My studio uses 2 ADAT XT20's and a MOTU 428 MkII w/adat interface. Some
friends of mine in Miami have switched from ADATs to the HD24. They say
the converters are much better than the ADATs. I can get another XT20
fairly cheap right now but I'm thinking if the HD24 is so much better I
should save up for that. How many people here are sticking with the ADAT
format and those who have compared with the HD24 - is there really a
differance or is it smoke and mirrors.

Noizman
Gainesville, Fl.

Noizman wrote:
My studio uses 2 ADAT XT20's and a MOTU 428 MkII w/adat interface.
Some
friends of mine in Miami have switched from ADATs to the HD24. They
say
the converters are much better than the ADATs. I can get another XT20

fairly cheap right now but I'm thinking if the HD24 is so much better
I
should save up for that. How many people here are sticking with the
ADAT
format and those who have compared with the HD24 - is there really a
differance or is it smoke and mirrors.

Noizman
Gainesville, Fl.

There is a measurable difference between the 20 bit ADATs
and most 24 bit systems, including the HD24. Depending on
the rest of your system and your ears it may not be an
audible difference. The HD24XR is also better than the HD24.

I try to maintain 1 ADAT in working condition for the times
when it may be needed, but that's been less and less recently.
Stuff that gets imported here now is mostly 24 bit wav files
from HD24 that's been burned to disk.

Save up for the HD24XR and get the fireport to tranfer the
files to computer for editing. Should last you for a lot
longer than the tape based ADATs would and sound better.

good luck
rd

I've used it several times (HD24), ando so the ADAT. and not having to
relay on the tape, is a real advantage.
and comparing with other hard drive units, like the one from mackie, I
believe it's better. Mostly because you can have two HD's in the unit,
and makes the back up process much easier.

Noizman wrote:
My studio uses 2 ADAT XT20's and a MOTU 428 MkII w/adat interface.
Some
friends of mine in Miami have switched from ADATs to the HD24. They
say
the converters are much better than the ADATs. I can get another
XT20
fairly cheap right now but I'm thinking if the HD24 is so much
better I
should save up for that. How many people here are sticking with the
ADAT
format and those who have compared with the HD24 - is there really
a
differance or is it smoke and mirrors.

Jim Gilliland wrote:

I've never used the original ADATs, so I can't give you a direct
comparison, but the HD24's converters are generally given very high
marks. And the XR model is the best yet - even at 44.1k or 48k, it
is
said to sound better than the stock HD24. But even the standard HD24
is
considered far superior to the original ADATs.

To get opinions from people who have actually used both, you should
probably join the HD24 group on Yahoo:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hd24

Had two Blackface ADATS, traded to two XT ADATS, traded to three
XT20's. Kept one XT20 (for transfers)and have been using the HD24 for
last couple of years with BRC running both units and a ProTools LE at
times.

The standard HD24 has very good converters. I just upgraded mine to
the XR 96k/24 converters and they are very nice. Said to be on par
with the Radar converters. These new converters even sound great at
48k/24. The HD24 is not in the same class as the tape ADATS.
FWIW.
Wayne

So the HD24 audibly sounds better even if you've recorded the original
sounds to ADAT XT20? I have a BRC. It looks like it works with the HD
too. I always thought the converters in the adats were better than most.
I'm surprised there is a big difference (or maybe not so big?). Has
anyone tried clocking the ADAT's with an Apogee Big Ben. I hear this
will make a difference as well.



Wayne wrote:
Noizman wrote:

My studio uses 2 ADAT XT20's and a MOTU 428 MkII w/adat interface.

Some

friends of mine in Miami have switched from ADATs to the HD24. They

say

the converters are much better than the ADATs. I can get another

XT20

fairly cheap right now but I'm thinking if the HD24 is so much

better I

should save up for that. How many people here are sticking with the

ADAT

format and those who have compared with the HD24 - is there really

a

differance or is it smoke and mirrors.


Jim Gilliland wrote:


I've never used the original ADATs, so I can't give you a direct
comparison, but the HD24's converters are generally given very high
marks. And the XR model is the best yet - even at 44.1k or 48k, it

is

said to sound better than the stock HD24. But even the standard HD24

is

considered far superior to the original ADATs.

To get opinions from people who have actually used both, you should
probably join the HD24 group on Yahoo:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hd24


Had two Blackface ADATS, traded to two XT ADATS, traded to three
XT20's. Kept one XT20 (for transfers)and have been using the HD24 for
last couple of years with BRC running both units and a ProTools LE at
times.

The standard HD24 has very good converters. I just upgraded mine to
the XR 96k/24 converters and they are very nice. Said to be on par
with the Radar converters. These new converters even sound great at
48k/24. The HD24 is not in the same class as the tape ADATS.
FWIW.
Wayne

I always thought the converters in the adats were better than most.
I'm surprised there is a big difference (or maybe not so big?).

The standard HD24 converters are much better than any of the ADATS.

Has
anyone tried clocking the ADAT's with an Apogee Big Ben. I hear this
will make a difference as well.



Not used the Apogee but do use a Lucid clock for the BRC which in turn feeds
the HD24 and the XT20. Eliminates popping, clicks, etc because of poor clocks
(the BRC for one). It's always better to have everything running off of one
clock source if possible.

The HD24 is 24 tracks at 48k/24 and only 12 tracks at 96k/24 if track count is
a concern.

Wayne


--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-