hulika

Author Topic: EMU-0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 2496?  (Read 2192 times)

Offline TheHunter

  • Senior Member
  • ***
EMU-0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 2496?
« on: September 17, 2006, 12:28:50 AM »
Which one is better in terms of performance and SQ? Plan to upgrade my noisy SB live... can't decide...pls. help
Let your ears teach your fingers.  :wink:

Offline KitC

  • Prime Moderator
  • *****
EMU-0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 2496?
« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2006, 10:00:26 AM »
I have an Emu and it sounds great! I'll be the first to admit, though, that it's patchmix software can be confusing for newbies because it provides so many routing options that people tend to say it's too complicated. It is this patchmix that makes the Emu powerful, aside from the DSP available, the ability to route signals with ease is the main selling point of this card. If you decide to get the Emu, just PM me and I'll walk you through.

The 2496 is also a very good sounding card with a simpler mixer compared to patchmix; easier to understand when coming from a SB background but no DSP capabilities unlike the Emu. The I/O is practically similar to the 0404. I'd consider getting an A/D converter so I could use the s/pdif for an additional 2 inputs.

If you could, get both!  :wink:
Sonar 4.04PE/5.2PE/7.02PE/8.31 PE, Project 5 v2.5.1, EmulatorX 1.5, Cubase SL2, Ableton Live 7.14,  Intel Q6600 MSI P43 Neo 4Gb Crucial Ballistix Tracer DDR2-800, Emu 1820m, Yamaha DSP Factory, Terratec DMX 6fire

Offline TheHunter

  • Senior Member
  • ***
EMU-0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 2496?
« Reply #2 on: September 17, 2006, 06:11:11 PM »
Wow! thank you so much for your quick reply. You inpired me big time! I think the same thing to other newbies here. This forum rocks!

By the way few questions:

1. Both of these cards are unbalance inputs and outputs, are these vulnerable to noise or hiss of my recording since my power supply is not grounded? Is 1212M (balance input) better in this issue?

2. Is the 1212M a big jump in SQ? I'm attracted for the ADAT lightpipe of this card perhaps can use in the future using my friend's Yamaha 01v96.


Thanks again!  :)
Let your ears teach your fingers.  :wink:

Offline KitC

  • Prime Moderator
  • *****
EMU-0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 2496?
« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2006, 06:48:40 PM »
Quote from: TheHunter
1. Both of these cards are unbalance inputs and outputs, are these vulnerable to noise or hiss of my recording since my power supply is not grounded? Is 1212M (balance input) better in this issue?


Personally, I can tell you the difference is like nite and day. Although I'm not using balanced cables ATM because of my synths, I can confirm the inputs as just plain surreal even when using unbalanced cables. Admittedly, I come from a 'blaster background having started with the AWE32, then SBLive, before I got my Terratec DMX 6fire. The 6fire was a revelation in terms of silent inputs and no DC offset to skew the waveform, something I had to do continually with the earlier cards.

My 1820m is sitting right next to my CRT, a precarious position considering the proximity to the flyback. Amazingly, the Audiodock isn't picking up any noise... but my cables are! At least the one's that are bad. I have a mix of very good cables and cheap cables and the cheap ones are like antennas. The shielding in those cables are probably compromised. I'm running Wavelab's realtime monitoring and the good unbalanced cables almost follow Emu's noise floor specs while the 'bad cables' are easily 20-30 db noisier. (Time for our Mogamis, eh Baldo?)

Quote from: TheHunter

2. Is the 1212M a big jump in SQ? I'm attracted for the ADAT pipeline of this card perhaps can use in the future using my friend's Yamaha 01v96.


See above. I don't want to sound like a shill or fanboy for Emu, but I'm a happy camper with my 1820m. If there was something to niggle at, it would probably be the latency because I would like to keep it at 2 ms. Right now, I usually track at 5 ms. and mix at 20 ms and more because I like to use a lot of fx.

The Emu, especially with the 'm' converters, give you imaging that's almost beyond belief when paired with the right monitors. Ever since I got my 1820m, I could now pinpoint pan better and there is a certain clarity in my mixes now. I could hear slurring in bass notes, something that was all but impossible with the 'blasters. No wonder Sound on Sound made these their reference soundcards.

About the ADAT, you can use the O1V's adat outputs, but remember that the ADAT I/O of the Emus don't seem to have S/MUX capability so you're limited to 8-channels 44.1/48 khz operation; no 96 or 192 khz multiplexing. also, remember that the 1820m has already been discontinued in favor of the 1616m so if you plan to upgrade to the 1820m Audiodock, sorry. The 1212m is still in production and Emu is coming up with a new 1212m card based on lead-free ROHs standards.

Going back to your previously mentioned 2496, however, I can say that it's quite good as well. A guitarist friend of mine tracks thru one and he sends me some of his mixes to listen to. It may not have mastering converters, but I can say his recordings sound good and have very good imaging.

hth,
Sonar 4.04PE/5.2PE/7.02PE/8.31 PE, Project 5 v2.5.1, EmulatorX 1.5, Cubase SL2, Ableton Live 7.14,  Intel Q6600 MSI P43 Neo 4Gb Crucial Ballistix Tracer DDR2-800, Emu 1820m, Yamaha DSP Factory, Terratec DMX 6fire

Offline TheHunter

  • Senior Member
  • ***
EMU-0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 2496?
« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2006, 09:55:22 AM »
Kit, thank you very much! it seems that EMU has the edge here for my current need. I like the features of this card. I'll have to decide whether 0404 or 1212M of course 1212M is all about the price against feature. If 1212M not supporting 96 kHz for 01v96 I think 0404 is my best pick.

