. The 2 EMU cards (1820 & 1820M) use the same DAC...
Nov 25, 2005 09:12 pm Nope, for the most part I dont think there are too many who will actually notice the differance. There seem to be alot of peep's liking them so they must not all be bad.
I honestly looked at the sampler version just for the hardware/software combo but reading many bad things turned me away from it.
Nov 26, 2005 05:45 am The EMU stuff is fine. The only problem with them is that there are so many out there... and the way they're advertised, you'd think they were the cure-all for one's pent-up creativity. The samplers are very good, especially for the money. They are, however, very dependant on the interface for their functionality, so any contention problems with computer/interface affect the sampler. The interfaces almost "demand" a "dedicated" computer and do not like being interrupted by networking stuff or AV apps. Of course, most interfaces are like that. Streaming multi-channel audio should not be interrupted. The old system reqs were a 500mHz PIII, which is now bumped-up to a more realistic 1gig minimum, but I'd say "more!"...
The "weak" points are an appearance of PCI buss "sensitivity" & "selfishness". They (the cards) do not like when something else is a buss hog also. But then, most interfaces are... Also, the drivers are perceived as "weak". They really aren't, just not as full-featured as "advertised", and they do "prefer" ASIO (no multi-channel WDM input). And last but not least, PatchMix (the software control) is confusing to most first-time purchasers. However, it is a *very* flexible & configurable front-end, hence the perceived complexity and the associated "problems".
Nov 26, 2005 03:50 pm My ESI interfaces have absolutely no problem's when running through any AV app's at all. I dont think I had any trouble either with my Delta with AV app's either.
Nov 28, 2005 11:26 am Which is one *big* reason why folks don't like the EMU line...
|
Related Forum Topics: |
If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.