Phil O'Keefe Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Well, I'm really happy to see that they put two Thunderbolt ports on it so that you can daisy chain. At the moment, there are no Thunderbolt "hubs" that offer multiple ports, so unless your product has two ports, it HAS to go on the end of the chain. That's great as long as you only have one such device, but not so much if you have two. For example, the new Avid Thunderbolt product only has one port... try to connect that, a Thunderbolt HDD, AND a non-Apple external monitor to your MacBook Pro's Thunderbolt port, and you instantly run into a BIG problem. So kudos to UA for getting it "right" on this issue! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted September 22, 2012 Author Members Share Posted September 22, 2012 This looks promising for optical peripherals, and I think Thunderbolt can carry optical over the same port type as wired. However, of course it doesn't deliver power to peripherals (yet), so that's an issue. Also this Belkin dock can daisy-chain to another Thunderbolt peripheral, and supply ports to other devices. I think an issue is that USB hubs work on a star network basis, while daisy-chaining is linear. So, I don't know if it would be possible to have a "hub" in the sense of, say, six Thunderbolt ports in a box (I could be wrong). I think what you would need is little boxes with three ports so one could be the incoming Thunderbolt chain, one would go to a formerly "end of chain" device, and the other port could go to the next device in the chain. But, this is (hopefully) informed speculation; I don't know the answer for sure. In any event I agree wholeheartedly about UA getting it right by not forcing Apollo to be an end of chain device Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jan-mikael Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 I'm very new to digital recording, having been completely analog for decades; I am contemplating the Apollo Quad with Thunderbolt, and I need some guidance...I am going to buy a new Mac along with the Apollo, and wonder whether I should go with a tower or the new Macbook Pro; I have an '08 Macbook Pro now, but it is one that only operates @ FW 400 according to the compatibility reference mentioned earlier.Financially I am leaning towards the Macbook, and would really need a compelling reason to do the whole tower set-up...I run Logic Pro, and intend to record analog as is my wont, and simply use the Apollo to get the raw tracks into Logic; I'll occasionally record live to Logic also though...I'm grateful for any advice...this is a great review and I've learned many things just by re-reading the posts here thus far, much of which has swayed me in the direction of the Apollo...thanks Mr Anderton, by the way; I was an avid reader of your Guitar Player columns for many years and miss your voice there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted October 6, 2012 Author Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 Originally Posted by jan-mikael I'm very new to digital recording, having been completely analog for decades; I am contemplating the Apollo Quad with Thunderbolt, and I need some guidance...I am going to buy a new Mac along with the Apollo, and wonder whether I should go with a tower or the new Macbook Pro Well...a lot depends on what else you plan to do with your computer. My primary "workhorse" computer is a PC Audio Labs tower, because of the ease of loading it up with RAM, and the customization options. For example, I've loaded it up with cards for USB, and it's the only reasonable way to use something like a SCOPE card. But, I'm definitely a power user not in the sense of bragging about it, but because I push computers really hard. When I'm doing videos, I'll have a DAW, screen capture program, and Vegas open, all working at full tilt. When editing videos, I often have one instance of Vegas rendering while another is doing editing. All of these things would be extremely inconvenient to do with a laptop. However, time are changing. Until UA's Satellite came along, the only way to run UA's plug-ins was with a desktop. Until USB 2.0 and FireWire, a good audio interface just about demanded a card. And now, with Thunderbolt, you can have a really good interface and a ton of DSP in an external box that works just fine with a laptop. And of course, for remote recording and other tasks, a laptop is way more convenient than a desktop. In a studio situation, the laptop could basically be a CPU brain, but hook up to additional monitors and such via Thunderbolt. So unless you need industrial-strength computing, today's laptops have a lot to offer. Does that help? By the way; I was an avid reader of your Guitar Player columns for many years and miss your voice there... Actually, I've been in there more or less every month since 2009, and every month in 2012, doing a column on recording guitar. I cover a lot of the aspects of high-tech guitar as well, like using amp sims. And (breaking news!) starting with the January issue, my column is being expanded to 1.5 pages so I can cover iOS devices. So UA...time to come up with an amp sim for me to cover. Just sayin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jan-mikael Posted October 6, 2012 Members Share Posted October 6, 2012 Thanks for the suggestion.... I am going to get the Apollo and the Macbook I think... Glad to hear you're still writing for GP... I haven't read it since the late 90's... Perhaps it's time to look in again...Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LatencyLover? Posted October 17, 2012 Members Share Posted October 17, 2012 how does the apollo compare to the scope dsp audio platform? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LatencyLover? Posted October 18, 2012 Members Share Posted October 18, 2012 Any users of both creamware and the apollo have any real world comparisons they would like to share?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Syncamorea Posted November 1, 2012 Members Share Posted November 1, 2012 Originally Posted by Anderton Also this Belkin dock can daisy-chain to another Thunderbolt peripheral, and supply ports to other devices. The Apple Thunderbolt display is also a TB hub that also has USB3, FW800, Ethernet and a magsafe power adapter, so it's a great option if you work with a MBP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jan-mikael Posted November 3, 2012 Members Share Posted November 3, 2012 I got my Apollo and a new Macbook Pro...great combination with the Thunderbolt card...more to come... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue bravo Posted November 10, 2012 Members Share Posted November 10, 2012 I have 2 questions regarding this interface (indirectly). 1. How do you interface MIDI with it? 2. The latest version of the Mac Pro desktop system does not have Thunderbolt available as an option, although the iMac and Laptops do. Any inside info as to when Mac Pro desktop system will be Thunderbolt compatible? THANK YOU IN ADVANCE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DCSJ48 Posted November 11, 2012 Members Share Posted November 11, 2012 PC early adopters ==how has UA's PC setup worked for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted November 12, 2012 Author Members Share Posted November 12, 2012 Originally Posted by blue bravo I have 2 questions regarding this interface (indirectly). 1. How do you interface MIDI with it? 2. The latest version of the Mac Pro desktop system does not have Thunderbolt available as an option, although the iMac and Laptops do. Any inside info as to when Mac Pro desktop system will be Thunderbolt compatible? THANK YOU IN ADVANCE! Sorry for the delayed reply...I just deleted about 200 spam posts in this thread Anyway, there is no MIDI interface in Apollo; you would need to add a separate MIDI interface. MOTU has a 5-port (in and out) model called the Micro Lite USB interface. If you need only a couple ports, the M-Audio MIDIsport 2 x 2 gives you two ports. There are also a lot of 1 x 1 USB adapters, like from Alesis. As to when Apple is planning on a Thunderbolt desktop...I have no idea. There are some PC motherboards with Thunderbolt (ASUS, IIRC), and the iMac already has Thunderbolt. But apparently, cards have their own issues...this thread has some interesting comments. Also, a post in another thread about Thunderbolt on the Mac says: "As the Thunderbolt interface uses PCI protocols, it would actually be reasonably straight-forward to devise and implement a PCI-e card to carry a Thunderbolt host controller chip. Unfortunately, because it would not be able to use the high speed interlock channels that are only accessible on the motherboard, the speed of the interface would be severely restricted -- even if a PCI-e x16 slot (normally used for graphics cards) was used, maximum speed would never be able to exceed 1.8 Gbps. "To gain the full speed of Thunderbolt, the host chip must be placed on the main motherboard with direct access to the chipset ... and currently the only chipset that supports PCI interlock is the new 'Sandy Bridge' series (P67, PM67, H67, HM67)." Google shows a bunch of threads in the Mac support forums, but they're down for maintenance as I write this. But, I think the bottom line is if you want Thunderbolt on a Mac is to get a laptop or iMac with it, or wait for the next generation of Mac Pros. As to Windows, cards will be available but only for specific motherboards that have specific chipsets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted November 12, 2012 Author Members Share Posted November 12, 2012 Originally Posted by DCSJ48 PC early adopters ==how has UA's PC setup worked for you? The Windows drivers aren't out yet...I keep asking for a beta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted November 12, 2012 Author Members Share Posted November 12, 2012 Originally Posted by LatencyLover? Any users of both creamware and the apollo have any real world comparisons they would like to share?? I reviewed the Sonic Core SCOPE about a year ago, but the system went back so I can't do a direct comparison. However, obviously the approach to software is different; the SCOPE system comes bundled with a lot of software and some that's optional at extra cost, while Apollo comes bundled with some software, and a lot that's optional at extra cost. Also, SCOPE has virtual instruments whereas there are currently no virtual instruments available from UA. However, UA offers lots of specialized and exceptional processors like tape emulators, the Lexicon 224 emulation, various classic effects from MXR and Roland, and the like. It is doubtful these kinds of plug-ins will be available for the SCOPE system, as they seem to be mostly into designing their own, and adapting the ones designed for the original