Q about using two interfaces into two firewire ports

[RegisWhite]

Hello to all;

I've been using the wisdom of this forum for some time, now, but this is my first question! I've searched this forum, and also Google, and I've yet to find a good answer to my question, which follows.

Is there any good reason NOT to connect two audio interfaces to two separate firewire ports on my Mac Pro, rather than go through the "piggyback" procedure described in virtually every interface owner's manual, where you make one a standalone, and slave it to your "main" interface?

Because I'm never recording more than a few tracks at one time, I can't think there would be any word clock issues, but if I'm wrong, I'd like to know. It just seems so simple, you know?

Thanks in advance for your help!

[Top Jimmy]

Well, if you have Pro Tools 9 or 10, you can build and use an aggregate I/O if you like. Though if you have Avid interfaces, they no likey aggregation. You will still need to leave one as clock master and slave the other one to it, or you will need to enable resampling for the secondary interface in the aggregate setup. If you value quality, you won't choose the resampling method.


Buttdialed by me & Tapatalk

[Darryl Ramm]

What exact two interfaces? Aggregate IO may not work at all, may work and suck or might if you are lucky.

I suspect there is some confusion underlying this question. Few if any interfaces support 'piggybacking' as you describe it. If you just chain multiple typical firewire interfaces together they don't 'aggregate' or combine in any way. A more typical and reliable mechanism of joining interfaces together is using ADAT or ADAT/SMUX to expand whatever interface you are using (as long as it supports ADAT etc.), the other box just needs to take ADAT out, its not interfacing directly to the computer.

[RegisWhite]

Thanks to Darryl and Jimmy; I think that provides a good answer to my question. When I used the "piggybacking" reference, I was referring to that process that many interfaces describe, where you connect lightpipe ins and outs, and end up with what, in practical terms, amounts to one big interface, instead of two smaller ones.

Lightpipe/ADAT output should be standard enough that it wouldn't matter if you used two different brands of interface; I have a Profire 2626, and I'm looking for something with a couple of inputs on the front, for convenience, say, a Mackie Onyx Blackbird, or one of the MOTU units, either the MkIII, or one of the older MkIIs, which are now relatively inexpensive.

I guess the reason why I asked was that it seemed very practical; yes, if your computer only has one firewire connection, then you obviously have to do something to make up the difference, so to speak, but if you're fortunate and have more than one, it "felt logical and reasonable" to just plug one interface into "input one," and the other into "input two," as long as you're never trying to actually *record* through both interfaces, at the same time.

Thanks for the help!

RW

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by RegisWhite

Thanks to Darryl and Jimmy; I think that provides a good answer to my question. When I used the "piggybacking" reference, I was referring to that process that many interfaces describe, where you connect lightpipe ins and outs, and end up with what, in practical terms, amounts to one big interface, instead of two smaller ones.

Lightpipe/ADAT output should be standard enough that it wouldn't matter if you used two different brands of interface; I have a Profire 2626, and I'm looking for something with a couple of inputs on the front, for convenience, say, a Mackie Onyx Blackbird, or one of the MOTU units, either the MkIII, or one of the older MkIIs, which are now relatively inexpensive.

I guess the reason why I asked was that it seemed very practical; yes, if your computer only has one firewire connection, then you obviously have to do something to make up the difference, so to speak, but if you're fortunate and have more than one, it "felt logical and reasonable" to just plug one interface into "input one," and the other into "input two," as long as you're never trying to actually *record* through both interfaces, at the same time.

Thanks for the help!

RW

Yes, so you have it now. Wherever possible you normally want to go ADAT not trying to use aggregate IO.

Darryl