Sonic Differences: Apollo 8 TB VS Apogee Symphony MK2

Mrgroovy

Member
For various reasons, I am thinking about moving to an Apollo 8 Thunderbolt from my Apogee Sympony 8x8 MK2. I am trying to get a feel for the discernable audio differences from any folks who have used both. I am aware that the conversion quality is supposed to have better numbers in the Symphony. Would I really be able to hear the difference? Thx
 

Kcatthedog

Hall of Fame Member
I and 2 of my friends have just gone the other way and we are all happier with the symph mkii.

I can't honestly recommend unless you absolutely need to track with UA plug ins ?

I would say conversion is better and in particular the DA and the headphone out is significantly better.

Workflow is similar but as I said above if the change you really want is tracking with UA plugs then your decision is made there ?
 

Mrgroovy

Member
I and 2 of my friends have just gone the other way and we are all happier with the symph mkii.

I can't honestly recommend unless you absolutely need to track with UA plug ins ?

I would say conversion is better and in particular the DA and the headphone out is significantly better.

Workflow is similar but as I said above if the change you really want is tracking with UA plugs then your decision is made there ?
Thx K, I read about conversion but have not had enough experience with other interfaces to judge a difference. What does "conversion is better" mean to you? I mean sonically?
BTW, I am not thinking of the moving to the Apollo just to track UA plugins. If that were the case, I BELIEVE that I can purchase a Satellite and connect it via TB to the Symphony or my iMac and pull the plugins up in ProTools like any other plugin - using the Satellite CPU.
 

Kcatthedog

Hall of Fame Member
Well I have had an SF apollo, had that modded by black lion audio and a bf.

I find the apogee more linear, musical and I frankly seem to make better mix decisions. I find the apogee more 3 d and that I am better able to place things in my mix/soundstage.

You can run ua plugs in your daw for tracking but you will not have low latency. The apollo console acts at the front end to your daw and gives you the lowest latency while tacking.

I have heard lots of great recordings done with apollo but I can only speak to my own experience and preferences.
 

Matt Hepworth

Master of the UADiverse
Forum Admin
Moderator
The Apollo 8 is kind of in between the Symphony and the Silverface Apollos. They sound good.

Option 1) Just keep the Symphony and get an Apollo. Feed ADAT from the SIO in stand alone mode to the Apollo and utilize it's better conversion. You'll have 16 analog channels to work with.

Option 2) keep using the SIO and add a TB OCTO Satellite and use LiveTrack to have low latency.

Keep in mind that Apollo's Console latency will be noticeably better (lower) than the TB SIO. If you're bothered by those things go with Apollo. If you don't need any effects or anything you could always rely on Maestro.
 

Kcatthedog

Hall of Fame Member
Symph mkii doesn't use meastro but the new Symphony Control, you can monitor with plug ins but they are still in your daw I think?
 

JamesNorth

Hall of Fame Member
I don't think you can go too wrong with either interface really.

I've got an 8 Quad BF, 16 BF and Twin MK II and the unison pres on the 8 work interchangeably with my real Neve/API pres in recordings. I got rid of SSL Alphalink converters which are really good so that I could track with the plugins.

Recently I tracked a client through plugin Pultec and LA2A. Usually her vocals go through my hardware Pultec and LA2A and once it went into the mix with the hardware recording we did earlier there was no difference at all. It's a pretty powerful thing.

Apogee stuff is awesome - so I'm sure you can make great records either way ... it's mostly a workflow thing I reckon?
 
UAD Bundle Month
Top