SCOPE system. There's also a philosophical difference. The SCOPE system is designed to virtualize a studio, e.g., the way it hooks into a DAW with "virtual patch cords" for the I/O. Apollo appears to a DAW like a traditional audio interface, but with the ability to add plug-ins while recording or on playback. In that respect, the systems are similar as you can use the processors for more than just playback from your computer. I think the SCOPE system is really brilliant, but it's also more complex to use than Apollo, which is more general-purpose. Although I can run my circa 2000 SCOPE card in my current computer - and kudos to Sonic Core for developing 64-bit drivers for owners of the original SCOPE cards! - I'm currently not using it, as so much of what it offers is duplicated by other software and hardware in my system, including the Universal Audio plug-ins; also some elements, like the samplers, are out of date compared to products like Kontakt and MOTU's MachFive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members onjam Posted November 13, 2012 Members Share Posted November 13, 2012 Originally Posted by Anderton The Windows drivers aren't out yet...I keep asking for a beta Thanks for your great work here in this forum, Craig! It's much appreciated! BTW, Re: Windows drivers for the Apollo, please do keep requesting them, and please keep this pro review running until we can get a good look at how well the Windows drivers work! I'm especially interested in how they perform at low latency, and how stable they are under a heavy load. I use TAFKAT's DAWbench tests to see how things perform, BTW, which consistently puts Lynx and RME at the top of the pack for low-latency performance. Hoping UA can put on a good show in that regard! UA has a real opportunity to get it right here. I've called UA about the Windows drivers and could not get a solid answer about when they might be released. If you or UA have any info on availability, please let us know. Needless to say, I can't use the Apollo with Windows yet, so I've been in limbo about buying it, hoping UA will release great drivers. I've really been hoping for the best, since the rest of the unit seems just about right for what I need. Thanks again, and keep it up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jan-mikael Posted November 22, 2012 Members Share Posted November 22, 2012 Wow...this is a great tool...I took the plunge after many years of analog-only exclusivism and bought Protools 10, a MB Pro and the Apollo...I've spent a week getting to know these devices and have gotten to the point where I am limping along through small projects without my board and hardware...My immediate concern is my huge gap in knowledge about basic aspects of this set-up...for example: I didn't realize I needed an external drive to record to. I ordered a 3TB OWC Mercury Elite external drive based on the Avid website's recommendation and am awaiting it. Here's the dumb question of the day: do I set the drive up from the Apollo or the Mac?This thread has changed my life. No. Really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LaycockAudio Posted November 22, 2012 Members Share Posted November 22, 2012 Hi there!What I would really like to know is - How easy is it to increase your input count with the Apollo?I have a Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 and Octopre, providing 16 mic pres and plenty of outputs, although they run at FW400. Therefore, as they are daisy-chained to my OWC external hard drive which can run at FW800 or eSATA (potentially), my hard drive is pulled down in speed to FW400 also.I would like to:a. take the load off my CPUb. increase my analogue input count and c. maximize the speed of my external driveI see that using the ADAT on the Apollo only adds 8 channels, and SPDif increases the count by a further 2, still only providing 12 mic pre's.If the Thunderbolt card is installed, could the Firewire ports be used with the two additional interfaces to make use of their analogue inputs?This would be excellent!The facility of DSP effects processing PLUS a total of 20 Mic Pre's would make for a killer rig, especially if I increase my 13" i7 Macbook Pro's RAM to 16GB. This could also leave my FW800 port on my MBP free for my OWC external drive. (I wish MBP's had an eSata port to really make use of the external disks potential!)If someone has an Apollo Quad with the Thunderbolt card and a bit of spare time to test this properly, I would LOVE to hear the results of it!This seems like the best solution for someone running a portable Macbook based home studio, where outboard equipment is limited.Being a home studio user doesn't mean I will only be simultaneously recording with a Vocal mic, DI box, and stereo pair on an acoustic. Some sessions require a little bit more!I would try it out myself if I had the money to get my hands on an Apollo, but I am a poor student!Many thanks,Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted November 22, 2012 Author Members Share Posted November 22, 2012 Originally Posted by LaycockAudio If the Thunderbolt card is installed, could the Firewire ports be used with the two additional interfaces to make use of their analogue inputs? Aggregating devices on the Mac is easy, and I've done it with Apollo. This article describes how to aggregate with both Windows and Mac computers, and the Mac example uses Apollo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members onjam Posted November 30, 2012 Members Share Posted November 30, 2012 Hi Craig, As a heads up (if you missed it), UA has finally released Windows drivers! Yay! So now that this major milestone has been reached, I'm hoping you'll take up the gauntlet and test these drivers out soon. If you get a chance, I invite you to test using DAW Bench ( http://www.dawbench.com/ ) which I've noticed has gained a lot of traction as a great audio device/driver benchmark suite over recent years. Anyway, whatever results you come up with for the Windows drivers will be much appreciated! I'm particularly interested in Apollo's low-latency performance, what load it can handle at low latencies, etc.... Looking forward to your next entries! