Can’t use TB-3 frustration... the search for an alternative

[Darryl Ramm]

Yes and I'm giving you a link to the very best info on DUC on all Windows PC builds, in case you hit issues, and because you asserted it would be a good PC because it's built for gaming. And I've seen you here on DUC only focusing on the interface and interface latency. I've never noticed you say what actual IO buffer size you run with today. You have no-end of choices of USB interfaces, buy one and get going. If RTL is important to you there are lots of old threads here and on the Web about RTL measurements. If you have a near decent interface today, changing to a much more expensive interface with a slightly lower best case RTL won't help you at all unless you are tracking at the very smallest Pro Tools IO buffer size, and even then it's often not that significant (sure might be a few bad cases). And if latency *is* critical... measure stuff starting with LatencyMon, if it's not good you might need to put $$ into a dedicated DAW PC vs say spend money on boutique converters and interfaces.

[pi-town]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Yes and I'm giving you a link to the very best info on DUC on all Windows PC builds, in case you hit issues, and because you asserted it would be a good PC because it's built for gaming. And I've seen you here on DUC only focusing on the interface and interface latency. I've never noticed you say what actual IO buffer size you run with today. You have no-end of choices of USB interfaces, buy one and get going. If RTL is important to you there are lots of old threads here and on the Web about RTL measurements. If you have a near decent interface today, changing to a much more expensive interface with a slightly lower best case RTL won't help you at all unless you are tracking at the very smallest Pro Tools IO buffer size, and even then it's often not that significant (sure might be a few bad cases). And if latency *is* critical... measure stuff starting with LatencyMon, if it's not good you might need to put $$ into a dedicated DAW PC vs say spend money on boutique converters and interfaces.

I'm currently running Pro Tools 2021 with an Apogee Duet 2 (44.1kHz - max capable) and HW buffer size of 32 samples. I recently bought a new computer (as you know) and would like to upgrade from a 5+ year old interface. ANYTHING (any interface, that is) would be an improvement but most of my post have a similar goal. That goal is finding out how diminishing the returns are if I were to go with dedicated conversion vs. an interface with onboard conversion.

[Mark Ziebarth]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

…And I've seen you here on DUC only focusing on the interface and interface latency. I've never noticed you say what actual IO buffer size you run with today…
If you have a near decent interface today, changing to a much more expensive interface with a slightly lower best case RTL won't help you at all unless you are tracking at the very smallest Pro Tools IO buffer size, and even then it's often not that significant (sure might be a few bad cases)...

But if he would buy an RME UFX why bother about latency? If you handle monitoring while recording via RMEs Total Mix there is no latency problem even if your buffer size in Pro Tools is 1024 samples.
Best
Mark

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by Mark Ziebarth

But if he would buy an RME UFX why bother about latency? If you handle monitoring while recording via RMEs Total Mix there is no latency problem even if your buffer size in Pro Tools is 1024 samples.
Best
Mark

(As I'm pretty sure you know) You have to choose between hardware or software monitoring. And TotalMix is fantastic, but lots of interfaces have near zero latency hardware monitoring. All great if you are OK doing hardware monitoring, but if need to/want to software monitor stuff you are at the mercy of the IO buffer etc. latency. I assume the OP is here focusing on this because he's decided has can't use hardware monitoring, needs to track through DAW plugins, has issues with punch in etc. etc. But things where latency often comes up most critical like vocals... well often they are the candidates for hardware monitoring.

The Duet he's coming from has a hardware mixer/monitor controlled by Maestro so I hope he's played with that and familiar with the tradeoffs.

And ultimately if latency while tracking is critical, and folks think they can't use hardware monitoring and need to run plugins in the DAW then it's HDX. Avid Carbon is not an option with Windows today, but maybe buy a new Mac and spend ~$4k on Carbon. Or cut over to Pro Tools Ultimate software, a HDX PCIe card and say used HD IO 16x16 box.

Maybe the OP can explain why he needs software monitoring needs here.

