couldnt be happier with the x4... significant step up from Apollo twin. Great clarity and detail in the sound, packed with features. Perfect for collaboration with the dual headphone. Top notch quality, feels premium. Additionally I got it with a nice promo of plugins. Tracking with 4 cores is now a breeze.
Hey, I was wondering if this comes with its own audio driver with variable buffer controls for windows that does not take exclusive audio control and block other audio from other applications. I am debating getting this or the Arturia Audio Fuse Studio. It looks like I can use my external gear on both, I only have a few analogue guitar pedals I use for fx, I just want to be able to use all my gear and hear all the audio from all my software at once and be able to travel with it. Are the plugins really worth having less connectivity for ins and outs? I have some pretty good plugins already but everyone keeps saying this is the best. I mainly do house and bass oriented music and travel a lot and am currently working with an irig pro duo hd which is great but it does not have any drivers! I want to stream my productions I have been able to use ASIO Link Pro Tool as a driver for now but it is no longer supported software and I do not want to rely on it forever
go for the UAD! Wait for a deal when you get an extra bundle of plugins . This is better than the Fuse, and the drivers, even for Windows work great. Get a few must have plugins, and then get a Plugin Alliance subscription. I have a video where I compare the two. In short - they combine well.
massivebeatzz thank you again sir it is so hard to find some of this info out. It took me two years to find a way to use asio4all in ableton and other audio applications simultaneously. And when you google interfaces with variable buffer controls like nothing pops up. None of the companies even top companies talk about it on there spec sheets either. So thank you very much!
can you use UAD Plugins inserted on Virtual Instruments in your DAW on low Buffersize like 128 Samples withoud issues? I've got an old Macbook i5 dual core from 2015 with just 8GB RAM and I get crackles or latency issues if I'm on a low buffersize. It gets better when I switche to 256 or 512 but then the latency for playing virtual instruments is getting bigger of course. To me thats a dilemma
UAD will do some of the heavy lifting when it comes to DSP processing, and so you can use weaker machines or older computers, which is kind of the idea. I noticed, not all UAD plugins react equally when played in super low latency mode with VI's, in my experience. And there is a limit how low you can go, because computer plugins & UAD calculated stuff need to sync up a bit. SO I wouldnt immediately assume 32 buffer size always.
@@massivebeatzz ok 32 Buffer is really very low. But I often use 128 when playing VI's over my Midi Keyboard to get a tight feel. And it would be great if I can throw UAD Plugins on the VI's as Inserts in my DAW while composing with 128 Buffersize. UA does not recommend to work like this because of Latency Issues. They always recommend to use UAD Plugins in the Mixing Process on Audio Tracks. But I'm already Mixing and Producing while Composing. So I don't have a seperate Workflow cause I like to shape the Sound while I'm Composing but I'm not sure if this works with UAD Plugins and VI's on low Buffersize
@@massivebeatzz all kinds of Plugins. I have Ultimate 8. So want to use Ocean Way Studios. EQ's, Comps, Amps, all the Reverbs and so on. But like I said. I can't test it on my own becaus my macbook is old and it isn't powerful enough. So it would be great if you can test it report back ;)
ok so this is interesting. i got it down to 64 buffer with a bunch running on Alchemy,,,, Ampeg BAss Amp (why not , tube driven), Teletronix LA2-A, and Capitol Chambers Reverb. At 32 it disables those plugins. At 128, the latency is too high for a lead sound or bassline. 64 feels right. I had to disable "Extra Buffer" in the control panel. UAD has a great article explaining why there is a bit of added Latency (and one great way to run a virtual output on the UAD console and reduce it to almost 0)., The good part is towards the end. help.uaudio.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003167103-Why-am-I-Getting-Latency-in-my-DAW-Sessions- hope this helps.
Sure thing. Good question. For one, 4 Unison Pre-amps on the X4 versus just 2 on the X6. Looks and desktop space. I like a unit that I can touch on my mixer desk. The X6 looked awkward. It's very deep, and you'd need a rack for it to fit properly. If you already have other gear, that' s no problem. Also heat might build up in a stuffy rack - they get hot. So plain looks and ergonomics on that latter point. I liked the headphone pre-amps on the X6 better though, when pushed they had a fresher more dynamic sound on high impedance headphones. I use a dedicated headphone amp that is better than any UA headphone out, so that wasn't a factor. I think a X8 would make sense , but I want to smoke whatever the guy smoked that decided on pricing for that one.
