APOGEE ROSETTA -VS- LUCID 24/96 A/D Conv. which to buy?

[Flipper]

I'm looking at buying a decent A to D converter for my new mixing room. I
would like to get some thoughts on the Apogee Rosetta. I have a Lucid 24/96
now in the tracking studio it sounds good, but I thought that I might try
the Rosetta out, but is the Apogee going to be any better than the Lucid??
Thanks, Alex Gerst

[J.W.]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 05:57:31 GMT, "Flipper" >
wrote:

>I'm looking at buying a decent A to D converter for my new mixing room. I
>would like to get some thoughts on the Apogee Rosetta. I have a Lucid 24/96
>now in the tracking studio it sounds good, but I thought that I might try
>the Rosetta out, but is the Apogee going to be any better than the Lucid??
> Thanks, Alex Gerst
>


The Apogee is slightly better but I wouldn't count on the quality
difference justifying the price difference. There's probably
something else in your mixing room that would utilize your $$$ better
(e.g. mastering software, plugins, microphones, monitors, a nice
comfortable chair, etc.)

[Nathan Eldred]

"Flipper" > wrote in message >...
> I'm looking at buying a decent A to D converter for my new mixing room. I
> would like to get some thoughts on the Apogee Rosetta. I have a Lucid 24/96
> now in the tracking studio it sounds good, but I thought that I might try
> the Rosetta out, but is the Apogee going to be any better than the Lucid??
> Thanks, Alex Gerst



The Lucid sounds much more accurate and clear IMO to the Apogee
Rosetta. But go ahead and try it and decide for yourself...please
don't be influenced by the "name game", or how they look visually
either. So many people do this, and end up disappointed.

Nathan Eldred
http://www.atlasproaudio.com

[Ivo]

ADC's are far less critical than mics, preamps, and monitors,


Not at all ... ADC is AT LEAST the same critical as mics, preamps and
monitors. I say at least. It is actually one of the most crucial
points in the chain. Even if you have the best possible mics and
preamps and just an average ADC (and you are recording into digital
domain), the result will be just average. Simply because all the fine
nuances created by a fine mic and preamp will not be accurately
converted to the digital domain by a mediocre ADC.
One realises that fully once he has an opportunity to try a really
GOOD ADC. Then he can never look back. I started with Digi 001. Apogee
Rosetta was a grand step from 001 convertors - only then I realised
how horribly these convertors sound. After I got Mytek AD, I realised
that Rosetta was actually sounding very dull .. ANd after getting
Lavry Blue AD, I understood what the ultimate conversion means ...
If you want to enjoy a nice, warm, beautiful sound, go for the best AD
you can afford (apart from mics and preamp, of course).


Ivo
www.savita.cz

[Ivo]

ADC's are far less critical than mics, preamps, and monitors,


Not at all ... ADC is AT LEAST the same critical as mics, preamps and
monitors. I say at least. It is actually one of the most crucial
points in the chain. Even if you have the best possible mics and
preamps and just an average ADC (and you are recording into digital
domain), the result will be just average. Simply because all the fine
nuances created by a fine mic and preamp will not be accurately
converted to the digital domain by a mediocre ADC.
One realises that fully once he has an opportunity to try a really
GOOD ADC. Then he can never look back. I started with Digi 001. Apogee
Rosetta was a grand step from 001 convertors - only then I realised
how horribly these convertors sound. After I got Mytek AD, I realised
that Rosetta was actually sounding very dull .. ANd after getting
Lavry Blue AD, I understood what the ultimate conversion means ...
If you want to enjoy a nice, warm, beautiful sound, go for the best AD
you can afford (apart from mics and preamp, of course).


Ivo
www.savita.cz