|
Audiophile 192 vs Delta 44
|
View this Thread in Original format
| digitalifeform |
I have a EMU 0404 but Im selling it and upgrading....
So Which one?
Audiophile 192 vs Delta 44?
I see the audiophile has a broader range of connections but i really dont care about that; the 4 x 4 analog I/O on the delta is fine with me, and I dont use any external hardware for production (everything internal Cubase, and many VST's) ... so processing and sound card itself wise which one is better to cut through those VSTs?
Also open for other cards in similar price range (US $150 - 200 ish) |
|
|
| RiCo |
| The Audiophile is more consumer-oriented and the Delta 44 is more pro-oriented. I haven't used the Audiophile series...I have only worked with Delta 44 and Delta 1010, which I currently have. You will be fine with either one. :) |
|
|
| hey cheggy |
| Well technically, if you're not using any hardware at all, then you don't need any of the excess cables on either. All you really need is two RCA out cables to plug into your monitors. Having 4 RCA in and 4 RCA outs (the delta 4/4) is not necessary. I would consider the audiophile because it gives you all the outputs you need plus it has a midi in/out port in the advent that you decide to get hardware. This way, you will not need to get a midi interface later on. |
|
|
| Chronosis |
| quote: | Originally posted by hey cheggy
Having 4 RCA in and 4 RCA outs (the delta 4/4) is not necessary. |
Delta 44 has balanced TRS jacks, not RCA.
digitalifeform: Hardware in those is not very different, plus they both use the same line M-Audio drivers. So you should make your choice between the connections. What you need, or what you may need in the future. |
|
|
| digitalifeform |
| thanks guys.... ill probably go with the delta 44.... but now im looking into a mbox to run pro tools le 6.4 ... just a thought though.... probably will stick with cubase and the delta 44 though |
|
|
|
|