@@massivebeatzz Ah ok .. I understand .. For me its coming down to the extra DSP on the x6... for the price difference. How significant is the extra DSP that it provides. does the x4 handle enough, without having to consider getting an additional satellite which will pan out to be more money anyways. I'm finding it very disappointing that nobody really compares the DSP performance differences between all these models... in practical Laymen terms.. How much MORE plugins could the Higher models withe 6 DSP chips handle compared to the 4 DSP chips in the desktop models.
hey great thought.Here comes aong answer - coz I been there my friend, I feel your frustration. It really depends on the plug-ins. Some of the newer ones are real hogs, some aren't. I get about 13 or so on the quadcore for my workflow, could probably do 16. But it also depends on how they are distributed per track , as UAD allocates its cores accordingly. I love Logic plugins for the maintenance and standard tasks a larger mix needs. AS in I don't need 28 instances of Neve EQ's that color everything. But I tried and even the Hexa X6 wasn't enough. If you want to run everything then I suggest a x4 plus an Octo for 12 cores. Try to get at least to 8 to 12 cores in total. Other people will tell you. Oh I have 3x X8's , and I am considering another Octo on top. This is somewhat all depending on your work. I'm super happy with the Quad, coming from a solo. Another Idea, and that' s if Neve interests you (I prefer API, but not the point). If you get LUNA with Neve Summing, and built in Oxide Tape, and a few otehr plug ins - all that is handled by your Mac (for now). No usage of cores. LIek I posted in my other video. 200 tracks with about 800 effects firing at the same time - is what my MacBook Pro 8 Core, i9 was bench marking. It's multiple of multiples what a rackload of UAD can process. So if we have these super computer boxes, maybe use them?
it can take 4 line or mic inputs at the same time, bit you also get 8 digital inputs. So a total of 12 , but you need a preamp expander with 8 additional inputs. If your devices are stereo, you need 10 inputs (5x2). At that point you might as well get the smaller Twin X Quad and put the $ difference to a Presonus, Mackie etc , for these 8 additional pres.
Tough call. There is the new ID44 Mk2 that just came out which is excellent. 1/3 of the price and tons of features. The advantage of X4 is the real time plugins it now comes with. If you do not need those, I would go with ID44mk2.
X4 of course. More (4) preamps, 2 headphone amps. X4 has 4 cores. always. On the rear panel, there are now two pairs of line outputs in addition to the main monitor outputs - meaning that, among other things, the x4 can be used to switch between three pairs of stereo speakers. I think it also looks better since it is wider and easier to work with (not so crammed). Then again, less portable, and a lot more expensive. I compared X6 vs X4 and decided to keep the X4 for myself.
That dos no longer work. They kind of disabled that a couple of years ago. You'd need one Desktop and one Big interface (rack) to combine. Baffles me why.
I’m in the exact same predicament right now. Deciding between the x4 and x8, doing as much research as I can before I make the purchase. Can the combo jacks in the back be used as a direct line input instead of a preamp ? And if so is there any noticeable noise created(I need to plug in about 3-4 synths at a time)
ha -- great minds think alike. Yes you can use as line audio cable jack or XLR jack, and line levels a well as MIC levels are supported. The front supports 2 x Hi-Z instrument inputs. No noise.
Thanks ever so much my friend. It does have a tiny improvement over the Twin MK2. And on some sources you might tell a difference. Sometimes it is also what you prefer (cleaner versus warmer sound, and people argue which is better). So the X4 has the same converters as the Twin X.
Yes, if you have a Windows 10 PC with Thunderbolt 3. Here are the requirements: Thunderbolt 3 cable (not included) Internet connection to download software and authorize UAD plug-ins 6 gigabytes available storage Quad Core i7 or better processor recommended For additional compatibility information, visit help.uaudio.com MAC: Available Thunderbolt 1, 2, or 3 port Thunderbolt 1 and 2 connections require an Apple Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 Adapter (not included) macOS 10.12 Sierra, 10.13 High Sierra, 10.14 Mojave, or 10.15 Catalina PC: Available Thunderbolt 3 port Windows 10 (64-Bit Edition)
I record with at least 3 microphones at the same time so the only (for me) affordable Apollo, the Twin, isn't enough. Then I started to check the 4 channel option and that bump in price is just too much. They sure know how to earn money, hope their sales justify it.