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted December 1, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 1, 2012 Originally Posted by onjam Hi Craig, As a heads up (if you missed it), UA has finally released Windows drivers! Yay! So now that this major milestone has been reached, I'm hoping you'll take up the gauntlet and test these drivers out soon. You bet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I've been waiting for this. I spoke to UA today to get some additional background information, which will be included as well. Unfortunately some flu-like something chose to visit me today, so while I may do the installation tonight, it will probably have to wait until tomorrow...I'm feeling pretty stupid right now. Then again, maybe that's the optimum time to install the system. If I can do it when I feel this bad, then imagine how easy it will be for people who aren't sick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted December 1, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 1, 2012 Originally Posted by jan-mikael I ordered a 3TB OWC Mercury Elite external drive based on the Avid website's recommendation and am awaiting it. Here's the dumb question of the day: do I set the drive up from the Apollo or the Mac? Not dumb, and often a source of confusion. I try not to daisy-chain FireWire devices, which is an issue with FW 400 (I need to get an FW 800 card for my Windows machine to test the new drivers properly). There should be enough speed to handle Apollo and a hard drive, but they will be sharing bandwidth. The general rule of thumb is to connect the faster device directly to the computer, and the slower device behind it. So for example if the drive is FW 400, you'd want to go Apollo > drive. I assume that would still be what you'd want with a FW 800 drive, but this isn't really my field of expertise Of course, assuming the laptop has a Thunderbolt interface, if you have the $$ for a Thunderbolt card for Apollo or a Thunderbolt-to-FireWire adapter, you can have each on a separate port if you encounter bandwidth issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jan-mikael Posted December 2, 2012 Members Share Posted December 2, 2012 Hey Craig...thanks for the response...I have the Apollo connected via Thunderbolt and the drive via FW 800...the only piece missing from the set-up so far is the UAD Satellite I get for free with my new 4-710d...how will that fit into the picture?Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tecknot Posted December 3, 2012 Members Share Posted December 3, 2012 Hi Craig,Being a follow SONARite myself, I am hoping you can provide some info on UA's thunderbolt drivers for Win7/8 or lack thereof. I recently learned that AU does not currently provide drivers for their optional thunderbolt card for operation under Windows. Do you know if this is just temporary or a permanent situation. I've been looking to purchase a Win8 laptop with thunderbolt (an ASUS G75VX), and the Apollo as the center pieces of an awesome portable studio. This realization is a terrible upset, and I don't think I will have much success falling back on firewire.Forgive me if you have already discussed this.Kind regards,Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted December 3, 2012 Author Members Share Posted December 3, 2012 You are correct, there are currently no drivers for using Apollo's Thunderbolt expansion card with Windows. I do not know if this is a permanent or temporary situation; as you know Thunderbolt has been late coming to Windows due to Intel's exclusivity agreement with Apple. I can ask, but usually companies don't like to commit to the future unless it's something that's already baked and ready to go. For example UA told me when I was sent the Satellite for review that it would be Mac-only and Windows drivers would not be available for it. Well, now we have Windows drivers for Satellite...I assume they would rather not promise something and have its existence be a pleasant surprise than promise something they couldn't deliver, and have it turn into a disappointment.If you can find a laptop with FireWire 800 you should be able to get excellent performance with Apollo, but finding FW800 on a Windows laptop is a pretty big "if" these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tecknot Posted December 4, 2012 Members Share Posted December 4, 2012 Thanks, Craig. Another wait and see in the big DAW game. It might be worth while taking up a cross platform setup, but I have resisted Apple for so long I don't know if I can do it now...Oh the humanity.Kind regards,Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.