Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Pro Tools Hardware > Third Party Interfaces

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-19-2022, 10:00 AM
itsjustmeee123 itsjustmeee123 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: california
Posts: 132
Default Re: Honest interface question.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-19-2022, 10:32 AM
K Roche's Avatar
K Roche K Roche is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Wilds of Wyoming
Posts: 1,718
Default Re: Honest interface question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by itsjustmeee123 View Post
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.
Combo Mic/line inputs on front....1/4 inch line inputs on back not an issue for me but YMMV.

The 2626 would be a serious consideration for me for a sub $1k interface .

But given you say two mic record channels would be fine . I think if it were me,,, I would try to sell the 192 and the Avid TB and put that money with the cost of the 2626 $700 and go straight to the RME RME Fireface UCX II 40-channel USB Interface @ $1499 ----You are going to get better everything, clocking, conversion , mic pres, etc.
__________________
System :
Avid Carbon interface , PT Ultimate 2021.12 .....Mid 2020 iMac 27" 3.8GHz 8-core i7 10th Gen processor,,128GB 2666MHz DDR4 memory,,2TB SSD storage,,Radeon Pro 5700 XT with 16GB of GDDR6 memory,, on Catalina 10.15.7

"Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding" Albert Einstein

Enjoy the Journey
.... Kev...

Last edited by K Roche; 01-19-2022 at 10:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-19-2022, 03:10 PM
Darryl Ramm Darryl Ramm is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 15,920
Default Re: Honest interface question.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-19-2022, 04:17 PM
Sardi Sardi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 2,629
Default Re: Honest interface question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm View Post
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.

There’s one issue with that unit that prevented me getting it. Might not be a problem for most, but was a showstopper for me, which is a shame as I REALLY wanted that interface.

If you want to use one of the optical ports as SPDIF, it mirrors what is being sent to the AES output. IOW, you can’t have 2 seperate discrete stereo digital feeds out of the unit. I believe this was the case in the original UFX as well.

Again, most people are probably using the ADAT ports for 8ch expansion. What I require is the ability to use one of the ADAT ports for 8ch expansion, the other ADAT port to function as a SPDIF 2ch output and the AES as an additional 2ch output. The AES I/O would feed my Mytek converters and the SPDIF would feed my Dangerous monitor controller. This is how I run my current setup, albeit without the second 8ch expansion as my current interface only has 1x ADAT ports and 1x SPDIF.

If I want to go the RME path (which I definitely do) I’ll probably have to go with a Digiface and add whatever I/O I need separately with access to 4 x ADAT I/O. Either that or compare the conversion on the UFX+ to the Dangerous and see if I can remove that from the chain.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-19-2022, 05:23 PM
Darryl Ramm Darryl Ramm is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 15,920
Default Re: Honest interface question.

Sardi,

Good you understand that AES/EBU and S/PDIF optical limitation. It's not very clearly described in lots of places.

Ha I faced the same issues, and more. I'm running AES/EBU direct out of the UFX+ to a monitor controller. But I have other stuff I wanted to connect... multiple AES/EBU Out and In, SPDIF on optical and coax and ADAT In. It was driving me nuts looking at multiple directions, including looking at UAD interfaces, I finally went with the UFX+ and chased down some used RME converter boxes (two ADI-192DD ADAT-AES/EBU converter and one ADI-640 ADAT-MADI converter. and I already had a RME Digiface and MadiFace). So now I've got a boat load of AES/EBU, Coax SPDIF (RME AES/EBU connections can do S/PDIF without converters/Baulins) as well as S/PDIF TOSLINK (each ADI-192DD has a S/PDIF on TOSLINK front panel pair). It did not take long to hunt these down on eBay and Reverb, some from Europe, some in the USA. One annoying thing is Pro Tools is slow tools UI when editing the large IO setup pages for this system. But damn those drivers are solid and low latency, and I ended up just using USB 3 to the UFX+ even with a Thunderbolt Macbook Pro rig, just had the cabling there.

Be careful with thinking about adding a Digiface if you want to use Totalmix... you can but there will be two completely separate Totalmix sessions running, but you can digitally connect the devices though ADAT and then use TotalMix as a router in the Digiface. If that's not making sense PM me and I can test/mock up stuff for you here.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-19-2022, 06:28 PM
BScout BScout is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 2,891
Default Re: Honest interface question.

Use the second adat port as ADAT but send it to a Mutec MC-4
(currently the best DD converter now that the RME ADI-192 DD is no longer; in fact, it may be better due to how it handles sample rates.)
__________________
Pro Tools Ult 2022.4, HDX 3, MTRX/SPQ, HD OmniS1 x 2, FireHD x 2, Dock, iPad Mac Pro 5,1 - 3.06 GHz 12 core - macOS 10.13.6RAM 64GB, SSD 4 x 2TB, GPU GTX 980 4GB

Last edited by BScout; 01-19-2022 at 08:20 PM. Reason: typo
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-19-2022, 06:52 PM
Darryl Ramm Darryl Ramm is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 15,920
Default Re: Honest interface question.