I feel you! it almost feel like a trap. How do we go from 499 to frigging 1799 right? But, I'd recommend getting it. 2 Headphone jacks, more outputs, more inputs (4 on the back, 2 Hi-Z's in the front). It's even better than the more expensive X6 in that regard. Right now they are including over $2000 worth in plug-ins, so it might be a good time to get it, if that's what it comes down.
Another WTF is that you can't set up surround in console for the six outputs, and you can't route inputs directly to outputs. This is possible with the rack versions. Not sure if it's a limitation of the FPGA they use in the X4 or if it's actually dumbed down on purpose to upsell to the x8. But apart from that (and the price) it's everything I wish the Twin was from start.
i'd invest toward RME audio interfaces with $1800. RME are far more superior in audio quality than UAD, more stable, more reliable and are German engineered.
I like RME (see below), but "far superior" is never something I heard or people tested, especially compared to the the latest UAD hardware (Thunderbolt 3, or mark 3 if you will ). They (RME) sound a bit brighter. But very good. For a little less money they are great, but also lack the DSP powered real time recording world of plugins and amps. If someone doesn't need that I would probably recommend it over UAD, or a cheaper Apogee. The only thing is that RME , including the software looks a bit dated these days. Also as for stability - the many UAD I tested were all super stable. The studio I record in is all RME. I think in general Thunderbolt 3 is smoothest on a Mac - literally plug & play.
I know, they added a few plugins that should be free anyways and call it Heritage Bundle, so it looks like a different device.. That is something else. I even felt 1800 was a lot.
Yeah the one thing about Universal Audio is that they milk their users for every last dollar. Their business model is very similar to Apple's. Good product generally speaking, quality audio and plugins. Though my x4 had burned out LEDs and x8 lost connectivity due to a poorly fitting thunderbolt card. I also didn't like how the units I got were made in China. I'm not in favour of supporting that murderous regime. Some x4 are made in Malaysia however.
Too much money but I do understand Quality I’m getting an mpcx and this is half the price 2200 hundred dollars and this is over a 1000 dollars maybe later the line but not now
Here is my issue. Apollo is so expensive but not the best. They have big name, when you buy device from UAD, you pay for the brand not for the sound quality, why? Audient is cheaper but better sound quality, Antelope is another beast. If Antelope finds a solution with their software or driver, we all should trash UAD or force them to low the price of their devices down.
The sound quality is amazing in my book. These new converters / crystal are the best - better than audient? maybe, maybe not. There are slight differences, a bit darker, a bit brighter - but that's a matter of preference. If you are over 12 years old, you don't hear frequencies over 16 to 18 Khz , and if you are much older, well it's even less. Antelope is an interesting company, but they need to get their act together. too many products, some obsolete, some canceled, every month they try something new. But great ideas. They are like LG phones. UAD, would be like Samsung. Apogee like Apple iPhones . Audient, like Oneplus.
@@massivebeatzz I would liken UAD to Apple more than Samsung as Samsung is android based with open options for using its hardware and software while UAD is very much like apple with its price, its restrictive nature regarding inability to use its plugins without being connected to its hardware, the Apollo acts as a dongle for its plugins. Apogee would be a tiny bit like apple but still more like Samsung as the new symphony uses onboard dsp for its plugins like uad but Apogee lets you use your own system hardware or not, so if you have a powerful system, you will be able to actually use many more plugins than you would be able to with UAD. UAD will ask you to buy satellite units to use more plugins before they let you use your own system resources. Audient is like one plus hehe id44 is great! Apollo is really nice, for the price though hmmm questionable..
I can't be the only one scratching his or her head at the price of ALL UA products! Yeah $1200 maybe...$1000 probably. But I've see many companies that are so proud of their products that they never sell any of their products. They can't be that much better than a high end Moto or Presonus, or the likes! I gotta eat!
@@stevend984 right? No TB cable with a $1000+ purchase; no class compliance mode (must download software to try it); locked ecosystem to top it all off
I couldn't appreciate using uad plugins because everything is just way to expensive. I would regret buying it and feeling ripped off. All that money can go towards another better interface for half the price and some nice top of the line external hardware and I can own it forever. Uad plugins when they have to be updated you gotta keep paying for the same thing. I pass on uad products
Agreed and everything you just said. Except you won't find a better interface for half the price. These are the best , along with Apogee and RME, and they are not cheap either.
