Fast Track Ultra vs MBox 2 Pro

[pcmusicpro]

Hi

I`m trying to decide wich interface to purchase. I see that FTU has more input preamps than MB2Pro but the last one is firewire. Tell me what do you think or if you have experience with this interfaces.

Thanks.

Ed.

[albee1952]

Interesting question. First let me ask what and how you want to record. Protools M-Powered is almost the same as Protools LE but the FTU only uses M-Powered and Mbox (all of them) only work with Protools LE. Does that matter to you? Mbox 2 PRO is firewire so it can run with less latency(firewire is faster at streaming audio). Mbox 2 PRO also has phono inputs in case you need to work with vinyl. I own the Fast Track Pro and find it to work fine on the whole but I don't use M-Powered. I use the box for SMAART system tuning or with WaveLab for stereo recording. Maybe take a poke around the M-Powered section of the DUC. If M-Powered meets your needs and you want 4 mic inputs, it might be just fine. The difference for me is the firewire(for speed) and I prefer regular Protools as I never run into a situation where something I need to do, or some plugin I want to use won't work in M-Powered. Since I haven't used M-Powered, I may be missing the boat here. Also, keep in mind that Mbox(all versions) include Protools. M-Audio units make you buy the software separately.

[pcmusicpro]

Well the info is that USB 2.0 is faster than Firewire 400. In any feature I see that FTUltra is a more interesting interface than MBox 2 Pro. But I`ve been using LE for so many years I have my fears to jump to M-Powered. Any way thanks for your answer.

Ed.

[erthquake]

Hi Ed,

USB 2.0 is only faster than FW400 in theory. USB2 can only maintain the high rate in bursts, not continuously (unlike FW). Plus, USB2 taxes the CPU (FW doesn't), lowering overall performance.

[pcmusicpro]

Originally Posted by erthquake

Hi Ed,

USB 2.0 is only faster than FW400 in theory. USB2 can only maintain the high rate in bursts, not continuously (unlike FW). Plus, USB2 taxes the CPU (FW doesn't), lowering overall performance.

Wow!!! that means I will have less plugins in PT M-Powered with the FTU than PTLE with M-Box 2 pro in the same machine?

How do the USB 2.0 interfaces avoid recording drop outs if they transfer data in bursts?

I see that M-Audio´s interfaces are now oriented more to USB 2.0 than FW. Indeed I heard that FW1814 and FW410 are being outdated.

[spkguitar]

Originally Posted by pcmusicpro

Wow!!! that means I will have less plugins in PT M-Powered with the FTU than PTLE with M-Box 2 pro in the same machine?

Not necessarily. (Why is everybody always concerned with "how many plugins can I run"?) Plugin count is usually CPU dependent.

Originally Posted by pcmusicpro

How do the USB 2.0 interfaces avoid recording drop outs if they transfer data in bursts?

Higher buffers. Most of the USB interfaces can only go as low as 128, where most FW interfaces can go as low as 64.

Originally Posted by pcmusicpro

I heard that FW1814 and FW410 are being outdated.

M-Audio have quite a few more FW interfaces than just the 1814 and 410.

[shawnc]

several months ago i was comparing FTU and MBOX2PRO too and got the Ultra at last, i was thinking of getting a USB interface so it gets more compatibilities, since Firewire is not that commonly seen on PCs, on this point it's your pick. Anyway I hate the preamps on FTU so much because they cant provide enough gain. input 1&3 can be phantom powered and i felt ok when using condensers on them, and when it comes to instrument inputs like guitars it's also ok but if you are plugging an SM57 mic in you never get a decent level. anyway, the sound quality is not bad at all so i still love my FTU.

about PTMP & PTLE, i thought the only difference between their features is that MP doesnt come with and cannot use DV Toolkits.