help with interfaces

Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:40 am

I've got to questions here,
1st one i may answer my self...
how many of you would chose a firewire interface over a usb? and would you chose the firewire, becuase of the high speed transfer?

2nd, Ive been looking at interfaces for a little while now and;
ive got a budget of up to £200 (roughly $400) and £200 is the max as ive been told by a few to buy things way out of my price range.

Ive looked at usb interfaces and firewire interfaces mainly:

Lexicon Omega
M-Audio FireWire 410

The M-audio seem to get a bad review and has got a few problems with it, so im pretty unsure about heading in that direction.

On the other hand ive heard good things about the Lexicon Omega apart from one comment.

I mainly want the interface for recording, a mic (vocals), guitar and maybe at a sound module or a synth keyboard later down the line.

So can anyone help me out with a few suggestions or a comment on the two above?

thanks in advance.

Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 9:40 am

I don't know either of those products personally, though I haven't heard too many good things about M-audio.
Anyways, I use an Edirol UA-25. Cheap and cheerfull stuff. For the money I paid I'm stoked, easy as to use and clean sound.
I should hit em up for marketing fees.

Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 10:02 am

There's a great post by someone about why Firewire beats USB.
It's to do with USB being a shared protocol and so any device can request bandwidth from the computer and potentially cause dropouts in your audio streaming. Firewire doesn't allow this, so the audio interface *always* has enough bandwidth to carry down it.

The search isn't being too helpful, as ever. I don't think I've EVER found anything specific using it.

Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:13 pm

yeah i just read up on the omega, and that is only a usb 1.1 connection so it does have a hard time.

I think a firewire interface is looking stronger and stronger the more i look into it, just a debate now to go for the m-audio 410 or look for simular in the price range...
any suggestions, thanks greener for the tip as well im looking at it right now..

Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 2:04 pm

Codemonkey wrote:

There's a great post by someone about why Firewire beats USB.
It's to do with USB being a shared protocol and so any device can request bandwidth from the computer and potentially cause dropouts in your audio streaming. Firewire doesn't allow this, so the audio interface *always* has enough bandwidth to carry down it.

The search isn't being too helpful, as ever. I don't think I've EVER found anything specific using it.

There's a slight advantage to USB though if configured right as it's a "dumb" protocol. This means that it simply passes the data straight to its intended target (DAW/HD). FW requires additional steps. (Hence the need for a driver for anything Firewire but not necessarily anything USB.) However, as you mentioned, since it is a shared protocol, anything requesting information across the same buss as the USB (say a keyboard/mouse, dongle, etc.) could cause a skip. This is why, if you're using a USB HD or interface, you should minimize all USB connections to only those necessary (use a USB to PS2 adapter for your keyboard and mouse) and if possible, keep your interface and/or hardware on its own buss/irq.

That being said - check out the TC Konnekt 8. I have it's bigger brother and can tell you, it's an amazing box and it should come in less than $400 USD.

Cheers-
Jeremy

Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 4:48 pm

thanks Jeremy, by the big brother i take it you mean the konnekt 24D?

the TC Konnekt 8, does seem good, but it only has two inputs correct or did i miss something?

Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:57 am

Cucco wrote:

Codemonkey wrote:

There's a great post by someone about why Firewire beats USB.
It's to do with USB being a shared protocol and so any device can request bandwidth from the computer and potentially cause dropouts in your audio streaming. Firewire doesn't allow this, so the audio interface *always* has enough bandwidth to carry down it.

The search isn't being too helpful, as ever. I don't think I've EVER found anything specific using it.

There's a slight advantage to USB though if configured right as it's a "dumb" protocol. This means that it simply passes the data straight to its intended target (DAW/HD). FW requires additional steps. (Hence the need for a driver for anything Firewire but not necessarily anything USB.) However, as you mentioned, since it is a shared protocol, anything requesting information across the same buss as the USB (say a keyboard/mouse, dongle, etc.) could cause a skip. This is why, if you're using a USB HD or interface, you should minimize all USB connections to only those necessary (use a USB to PS2 adapter for your keyboard and mouse) and if possible, keep your interface and/or hardware on its own buss/irq.

