1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

Fireface UFX, PT9

Discussion in 'Pro Audio Equipment' started by BobRogers, May 1, 2011.

  1. BobRogers

    BobRogers Well-Known Member

    Well, I've been putting it off for a long time, but I'm going to upgrade the interface this summer - maybe this week. My basic thought is the RME Fireface UFX. A few extra features that (I think) make it worth the price over the 800. For now, I'll be using it with PT9. I'll be connecting via ADAT to the Focusrite Octopre. (I'll keep using the Octopre's converter card until I've added more quality preamps.)

    There hasn't been that much discussion of the UFX here, but I've been sort of doing due diligence, searching around for compatibility problems or just other complaints about the UFX. Any thoughts?
     
  2. TheJackAttack

    TheJackAttack Distinguished Member

    You can't go wrong with RME in my opinion. The only advantage the FF800 has is the ability to daisy chain three units.
     
  3. BobRogers

    BobRogers Well-Known Member

    Funny. I can't see doing that, but then again I can't see recording 18 channels at 192kHz (an advantage of the UFX). The more concrete advantages of the UFX are two more analog channels (though they have to be accessed through the front panel), AES instead of S/PDIF (no big deal I guess), availability of effects for use during tracking, and the more sophisticated routing options. The last looks cool in the demos, but I'm not really sure how it would fit into my workflow. I may have a line on someone selling a FF800 in a couple of weeks. That could change things.
     
  4. TheJackAttack

    TheJackAttack Distinguished Member

    Oh I think I'd go with the UFX. I don't know if you'd need to daisy chain and I like the new TotalMix too. I didn't phrase my original post very well. And the UFX has the same converters as the Micstacy. Very high end.
     
  5. BobRogers

    BobRogers Well-Known Member

    The one thing about the converters on the UFX is that the best converter technology (the double converters) are used only on the preamp channels. I have not really seen anyone definitively distinguish between the converters chips on the 800 vs. UFX vs. Micstacy. But the converter specs for the Micstacy look better (if I'm looking at the right thing).

    One thing I don't like about both of the fireface units is that the preamps are on the front panel. I'd much prefer that they use DB25 connectors instead of the trs to save space and put the mic connections in the back. If I get the UFX I'll rearrange my desk so that I can use the front connections without them getting in the way, but its a bit of a kludge. Mostly cosmetic, but a little annoying.
     
  6. TheJackAttack

    TheJackAttack Distinguished Member

    I see your point on the preamps. This series is primarily designed for us mobile guys I think. You could always make yourself a patch panel for the back of your rack with the thin Canare or similar running around to the front.
     
  7. BobRogers

    BobRogers Well-Known Member

    Yeah. It's easy to work around. And since I'm basically deciding between the UFX and a used 800 at this point it's not a factor in the decision. Just something I'd change if they'd ask me. Right now I'm thinking the UFX, Focusrite ISA 428 MkII with digital card. Alice doesn't really need that last semester of college, right?
     
  8. TheJackAttack

    TheJackAttack Distinguished Member

    It didn't do me any good.....
     
  9. soapfloats

    soapfloats Well-Known Member

    I don't think you'll go wrong w/ any of your plans, despite my recent issues w/ my FF800 (resolved).

    I'd love to get the card for my ISA (and free up 4 channels of line-in), but the cost alone is a Beyer ribbon, SM7b, 2x421, or savings towards that API 3124 I've had my eye on.
    Hard to pull the trigger to turn an 8 channel ADAT connection into only 4 channels, with those gems in mind.

    Like you, I rue the mic/line inputs on the front for Channels 9/10. I usually plug my talkback into AN10, but like to use AN9 when drums+bass = nine channels.

    Still, my biggest issue w/ the FF800 is only 8 analog outs, and they're forced into 4 stereo pairs.
    Making discrete headphone mixes/feeds difficult for large bands.
    Make sure one of your ADAT connections has analog outs to feed more than the 3 stereo headphone mixes the RMEs offer (minus the first pair for monitors).
    My Digimax LTs only offer inserts and no ADAT IN, sadly.
     
  10. BobRogers

    BobRogers Well-Known Member

    Thanks. I think it's a good plan. I have decided to get the UFX now and put the ISA off until some of the other bills are paid. (Yes, including the last tuition payment this August.) I think I can get through the projects I have currently planned with the preamps I have now plus the four new UFX pres. I will have the Octopre's preamps and converters if I need more than 13 channels at once, but I can probably do without it.

    I don't look at it that way (other than the expense). The card gives you eight channels of (what looks to me to be) high quality conversion up to 96kHz for $500. Dedicated converters are higher quality, but an order of magnitude higher in price. The ISA specs look better to me than, say the UA 4-710d. You move your ISA pre from the FF800 channels to the new ADAT channels, but the net gain is still 8 inputs. (That doesn't mean that this is the biggest bang for your next $500 bucks.)

    Yeah, I'm going to have to figure a nice cosmetic way to use those four front channels. They are good preamps by all accounts and have the best converters on the UFX. I'm going to have to rearrange my desk anyway. I'll think of something.

    My solution to this has always been to go with one basic stereo mix out and six mono stems that can be added to the stereo mix for "more me."
     

Share This Page