Skip to main content

Entry level interface- (m-audio M-track 2x2m)

http://www.m-audio.com/products/view/m-track-2x2m#.V0pHKNz3arU

This thing comes out in July, for $150, I'm thinking of pre ordering one in about 2 weeks. My Maudio 1814fw, would require a $50 siig PCIe FireWire card with the TI chip-set, just to plug into my computer. Since the drivers haven't been updated past W7, Maudio doesn't officially support the interface anymore. The tech person I spoke with over there, said that there's been a reasonable amount of users who have had no problems running the interface on w10, but either way, they don't support it anymore.

Feeling like I got my $400 worth, I'm skeptical to put any more into/towards a 10 year old interface, that has been discontinued for like 8 lol. It's been rock solid driver wise, and functioned fine for what it was.

So anyway, at this price point it's got nothing to do with quality, it's all about features. Mainly, this is the only interface in the price range that does the technical spec of 192khz, which is going to be my standard sampling rate, with 384k already rearing out of the shadows in an antelope converter, and even Samplitude pro X supports 384. So while 192 'standard' seems kinda ridiculous, I'm thinking of future compatibility/archiving, and the potential endless file format conversions my audio will suffer.

So this thing ticks that box, and is got two combo jacks, so I can record di/mic for my home guitar tracks. I only own 6 decent mics, and a couple nady beaters. Even when the burl mothership (or equivalent) lands in my mix suite, it'll be only be 4x8, then either 4x16, or 8x16, which is the the max channel count I picture myself needing between, a couple studio monitor pairs, and a surround setup. I'm aiming try try and catch up w 7.2, while it's still relevant. 9.2 and 13.2 don't appeal to me yet, and I think I'd prefer prefer atmos/auro once I progress past 7.2. I'd have to consider switching to Sequoia, since 7.1 is the highest support in Pro Tools, and I think 5.1 for Samplitude.

Anyway. My new interfaces purpose is purely to have a way to get sounds into the computer, for ideas and demos, and have something to plug my monitors into, which are currently running through an Apple TV/32" Ldc tv.

So i don't expect thing thing to sound good, as long as it at least sounds as good or improved from my 1814, I'm just fine. It's clean quiet and anemic, fair enough. It also was capable of recording 2 simultaneous 192k, which I never used, since I was 44.1k. At the time. All my serious tracking will be done at the studios, or I'll borrow some of my friends live tracking gear, which is quite good.

Just wanted to see if anyone had any thoughts, concerns, or suggestions, before i mentally pull the trigger on this one, and order it in a couple weeks if all goes well. I'm completely open to any suggestions, since this is the current placeholder, and winner, as far as I can tell from a few days of poking around.

The 500$ range just doesn't offer quality I'm looking for as a long term keeper, although, I'd be happy to consider one in that range, if quality was there. The Audient company has a nice one, limited to 96k, otherwise I would save and order that one.

Then when I get into the $1k range, is just very functional gear aimed at the top of the project studio.

$2500, is a strong point with a lot of options, none of them elite, but solid true professional, apogee, Lavry, mytek, and most interestingly to me Focusrite rednet.

But... Since I only need low channel counts, another thousand ($3,500) range, puts me in the high end/boutique quality level, I'm determined to experience in my daily life. That's where the burl, antelope, and Prism, land.

The time frame is 1.5 years, till boutique converter acquisition, which I'll pair with either my current computer (depending on how it's doing) or preferably a new custom computer that I put together.

So, as far as longevity, I hope to have to rely on this entry level demo interface, for 2-3 years, as my everyday driver. At $150 I'd have no problem getting something better in as soon as 6 months, but that depends heavily on some pending financial things going my way. If I am denied, then the 2-3 year time frame is more realistic.

With BFD showing up at my door last month for $175 (half price), and most recently (yesterday) the VSL ensemble pro 5 vsti, for $188 instead of like 230-250, I'm starting to get super duper excited about my new little modest home setup. VSL is still on sale for the rest of the month. I'm just looking for an interface to hook up my only pair of studio speakers to, and start learning all these cool new programs I'm starting with.

Sorry to ramble, lol, hope all y'all who're in the US, is having a good safe long weekend!