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by pi-town

I'm currently running Pro Tools 2021 with an Apogee Duet 2 (44.1kHz - max capable) and HW buffer size of 32 samples. I recently bought a new computer (as you know) and would like to upgrade from a 5+ year old interface. ANYTHING (any interface, that is) would be an improvement but most of my post have a similar goal. That goal is finding out how diminishing the returns are if I were to go with dedicated conversion vs. an interface with onboard conversion.

Thanks for the extra info, great you are running at 32 IO buffer sizes.

The common source for RTL measurements is this thread on "Gearslutz": https://gearspace.com/board/music-co...data-base.html Maybe you've seen and undersand that. Hopefully you are able to run your own RTL measurements. If you want to focus on latency discussions you should probably be having conversations over there.

The Apogee duet (I assume the original Thunderbolt one) lists there at 4.8ms RTL @ 32 samples, Apogee claim 3.6ms RTL @ 32 samples for the Duet 2, that very likely is a Mac number. Would not surprise me if their Windows drivers are worse. You should measure it.

So 3.6ms RTL or anything close to that is great. You basically are not going to find anything appreciably lower worth worrying about. If this is the driving issue for you then start looking for stuff that has similar RTL on that benchmark list. I've already pointed you at the RME Fireface UFX+ as a great product. Fantastic company, great support, USB and Thunderbolt. And way more IO, connectivity, likely product lifetime than products you have been talking about. Or look at the RME Fireface UCX II for $1,500, USB 2 interface, it will have low latency (because RME), who cares it's USB 2 it will deliver. But look at those RTL benchmark results and talk a look at any low/similar RTL products to see if they suit you.

And if you are focusing "external converter" systems be careful as the digital interface latencies/RTL numbers often do not include any conversion time, so those are useless number for you.

As for longevity which you've raised many interface you purchase is going to be out of date in a decade. Anything dependent on drivers or custom software to interface to the computer is very likely to end up killed by end of life software support from the vendor, or by the death of the vendor themselves You can hopefully find stuff that lasts longer if it uses the most commodity interfaces (e.g. USB) and/or also provides standard industry I/O e.g. supports ADAT/SMUX or AES/EBU or MADI in and/or out. Some interfaces offer stand-alone mode so you could flip them to be ADAT/SMUX preamps in future. Some vendors add class compliant USB support in addition to high performance drivers... e.g. done for iOS connectivity, but that's a nice fall back if the vendor disappeared tomorrow you could at least use them with future OS releases in class compliant mode. Cough, again done by RME with some products, but they are not alone. And PCIe card stuff... much of that is dead or only really stuff for the high-end very high for high IO counts (via.....). The transition to network audio is underway, with AVB and Dante becoming more important. But which of those two will take over? MADI, ADAT, AES/EBU, Digilink... will be around for many years but will be interesting to see how hard a competition AVB and Dante give them. If you want forward compatibility options/to reduce risks you might want to include interfaces with some of these connection options, but also maybe just spend less and get simpler stuff and replace it sooner.

What is your budget? Do you own nice outboard mic preamps today? Your desire here to find stand alone converters is a bit unusual, especially for somebody coming off a (nice but) low-end interface. If you were a studio wanting to rack a pile of gear, to give many many channels or be more modular then sure, or money's no object and you wanted those Prism logos to pull clients... then sure spend the money. But you are asking about stuff in the ballpark done today with single box modest interfaces.

[Mark Ziebarth]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

(As I'm pretty sure you know) You have to choose between hardware or software monitoring. And TotalMix is fantastic, but lots of interfaces have near zero latency hardware monitoring. All great if you are OK doing hardware monitoring, but if need to/want to software monitor stuff you are at the mercy of the IO buffer etc. latency. I assume the OP is here focusing on this because he's decided has can't use hardware monitoring, needs to track through DAW plugins, has issues with punch in etc. etc. But things where latency often comes up most critical like vocals... well often they are the candidates for hardware monitoring.

The Duet he's coming from has a hardware mixer/monitor controlled by Maestro so I hope he's played with that and familiar with the tradeoffs.

