[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: TC electronic interface

what about the tc konnekt live? has it been discontinued?

2009/6/17, Rainer Straschill <moinsound@googlemail.com>:
>> I've checked out the Motu ultralight but had some compatibility issues 
>> wondered if anyone has used the TC electronic Konnekt 24
>> http://www.tcelectronic.com/default.asp?id=11055.
>> On paper it looks real good and I've always had good luck with other
>> equipment of theirs that I've had.
> (Note that while you say "Konnekt 24", your link refers to the
> "Konnekt 24D" - which I'll also refer to. And I'm going to do only a
> quick, early morning review here).
> * Lots of (sometimes knowledgeable) people have mentioned the high
> quality of both the pres and the converters (the latters being
> referred to as "the best converters in a complex interface below 1500
> bucks" e.g. at recording.org). With only superficial comparisons, I
> can second that.
> * The thing is really big and heavy in comparison with other
> interfaces with a comparable feature set. This may be of relevance in
> a mobile performance setup; it won't fit into some of the more shallow
> racks.
> * The quality of the built-in effects is top-notch, both the Fabric R
> reverb and the Fabric C channel strip. No wonder, these algorithms
> reportedly come from the System6000.
> * TC Electronic have issues both with stability and performance of
> their drivers/chipset. Lots of people have reported this. In a
> comparable application setting, obtainable latency settings have been
> over double of those of other, sometimes considerably cheaper
> interfaces (e.g. Presonus Firebox).
> * In comparison with a lot of other interfaces, routing is VERY
> inflexible in the onboard mixer. This does include that the Fabric C
> algorithms can only be applied to input channels 1 and 2.
> * In the same realm, the gain structure of the Fabric C and the mixer
> is very inflexible. For that reason, level setting for some line
> signals which come in below +4dB is at least impractical.
> * won't go into the obvious (number of channels etc. here, you've most
> probably already reviewd them in detail on their website).
> Summarizing: the biggest issue for me is the drivers/chipset thing.
> Here, they really don't live up to what we've come to expect from
> their non-computer gear. The big size and weight may or may not be an
> issue for you. If both items aren't a problem for you (e.g. if using
> the interface for stationary recording purposes), then you get the
> reportedly best converters in that price range, some high-quality pres
> and some outstanding algorithms for the money which is not the
> cheapest for the feature set.
> Otherwise...you might look at a Marian UCON CX. Marian obviously faced
> the problem that customers weren't able to accept a USB interface with
> a professional feature set. But if you're able to accept that drivers
> are available only for XP, you get them dead cheap at some factory
> sales - if you get them.
>               Rainer

Raul Bonell at Blogger: http://raulbonell.blogspot.com
Chain Tape Collective: http://www.ct-collective.com