Comments

pcrecord Sun, 05/29/2016 - 04:50

I had it long ago with M-Audio for their converter quality and lack of driver developpement.
I had 2 delta 66 and 2 delta 44 (I think I still have those in a box somewhere) with which every OS update was a pain because of the drivers..

All that said, they may have put up a little gem for all we know. . . New equipement is always an unexplored territory !
My reflex would be buying a presonus interface instead but apart from Presonus and focusrite, this one is worth mentionning below 500$
http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/UH7000 at 399$ right now...
Burr brown converter and DSP got to be interesting no ??
;)

kmetal Sun, 05/29/2016 - 10:30

Marco, Marco, marco, you sir are the man.!!! I've always had a soft spot for Tascam. This thing ticks boxes I actually "want" to pay for. Burr brown conversion has always been decent in my Dennon theater receiver. Dsp, is more a bonus, since I'm trying to run natively, but... We all know about that punch in/overdub that happens in the middle of mixing, and I wouldn't want to count on my computer for some comfort verb or compression, deep into a heavy mix.

It even runs as a standalone 2ch mic pre!!

So the way I see it, AES outs, burr chips, and Dsp, make this "it man" (lol said in a hippie voice). I mean for $250 difference it's a good deal.

Now I have no dillusions of grandeur with the Tascam. But you've shown me something that is way more feature rich, and mos likely, sounds better, right in my price range. Awesome dude. I'm gonna look more deeply into this thing.

I'm sorry to hear about your experience w m audio. Mine were a bit different, but nothing to right home about, and my heart of hearts doesn't really want to return to them. It's not exactly a good look, lol ya digg?

I'll check again, since presonus was the first company I looked into for a budget interface, from what I saw they were limited to 96k. I'll double check, but now that you've made me aware, I'm looking at this Tascam and it's slightly higher price point, as a better long term solution, more of a "keeper" if you will, under the budget banner/context.

You saved my butt reccomending Qnap, over synology 8 months back, and I haven't regretted it yet, or opened it, but still it's undoubtably what I wanted. Never woulda got that one if it wasn't for Your thoughts.

Hopefully, it stays on sale, I need about a month or little more to accrue $400, but, I could have one of my buddies finance it for me on his Sweetwater card, or borrow the cash. The fact that they even bother to talk about caps, on the the feature set of a product in this range, says something of the design intentions. If nothing else, it should be easy to swap out the chips and caps on this, but I'd probably not bother, except for fun.

Seriously Marco, thanks.

kmetal Sun, 05/29/2016 - 22:23

Looks like presonus doesn't include 192k until their flagship studio 192 line. Priced at $600, it packs a few more inputs and outputs than I need for this application. They do have a pretty cool little tablet interface, that's very affordable, and looks pretty cool.

The Tascam got a favorable, albeit brief, review in tape op. http://tapeop.com/reviews/gear/103/uh-7000-mic-preamp-usb-interface/

I really like that the digital I/O can run simultaneously with the analog, making total track count 4x4. This smokes the mtrack in cost vs quality (based on spec, haven't heard them, and the m track isn't out yet). Guitar center is offering 15% off this holiday weekend in the states, which makes the Tascam $340. $340 more than I got, so I'll just keep saving, and wait for a similar deal.

I think this Tascam is right where i need to be. I realized that 4-500 seems to be my home recording device price point, my 1814 being 400, my Tascam Portastudio was around $500, when I bought them new back then.

This is in the same class, and the difference with this is it's a focused on a bit better quality, sacrificing channel count. I always opted for channel count, sacrificing a little quality, because I was doing a lot of recording live, and at practice spaces. With acess the the studios, I don't need channel count, and I don't really have any intentions of ever having bands over to track at my mix suite overdub room, when I eventually build it. I'm more interested in solo artist, artist development, and co writing, Ect, as far as tracking at my residence.

So while this is entry level, it is in line with my current less-is-more rig design philosophy.

I've had my bass amp, and the rest of my guitar rig and recording gear, packed up, waiting to be sold to GC. So I'm gonna get in touch with them, see if they stock the Tascam, and arrange a demo, while I'm unloading the last of my old gear. I won't be in the position to use any of the trade in towards anything new, it's already spoken for, but it will be good to hear the the Tascam. Particularly of interest, is the d-a section, since I use my studio speakers for everyday listening as well. The digital, should come in handy when sending a mix to my surround receiver for a/b. Since I'm relying mostly on vsti for composition, and mixing and editing, particularly editing, from home, I'd be curious how this stacks against one of the motu's d-a section at the studio.