I don’t think you will find a better interface than this for half the price. Technically it’s expensive but you also pay more than what you’re actually paying. With the amount of gear it emulates you should be paying 80,000$ worth of gear buddy.
Yes and no. When tracking in their Console Mixer, yes only UAD plugins work. When Mixing / working in your DAW - any AU/VST/AAX plugin works, just like with any other audio interface. But then it' snot powered by DSP but by the computer. While UAD plugins get powered by DSP. , all in the same session.
couldnt be happier with the x4... significant step up from Apollo twin. Great clarity and detail in the sound, packed with features. Perfect for collaboration with the dual headphone. Top notch quality, feels premium. Additionally I got it with a nice promo of plugins. Tracking with 4 cores is now a breeze.
nice!! Enjoy. Can't beat this.
Hey, I was wondering if this comes with its own audio driver with variable buffer controls for windows that does not take exclusive audio control and block other audio from other applications. I am debating getting this or the Arturia Audio Fuse Studio. It looks like I can use my external gear on both, I only have a few analogue guitar pedals I use for fx, I just want to be able to use all my gear and hear all the audio from all my software at once and be able to travel with it. Are the plugins really worth having less connectivity for ins and outs? I have some pretty good plugins already but everyone keeps saying this is the best. I mainly do house and bass oriented music and travel a lot and am currently working with an irig pro duo hd which is great but it does not have any drivers! I want to stream my productions I have been able to use ASIO Link Pro Tool as a driver for now but it is no longer supported software and I do not want to rely on it forever
Should I take that heart as a yes?
go for the UAD! Wait for a deal when you get an extra bundle of plugins . This is better than the Fuse, and the drivers, even for Windows work great. Get a few must have plugins, and then get a Plugin Alliance subscription. I have a video where I compare the two. In short - they combine well.
massivebeatzz thank you again sir it is so hard to find some of this info out. It took me two years to find a way to use asio4all in ableton and other audio applications simultaneously. And when you google interfaces with variable buffer controls like nothing pops up. None of the companies even top companies talk about it on there spec sheets either. So thank you very much!
Great Review. I am in the process of upgrading from a Silver Apollo8 to an X4 and your video helped validate my decision
Glad I could help!
just waiting on a tb3 adapter to get started. this by far the best review and unboxing of the Apollo x4 on RUclips.
thanks very much! Hope your TB adapter comes soon.
Just bought mine!! Can't wait
can you use UAD Plugins inserted on Virtual Instruments in your DAW on low Buffersize like 128 Samples withoud issues? I've got an old Macbook i5 dual core from 2015 with just 8GB RAM and I get crackles or latency issues if I'm on a low buffersize. It gets better when I switche to 256 or 512 but then the latency for playing virtual instruments is getting bigger of course. To me thats a dilemma
UAD will do some of the heavy lifting when it comes to DSP processing, and so you can use weaker machines or older computers, which is kind of the idea. I noticed, not all UAD plugins react equally when played in super low latency mode with VI's, in my experience. And there is a limit how low you can go, because computer plugins & UAD calculated stuff need to sync up a bit. SO I wouldnt immediately assume 32 buffer size always.
@@massivebeatzz ok 32 Buffer is really very low. But I often use 128 when playing VI's over my Midi Keyboard to get a tight feel. And it would be great if I can throw UAD Plugins on the VI's as Inserts in my DAW while composing with 128 Buffersize. UA does not recommend to work like this because of Latency Issues. They always recommend to use UAD Plugins in the Mixing Process on Audio Tracks. But I'm already Mixing and Producing while Composing. So I don't have a seperate Workflow cause I like to shape the Sound while I'm Composing but I'm not sure if this works with UAD Plugins and VI's on low Buffersize
I can try it out and report back. What kinda UAD plugins do you plan on using on that channel?