And ultimately if latency while tracking is critical, and folks think they can't use hardware monitoring and need to run plugins in the DAW then it's HDX. Avid Carbon is not an option with Windows today, but maybe buy a new Mac and spend ~$4k on Carbon. Or cut over to Pro Tools Ultimate software, a HDX PCIe card and say used HD IO 16x16 box.

Maybe the OP can explain why he needs software monitoring needs here.

Hey Darryl,
you are right. If there is a need for software monitoring TotalMix does not help. While writing my first answer I was not sure if the OP needs software monitoring. By now I know.
In my opinion Carbon with its Hybrid Engine is a very good system to avoid latency during recordings if you need to track with plug-ins. But it is Mac only so far.
The more than ten years old DSPs from HDX (also used in Carbon) have this one advantage left: they calculate plug-ins fast enough for monitoring. HDX got the Hybrid Engine as well but is even more expensive.
I guess you are on the best route for a Windows user right now: to get the latest and greatest combination of a fast computer combined with an interface with well programmed drivers causing very short latency.
Best
Mark

[pi-town]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Thanks for the extra info, great you are running at 32 IO buffer sizes.

The common source for RTL measurements is this thread on "Gearslutz": https://gearspace.com/board/music-co...data-base.html Maybe you've seen and undersand that. Hopefully you are able to run your own RTL measurements. If you want to focus on latency discussions you should probably be having conversations over there.

The Apogee duet (I assume the original Thunderbolt one) lists there at 4.8ms RTL @ 32 samples, Apogee claim 3.6ms RTL @ 32 samples for the Duet 2, that very likely is a Mac number. Would not surprise me if their Windows drivers are worse. You should measure it.

So 3.6ms RTL or anything close to that is great. You basically are not going to find anything appreciably lower worth worrying about. If this is the driving issue for you then start looking for stuff that has similar RTL on that benchmark list. I've already pointed you at the RME Fireface UFX+ as a great product. Fantastic company, great support, USB and Thunderbolt. And way more IO, connectivity, likely product lifetime than products you have been talking about. Or look at the RME Fireface UCX II for $1,500, USB 2 interface, it will have low latency (because RME), who cares it's USB 2 it will deliver. But look at those RTL benchmark results and talk a look at any low/similar RTL products to see if they suit you.

And if you are focusing "external converter" systems be careful as the digital interface latencies/RTL numbers often do not include any conversion time, so those are useless number for you.

As for longevity which you've raised many interface you purchase is going to be out of date in a decade. Anything dependent on drivers or custom software to interface to the computer is very likely to end up killed by end of life software support from the vendor, or by the death of the vendor themselves You can hopefully find stuff that lasts longer if it uses the most commodity interfaces (e.g. USB) and/or also provides standard industry I/O e.g. supports ADAT/SMUX or AES/EBU or MADI in and/or out. Some interfaces offer stand-alone mode so you could flip them to be ADAT/SMUX preamps in future. Some vendors add class compliant USB support in addition to high performance drivers... e.g. done for iOS connectivity, but that's a nice fall back if the vendor disappeared tomorrow you could at least use them with future OS releases in class compliant mode. Cough, again done by RME with some products, but they are not alone. And PCIe card stuff... much of that is dead or only really stuff for the high-end very high for high IO counts (via.....). The transition to network audio is underway, with AVB and Dante becoming more important. But which of those two will take over? MADI, ADAT, AES/EBU, Digilink... will be around for many years but will be interesting to see how hard a competition AVB and Dante give them. If you want forward compatibility options/to reduce risks you might want to include interfaces with some of these connection options, but also maybe just spend less and get simpler stuff and replace it sooner.

What is your budget? Do you own nice outboard mic preamps today? Your desire here to find stand alone converters is a bit unusual, especially for somebody coming off a (nice but) low-end interface. If you were a studio wanting to rack a pile of gear, to give many many channels or be more modular then sure, or money's no object and you wanted those Prism logos to pull clients... then sure spend the money. But you are asking about stuff in the ballpark done today with single box modest interfaces.

