EMU 0404 or M-Audio Delta Audiophile 2496

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alcaline
  • Start date Start date
A

Alcaline

New member
Hi, i am new to this forum.
And it seems like a place with people that knows what they are talking about :)

But I am getting a new sound card.. I dont want to put so much money in it.
But it must have MIDI, S/PDIF, ASIO compatible and some ins. and outs.
So I am down to these two:
- EMU 0404
or
- M-Audio Delta Audiophile 2496
They are about the same price..

Any pros, cons, tips or warnings anyone would share with me? :)
 
Alcaline said:
Hi, i am new to this forum.
And it seems like a place with people that knows what they are talking about :)

But I am getting a new sound card.. I dont want to put so much money in it.
But it must have MIDI, S/PDIF, ASIO compatible and some ins. and outs.
So I am down to these two:
- EMU 0404
or
- M-Audio Delta Audiophile 2496
They are about the same price..

Any pros, cons, tips or warnings anyone would share with me? :)
Click to expand...



My personal experience:

I had a 2496 and up grade with a audiophile 192, a litlle more $$$ but better sound
 
Nothing between those cards sound quality-wise.

Me, I'd go for the audiophile because of their mature drivers
 
Bulls Hit said:
Nothing between those cards sound quality-wise.

Me, I'd go for the audiophile because of their mature drivers
Click to expand...

I concur! or agree if some people dont understand ;) :D
 
Okay, thanks for your help :)

If I`m first going to think about the Audiophile 192 I rather want the Delta 1010LT :)
But the 192 has 192kHz and both Audiophile 2496 and Delta 1010 only has 96kHz?
Is there a big difference?
 
I really dont think that it does, some people might swear by 192 kHz but 48kHz is good enough
 
Carter said:
I really dont think that it does, some people might swear by 192 kHz but 48kHz is good enough
Click to expand...


I am also in concurrence that 48KHz is good enough
 
emu 0404 is not for the armature. most complaints are "I don’t know how to make it work." I’ve used it with no problem and seem to like the routing options with the patch mix. which is the virtual mixer. but that’s the other complaint. the patch mix. If you have no patience and don’t understand how a mixer works then the 0404 is not for you. So the 2496 would be a better investment for entry level recording.
 
altiris said:
emu 0404 is not for the armature. most complaints are "I don’t know how to make it work." I’ve used it with no problem and seem to like the routing options with the patch mix. which is the virtual mixer. but that’s the other complaint. the patch mix. If you have no patience and don’t understand how a mixer works then the 0404 is not for you. So the 2496 would be a better investment for entry level recording.
Click to expand...


Well the 2496 has the same thing and at first it is hard to route your channels! so it really a toss up between the two.
 
I would go with the Audiophile 2496.
It was my first soundcard, good (not excellent) sound quality, reliable....cheap...
The 192 is useless unless you really want to record at 192 ?
 
repeat:

I had an 2496 and up grade with an audiophile 192, a litlle more $$$ but much better sound. See tech specifications: better signal noite to ratio, and ... (my impressions:better bass definition, better transients response, you can hear percussion´s details that you don´t heard before ...) I really recomend over the 2496 :) :
 
CIRO said:
repeat:

I had an 2496 and up grade with an audiophile 192, a litlle more $$$ but much better sound. See tech specifications: better signal noite to ratio, and ... (my impressions:better bass definition, better transients response, you can hear percussion´s details that you don´t heard before ...) I really recomend over the 2496 :) :
Click to expand...
Well, if the converters used in the 192 seems much better according to your sayings, then the 192 is a wiser choice.
 
Thankz!

Thank you all for the help..

I guess I will go for the 192 if as you say the converters are better.
Because I dont realy care about the 96/192kHz issue..
Or if I just wait to save up some more, and go for the Delta 1010LT.
Its got more ins and outs, and when the price difference is so small
from the 192, it seems like a good idea..

Agein thanks alot! :)
 
Alcaline said:
Thank you all for the help..

I guess I will go for the 192 if as you say the converters are better.
Because I dont realy care about the 96/192kHz issue..
Or if I just wait to save up some more, and go for the Delta 1010LT.
Its got more ins and outs, and when the price difference is so small
from the 192, it seems like a good idea..

Agein thanks alot! :)
Click to expand...
Beware, the Delta1010LT converters are the same as the Audiophile 24/96.
Thus, the converters of the 192 are better.
But getting more Ins and Outs can compensate a lot for having lower grade converters. I mean, these converters are not "bad" they simply are a little shy treble wise and lack a little sonic depth.
 
TheDewd said:
Beware, the Delta1010LT converters are the same as the Audiophile 24/96.
Thus, the converters of the 192 are better.
But getting more Ins and Outs can compensate a lot for having lower grade converters. I mean, these converters are not "bad" they simply are a little shy treble wise and lack a little sonic depth.
Click to expand...
Okay, But I am looking at it alittle like this..
What I need now really is MIDI I/O,1 stereo inn, 1 mic inn and 2 stereo outs.
So instead of getting just that and save a few $$, ill rather pay a little more
and have some extra i/o`s for later.. never know when I`ll need them :rolleyes:

But I was shure that I read some where that the Delta1010LT had the same
award winning converters as Delta44/66...
The fact that they are award winning sounds nice! haha :p
 
Alcaline said:
But I was shure that I read some where that the Delta1010LT had the same
award winning converters as Delta44/66...
The fact that they are award winning sounds nice! haha :p
Click to expand...
Yeah, in your position, I'd just go with the 1010LT.
Award winning in 1845 doesn't mean "good" per today's standards :)
But still very very useable IMHO.
The projects I made with my 2496 were good sounding.
Best of luck dude!
 
TheDewd said:
Yeah, in your position, I'd just go with the 1010LT.
Award winning in 1845 doesn't mean "good" per today's standards :)
But still very very useable IMHO.
The projects I made with my 2496 were good sounding.
Best of luck dude!
Click to expand...


lol, maby not.. But award winning never the less ;) :D

Thankz! :)
 
I'm casting another (I think?) vote for the 1010lt. Hard to beat for that price. I like M-Audio's customer service better than E-Mu's.

Just a note: The Delta 1010LT supports up to 192kHz, with a recent patch/update I believe. Only pros have use for frequencies above 96k.
 
jaykeMURD said:
I'm casting another (I think?) vote for the 1010lt. Hard to beat for that price. I like M-Audio's customer service better than E-Mu's.

Just a note: The Delta 1010LT supports up to 192kHz, with a recent patch/update I believe. Only pros have use for frequencies above 96k.
Click to expand...


When I had my Audiophile 2496, I recorded a project (songs with less tracks ,4 or 6 acoustic guitars channels , 1 piano, strings and a voice), in 96K (and obvously ,resample in digital to 44.1)
my opinion: the sound is better in 96, better convert than record all project in 44.1.

That´s my opinion...(with a lot of channels and plug ins is other story,the computer :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top