Behringer ADA8000 - stinky or not?

[studio_57]

i'm about to buy a Behringer ADA8000 (8x8) i was wondering what you guys have to say about it. i've read some pretty bad stuff about Behringer on here so far but they make pretty good cabs so... what's the deal?

what about their compressors?

thanks for the help

[ssscientist]

Larry Crane from Tape-Op and Paul White from Sound on Sound both gave the ADA 8000 positive reviews. Both of them were incredulous that such a good set of eight preamps could cost so little, and both mentioned the clarity and lack of undue noise.

They have way more access to all types of gear than you or I could ever hope to have, and they're both good writers who take the time to review gear without prejudging it because of price.

So 'not stinky' is their verdict. And also quiet, neutral and not noisy. I own 3 Behringer products - an EQ, a B-1 mic and a V-Amp Pro - and they're at least as good as stuff that would've cost five times as much 10 years ago.

[Sklathill]

I've owned an ADA8000 for the last few months. While they're certainly my worst pres, they're also pretty darn usable. The last 25% of the dial their pretty frigging noisy, and I don't put any of my dynamics through them, but they're much better than I imagined them to be. I mainly bought mine to add more IO to my system with its unused ADAT, but I've been using the pres with good success. I don't regret the purchase one bit.

[Paj]

If you need the ADAT, it's an amazing plain-vanilla bargain. Remember: no EQ, no inserts---only pad. Phantom power is global (all channels or none) and 48kHz is the max. That being said, you should expect the same performance that you would get from the channel insert sends on a 4580 opamp strip (Mackie VLZ Pro, Behringer UB, Yamaha MG, etc.). Clinique, not boutique.

I've been using one for about 6 months to add 8 more LoZ/phantom channels via ADAT to my recorder for live recordings and multiple mic setups. It's worked flawlessly. I find that the relationship between the pres headroom, peak meter, and ADAT signal makes it very easy to get good ""Popeil" levels into my recorder---"Set it and forget it!".

There are, of course, other units like this out there with different bells and whistles. The Behringer is the least expensive, and if "plain vanilla" is ok, quite useful.

Mackie also has a unit like this coming out soon.

Good luck,
Paj
8^)

[BrettB]

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun0...daa9145589f288

look at that review. If you need a cheap way to increase your I/O through ADAT, it seems a great option.

[Markd102]

I'd like to know how the converters stack up. How do they compare to say a Digi001 or a Presonus Digimax? I don't really give a toss about the preamps.

[SonicAlbert]

That Tape-Op review wasn't an unqualified rave. My impression after reading the article was that the ADA8000 is sitting squarely in the "bang for buck" arena. So, a great unit for $200 as long as you can accept the compromises.

It's probably the preamp/converter section of the DDX3216 mixer repackaged. Don't know that for sure though.

[charger]

I tried it in two different situations: against a Presonus DigiMax, and just to add inputs to my system using a mixer (Soundtracs Topaz) as the front end. Against the Presonus, the difference in sound quality was not noticeable until we pushed the pres. The Presonus had more gain to start with, the Behringer needed to be turned up a little. That said, unless we were cranking it, the difference in quality was indetectable.

Using it with my mixer, I basically bypassed the pres and used it as a line device. In this capacity, I can say that it did the job exactly as I wanted it to. In our studio, it is a backup (the Presonus keeps needing fixes), but it could easily be the main box.

My main gripe with it is that it doesn't have separate analog outputs. The Presonus has analog and ADAT outputs, so we can use it to send 8 channels digitally to the DAW, while monitoring the analog outputs through our board, thus avoiding all latency issues. With the Behringer, we can't do this. For this reason alone, we use the mixer pres with the Behringer, then send the channel outs from the mixer to the Behringer, and send the digital outs of that to the DAW. A different patching configuration. Annoying, but that's why it's $200.

[Warhead]

The TapeOp review said it had a bit of a dirty midrange etc. but that overall it would be good on electric guitars or something like that. Larry did give it a thumbs up in its price range, stating that it's a decent cheap alternative.

The DDX3216 has different specs and twice the oversampling spec on the converters, no these are not the same as the DDX mixer.

Hell $200 is nothing, give it a shot.

War

[NeoMagick]

Charger -

Have heard that an ADAT litepipe cable from the I to the O of the behringer acts as a pass-through so you can use it as an analogue in to analogue out preamp system all in one. Don't own one yet, so can't vouch for this, but it makes sense based on what the manual has to say about it.

Anyone have any more details on the Mackie unit mentioned? (it's not the Onyx 800R, is it?). I'm leaning towards the behringer, but i trust mackie with my life, so if they're coming out with something to compete, i'd throw down extra cash for another product of theirs (but not $1k extra, like the onyx is MSRP'd at...).

[timboZ]

I've had mine for just over a year. I use it for drums most of the time.
I have got some good recordings out of it.

[timboZ]

Originally Posted by NeoMagick

Charger -

but i trust mackie with my life,

Then you never used a Mackie SR56*8 board.

TimboZ

[NeoMagick]

No, but i have used the SR40-8.. loved it. any of their boards i've ever touched were beyond pristine. If there were problems, i never, *ever* ran into any. i just wish i could justify purchasing one for my studio... thinking about the onyx firewire board tho...

bad experiences i take it?

