Universal Audio Apollo Quad
Universal Audio Apollo Quad

Apollo Quad, Thunderbolt audio interface from Universal Audio in the Apollo series.

  • Increase or decrease font size
  • Print
  • RSS

All user reviews of 3/5 for the Universal Audio Apollo Quad

  • Like
  • Tweet
  • Submit
Not satisfied with those reviews?Request a new review
Loki H10/05/2012

Loki H's review (This content has been automatically translated from French)"BUT well worth a REAL update!"

Universal Audio Apollo Quad
# What characteristics have motivated your choice?

The possibilities of using UAD plugs live without latency to make a rack full reverbs. This feature does not interest me more than that to make recordings, although it still proves useful for listening to music.

# With which instruments or systems (console, preamp, DtD ...) you use it and how connections?
# For what purpose? What is your config (Motherboard / CPU / Ram / Hard, ...)?

I use it alone or mix mobile rack reverb with my MacBook Pro 13 ", if I had the opportunity to record a group for an entire album, I rented one for additional entries Aphex 1788A ( in Adat), and a Universal Audio 2192 which I used for both A / D converter on the S-Pdif (with preamp Millenia STT-1 primarily for bass and vocals) and master clock for all family. There was also an old Soundcraft which I used in the preamp line input for control lanes.


# The drivers are stable?

But I have had a problem using a DVI adapter MiniDisplay (even official) to a DVI Apple. 2 min to the console (and even whole computer) reacts very slowly, or the owner of the screen has no problem with his iMac and Apogee Ensemble ... However no problem with a VGA adapter MiniDisplay to a VGA monitor.

# Are they often updated?

Ok, now for the updates did not bring much to share the arrival of new plug-ins (for a fee of course ...)

# What software do you use most often?

Logic Audio

# How many tracks you get to record / playback simultaneously?

18 Recording without worry.


# The installation is done it without problems?


# The general configuration is easy?


# Have you encountered any incompatibilities?

Yes, graphic order, in fact I have a MacBook Pro 13 "late 2010, the vertical resolution of the screen is too low to fully display the console, and Universal Audio have not made vertical scroll bar, can not reach certain functions such as LINK stereo inputs, unless an external display resolution sufficient ...


# How long have you been using?

6 months

# Did you try many other models before buying it?

Some interfaces with a range much lower, if I already knew the Apogee Ensemble (which I like much of a sound point of view), and I've had a few RME hands.

# What do you think of her?

So for that reading is (D / A), it is not bad at all, but I was able to compare directly with Apogee Ensemble and much sound it seemed to all of us (we were 3 people to listen) better with Apogee, an acute softer, less aggressive and more accurate bass (and with such adjectives, we do not talk about subjective details, as do sellers importers, and other forumers, because they are real qualifications that help to mix well, not just a color tone).
However I redid listening on Apollo by putting the slave clock Apogee Ensemble, and many things have improved and we are back on a sound very similar to the Apogee.
------> It would seem that they are good converters but the internal clock is not their height. I personally made recordings using a UA in 2192 master clock (I did it with the Ensemble and Apollo, and it changes so much better than I am seriously thinking to buy one ...)
Regarding the D / A and preamps, I did used to control lanes not very important, so I did not bring more attention to it, but absolutely nothing bad m ' shocked.
And external effects rack (for the moment I can only do two simultaneous reverbs, I have wanted to do 4), the Lexicon 224 plug, EMT 250 is great, it sounds and is more Quick to set a good old PCM70.

# What do you think of the use of the opportunities?

Them more: obvious simplicity of the interface even one or two details I crumple (Levels provisions for Pan and Aux Send which do not facilitate quick reading ...)

-Cons: simplicity involves a lot of limitations too. and routing options are far too limited. so that we can really use multi-rack reverb (I'd make 4).
more AUX bus would be welcome (for the moment there are only two stereo post-fader), 4 stereo switchable PRE-POST it would be nice, it would make a circuit for additional listening zicos in HP more than 2 bus (for shipments headphones, which they are PRE-fader), or shipments effect. Also to manage the mix of zicos, the knobs are a bit small to be precise, a mode-fader send would have been seen. Also exploit all the outputs of the card by offering a mode "Alternate monitor", that we can also use the card A / DD / A standalone ... Finally, lots of small thing that may change in the future ...

Notice # overall value for money, do again this choice?

Yes, because at the time of purchase I need both a sound card and DSP. But ...
This is a sound card rather good and the concept is very interesting. It could become a standard if Universal Audio leans a little on software development, it would remove some flaws, and it would add some great qualities. I had written an email a few months ago making them suggestions about a dozen improvements, an answer of course, but two updates and almost four months later, almost nothing has changed except the catalog of plug-in has expanded (with Sonnox EQ among others), yet the latter is also to support the Thunderbolt interface, which might have been expected to think qu'UA exit to exit TRUE update .
Hopefully Universal Audio react well and wants to finish developing their Apollo before a crash ...
Obviously, if AU is an update that's worth, I too would update this opinion.