emu interfaces and synchronization
Home > Home Recording Forum > Recording Techniques > 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 ]
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
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.
jmailjimmie neutronMember
Since: Feb 14, 2005
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...
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
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.
jmailjimmie neutronMember
Since: Feb 14, 2005
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...
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
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.
jmailjimmie neutronMember
Since: Feb 14, 2005
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...
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
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.
jmailjimmie neutronMember
Since: Feb 14, 2005
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".
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
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.
jmailjimmie neutronMember
Since: Feb 14, 2005
Nov 28, 2005 11:26 am Which is one *big* reason why folks don't like the EMU line...