[charger]

Charger -

Have heard that an ADAT litepipe cable from the I to the O of the behringer acts as a pass-through so you can use it as an analogue in to analogue out preamp system all in one.

Yes, but that defeats the purpose. We don't want to use it as an analog preamp. We want to use the digital inputs into Pro Tools, and also have those outputs coming into our board analog so we can monitor them directly (not through the DAW). This is a common application that most 8 channel analog/ADAT pres do. The Behringer doesn't. But it costs less than half the price of anything else, so I understand why.

[NeoMagick]

So you wanted dual routing, both analogue & digital. The ADA8k was the first i'd heard of that made the A-inputs and A-outputs completely independant of each other.

I think i remember reading on the behringer page that it was designed mainly to go along with the DDX3216 mixer, to ammend the input/output capacity of it. The way they worded it, it essentially made its functionality as a standalone preamp unit a distant bonus.

[Strryder]

I've been using an ADA-8000 to add 8 more inputs to a MOTU 828mkII for a few months now with no complaints at all, I think it's a great deal for 230 bucks.

[NeoMagick]

Strryder - That's exactly the setup i'm getting the 8000 for. glad someone knows the two work well. noticed any difference between using the MOTU as clock master, and using the Behringer as clock master? as much as it doesn't make sense, i've heard some people have found that the 8k produces a weaker sound when it's the clock slave. any experience either way?

[SonicAlbert]

What do you mean by weaker? If the sound is worse when it is clocking to an external source, then that probably means that the external clock is worse than it's internal clock, if that is possible. I've read reports on message boards from people who say that clocking the ADA8000 to a good clock, like the Big Ben, improves its sound dramatically.

[NeoMagick]

Sonic -

From http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewto...rum=5&start=20 (a post by 'Proximo', about halfway down the second page):

'I set up the ADA8000 (as slave) and started recording the same patern..

I was not very convinced right away, and my fear was confirmed when I started to compare the ADA8000 track to the I/O box track.
(all tracks have been DCed and normalized).
It sounded indeed clear/bright, but thin, cold, without punch ... better than the fostex though, but not to replace any Creamware converters I have...

Then I don't know why, but started another test right away in the same condition, but this time I put the ADA8000 as Master, and started recording ....
Well, what a difference !!??!? It had more punch, it became warmer, the basses were better, the whole definition of the sound in general...
what a relief ! I even don't know which one I like best now
But now the ADA8000 is a good alternative. '

There's more details about his equipment in the post. Just intrigues me that changing the clock source would appear to have such a drastic effect on sound quality... in the outfit i'm planning (mentioned before, a Motu 828mkII with the 8000 as essentially an 8-pre adat expansion), can't help but wonder if making the motu a slave would sacrifice the quality of its sound, or vice versa...

[Strryder]

I use a wordclock connection from the 828mkII (master) to the ADA-8000 (slave), so far I have only used the ADA-8000 for it's inputs, so I only have one lightpipe connection and the wordclock connection.

[NeoMagick]

Originally Posted by Strryder

I use a wordclock connection from the 828mkII (master) to the ADA-8000 (slave), so far I have only used the ADA-8000 for it's inputs, so I only have one lightpipe connection and the wordclock connection.

I know the 828mkII has adat lightpipe in - but it's only got one. When you're at 96khz, that limits it to 4 channels in, right? I know in this particular post, the ADA8k only goes to 48khz, but I'm debating replacing my 828mkII which fried some time ago and weighing the pros/cons.

[mshilarious]

Originally Posted by NeoMagick

Then I don't know why, but started another test right away in the same condition, but this time I put the ADA8000 as Master, and started recording ....
Well, what a difference !!??!? It had more punch, it became warmer, the basses were better, the whole definition of the sound in general...
what a relief ! I even don't know which one I like best now
But now the ADA8000 is a good alternative. '

Generally, a converter should work best using its internal clock. Dan Lavry has written lots about that. And there have been lots of arguments about the merits of quality external clocks, but nobody has suggested that using an average external clock is better than using an average internal clock.

If I recall correctly, the Behri uses Wavefront chips, which are the last generation of 24 bit Alesis chips, the same as the Alesis AI3 used. So there is no reason that the Behri would be horrible.

[Big Kenny]

Thread is over 2 years old...... if it wasn't stinky then....it is by now.

[mshilarious]

Originally Posted by Big Kenny

Thread is over 2 years old...... if it wasn't stinky then....it is by now.

Yeah but it was bumped by an original participant . . . so . . .

[Yareek]

Well if anyone cares I had one and really liked it, just sold it because I'm going from PC to Mac and getting a FirePod that has the pre's and converters in one box.

Pretty clean, low noise, not outstanding sound quality, but not enough to hold back your average home-rec'er. I look at it this way: is it my preamp/converter that's making the biggest difference or my lack of experience in tracking? Probably the latter.

I wish they would have used combo XLR-1/4" jacks on the back though...I had to make a set of patch cables to use the analog outs with my mixer. Not a biggie, but took a few hours to solder together and maybe $40 in parts.