INTPDR wrote:RME vs M-audio
mr_debauch wrote:can that even be said?.
Toe wrote:When I got to this guys house to pick up my 60 he fired up his sp1200 and played me a beat, I almost cried, it sounded like jesus beatboxing in my ears.
Coz wrote:
Political correctness was shot dead at the door of this forum! It is funny at times though.
kebzer wrote:I cannot comment on M-AUDIO but I used to own an E-MU 1212m (almost the same converters) before switching to RME and I can tell you that you cannot spot any real difference in audio quality until...you pump up the volume all the way up! The RME can drive any set of monitors to their limits without clipping or distorting the output, hands down.
Zukan wrote:kebzer wrote:I cannot comment on M-AUDIO but I used to own an E-MU 1212m (almost the same converters) before switching to RME and I can tell you that you cannot spot any real difference in audio quality until...you pump up the volume all the way up! The RME can drive any set of monitors to their limits without clipping or distorting the output, hands down.
Eh? Sorry man, but this makes no sense. What bearing has convertor quality or drivers or anything else for that matter have to do with gain running on the outs?
We test convertors based on a number of criteria, THD, dynamic range, S/N, slew rates across multiple devices, buffering and so on. Dik to do with volume.
kebzer wrote:I cannot comment on M-AUDIO but I used to own an E-MU 1212m (almost the same converters) before switching to RME and I can tell you that you cannot spot any real difference in audio quality until...you pump up the volume all the way up! The RME can drive any set of monitors to their limits without clipping or distorting the output, hands down.
i don't understand.Zukan wrote:If you are working in a linear system then a badly structured slew rate will create non linear artifacts. How it represents itself depends on what process is being used.