Just to clarify, I have an Apogee Duet 2 USB. As luck would have it, it’s the one unit Apogee wrote Windows drivers for, so I didn’t have to immediately purchase a new interface when I built my new PC. I don’t think where someone comes from should necessarily be a determining factor of where they end up.

I was attracted to standalone conversion because it is free of, to be completely frank, the bull**** (DSP power, unnecessary digital I/O, etc). I just need a unit to perform well. All the bells and whistles are great for marketing but a list of bullet points that run on not-so-great third-party drivers isn’t what I want to spend $3k on.

However, I am unfortunately finding that stand-alone converters like the Aurora (n) don’t offer any type of savings, even when choosing a very barebones configuration (8 Line I/O, 16 AES I/O). I can only be left to assume it’s because the conversion is better but from the responses I’ve been met with, it would seem not by much.

I did take a look at some of the options you mentioned above. I could make the UCX II work (and the UFX+ is probably an even more future proof option because of MADI), but again - bells and whistles... much less so than with some other products but even still...

UCX II: Channels 1 to 4 feature an automatic overload protection. AutoSet tries to keep a headroom of 6 dB. Levels higher than -6 dBFS will permanently reduce the gain.

That kind of stuff it’s a huge turn off and I’ve already read posts where it has interrupted workflows because users were unable to turn it off and keep it off. While this example may lean toward the weaker side, I wanted to give an example of why interfaces were less of a focus than converters. However, I am aware my logic may be flawed and that is why I sought information/opinions here.

I’ve seen the thread you mentioned and it was very helpful. I found this podcast to be even more informative. Highlighting the role software plays in conjunction with hardware and connectivity:

https://dawbench.libsyn.com/episode-...etting-the-bar

I only have a single LA-610 at the moment but the plan is to continue to expand my outboard selection. Next with a nice quad pre and likely an additional LA-610. I’m just trying to figure out the best way to get these things in the box.

I very much appreciate the help. I’d like to spend =<$3k on some sort of solution.

[EGS]

Originally Posted by Mark Ziebarth

... is a very good system to avoid latency during recordings if you need to track with plug-ins....

I use regular Pro Tools on a modern Windows 10 build at buffer 64

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by pi-town

That kind of stuff it’s a huge turn off and I’ve already read posts where it has interrupted workflows because users were unable to turn it off and keep it off. While this example may lean toward the weaker side, I wanted to give an example of why interfaces were less of a focus than converters. However, I am aware my logic may be flawed and that is why I sought information/opinions here.

That feature is trivially easy to turn off and I have no idea why it would turn back on again. Maybe somebody was confused, did not understand how to use the gain knobs/menu or somebody else was changing this remotely by TotalMix. Never had this turned on on the UFX+ Never been an issue. And if people are hitting A/D converters very hot they have a problem anyhow. Something like these RME boxes can be complex, you need to take a few days and play and understand them. But things like TotalMix (or similar systems)... if you don't want that on it takes ~ ten minutes to learn and make sure you know how to disable it. Some of those features can save your ass in situations when you need it. TotalMix mixer for *reliable* low latency tracking, TotalMix being able to run stand alone and change an interface into a routing/outboard box, etc.

[pi-town]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

That feature is trivially easy to turn off and I have no idea why it would turn back on again. Maybe somebody was confused, did not understand how to use the gain knobs/menu or somebody else was changing this remotely by TotalMix. Never had this turned on on the UFX+ Never been an issue. And if people are hitting A/D converters very hot they have a problem anyhow. Something like these RME boxes can be complex, you need to take a few days and play and understand them. But things like TotalMix (or similar systems)... if you don't want that on it takes ~ ten minutes to learn and make sure you know how to disable it. Some of those features can save your ass in situations when you need it. TotalMix mixer for *reliable* low latency tracking, TotalMix being able to run stand alone and change an interface into a routing/outboard box, etc.

I understand. Well, RME seems like a great choice. Thanks for the advice