Fireface 800 connected to a Pulsar

A place to talk about whatever Scope music/gear related stuff you want.

Moderators: valis, garyb

Post Reply
claudioD
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Palermo / Italy
Contact:

Fireface 800 connected to a Pulsar

Post by claudioD »

hello
I'm planning to buy a RME Fireface 800 to expand my Analog IO converters . I have a Pulsar 2 Z-link and a A16 ultra. The questions are : how can I connect the the Fireface ? Via Adat to the Pulsar ? Should I use a BNC cable for the digital synch between the A16 and the FF to use both the converters togheter ? Can I use it as main clock if I connect it via ADAT ?
The more infos you can give me the better is, it is appreciated
thanks
manfriday
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:41 am
Location: St. Charles, IL

Post by manfriday »

You can use the ADAT outputs from the fireface to connect to the pulsar, yes.

And yes, I would sync things up via wordclock (the bnc connectors)
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23246
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Post by garyb »

but you can use adat for sync if you prefer.
User avatar
valis
Posts: 7320
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: West Coast USA
Contact:

Post by valis »

ADAT sync should work fine in most cases. In my previous studio I had to use a rather lengthy optical cable run from my Scope to my Hammerfall Multiface and so I would see occasional errors, bnc solved that. I've seen no actual data errors since, but for 6 feet or less (2 meters?) I can't imagine you having a problem with ADAT alone.
claudioD
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:00 pm
Location: Palermo / Italy
Contact:

Post by claudioD »

thanks for your replies

should I use the Adat out of the A16 (that is the clock master in my system) or I can use the ADAT out the the Pulsar ?
manfriday
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:41 am
Location: St. Charles, IL

Post by manfriday »

seems like I read somewhere that there is less jitter when clocking via bnc as opposed to optical.
Anyone know if this is actually the case?
I'm just a button-pusher, so I just go by what folks say who is smarterer than me. ;)
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23246
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Post by garyb »

yes, bnc is typically less jitter than adat, but that doesn't assure you of a better sound. personally, i prefer an external master clock and bnc, but adat is more than sufficient for most project studio work. most people wouldn't know the difference.
User avatar
astroman
Posts: 8410
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 4:00 pm
Location: Germany

Post by astroman »

isn't that because the (dedicated) clock source feeding the BNC cable is more stable than the 'regular' clock on the card and not the 'transmission error' induced by the cable type ? ;)
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23246
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Post by garyb »

yep, probably....
thanks for the clarification.
User avatar
astroman
Posts: 8410
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 4:00 pm
Location: Germany

Post by astroman »

oops, if I may hi-jack...
do you still have an old A16 (somewhere) around ?
if so, could you run it's BNC sync against your studio clock ? i.e. let the A16 provide the signal and tell if there's a difference noticeable or not ?

I recently found a passage in the old manual that the A16 was supposed to act as a studio clock and had dedicated circuitry for this purpose - of course it's somewhat inferior as it's chaining from a single source only, and not star-connecting, but anyway...

cheers, Tom
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23246
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Post by garyb »

sorry, i can't help. i don't have the a16 around...
i would bet the clock on the a16 to be very good.
Post Reply