003 user looking for new interface

[Patill]

Hey,

as I said I want upgrade to a new interface after buying a new MacBook Pro with M3 Max Chip and 36 GB RAM. Been looking through some like Apollo Audio, Neumann etc. but wanna stick with Avid due to the simplicity of connetction and compatibility.

Question now is…which one? There’s some open points I’d like to clarify before making a choice. Looking into the Carbon and Mbox Studio.


1. Am I missing a good interface apart from those two?

2. The Carbon only seems to have one monitor output. I really like to switch between my two monitors…I have read it also had Alt monitor outputs? I could not find them

3. How do you connect the Carbon to a MacBook?

4. Would an MBox Studio maybe be enough compared to a Carbon when you “upgrade” from a 003 Rack?

5. Would the Mbox be kind of a downgrade from the 003 (even if it’s old). Seems it also only has USB 2.0 which would be kind of lame when the mac offers Thunderbolt 4


Sorry if my questions may sound stupid or ignorant, I was very happy with my 003 for a long time not touching anything at all :)


Thanks.

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by Patill

Hey,

as I said I want upgrade to a new interface after buying a new MacBook Pro with M3 Max Chip and 36 GB RAM. Been looking through some like Apollo Audio, Neumann etc. but wanna stick with Avid due to the simplicity of connetction and compatibility.

Question now is…which one? There’s some open points I’d like to clarify before making a choice. Looking into the Carbon and Mbox Studio.


1. Am I missing a good interface apart from those two?

2. The Carbon only seems to have one monitor output. I really like to switch between my two monitors…I have read it also had Alt monitor outputs? I could not find them

3. How do you connect the Carbon to a MacBook?

4. Would an MBox Studio maybe be enough compared to a Carbon when you “upgrade” from a 003 Rack?

5. Would the Mbox be kind of a downgrade from the 003 (even if it’s old). Seems it also only has USB 2.0 which would be kind of lame when the mac offers Thunderbolt 4


Sorry if my questions may sound stupid or ignorant, I was very happy with my 003 for a long time not touching anything at all :)


Thanks.

Not stupid I have both Carbon and I also have a M1 MBP (see my systems at bottom of page)

#1 Avid does not offer anything between MBox Studio and Carbon.

MBox has 4 mic pre's, Carbon has 8. BUT Carbon offers on board HDX DSP Hybrid Engine for latency free recording and dubbing MBox does not.


#2 So Carbon has only one pair of monitor outs that are separate from it's 8 other analog line outputs... BUT you can definitely have a second or third pair of monitors connected to either the DB-25 line outs 1-2 0r 3-4 from the 8 available DB25 line outs, and you choose the Alt outs in the software (see screen shot below)

#3 (Unless something else has com along since I got my mine) Because Carbon uses AVB and an ethernet connector . You have to use either.
The two Apple adaptor set up. This one https://www.amazon.com/Apple-Thunder...8396330&sr=8-1
and this one https://www.amazon.com/Apple-Thunder...8394198&sr=8-2

Or for a one adaptor set up but twice as expensive https://www.amazon.com/Sonnet-Thunde...8394367&sr=8-1

#4 "would MBox Studio be enough" is pretty hard to answer for someone else.
As noted M Box has 4 mic pres. Carbon has 8 For me the 8 HDX chips for DSB was a big deciding factor and the HDX hybrid engine DSP makes recording and overdub a real treat .
Plus I think the converters in Carbon may be better

#5 A down grade ? No I would say and up grade (I started with a Digi 002) the pres and converters in the MBox are superior to the 003. Also note MBox Studio is USB C not 2.0

Here is the Carbon Hardware setup main page with Monitor Alt 1 and Alt 2

[Darryl Ramm]

I would challenge the premise that there is benefit or ease from an Avid interface, especially at the low end and if you are not say operating in a large DigiLink environment (esp. with frame lock video requirements, which is not you). What exact "simplicity of connection or compatibility" do you think you are getting? You install drivers, connect the interface, select the interface as a playback engine, same as whether it's Avid or a third party interface.

