Can you really hear the difference in AR or DX Stage boxes?

Forums Forums SQ Forums SQ general discussions Can you really hear the difference in AR or DX Stage boxes?

Tagged: , , ,

This topic contains 5 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of lightingman117 lightingman117 5 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
  • #79668
    Profile photo of Nanex


    tomorrow I will order a new console for me. Coming from Midas I want to switch to A&H because of the better fitting workflow for me. And so I will be buying an SQ-6.

    The only question that I still have is:
    is it worth to spend the extra money on the dx’s or will I just be fine with the AR2412 and AR0804?
    I like the sound of the GLD very much, so I think I don’t really need the DX’s, but still..if it would make the job easier because of the better sound (and probably better working effects on 96kHz?) I think it would be nice to have and I would spend the extra money.

    So let me hear, what you think!

    Profile photo of Art

    The desk still runs at 96kHz, even though the input from the AR’s is 48kHz. So the effects would still be at 96kHz.

    As for sound, I can’t comment on that as I use the DX boxes both for my SQ and my dLive.

    Profile photo of MarkPAman

    I’m planning to test an AR2412 against the SQ’s local inputs tomorrow, which should be much the same thing I think?. I’ll let you know what I find.

    Profile photo of baylonjay

    I say YES – it is worth it to go with the DX168, etc to keep everything at 24/96. The whole reason why I bought the SQ6 is I do an even mix of just Live and live recording, along with studio tracking and mixing. I wanted one system – that ran 24/96 at the core, and would support Dante at that rate (still waiting for that SQ dante card, I am in line a sweetwater to get it in 2 weeks, so we’ll see). I had been waiting for someone (thanks A&H!) to come out with a reasonably priced (nothing yet close to it… though Id imagine the others, and you know who they are, are close to having 24/96 competition to SQ) FULL FEATURED 24/96 board. The Slink is great to use with DX-168 (which is an excellent 24/96 stage box) for getting all the cables close to the center of action, and the dante is great for attaching PM, DAW, and other systems at 24/96 – I use the DAL PM mix-16 system with dante, and also have rednet D/A, and other Dante connected stuff for doing the studio recording. I only wish that there could be 2x I/O ports in the SQ6 – so I could run another WAVEs soundgrid card in it. (there is a Dante to soundgrid bridge I can use, and may look into that). I love 24/96 and Dante – since we are close to arriving at omnipotent standard (cheap and evolved enough that even inexpensive stuff can support it direct) that is as good as audio should ever need (not interested in that debate anymore!) for live and recording, and with Dante getting omnipotent as well…. the world of audio has all it needs to provide full 24/96 rouging, network audio processing and mixing that can be a standard for a LONG time – all over a cat5! What is not to absolutely love?!?! 🙂

    Profile photo of Nanex

    Thank you for all of your replies!

    But finally, did you have time to test the AR vs. the DX? and if so, what do you think about the difference?

    Profile photo of lightingman117

    Here are some traces that I took awhile back.

    This is before I started learning REW/ARTA so maybe in a few months I can get distortion & other metrics.

    General gut feeling, SQ is smoother/nicer than AR. If you have the money go DX.
    Does it matter that much? No. I’d rather have a digital snake (AR2412) than analog snake and local IO simply from ease of setup P

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.