@@massivebeatzz all kinds of Plugins. I have Ultimate 8. So want to use Ocean Way Studios. EQ's, Comps, Amps, all the Reverbs and so on. But like I said. I can't test it on my own becaus my macbook is old and it isn't powerful enough. So it would be great if you can test it report back ;)
ok so this is interesting. i got it down to 64 buffer with a bunch running on Alchemy,,,, Ampeg BAss Amp (why not , tube driven), Teletronix LA2-A, and Capitol Chambers Reverb. At 32 it disables those plugins. At 128, the latency is too high for a lead sound or bassline. 64 feels right. I had to disable "Extra Buffer" in the control panel. UAD has a great article explaining why there is a bit of added Latency (and one great way to run a virtual output on the UAD console and reduce it to almost 0)., The good part is towards the end. help.uaudio.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003167103-Why-am-I-Getting-Latency-in-my-DAW-Sessions- hope this helps.
Mind elaborating on why you returned the x6 for the x4?
Sure thing. Good question. For one, 4 Unison Pre-amps on the X4 versus just 2 on the X6. Looks and desktop space. I like a unit that I can touch on my mixer desk. The X6 looked awkward. It's very deep, and you'd need a rack for it to fit properly. If you already have other gear, that' s no problem. Also heat might build up in a stuffy rack - they get hot. So plain looks and ergonomics on that latter point. I liked the headphone pre-amps on the X6 better though, when pushed they had a fresher more dynamic sound on high impedance headphones. I use a dedicated headphone amp that is better than any UA headphone out, so that wasn't a factor. I think a X8 would make sense , but I want to smoke whatever the guy smoked that decided on pricing for that one.
@@massivebeatzz Ah ok .. I understand .. For me its coming down to the extra DSP on the x6... for the price difference. How significant is the extra DSP that it provides. does the x4 handle enough, without having to consider getting an additional satellite which will pan out to be more money anyways. I'm finding it very disappointing that nobody really compares the DSP performance differences between all these models... in practical Laymen terms.. How much MORE plugins could the Higher models withe 6 DSP chips handle compared to the 4 DSP chips in the desktop models.
hey great thought.Here comes aong answer - coz I been there my friend, I feel your frustration. It really depends on the plug-ins. Some of the newer ones are real hogs, some aren't. I get about 13 or so on the quadcore for my workflow, could probably do 16. But it also depends on how they are distributed per track , as UAD allocates its cores accordingly. I love Logic plugins for the maintenance and standard tasks a larger mix needs. AS in I don't need 28 instances of Neve EQ's that color everything. But I tried and even the Hexa X6 wasn't enough. If you want to run everything then I suggest a x4 plus an Octo for 12 cores. Try to get at least to 8 to 12 cores in total. Other people will tell you. Oh I have 3x X8's , and I am considering another Octo on top. This is somewhat all depending on your work. I'm super happy with the Quad, coming from a solo. Another Idea, and that' s if Neve interests you (I prefer API, but not the point). If you get LUNA with Neve Summing, and built in Oxide Tape, and a few otehr plug ins - all that is handled by your Mac (for now). No usage of cores. LIek I posted in my other video. 200 tracks with about 800 effects firing at the same time - is what my MacBook Pro 8 Core, i9 was bench marking. It's multiple of multiples what a rackload of UAD can process. So if we have these super computer boxes, maybe use them?
how many hardware instruments can I plug into this device? I have I have 2 drum machines and 3 synths.
it can take 4 line or mic inputs at the same time, bit you also get 8 digital inputs. So a total of 12 , but you need a preamp expander with 8 additional inputs. If your devices are stereo, you need 10 inputs (5x2). At that point you might as well get the smaller Twin X Quad and put the $ difference to a Presonus, Mackie etc , for these 8 additional pres.
Is this better than an audient Id44?
Tough call. There is the new ID44 Mk2 that just came out which is excellent. 1/3 of the price and tons of features. The advantage of X4 is the real time plugins it now comes with. If you do not need those, I would go with ID44mk2.
Which one is better?? Twin x or x4 an why???
X4 of course. More (4) preamps, 2 headphone amps. X4 has 4 cores. always. On the rear panel, there are now two pairs of line outputs in addition to the main monitor outputs - meaning that, among other things, the x4 can be used to switch between three pairs of stereo speakers. I think it also looks better since it is wider and easier to work with (not so crammed). Then again, less portable, and a lot more expensive. I compared X6 vs X4 and decided to keep the X4 for myself.
@@massivebeatzz appreciate it bro
Curious is anyone using the apollo x4 that has a core i5 processor and also Luna?
I have tried it. Works!