Worse, it's probably the opposite to what you think, I'd argue you are likely to get better customer and ongoing engineering support from other high-end/quality interface manufactures. RME being top of my list. DAD being another (also helps how close they are to Avid). But UAD and others offer good engineering and customer support as well. I'd be wary of smaller players/new entrats to the market that in some cases outsource driver/software development. Avid has a history of some fairly awful support on lower-cost interfaces, the abandonment of the Eleven Rack being one example. Avid's claimed end of life support dates effectively mean nothing. And more recently Avid has been acquired by PE firm STG. As far as I know they have given no public direction of what their plan is for hardware products since that acquisition, and I've seen no commitment to improve areas like long term driver support that Avid has demonstrated it can be weak at.

The biggest issue I have with the MBox Studio is it's 8 DAW output into it's internal hardware mixer, all the 22 outputs that Avid talk about are from the hardware mixer only, if you think of this as a typical interface its an 8 output interface. Avid marketing on this is just awfully misleading. They have had lot of opportunity to clarify this and just leave it misleading. And which vendor do you want to trust to spend your money with?

Then the thing just looks big and clunky and ugly and I'd much rather have a small more compact box. Folks have them seem to be happy with them, with some folks upset about the 8 output issue. I was getting concerned that Avid did not release any software updates for the box and they recently released one.

And on that the cadence of updates from Avid with interfaces is often lower than say folks like RME. I'm used to seeing lots of RME firmware and driver releases (and recently parallel release of new style DriverKit (userspace) and kernel extension drivers for Macs, etc.), and beta drivers, and being able to get direct info from technical folks at RME via their support forums. And these drivers can support decade old products instead of abandoning them. And these are arguably the best USB audio drivers in existence. A high cadence of driver updates is especially something I want to see on Macs with all the disruptions caused by the Intel to Apple Silicon, changes in macOS security and privacy behavior, and kext to DriverKit changes. Avid for example had issues over the last several years even with their high-end HD Drivers not able to keep up and stay compatible with macOS changes. Quite a few customers with Avid DigiLink interfaces have had a harder time tracking macOS updates, or buyign new Macs, because of that than typical customers with third party USB interfaces, so again I'm wondering what this mystical benefit you are after is.

The Carbon connects over Ethernet using Avid proprietary version or AVB. Which is not compatible with other AVB products and is an unusual choice for a interface connection for that device. And there is no Windows PC support. My only guess as to why is Avid had a bunch of folks who worked on Live AVB product sitting around and had them develop this. Thunderbolt would have been a more sensible choice IMNSHO. Carbon is a strange duck, you might be buying into some hybrid engine complexity and bugginess, although hopefully much of that has been addressed, I'm still hearing anecdotes of folks with latency weirdness with hybrid engine, but given there are so many latency issues in Pro Tools anyhow... (one that I've pushed on Avid about for a while is finally hopefully fixed in the next PT release but I expect there are many other to be addressed).

The primary choice of whether Carbon is interesting or not should probably be if you want to track with HDX/DSP. If you do then look into it more, if not I'd skip, if you have no idea if you want to or not, you likely don't.

A much more interesting Avid branded interface to me is the MTRX Studio, with Thunderbolt connection. An interface developed for Avid by DAD/NTP. It's a benefit to me that drivers and DADman software are provided by DAD not Avid.

It's got an Avid brand on it but it ain't really that integrated, the whole DADman routing thing is powerful, great, a bit ugly/clunky and not integrated at all in Pro Tools... same as with the MTRX, and this is Avid's high-end interface story. So if you are after integration... uh well, Avid has moved off that in part. The MTRX studio physical packaging is pretty nice, better to me than similar NTP mid-tier products, Avid did a good job there working with NTP.

And then there is the MTRX II. A rebadged DAD/NTP product with some changes that break some compatibility. Very nice if you have the money. Expanded systems get really expensive. Avid made a good decision here to resell DAD products. But it certainly fuels the question of how committed Avid is to design or sell new hardware. And there is the question of if buying that why not buy an actual DAD box.

I personally do *not* want to see everything in an interface integrated into Pro Tools. I want to see software like DADman be separate. I want hardware to work excellently with Pro Tools and Logic Pro and any other DAW or application I need to use. And I want the interface vendor to provide excellent support, starting with driver updates. And I want to see that proven by what vendors actually deliver.

Edit: The difficulty is we have so many choices of fantastic interfaces out there, from some great vendors, and maybe besides for DigiLink interfaces, being "from Avid" would just not be on my list of hard requirements. I've used interfaces form Apogee, UAD, RME, MOTU, Focusrite.. and had great things to say about all those products and vendors. And yes as much as I'd love an Avid MTRX II (since I need MADI) I'll probably do fine with my lovely RME rigs. My other advice to folks is just to read through the interface documentation carefully, especially if you want to use hardware motioning/mixing (and nothing really is as simple/transparent as the LLM mixer support in the 003 was *supposed* to be, but it seemed to be pretty broken).

[albee1952]

As a reasonably happy Mbox user, I will echo Darryl's comment about the outputs. They dropped the ball on that detail and you really only have 8 analog, 2 stereo HP outs, and the rest are not easily addressed(not like you could do with the 003). Having said that, if your IO needs are covered, the Mbox is a solid product for a 1-2 person session and does basic monitor switching for 2 sets of speakers plus a Bluetooth out(handy for checking a mix on a BT speaker in mono). The Mbox can also handle more inputs via a lightpipe preamp.

Carbon is a huge step up in cost(probably worth it IF you need the hybrid DSP function) but there are lots of options in between. UA is worth a look, but so is RME Start by assessing your IO needs, followed by your budget

[The Weed]

I'm with Darryl about RME. Their drivers and driver support are arguably the best. They write their own USB drivers so USB 2 and USB 3 are fine for some of their interfaces. The icing on the cake is TotalMix and its near limitless routing capabilities. I went from a Digi 002 to an RME UFX and couldn't be happier. If I had to replace the UFX tomorrow it would be with a UFX III. As always, YMMV.

[K Roche]

Just thought of something else in Terms of Carbon and Mac OS Sonoma
Apparently some Carbon users have experienced intermittent dropouts on Sonoma , while some are not reporting any issue. But Avid has acknowledged it as an issue and hopefully will be addressed in the next PT update (expected this month) So assuming your M3 came with Sonoma I would wait to see what the new PT brings befor purchasing a Carbon

Also I have great respect for Darryl and his knowledge and understand his frustration with Avid. And as he said there are myriad 3 rd party interfaces choices which will work fine. And being a Carbon user I would agree that the Avid proprietary AVB ethernet is a strange choice and yes only works on Mac computers and agree Thunderbolt might have been a better connection choice .

That said:: as a Carbon user since Dec. 2020 I do not share Darryls opinion of the overall usefulness and viability of Carbon (depending of corse on exactly what one is doing , or is not doing, in their specific recording situation) I can say for what I do Carbon has been a flat out great choice. The pre's are so good that I sold my A Design MP2A mic pre. The converters are great IMO and there is a presence that I did not have with my Avid Omni . And for me the AVB connection has not been an issue.. just sayin'

Now I will say for my specific recording situation and what I do,,, If I did not have the Carbon I would be seriously looking at the RME Fireface UFX III USB 3.0 interface which is about $1000 less than the Carbon so there is that

[Darryl Ramm]

Kev

Originally Posted by K Roche

I do not share Darryls opinion of the overall usefulness and viability of Carbon

Uh not sure I actually said that, I pointed out some concerns/issues with Carbon and then left it as...

The primary choice of whether Carbon is interesting or not should probably be if you want to track with HDX/DSP. If you do then look into it more, if not I'd skip, ....

If you are saying Carbon is generally a good choice if you *don't* want HDX/DSP? Then I'm going to disagree with that, all the weirdness, ongoing issue, etc. with this box sure does not seem worth it to me unless you want HDX/DSP.

Thanks for pointing out the ongoing AVB compatibility issues, I know folks are running OK even with that potential issue, and Avid was very good to clearly point out the issue to everybody. But that ultimately goes back to Avid for making a bad choice with AVB here. Hopefully that will get solved but its got to be a worry for anybody currently buying a new Mac and owning or looking at Carbon.

Not that I have any clue if there have been AVB changes in Sequoia or not but I hope Avid is testing Carbon with the current Sequoia beta (which in my quick tests with USB interfaces was at least more stable than early Sonoma running Pro Tools, Pro Tools on early Sonoma was quite unstable for me (I personally care about Sequoia and am testing stuff there because Apple has fixes for some simple Core Audio API bugs I've reported coming in that release. Again my tests have nothing to do with Carbon. I don't have a Carbon)).

My main point with my long post was to challenge the assumption that "Avid" branded interfaces are somehow better with Pro Tools. If the integration the OP was after *was* HDX/DSP processing then sure Carbon should be considered, including the known issues with it, but DSP was not mentioned in the original post so I have no clue what benefits the OP is talking about from "Avid" interfaces. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[K Roche]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Ke
If you are saying Carbon is generally a good choice if you *don't* want HDX/DSP? Then I'm going to disagree with that, all the weirdness, ongoing issue, etc. with this box sure does not seem worth it to me unless you want HDX/DSP.

No I am not saying that,,,, in fact I am saying the opposite-- for me the reason to buy Carbon was to be able to track with HDX/DSP engaged.

Thanks for pointing out the ongoing AVB compatibility issues, I know folks are running OK even with that potential issue, and Avid was very good to clearly point out the issue to everybody. But that ultimately goes back to Avid for making a bad choice with AVB here. Hopefully that will get solved but its got to be a worry for anybody currently buying a new Mac and owning or looking at Carbon.

Not that I have any clue if there have been AVB changes in Sequoia or not but I hope Avid is testing Carbon with the current Sequoia beta (which in my quick tests with USB interfaces was at least more stable than early Sonoma running Pro Tools, Pro Tools on early Sonoma was quite unstable for me (I personally care about Sequoia and am testing stuff there because Apple has fixes for some simple Core Audio API bugs I've reported coming in that release. Again my tests have nothing to do with Carbon. I don't have a Carbon)).

My main point with my long post was to challenge the assumption that "Avid" branded interfaces are somehow better with Pro Tools. If the integration the OP was after *was* HDX/DSP processing then sure Carbon should be considered, including the known issues with it, but DSP was not mentioned in the original post so I have no clue what benefits the OP is talking about from "Avid" interfaces. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Perhaps :
One benefit of Carbon over say UAD Apollo (I believe) is that with Carbon you can use DSP in one single Pro Tools window with one routing scheme. Where as I believe that with UAD, you have to also use its mixer to use it's DSP capability so you are dealing with two windows and two routing schemes ? At least that is what one engineer I know said when he switched from Apollo to Carbon.

I do not know about the RME unit I listed and if you can use it's DSP ability directly in PT or not or if you have to use the RME mixer also ?

[Darryl Ramm]

We are in really agreement then.

Originally Posted by K Roche

Perhaps :
One benefit of Carbon over say UAD Apollo (I believe) is that with Carbon you can use DSP in one single Pro Tools window with one routing scheme. Where as I believe that with UAD, you have to also use its mixer to use it's DSP capability so you are dealing with two windows and two routing schemes ? At least that is what one engineer I know said when he switched from Apollo to Carbon.

I do not know about the RME unit I listed and if you can use it's DSP ability directly in PT or not or if you have to use the RME mixer also ?

The only system that provide that integrated hardware monitoring control with Pro Tools is HDX, whether done via HDX cards or Carbon.

Modern interface hardware monitoring/mixer support ranges from the most simple monitor/mix knob adjustment (presumably often a simple analog mixer, with a benefit of being low-cost and avoiding even conversion latency) through to full DSP based digital mixers with DSP effects.

Avid did have integrated hardware mixing in some legacy systems including the 003 (and HD Native) and it's not clear to me when Avid dropped the integration with the 003 hardware mixer support in Pro Tools but IIRC they did. These had lots of limitations and caused confusion with folks. Nowadays AFAIK low latency monitoring in Pro Tools, besides HD Native, just mutes software monitoring and gets out of the way, you do everything in a separate interface vendor supplied control app (which OK sometimes you might be able to launch from within Pro Tools, but that's just not any real integration). There was some support at one time for simple hardware monitoring with suitable ASIO interfaces, and again I think users had issues with that and I'm not sure if it's still supported.

Modern interface hardware monitoring/mixers just really can't work in an integrated way with any DAW, many higher-end ones with DSP effects need a suitable control app so the whole idea of integration just does not make a lot of sense. And you see that with Avid's own Mbox Studio where the hardware mixer controls are not integrated into Pro Tools, they should not be as they need to work with other DAWs.