That being said - check out the TC Konnekt 8. I have it's bigger brother and can tell you, it's an amazing box and it should come in less than $400 USD.

Cheers-
Jeremy

I don't actually agree with all of this. the reason is fairly straightforward in that, as you say, USB is just a dumb port, while Firewire is isosynchronous, meaning that it guarantees the delivery of time-critical data up to the limits of its data transfer rate. It was designed specifically with multichannel audio and video streaming in mind.

Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 12:23 pm

And like other proprietary formats such as Beta, Firewire will die a lonely death.

USB is a nifty (cheap) way of sending digital data. Don't be a fool and what you get is a HUGE amount of trouble free streaming.
If you're a fool and can't get your head around a flow chart, get Firewire.

Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 9:59 pm

Greener wrote:

And like other proprietary formats such as Beta, Firewire will die a lonely death.

USB is a nifty (cheap) way of sending digital data. Don't be a fool and what you get is a HUGE amount of trouble free streaming.
If you're a fool and can't get your head around a flow chart, get Firewire.

Can you elaborate on why and when Firewire will die?

I'd also like you to elaborate on the flow chart. Perhaps provide one. Maybe explain what you mean to all the "fools" out there, instead of just insulting people.

Back up your claims. Show us fools what you are talking about.

I'm getting a little tired of your five plus posts per day filled with what often appear to be insults followed by an insinuation that you know better. I don't know you from a hole in the ground, but you sure come across as a bit of a wanker.

Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 10:05 pm

At the risk of being insulted, I agree with VonRock. Greener, I am curious as to why USB would be preferable to Firewire after all the research I've done says otherwise. Not to mention the advise of other people on this forum...

I apologize in advance if I've made any grammatical errors.

Thanks,

Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Firstly. I know nothing, I make everything up and have no empirical evidence to support anything I say, ever. I don't keep paperwork.

Secondly. What I do with my hands and bits in my free time is my business.

Thirdly. You put a comma where you should have put a full stop. It's cool mhutch, I forgive you.
//Edit: If you read your signature as being apart of that post
then that comma is justified. You run a tight ship mhutch.

Next up Firewire.

Firewire is a proprietary protocol and hardware chipset. You can think of it like Beta video tapes.
USB isn't. You can think of it like VHS tapes.
Beta was better than VHS. I can still buy and rent VHS.
Last time I saw Beta was in the 80's...

Flow chart. Cpu -> bus -> device
If you go: Cpu -> bus -> device + device it will still work for mice and keyboards but will usually give you errors when streaming a boat load of audio.
USB can work fine if you understand this... Infact, used like this it will push almost as much data as Firwire.
But Firewire has expensive built in routing tech which aids people who probably can't figure out how to wank.

I use my brain, I save dollars and get the job done.

If that makes me a wanker that insinuates I know better it could be because I am and do.

If my posts sap your precious energy, vonRocK, don't read them.
Though I don't think you do actually read them. Most of the time I'm chewing out people getting them to explain wtf they are on about so someone who has the experience can come in and answer helpfully. Some of the time I share things I know and some of the time I poke fun at idiots.

And sometimes, like this one, I don't know what the fuck I'm doing.

Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 6:57 am

Wikipedia:

Quote:

USB compared with FireWire

USB was originally seen as a complement to FireWire (IEEE 1394), which was designed as a high-speed serial bus which could efficiently interconnect peripherals such as hard disks, audio interfaces, and video equipment. USB originally operated at a far lower data rate and used much simpler hardware, and was suitable for small peripherals such as keyboards and mice.

The most significant technical differences between FireWire and USB include the following:

* USB networks use a tiered-star topology, while FireWire networks use a repeater-based topology.
* USB uses a "speak-when-spoken-to" protocol; peripherals cannot communicate with the host unless the host specifically requests communication. A FireWire device can communicate with any other node at any time, subject to network conditions.
* A USB network relies on a single host at the top of the tree to control the network. In a FireWire network, any capable node can control the network.
* USB runs with a 5 V power line, whereas Firewire can supply up to 30 V.

