Honest interface question.

[Sardi]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

All I meant is if you have two RME interface connected to a computer, you get two separate instances of TotalMix. Works great, but there is no signal path between those TotalMix environments. You can't route a signal between them in the computer, if you want to do that you need to make a physical connection between each interface.

I suspected that’s what you meant, but was confused as I thought we were talking about one RME interface as opposed to two running in tandem.

BTW, it would be an either or for me. Either the UFX+ with my converters and monitor controller or the Digiface with the same converters and monitor controller plus some 8ch I/O expansion.

Thanks for the clarification. Thought I’d totally missed something as it’s been a little while since I used Totalmix.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skytouch]

Originally Posted by itsjustmeee123

Yeah, pro tools and zoom has been a pain for me. Luckily, most of my online sessions are with Logic but PT has been the DAW of my choice for a long time now. It’s just annoying that I can’t easily share my audio with my zoom clients. I read some crazy way of getting it to work on a site a while ago but there’s just too many steps involved. That’s probably one of the more important reasons I was looking to dump the 192. There really are a lot of choices for interfaces out there. I’d like a rack mounted interface with all connections in the back and won’t cost an arm and a leg. Unfortunately the Presonus inputs looks like they are in the front.

Avid Omni HD PCIe user here. After testing BC Connector and Source Nexus to bridge Pro Tools to the outside world, I've switched to Cubase 9.5 for Zoom sessions. BC Connector works but adds some latency and more software to configure. In Cubase I've created a very simple mixer with a few plugins for voice and stream processing - this integrates well with Loopback, Audio Hijack and Zoom directly.

Sky

[Skytouch]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Glad it's not just me in love with RME stuff. Super glad I stumbled across the Fireface UFX+ (I needed a MADI connection). Just love the quality of their drivers.

Hi Darryl, For generally small sessions not needing MADI, do you see any advantages to USB3/TB2 versus USB2 still being used in UFX II and UCX II? Buying a USB2 interface in 2022 gives me pause, despite consensus that RME USB2 drivers are still better and faster than some TB3 alternatives. One recent thread advised skipping UFX II and going UFX+ for a few hundred more. The UCX II is currently on my short list.

Thanks,
Sky

[Darryl Ramm]

Originally Posted by Skytouch

Hi Darryl, For generally small sessions not needing MADI, do you see any advantages to USB3/TB2 versus USB2 still being used in UFX II and UCX II? Buying a USB2 interface in 2022 gives me pause, despite consensus that RME USB2 drivers are still better and faster than some TB3 alternatives. One recent thread advised skipping UFX II and going UFX+ for a few hundred more. The UCX II is currently on my short list.

Thanks,
Sky

I understand your concern, but I suspect USB 2 is fine for smaller interfaces as RME argues here:
https://youtu.be/dSIf4QGYs-c, unless you need the channel count you don't need higher bandwidth interfaces to get low latency. And heck *every* computer has a USB2 interface. Now I'd still hope that Thunderbolt might buy something because of how potentially efficient the PCIe interface is... but at least when I used to look at the RTL measurements out there for the UFX+ the USB 3 had lower latency than Thunderbolt. I've not kept up where that's at/if there have been driver changes. But with my own UFX+ after testing it with Thunderbolt 3 I actually racked it up with USB 3 as it's just easier/cheaper long cabling and then the other day I realized I'd mistaking swapped the the USB 3 cable for a USB 2 cable... only noticed after a while as none of the MADI I/O was showing up.

And then in addition to having great driver's many of their products are USB class compliant as well so will work with iOS devices, so maybe handy for some. And recording to a USB stick might also be handy, personally not something I need.

I wonder if part of the problem with some interfaces is vendors more repackaging sample driver code provided by chip suppliers and maybe not being as deeply software savvy as others.

And BTW for me I don't use MADI for high concurrent I/O counts, I use it more for diverse connectivity, especially being able to patch in AES/EBU and S/PDIF I/O without messing around with cables. But I can see adding a M1610 analog I/O box.