I don't know why RME dropped the ball with format converter boxes. They announced a whole set of new boxes way back on 2013 and never delivered them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jjr61Vnzcbw maybe too expensive, since they also never replaced the ADI-4DD. The Mutec MC-4 looks a fantastic option.

And yes I know you can get some routing with RME's modern outboard boxes like a 1610 or 12Mic.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-25-2022, 04:54 PM
Sardi Sardi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 2,629
Default Re: Honest interface question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BScout View Post
Use the second adat port as ADAT but send it to a Mutec MC-4
(currently the best DD converter now that the RME ADI-192 DD is no longer; in fact, it may be better due to how it handles sample rates.)

Yeah. Format converter box is an option, but seeing as that’s my only use for it at this point, it’s a rather expensive way to get what I’m after.

But agree, that is a good box.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-25-2022, 04:57 PM
Sardi Sardi is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Perth
Posts: 2,629
Default Re: Honest interface question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm View Post
Sardi,

Good you understand that AES/EBU and S/PDIF optical limitation. It's not very clearly described in lots of places.

Ha I faced the same issues, and more. I'm running AES/EBU direct out of the UFX+ to a monitor controller. But I have other stuff I wanted to connect... multiple AES/EBU Out and In, SPDIF on optical and coax and ADAT In. It was driving me nuts looking at multiple directions, including looking at UAD interfaces, I finally went with the UFX+ and chased down some used RME converter boxes (two ADI-192DD ADAT-AES/EBU converter and one ADI-640 ADAT-MADI converter. and I already had a RME Digiface and MadiFace). So now I've got a boat load of AES/EBU, Coax SPDIF (RME AES/EBU connections can do S/PDIF without converters/Baulins) as well as S/PDIF TOSLINK (each ADI-192DD has a S/PDIF on TOSLINK front panel pair). It did not take long to hunt these down on eBay and Reverb, some from Europe, some in the USA. One annoying thing is Pro Tools is slow tools UI when editing the large IO setup pages for this system. But damn those drivers are solid and low latency, and I ended up just using USB 3 to the UFX+ even with a Thunderbolt Macbook Pro rig, just had the cabling there.

Be careful with thinking about adding a Digiface if you want to use Totalmix... you can but there will be two completely separate Totalmix sessions running, but you can digitally connect the devices though ADAT and then use TotalMix as a router in the Digiface. If that's not making sense PM me and I can test/mock up stuff for you here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm View Post
Sardi,

Good you understand that AES/EBU and S/PDIF optical limitation. It's not very clearly described in lots of places.

Ha I faced the same issues, and more. I'm running AES/EBU direct out of the UFX+ to a monitor controller. But I have other stuff I wanted to connect... multiple AES/EBU Out and In, SPDIF on optical and coax and ADAT In. It was driving me nuts looking at multiple directions, including looking at UAD interfaces, I finally went with the UFX+ and chased down some used RME converter boxes (two ADI-192DD ADAT-AES/EBU converter and one ADI-640 ADAT-MADI converter. and I already had a RME Digiface and MadiFace). So now I've got a boat load of AES/EBU, Coax SPDIF (RME AES/EBU connections can do S/PDIF without converters/Baulins) as well as S/PDIF TOSLINK (each ADI-192DD has a S/PDIF on TOSLINK front panel pair). It did not take long to hunt these down on eBay and Reverb, some from Europe, some in the USA. One annoying thing is Pro Tools is slow tools UI when editing the large IO setup pages for this system. But damn those drivers are solid and low latency, and I ended up just using USB 3 to the UFX+ even with a Thunderbolt Macbook Pro rig, just had the cabling there.

Be careful with thinking about adding a Digiface if you want to use Totalmix... you can but there will be two completely separate Totalmix sessions running, but you can digitally connect the devices though ADAT and then use TotalMix as a router in the Digiface. If that's not making sense PM me and I can test/mock up stuff for you here.

The only thing you lost me on is the 2 x Totalmix sessions running simultaneously.

FYI - this is by no means urgent. Just spitballing a future upgrade. More than likely linked to a move to M1 Mac hardware as it will render my current interface obsolete.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-25-2022, 11:21 PM
Darryl Ramm Darryl Ramm is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 15,920
Default Re: Honest interface question.

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.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I need your HONEST HONEST opinion on my mixing. elisharichards Pro Tools 10 5 12-24-2012 04:54 PM
an honest question to David Sumich/Digi: pk_hat 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 9 11-04-2002 05:18 PM
HONEST question: do your ProTools freeze often? Dag Pro Tools TDM Systems (Win) 8 09-05-2002 04:03 PM
serious question, be honest kill or be killed Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) 3 07-08-2002 11:47 PM
SDII/Digital Interface/Analog Interface Question Karmitz Digidesign Hardware & Software 1 07-15-2000 12:30 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:17 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com