I plan to but a Yahama MG10/2 same time with EMU. Any comments?

Before I considered this EMU/Yahama setup, I looked the posibility of getting Phonic Helix Board 12 FW but I'm not yet convince about this new board (preamp, S/N, etc..). I asked help from this forum but nobody replied yet. I think nobody in here got experience of this board.
Let your ears teach your fingers.  :wink:


Offline KitC

  • Prime Moderator
  • *****
EMU-0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 2496?
« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2006, 10:51:36 AM »
Quote from: TheHunter
Kit, thank you very much! it seems that EMU has the edge here for my current need. I like the features of this card. I'll have to decide whether 0404 or 1212M of course 1212M is all about the price against feature. If 1212M not supporting 96 kHz for 01v96 I think 0404 is my best pick.


I checked the documentation on high samplerate operation and I found out that the 1212m and 1820m do support high sample rates with SMux thru the ADAT ports, not the coax spdif. :oops:  Since the 0404 doesn't have ADAT, it doesn't support 96 khz operation thru the coax connection. Here's an excerpt from the manual:

When operating at 88.2k, 96k, 176.4k and 192k sample rates, the mixer functionality
and number of I/O channels are reduced. These changes are summarized in the
following tables. All S/PDIF inputs and outputs are disabled at 176.4kHz and192kHz.
The number of ADAT channels also decreases at the 88.2k/96k and 176.4k/192k sample
rates (due to the bandwidth limitations of the optical components).
When using 88.2kHz, 96kHz, 176.4kHz or 196kHz sample rates:
The ADAT optical interface was originally designed to carry 8 channels at a 48kHz
sample rate. We use the Sonorus® S/MUX™ standard to encode audio with higher
sample rates onto the ADAT light pipe. In this multiplexing scheme, two ADAT channels
are used to carry one 88.2k or 96k stream and four ADAT channels are used to carry one
176k or 192k audio stream. In order to use the ADAT interface at these higher sample
rates, you must have other equipment that supports the Sonorus S/MUX standard.
• Effect processors are disabled. (Output sends & returns are still available.)
• ADAT is reduced to 4 chan. at 88k/96k, & 2 chan. at 176k/192k.
• ASIO channels are reduced to 8 stereo ASIO channels at 88k/96k,
and 4 stereo ASIO channels at 176k/192k.
• At 176.4k/192k, the number of physical inputs/outputs is reduced.
• At the 176.4k & 192k sample rates, S/PDIF optical is disabled.


Looks like you can use the O1V's optical I/O for this after all! Sorry for the faff!  :oops:

Quote from: TheHunter

I plan to but a Yahama MG10/2 same time with EMU. Any comments?


I don't see any problems with this. It is an analog mixer after all. Will it be part of the recording chain? Or strictly for monitoring? One of the things we recommend in the Unofficial Emu Forums is to use a mixer with an Alt 3/4 bus so that you lessen the chances of creating a feedback loop since the 1212m and 0404 only have stereo analog I/O. Part of the problem is when you feed the soundcard's output back into the mixer. The Alt 3/4 bus mitigates the feedback problem by providing a separate path for the audio outside of the mixer's mix bus. Since the Emu cards provide hardware monitoring, latency is not a problem.

Quote from: TheHunter

Before I considered this EMU/Yahama setup, I looked the posibility of getting Phonic Helixboard FW but I'm not yet convince about this new board (preamp, S/N, etc..). I asked help from this forum but nobody replied yet. I think nobody in here got experience of this board.


I've been looking for reviews myself but I remember posting a reply to that question. It seems the Phonic performs better than the similar Alesis but all these firewire mixers seem to have a limitation similar to Mackie's Onyx FW mixer wherein the signal sent out of the FW is tapped before the EQ section of the mixer. In some cases, it's ok, but for the Onyx, it frustrated a lot of potential owners who wanted the EQ to be part of the recording chain. IMO, Mackie dropped the ball on that one by not making the tap point selectable.

hth,
Sonar 4.04PE/5.2PE/7.02PE/8.31 PE, Project 5 v2.5.1, EmulatorX 1.5, Cubase SL2, Ableton Live 7.14,  Intel Q6600 MSI P43 Neo 4Gb Crucial Ballistix Tracer DDR2-800, Emu 1820m, Yamaha DSP Factory, Terratec DMX 6fire

Offline TheHunter

  • Senior Member
  • ***
EMU-0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 2496?
« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2006, 11:43:58 PM »
Quote from: KitC

I don't see any problems with this. It is an analog mixer after all. Will it be part of the recording chain? Or strictly for monitoring?  


I will use MG10/2 as mic preamp. I will plug the mic, a. guitar, bass and keyboard to MG10/2. I don't have yet a set of monitor speakers but at the moment I'm using headphone and good quality computer speakers for monitoring.
Let your ears teach your fingers.  :wink: