mrclunk

So were looking to get another PT HD system and the Lynx Aurora interfaces (with the PT card) seem to be a great solution.
But am i missing something?

What can a Digi 192 do the Auroras can't?

I see that the Auroras dont have ADAT or SDIF but thats no biggy for us.

Can i do film speed conversions on the Auroras or do i need a 192 for that? possibly thats just in the PT software.

What are you guys experience with them, most of the stuff i've read thus far is positive.
thanks for the input.

paul ???


« Last Edit: April 23, 2009, 06:13:06 AM by mrclunk »


MartyMart

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2009, 05:10:24 AM »
The only issue that I've come across is that they run VERY hot in a rack, you absolutely MUST give
them a space top and bottom for airflow .... you could cook an egg on them !!

MM.
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm"

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2009, 10:04:25 AM »
We're rebuilding our studio and adding a control room, and one of the things on my gear list is a couple Aurora 16's for my HD rig.  I have friends that rave about the sound quality, though I have yet to hear one for myself. 

pucho812

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2009, 11:19:07 AM »
Here is the catch.

1.they show up like 2 192's to pro tools so when setting up a session with all analog I/O have to use A 1-8 and B 1-8 for 16 I/O.
2.they run hot and at higher samples rates, above 48K, they run super hot. The comparison of cooking an egg is accurate.
3. Need to be in a room with good air flow as to dissipate heat. I find it funny that their ads show 2  units right next to one another.
4. if your using the HD card  to make it work with pro tools, then you loose the other digital inputs. the 192's stock has more digital i/o types then the aurora's which is mainly the pro standard of AES/EBU single and dual wire.

outside of that, they have better clock IMO. They sound really good.

 A while back, I did some tech work for a very famous guitarist. Vai in his studio has had the 192's the Apogee ad and da 16's and now runs exclusively the aurora's as he feels they sound the best. I was their when we did the A/B test between the apogee's, something in the midrage that the aurora's had the apogee's were lacking. There was a difference and all around the aurora's sounded the best out of the 3.
You tell me whar a man gits his corn pone, en I'll tell you what his 'pinions is.

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2009, 03:32:40 PM »
I'm running three 192's right now, so if I moved one to expand another rig and swapped in an Aurora 16, I think I'd still have all the digital I/O I need. 

TomWaterman

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2009, 09:04:55 PM »
We have 2 at work, they are hot but sound great!

The nice thing is hardware insert compensation is sample accurate to a Digi 192 AFAIK. You also get 32 in/out from one...16 analogue and 16 AES.

You can also switch the metering from small 2 LEDs on 16 channels, to a large 16 segment stereo display running horizontally.

I use Lynx at home too, they sound great. Just got an Ensemble for the laptop and a friend has a Prism Orpheus which is just ridiculously good sounding. I feel a little ABC shootout coming on between apogee, prism and lynx. All three sound better than the digi stuff to me but not in direct AB. To me the Lynx is clean like the prism, but not as deep or tight. Verdict still out on a apogee...

-T

strangeandbouncy

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #6 on: April 22, 2009, 05:12:27 AM »
Hi,


  if anyone is looking for another way in/out, i can recommend the SSL Alpha link. I have one running optical in, and Dean St where we go to use live room, has 2 running via MADI. Won't do 192kHz, but sounds amazing at 96kHz! Not done a comparison with Aurora yet. Only comparison I can make is on price. SSL option is MUCH cheape. r, and doesn't run HotHotHot. I personally wouldn't feel comfortable with something that hot in my rack! I guess it won't last very long for one thing!


   I personally think that the 192 SHOULD sound way better than it does, especially the AtoD part. For that much dosh, and considering the chipset is probably the same. Ho Hum.


   KIndest regards,


       ANdyP
. . . . RUH ROH . . . . .

mrclunk

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #7 on: April 22, 2009, 05:18:37 AM »
cool thanks guys.
They sound like a winner.

I should ask this of the lynx tech support really but incase you guys are doing it...
can i:-
with two aurora 16s, have a PT-HD card in aurora one. (connected to a core card) and then connect aurora two
via AES to aurora one to realise 32 channel analogue i/o?

reason i ask is we've started to do alot in Logic 8 recently and with core audio drivers you an only have 8 channel outputs of logic native tracks/pluggins through protools TDM.
If i could leave the expansion slot free in aurora two for the firewire card option then i could run 16 i/o natively from logic.
make sense... probably not.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2009, 03:31:04 PM by mrclunk »

mrclunk

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #8 on: April 22, 2009, 07:10:26 AM »
Hi Andy, yeah thanks i've been looking at the ssl option too.
It may suit us better.
but something put me off it last time i looked into it.
think it was the latency, but its only a couple of samples. only a robot could notice that.

basically PTHD 24 analogue i/o for £3,238.00 
+ you get adat.
and adding another 24i/n would only be £1400
pretty good deal
plus i think we can get good discounts on ssl stuff.


noulou

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #9 on: April 22, 2009, 07:34:21 AM »
I can also confirm that the aurora works and sounds beautiful with HD. Excellent value for money. get the new trimable version if you can.

I like its sound better when it is clocked to our lavry blue though.


You can also switch the metering from small 2 LEDs on 16 channels, to a large 16 segment stereo display running horizontally.

 :o
how do you do that?


Sarcastic Sound

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2009, 01:35:27 AM »
I cant confirm for myself as I wasn't there BUT...

I had an engineer buddy that was tracking at a studio with a very good drummer and they were hitting a console to PT HD. At first they were using the Aurora converters on the system. Everything was fine while getting tones until the drummer went to play with the track. All the tracks were straight threw the system (no plugins anywhere) and the drummer instantly noticed a delay (in the milli seconds) that threw him off. After much head scratching they figured the only thing it could be was the converters (aurora). They repatched into the 192's and the delay was gone.

Is there a slight delay when using the Aurora Digi interface? I dont know, as I said, I wasn't there. But these guys are top notch and I doubt it was something silly in set up. Might be something to look into.

Can anyone deny or confirm this?

Rob Flinn

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #11 on: April 23, 2009, 05:42:33 AM »
Maybe it's no coincidence that Lynx do a matching vented rack panel !!!

http://www.lynxstudio.com/product_detail.asp?i=52
regards Rob

mrclunk

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #12 on: April 23, 2009, 06:01:56 AM »
Defiantly leaning toward the SSL solution here.
If we go the SSL route we can put a ssl madi pcie card in our mac and then have 24i/o out of logic core audio.
This would be a big bonus for us.
 
Does any one know where i can find real world measured latency figures for interfaces?
Like to know how the SSL, Aurora compare. SSL states there's a 1 sample out and 1 to 2 samples in delay.
Aurora claims to have the same latency as the 192.

Also more worryingly whats to stop Digidesign releasing a PT update that screws the compatibility of all the non Digi interfaces?
After all there in direct competition with Digi's own products!

radiance

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #13 on: April 23, 2009, 06:15:05 AM »
Here a quote from the lynx support forum...

Quote from: Paul Tech
The conversion delays for the Aurora are:
The ADC latency is:
12 samples @ 1X rate (44.1k, 48k)
9 samples @ 2X (88.2k, 96k)
5 samples @ 4X (176.4k, 192k)

The DAC latency is:

10 samples @ 1X rate (44.1k, 48k)
5 samples @ 2X
5 samples @ 4X

The delay in and out of the FPGA is 3 samples at any rate.

So, as an example, at 96k, the total in to out latency would be 17 samples.
"Knowing that you are dreaming, however, does not automatically guarantee full rationality.
Then again, being awake doesn't ensure good thinking, either." -  Lynne Levitan

TomWaterman

I was sure the latency matched a 192 but I will have to check now.

living sounds

The Aurora sounds very good, but it performs best at samplerates 88,2khz and higher. There's a noticeable difference.

I also wouldn't plan on using the Firewire option when you're going to use many channels. I tried to get it to work properly on various systems for a year, real nightmare. In the end I bought two AES16 cards.

radiance

I think the latency figures are best with an AES16e card. The figures quoted above are with a RME hdsp card. ...Here a link to the whole thread

http://www.lynxstudio.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2665&KW=latency

Really, you should ask this at the lynx forum. Their support via this forum really is great!!
"Knowing that you are dreaming, however, does not automatically guarantee full rationality.
Then again, being awake doesn't ensure good thinking, either." -  Lynne Levitan

pucho812

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #17 on: April 23, 2009, 12:43:13 PM »
I cant confirm for myself as I wasn't there BUT...

I had an engineer buddy that was tracking at a studio with a very good drummer and they were hitting a console to PT HD. At first they were using the Aurora converters on the system. Everything was fine while getting tones until the drummer went to play with the track. All the tracks were straight threw the system (no plugins anywhere) and the drummer instantly noticed a delay (in the milli seconds) that threw him off. After much head scratching they figured the only thing it could be was the converters (aurora). They repatched into the 192's and the delay was gone.

Is there a slight delay when using the Aurora Digi interface? I dont know, as I said, I wasn't there. But these guys are top notch and I doubt it was something silly in set up. Might be something to look into.

Can anyone deny or confirm this?


I seriously doubt it was the aurora's or if it was there was something else going on with them and not the fact they were hooked up to a pro tools system. The aurora has internal patching so it might have been a setting with in the unit.


After re getting familiar with the SSL alpha and delta link, looks cool but not that cheaper by the time it's all done. they all come out to about the same in price, it's a matter of finding the converters that are right for you in terms of sonics, features and price.
You tell me whar a man gits his corn pone, en I'll tell you what his 'pinions is.

strangeandbouncy

Hi,


   I am not here to blow the SSL trumpet. I have used an Aurora and it sounded really good too. I was only recording vocals, not whole band. I have now tracked an albums worth of tracks at Dean Street, where they have a 48in/out SSL system. I think they have a third party clock, but I'm not sure which. Absolutely no latency discernable at all, and it all sounds amazing!


    'nuff said.


   If you are interested, I am sure Dean Street would be very happy to have a chat. Let me know, and I'll set it up.



       I think both would be an improvement over 192's. I am uncertain what will set you back less, but i was led to believe that the SSl option is not as expensive.



     KIndest regards,



    ANdyP


        ANdyP
. . . . RUH ROH . . . . .

wtmnmf

Re: Lynx Aurora 16 with PT HD, whats the catch?
« Reply #19 on: April 23, 2009, 09:17:39 PM »
Maybe it's no coincidence that Lynx do a matching vented rack panel !!!

http://www.lynxstudio.com/product_detail.asp?i=52

$95 for a vent panel!!!   "The product of an extensive oneyear development program" :o


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
39 Replies
13790 Views
Last post February 11, 2010, 03:21:57 AM
by La Casa Studio
27 Replies
8280 Views
Last post October 29, 2008, 09:39:48 AM
by Svart
1 Replies
723 Views
Last post August 31, 2019, 05:06:09 AM
by andow
0 Replies
315 Views
Last post September 19, 2019, 07:44:09 AM
by analogica