Apollotics
What about daisy chaining
2 twin X’s?
Since I already own one Twin X duo
That dos no longer work. They kind of disabled that a couple of years ago. You'd need one Desktop and one Big interface (rack) to combine. Baffles me why.
I’m in the exact same predicament right now. Deciding between the x4 and x8, doing as much research as I can before I make the purchase. Can the combo jacks in the back be used as a direct line input instead of a preamp ? And if so is there any noticeable noise created(I need to plug in about 3-4 synths at a time)
ha -- great minds think alike. Yes you can use as line audio cable jack or XLR jack, and line levels a well as MIC levels are supported. The front supports 2 x Hi-Z instrument inputs. No noise.
Zen tour synergy core PLUS free gift: Full bigwig and Free Mic edge solo. Tell me about it!
great review, a question. Dose the X4 have different AD/DA converts than the Twin. IF so can you tell a difference in the sound?
Thanks ever so much my friend. It does have a tiny improvement over the Twin MK2. And on some sources you might tell a difference. Sometimes it is also what you prefer (cleaner versus warmer sound, and people argue which is better). So the X4 has the same converters as the Twin X.
Can u use this on windows PC?
Yes, if you have a Windows 10 PC with Thunderbolt 3. Here are the requirements:
Thunderbolt 3 cable (not included)
Internet connection to download software and authorize UAD plug-ins
6 gigabytes available storage
Quad Core i7 or better processor recommended
For additional compatibility information, visit help.uaudio.com
MAC:
Available Thunderbolt 1, 2, or 3 port
Thunderbolt 1 and 2 connections require an Apple Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 Adapter (not included)
macOS 10.12 Sierra, 10.13 High Sierra, 10.14 Mojave, or 10.15 Catalina
PC:
Available Thunderbolt 3 port
Windows 10 (64-Bit Edition)
@@massivebeatzz Thanks so much💯💯💯💯💯
I record with at least 3 microphones at the same time so the only (for me) affordable Apollo, the Twin, isn't enough. Then I started to check the 4 channel option and that bump in price is just too much. They sure know how to earn money, hope their sales justify it.
I feel you! it almost feel like a trap. How do we go from 499 to frigging 1799 right? But, I'd recommend getting it. 2 Headphone jacks, more outputs, more inputs (4 on the back, 2 Hi-Z's in the front). It's even better than the more expensive X6 in that regard. Right now they are including over $2000 worth in plug-ins, so it might be a good time to get it, if that's what it comes down.
@@massivebeatzz id44 offers much more, and the plugins?, no much deal.. you can get it on the web
@@juap you mean stolen plugins?
Another WTF is that you can't set up surround in console for the six outputs, and you can't route inputs directly to outputs. This is possible with the rack versions. Not sure if it's a limitation of the FPGA they use in the X4 or if it's actually dumbed down on purpose to upsell to the x8.
But apart from that (and the price) it's everything I wish the Twin was from start.
yes x6 x8 are best value and most functional
The real price of Apollo x4 should be $1200. I bet, they would make more money!
then what should be the real price of apollo quad ? and duo and solo ?
@@RepeatAgain979578 UAD appolo QUAD $1095
GREAT JOB!
thank you ever so much my friend!
It's a pain to spend 1800+ in a desktop audio interface and comes without thunderbolt cable. With 1800, just go with Zen tour synergy core !!!
I prefer it. I can choose the length I need. People will either complain that the cable is too short/too long. Or now that there isn't one at all.
also alot of people still are using TB2 with an adapter
Dude you act like you work for antelope...use what you want and let other ppl do the same man.
waiting for mine to be delivered
awesome. Enjoy!
i'd invest toward RME audio interfaces with $1800. RME are far more superior in audio quality than UAD, more stable, more reliable and are German engineered.
I like RME (see below), but "far superior" is never something I heard or people tested, especially compared to the the latest UAD hardware (Thunderbolt 3, or mark 3 if you will ). They (RME) sound a bit brighter. But very good. For a little less money they are great, but also lack the DSP powered real time recording world of plugins and amps. If someone doesn't need that I would probably recommend it over UAD, or a cheaper Apogee. The only thing is that RME , including the software looks a bit dated these days. Also as for stability - the many UAD I tested were all super stable. The studio I record in is all RME. I think in general Thunderbolt 3 is smoothest on a Mac - literally plug & play.
great review man... i'm getting one of these soon.
Right on!
I wish I could get this for $1800 its $2299.00 now wtf
I know, they added a few plugins that should be free anyways and call it Heritage Bundle, so it looks like a different device.. That is something else. I even felt 1800 was a lot.
Yeah the one thing about Universal Audio is that they milk their users for every last dollar. Their business model is very similar to Apple's.
Good product generally speaking, quality audio and plugins. Though my x4 had burned out LEDs and x8 lost connectivity due to a poorly fitting thunderbolt card. I also didn't like how the units I got were made in China. I'm not in favour of supporting that murderous regime. Some x4 are made in Malaysia however.
They all have Pro & cons..avid is the worse..just make music and stop crying dude
Too much money but I do understand Quality I’m getting an mpcx and this is half the price 2200 hundred dollars and this is over a 1000 dollars maybe later the line but not now
Here is my issue. Apollo is so expensive but not the best. They have big name, when you buy device from UAD, you pay for the brand not for the sound quality, why? Audient is cheaper but better sound quality, Antelope is another beast. If Antelope finds a solution with their software or driver, we all should trash UAD or force them to low the price of their devices down.
The sound quality is amazing in my book. These new converters / crystal are the best - better than audient? maybe, maybe not. There are slight differences, a bit darker, a bit brighter - but that's a matter of preference. If you are over 12 years old, you don't hear frequencies over 16 to 18 Khz , and if you are much older, well it's even less. Antelope is an interesting company, but they need to get their act together. too many products, some obsolete, some canceled, every month they try something new. But great ideas. They are like LG phones. UAD, would be like Samsung. Apogee like Apple iPhones . Audient, like Oneplus.
@@massivebeatzz I would liken UAD to Apple more than Samsung as Samsung is android based with open options for using its hardware and software while UAD is very much like apple with its price, its restrictive nature regarding inability to use its plugins without being connected to its hardware, the Apollo acts as a dongle for its plugins. Apogee would be a tiny bit like apple but still more like Samsung as the new symphony uses onboard dsp for its plugins like uad but Apogee lets you use your own system hardware or not, so if you have a powerful system, you will be able to actually use many more plugins than you would be able to with UAD. UAD will ask you to buy satellite units to use more plugins before they let you use your own system resources. Audient is like one plus hehe id44 is great! Apollo is really nice, for the price though hmmm questionable..
So you want to buy a Lamborghini with the price of a vw bettle?
I can't be the only one scratching his or her head at the price of ALL UA products! Yeah $1200 maybe...$1000 probably. But I've see many companies that are so proud of their products that they never sell any of their products. They can't be that much better than a high end Moto or Presonus, or the likes! I gotta eat!
You are not wrong at all. They are milking it in extreme ways. Watch out for Antelope products tehy are putting as stop to this.
@@massivebeatzz In what way is Antelope putting a stop to this...and what is "This" the UA rip-off?
@@stevend984 right? No TB cable with a $1000+ purchase; no class compliance mode (must download software to try it); locked ecosystem to top it all off
@@ACDevastation then go to another company and stop watch ua videos
I couldn't appreciate using uad plugins because everything is just way to expensive. I would regret buying it and feeling ripped off. All that money can go towards another better interface for half the price and some nice top of the line external hardware and I can own it forever. Uad plugins when they have to be updated you gotta keep paying for the same thing. I pass on uad products
Agreed and everything you just said. Except you won't find a better interface for half the price. These are the best , along with Apogee and RME, and they are not cheap either.
I don’t think you will find a better interface than this for half the price. Technically it’s expensive but you also pay more than what you’re actually paying. With the amount of gear it emulates you should be paying 80,000$ worth of gear buddy.
Blah blah blah
Yeah and you HAVE to use THEIR plugins because yours won't work otherwise so what the f'ing point???
Yes and no. When tracking in their Console Mixer, yes only UAD plugins work. When Mixing / working in your DAW - any AU/VST/AAX plugin works, just like with any other audio interface. But then it' snot powered by DSP but by the computer. While UAD plugins get powered by DSP. , all in the same session.
👍
I challenge you to compare the Antelope Audio Zen Tour Synergy Core Audio Interface with Apollo x4 here. You will have to return your Unit live. :-)
I'll check it out
Кто русский и пришёл посмотреть на карту славы марлоу?