RME TotalMix (and technically TotalMix FX) is a nice DSP based mixer with a clean "Germanic" UI/UX. TotalMix has been included in RME interfaces since forever, more recently TotalMix FX with more advanced capabilities and DSP effects is included, but that's been out for quite a while. TotalMix and TotalMix FX look and operate the same. They get installed with the drivers package and are always just there when you use an RME interface. I often track at 64 samples @ 96kHz, possible in part because of the quality of the RME drivers, I typically don't use TotalMix so much to do low-latency monitoring, more to provide simple monitor control, distribute headphone mixes, and miscellaneous routing with across potentially hundreds of channels of MADI, but if needed it's right there. The effects in TotalMix are fairly basic and not available as plugins to use in any DAW.

UAD Console is the king of full on hardware mixer UI/UX. And unlike most vendors you get to run UAD DSP plugins in the console that you can also run in the DAW via plugins routing back to the DSP in the interface or UAD DSP cards (all at much higher latency). Lots of ex-Avid folks at UAD and UAD have been doing well vs. Avid for a while. And it's clear with their Luna DAW they wanted to take on Pro Tools integrated DSP story. They seen to have taken a sensible ramp/evolution of Luna starting simple and growing it over time. Although I'd argue that UAD sticking with DSP exclusively for too long hurt them and I hope they get all their plugins over to native as fast as possible. All an interesting coopetition situation. The Carbon is very much a copy of the UAD Apollo series, especially the Apollo 8p/x8p, uh except Avid forgot to copy the more sensible Thunderbolt connectivity.

Other vendors like Apogee Digital, no doubt inspired by UAD Apollo interfaces, are offering plugins that run native in DAWs or in the DSP in their interfaces. Again all their monitoring stuff operates in separate control software outside any DAW as it should.

And not to miss one potential benefit of HDX based systems is not so much the straight up monitoring while tracking, but more important to some users is potentially the ability to monitor and do punch-ins on nearly completed large mixes without dealing with native systems buffer size induced instability. But the potential devils are in the details, starting with if you have enough DSP power to do what you want, if using the hybrid engine it does not introduce issues (e.g. latency errors, instability), if the current possible Carbon issues on Sonoma don't cause problems for you, and (as is always the case for HDX based systems) if the plugins you want to monitor through are available with HDX/DSP support, and even if so actually how low latency are they, and what is the overall actual latency is with the plugin chain you want to use, and so on. It's just not a simple argument just to go to HDX or Carbon even money is not an issue, it takes some knowledge and thinking to work out the best choice for different uses/users. The clear choice for HDX (or HD Native) systems is where folks need HD Sync/Sync X support today (that hopefully can't keep staying that way).

OK enough waffle.

[unkJE]

Originally Posted by Patill

The Carbon only seems to have one monitor output. I really like to switch between my two monitors…I have read it also had Alt monitor outputs? I could not find them

PreSonus Universal Control and Quantum HD 2 also enable speaker switching - easily check your mixes on two different speaker sets for accuracy.


I just bought a (US $499.99) PreSonus Quantum HD 2 (love the RE-AMP OUTPUTS!) – would it give you everything you need?

I copied the following Description from Front End Audio:
https://www.frontendaudio.com/preson...dio-interface/

The Presonus Quantum HD 2 Audio Interface leverages the legacy of high-end PreSonus studio products to create stunning high-fidelity performance.
Power your project with the Quantum HD 2 – the recording interface for project studios and full band recordings.

THE CULMINATION OF 30 YEARS OF INNOVATION
The Quantum HD 2 features two newly redesigned high-definition MAX-HD mic preamps with +75 dB of gain – making it ideally suited for today’s most popular microphones. Guitarists and bassists will love the two instrument inputs, which were co-developed with Fender engineers. An Auto Gain button sets the perfect gain level for your microphones and instruments. You also get two re-amp outputs so you can send audio from your DAW to your guitar or bass amp and re-record it to experiment with different amps, pedals, and mic placements. An illuminated push encoder provides flexible control over gain level and output volume, making it great for self-produced recording.

HIGH PERFORMANCE SIGNAL FLOW
Our custom low-latency driver provides exceptionally low audio latencies when recording, and high-performance converters with 124 dB dynamic range let you hear and capture audio with stunning clarity and fidelity.