These and other differences reflect the differing design goals of the two buses: USB was designed for simplicity and low cost, while FireWire was designed for high performance, particularly in time-sensitive applications such as audio and video. Although similar in theoretical maximum transfer rate, in real-world use, especially for high-bandwidth use such as external hard-drives, FireWire 400 generally, but not always, has a significantly higher throughput than USB 2.0 Hi-Speed.[19][20][21][22] The newer FireWire 800 standard is twice as fast as FireWire 400 and outperforms USB 2.0 Hi-Speed both theoretically and practically.[23] The chipset and drivers used to implement USB and Firewire have a crucial impact on how much of bandwidth prescribed by the specification is achieved in the real world, along with compatibility with peripherals.[24] Audio peripherals in particular are affected by the USB driver implementation.[citation needed]

One reason USB supplanted FireWire, and became far more widespread, is cost; FireWire is more expensive to implement, producing more expensive hardware.

I don't think that firewire is going anywhere. It just might not be built into your Dell/HP computer. If you want something better it will almost always cost more. This is a simple fact about technology.

Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 9:17 am

Firewire is built into my computer, an Asus.

Look, I like alot of the features you get with Firewire. And I understand that _all_ off the high end gear comes with Firewire. I'm not knocking it. I just can do exactly the same thing with USB, for a lot cheaper.

"* USB runs with a 5 V power line, whereas Firewire can supply up to 30 V. "

So how does my USB 1.1 mic pre give me 48v phantom power?
A voltage transformer.

USB 1.1 is fast enough to give 2 channels of 96k 24bit audio streaming.

USB 2.0 is as fast as Firewire 400... How many channels is that? Enough for a home studio?

I really can see the day coming when Apple will have a new chipset and protocol to ride and that will be the new industry standard and that's what all the pro-sumer gear will come with... USB will still be chugging along. Just like your PS2 port on your motherboard... Redundant? Yes. Gone? No.

Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:38 am

hackenslash wrote:

Cucco wrote:

Codemonkey wrote:

There's a great post by someone about why Firewire beats USB.
It's to do with USB being a shared protocol and so any device can request bandwidth from the computer and potentially cause dropouts in your audio streaming. Firewire doesn't allow this, so the audio interface *always* has enough bandwidth to carry down it.

The search isn't being too helpful, as ever. I don't think I've EVER found anything specific using it.

There's a slight advantage to USB though if configured right as it's a "dumb" protocol. This means that it simply passes the data straight to its intended target (DAW/HD). FW requires additional steps. (Hence the need for a driver for anything Firewire but not necessarily anything USB.) However, as you mentioned, since it is a shared protocol, anything requesting information across the same buss as the USB (say a keyboard/mouse, dongle, etc.) could cause a skip. This is why, if you're using a USB HD or interface, you should minimize all USB connections to only those necessary (use a USB to PS2 adapter for your keyboard and mouse) and if possible, keep your interface and/or hardware on its own buss/irq.

That being said - check out the TC Konnekt 8. I have it's bigger brother and can tell you, it's an amazing box and it should come in less than $400 USD.

Cheers-
Jeremy

I don't actually agree with all of this. the reason is fairly straightforward in that, as you say, USB is just a dumb port, while Firewire is isosynchronous, meaning that it guarantees the delivery of time-critical data up to the limits of its data transfer rate. It was designed specifically with multichannel audio and video streaming in mind.

Well...USB is capable of delivering its entire bandwidth as long as it doesn't have to compete for resources. Firewire, as Greener mentions, takes that guesswork out by negotiating its protocols and connections in advance. If you're careful with system implementation and planning, this should be a non-issue.

Second, Firewire wasn't designed with multi-channel audio and video in mind, that's just how it found its niche in the market.

Don't get me wrong -
I personally use and prefer Firewire interfaces over USB. My only point is that you shouldn't simply rule out USB - it's a viable, tested and reliable format.

Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:55 am

TheUkProducer wrote:

thanks Jeremy, by the big brother i take it you mean the konnekt 24D?

the TC Konnekt 8, does seem good, but it only has two inputs correct or did i miss something?

Two analog line inputs (includes the mic pres- which, BTW, are as good as you'll find on any interface), 2 SPDIF channels and/or 8 ADAT inputs.

Start with this and add a nice pre with digital outs or a separate AD converter and you've got a rockin system that will outlive any of us.

This topic sponsored by: