View other reviews for this product:
joulss781
Published on 07/29/13 at 04:03
What characteristics have motivated your choice?
8 outputs (6 lines symmetrical + 1 stereo headphone used as additional independent unbalanced line output), USB connectivity, ease of use, reputation Apogee, the look!
For what purpose?
Mixing and mastering in Protools, mainly when I'm not in the studio. Hardware inserts the inputs / outputs of the Quartet
What is your config (Motherboard / CPU / Ram / Hard, ...)?
Mac Mini 2.3GHz i7 8GB RAM
Which instruments and systems (console, preamp, DTD ...) you use it and how connections? ...
Connected to an SSL X-Desk
UTILIZATION
The drivers are stable?
Generally yes, although I noticed some bugs in Protools especially using long the device. Not bad "CPU overload" when the buffer is 1024, and the CPU usage even at 15% ... Nothing bad but probably due to the USB which is still much less reliable than the Firewire well. Logic with no concern on the other hand.
Are they often updated?
I have not seen an update in 6 months
What software do you use most often?
Protools
What you get lag?
I did not measure!
How many tracks you get record / playback simultaneously? ...
I do not record that I mix, but the card cash smoothly 4-track recording and 8 output
GETTING STARTED
Simple installation, just download the software from the Apogee website.
Everything is then very fast. The Maestro software is pretty well done and easy to use.
OVERALL OPINION
I kept this card only two months since I moved to another system. It took me 16 tracks output to the warning on my SSL. I am now on a Metric Halo 2882 Expanded 2D and Rosetta 800 connected top and synchronized ADAT WC (Rosetta is the master).
As mentioned above I did not recorded it with the Quartet, but I tested the preamps for the price they are pretty good, but very neutral.
So I can make / compare Rosetta Quartet, and also with the MH even if it's not the same kind.
The Quartet has very good converters, but not at all neutral. Apogee is known for producing colored converters but this is a little "too much". The Quartet has a very distinctive hi-fi sound, that is to say, a lot of low and midrange dug. We do not find the sweetness of the usual treble at Apogee, those of the Quartet are a little dry.
I find the more neutral than the Rosetta Quartet! But Rosetta is considered a colored converter ... If we compare the two, the Rosetta has more accurate, the less mushy and less "extreme" mediums least dug more musical and sweeter treble. Overall, Rosetta is nicer, more musical and sweeter, but less "bright" as the Quartet. I too agree with those who say that the Quartet is the same level as the Rosetta or better. For cons, the stereo image of the Quartet is wider than the Rosetta chouilla.
Digression now when compared to the Quartet MH: I'm not a big fan of HD sound, I find it cold, aggressive and narrow. The Quartet is more musical and stereo much broader picture. Ok the MH is neutral, that is true but not especially pleasant. As against the MH has much more punch, ideal for drums. Here I think it is a matter of taste.
To summarize: the Quartet is rather intended for home studio use, in order to flatter the mixes, Rosetta is rather intended to use in a pro studio to convert the signal faithfully while adding a slight analog coloration. It does not mean that the Quartet is bad, far from it, I still mixed and even mastered a few projects with this card, making back and forth with the analog hardware, customers were happy and me too. Sounds and it's the job, just need to be aware that it adds a little low and it deepens mediums.
In short, the Rosetta is doing well for a machine that is 10 years old ... He should know that today a Rosetta is cheaper than a new opportunity in Quartet. It all depends if you are looking for mobility to sacrifice quite a bit of quality, good preamps and 4, or a converter without quality preamp and not mobile at all.
8 outputs (6 lines symmetrical + 1 stereo headphone used as additional independent unbalanced line output), USB connectivity, ease of use, reputation Apogee, the look!
For what purpose?
Mixing and mastering in Protools, mainly when I'm not in the studio. Hardware inserts the inputs / outputs of the Quartet
What is your config (Motherboard / CPU / Ram / Hard, ...)?
Mac Mini 2.3GHz i7 8GB RAM
Which instruments and systems (console, preamp, DTD ...) you use it and how connections? ...
Connected to an SSL X-Desk
UTILIZATION
The drivers are stable?
Generally yes, although I noticed some bugs in Protools especially using long the device. Not bad "CPU overload" when the buffer is 1024, and the CPU usage even at 15% ... Nothing bad but probably due to the USB which is still much less reliable than the Firewire well. Logic with no concern on the other hand.
Are they often updated?
I have not seen an update in 6 months
What software do you use most often?
Protools
What you get lag?
I did not measure!
How many tracks you get record / playback simultaneously? ...
I do not record that I mix, but the card cash smoothly 4-track recording and 8 output
GETTING STARTED
Simple installation, just download the software from the Apogee website.
Everything is then very fast. The Maestro software is pretty well done and easy to use.
OVERALL OPINION
I kept this card only two months since I moved to another system. It took me 16 tracks output to the warning on my SSL. I am now on a Metric Halo 2882 Expanded 2D and Rosetta 800 connected top and synchronized ADAT WC (Rosetta is the master).
As mentioned above I did not recorded it with the Quartet, but I tested the preamps for the price they are pretty good, but very neutral.
So I can make / compare Rosetta Quartet, and also with the MH even if it's not the same kind.
The Quartet has very good converters, but not at all neutral. Apogee is known for producing colored converters but this is a little "too much". The Quartet has a very distinctive hi-fi sound, that is to say, a lot of low and midrange dug. We do not find the sweetness of the usual treble at Apogee, those of the Quartet are a little dry.
I find the more neutral than the Rosetta Quartet! But Rosetta is considered a colored converter ... If we compare the two, the Rosetta has more accurate, the less mushy and less "extreme" mediums least dug more musical and sweeter treble. Overall, Rosetta is nicer, more musical and sweeter, but less "bright" as the Quartet. I too agree with those who say that the Quartet is the same level as the Rosetta or better. For cons, the stereo image of the Quartet is wider than the Rosetta chouilla.
Digression now when compared to the Quartet MH: I'm not a big fan of HD sound, I find it cold, aggressive and narrow. The Quartet is more musical and stereo much broader picture. Ok the MH is neutral, that is true but not especially pleasant. As against the MH has much more punch, ideal for drums. Here I think it is a matter of taste.
To summarize: the Quartet is rather intended for home studio use, in order to flatter the mixes, Rosetta is rather intended to use in a pro studio to convert the signal faithfully while adding a slight analog coloration. It does not mean that the Quartet is bad, far from it, I still mixed and even mastered a few projects with this card, making back and forth with the analog hardware, customers were happy and me too. Sounds and it's the job, just need to be aware that it adds a little low and it deepens mediums.
In short, the Rosetta is doing well for a machine that is 10 years old ... He should know that today a Rosetta is cheaper than a new opportunity in Quartet. It all depends if you are looking for mobility to sacrifice quite a bit of quality, good preamps and 4, or a converter without quality preamp and not mobile at all.