ALL-NEW MAX-HD MIC PREAMPS
The Quantum HD 2 features two newly designed mic preamps with +75 dB of gain. Our high-definition MAX-HD preamps are transparent, low-noise, and digitally-controlled analog, making them ideally suited to today’s most popular microphones.

CO-DEVELOPED WITH FENDER®
Built by the best ears in the business, guitarists and bassists will love the two instrument inputs, co-developed with Fender engineers – industry experts who designed them specifically for guitar and bass.

PROFESSIONAL RECORDING SOFTWARE INCLUDED
Leap into 12 months of Studio One+ add-ons, exclusive content, and tools, plus a perpetual license to Studio One Professional Edition.

AUTO GAIN
An Auto Gain button sets the perfect gain level for your microphones and instruments, so you get the perfect take every time.

RE-AMP OUTPUTS
Re-amp audio directly from your DAW and use amps and effects to sculpt your sounds. Send audio from your DAW to your guitar or bass amp and re-record it to experiment with different amps, pedals, and mic placements.

UNIVERSAL CONTROL APP
Quantum works on any mobile or desktop device, so you’re ready to record whenever inspiration strikes – whether on your phone, tablet, or in your home studio. Critical preamp functions like preamp gain, phantom power, and more can be controlled with the Quantum HD 2’s flexible front panel, or right from Studio One and the Universal Control app, so you can dial in the perfect gain staging without looking away from your recording session. Universal Control and your Quantum HD 2 also enable speaker switching—easily check your mixes on two different speaker sets for accuracy.

Presonus Quantum HD 2 Audio Interface Features
• 20 x 24, 32-bit 192 kHz USB-C Audio Interface
• High-performance converters with 124 dB dynamic range let you hear and capture audio with stunning clarity and fidelity.
• Custom low-latency driver provides exceptionally low audio latencies when recording.
• Two all-new, next-generation PreSonus MAX-HD preamps provide transparency and accuracy across the frequency range with +75 dB of gain to maximize the performance for today’s most popular studio microphones for modern recording and broadcast.
• Discreet phantom power means consistent, full power for microphones that require it, so you’ll get the most from your high-performance studio microphones.
• 2 Re-amp outputs let you send audio from your DAW to your favorite outboard gear and record it again, so you can experiment with different amps, pedals, and mic placement to get the exact sound you want without cutting multiple takes.
• Control your Quantum HD 2 right from Studio One and our Universal Control app, in addition to hardware – so you can adjust preamp gain, toggle phantom power, adjust channel settings, and more without looking away from your recording session. Perfect for dialing in optimal gain staging.
• Universal Control and your Quantum HD 2 also enable speaker switching—easily check your mixes on two different speaker sets for accuracy.
• A full-color, high-resolution screen lets you keep an eye on your input and output meters while an illuminated push encoder provides fast, intuitive control over channel and output settings.
• 16 channels of ADAT Optical input (up to 48 kHz) plus stereo S/PDIF I/O make connecting your digital gear fast and easy.
• 2 balanced ¼-inch TRS main outputs plus 2 balanced ¼-inch TRS line outputs and 1 high-power headphone output gives you flexible monitoring, while built-in speaker switching allows you to check your mix on multiple sets of studio monitors.
• DSP monitor mixer plus loopback audio make creating monitor and streaming mixes quick and easy

Presonus Quantum HD 2 Audio Interface Specifications
Inputs and Outputs
Microphone Inputs: 2
Guitar Inputs: 2
Line Inputs: 2
S/PDIF Input: 1
Optical Input: 2
MIDI Input: 1
Monitor Outputs (DC coupled): 2
Line Outputs (DC coupled): 2
Re-amp outputs: 2
S/PDIF Output: 1
Optical Output: 2
MIDI Output: 1
Headphone Outputs: 1
USB-C ports: 1
AD / DA Conversion

Supported Sample Rates: 44.1, 48, 88.2, 96, 176.4, 192
Bit Depth: 32

Electrical
Connector: type DC Connector
Configuration: Internal, Universal
Power Input: 12V DC, 2A

Presonus Quantum HD 2 Audio Interface Includes
Presonus Quantum HD 2 Audio Interface
Power Cable
Manufacturer Warranty



There’s also the US $999.99 Quantum HD 8
26 x 30, 32-bit / 192 kHz Recording Audio Interface
8 MAX-HD Mic Preamps