Either way looks like we got a winner, just have to keep plodding along till the day the cashish, and the price line up, and I'll make it my own. Still going to keep browsing and researching, but this is the current winner, and seems tough to beat.

It could also be very useful just as a standalone Dsp device, even when I get the mothership, I'm thinking I can digitally route the Tascam in the daw, to be fed from an aux or bus, just for realtime monitoring effects, which is a great option to have.

Thanks again Marco. Keep us posted on that mic xformer.

DonnyThompson Mon, 05/30/2016 - 01:48

kmetal, post: 438707, member: 37533 wrote: I'm thinking I can digitally route the Tascam in the daw, to be fed from an aux or bus, just for realtime monitoring effects, which is a great option to have.

Kyle...

Just so you know, according to Tascam, the DSP is unavailable when recording at 192:

source: http://tascam.com/product/uh-7000/

  • When operating at 88.2kHz or 96kHz, only one of the effects (dynamics or send) can be used.
  • When operating at 176.4kHz or 192kHz, no effects can be used.

class="xf-ul">

pcrecord Mon, 05/30/2016 - 03:09

@kmetal I think my comment was : worth mentionning
I'm glad it went further than that for you. I'm sure we could find many better interfaces but for the price (it often come down to this), I think we're getting there.

Other out of price range 2 preamp units choices would be :
Audient id22 599$
SPL Creon USB Interface 599$
Universal Audio Apollo Twin Duo USB 899$
RME Fireface UCX 1599$

kmetal, post: 438697, member: 37533 wrote: I'll check again, since presonus was the first company I looked into for a budget interface, from what I saw they were limited to 96k.

I think the PreSonus Studio 192 Mobile goes to 192khz.
But between you and me, running a budget interface at 192khz seems a bit overkill. Creating higher latency and bigger files of lower quality doesn't appeal to me.. ;)
I would use 192 only for mastering but then I woundn't do mastering with budget gear..

kmetal Mon, 05/30/2016 - 23:35

DonnyThompson, post: 438710, member: 46114 wrote: Kyle...

Just so you know, according to Tascam, the DSP is unavailable when recording at 192:

source: http://tascam.com/product/uh-7000/

  • When operating at 88.2kHz or 96kHz, only one of the effects (dynamics or send) can be used.
  • When operating at 176.4kHz or 192kHz, no effects can be used.
class="xf-ul">

Donny, you hit the nail on the head my man, I actually was signing on here to post that exact update to the thread. I had read the manual quickly, and noticed that. Not a deal breaker, but I guess just a little disappointing. Dsp was a bonus feature in my eyes.

I've learned to except 'seemingly odd' compromises, with my new choices in gear, particularly 7.2 and 192k is the top side of standard, as far as tech specs go. So I ran into this when browsing for monitor controllers, and bigger interfaces. Like if you go 7.2, you give up an alternitave set on speakers, or if you run 192, you divide channel count by 4, and increase data usage.

What I've found D, is much of what does what I "need", lol term used loosely, is found in modular systems. It seems that there are basic foot prints in gear designs, and designers will trade features, but remain within certain footprints. There's apparently only so much you can do within the context of standard rack spaces, and power consumption ratings. Price points, I'm sure are the biggest influence.

Dangerous, and burl in particular, are modular, and seems to keep up with quality, tech specs, and the associated price tag to go with it. This sort of open format, certainly doesn't put a threshold on earnings potential from the manufacturing side, or bragging rights and poverty for the buyers :)

It's taken me many many years to start to figure out what I really need, and confidently start putting things together on a component basis.

More than a dozen times, gear I drooled over in the mags, and reputation, and happy owners, have left me wondering what all the fuss was about. Fortunately this didn't cost me a whole lot of money personally, maybe a couple hundred on the rode, and a couple more on PT. particualry mics, and pre amps in the upper end, have sometimes made me think, um really?

kmetal Tue, 05/31/2016 - 00:11

pcrecord, post: 438712, member: 46460 wrote: @kmetal I think my comment was : worth mentionning
I'm glad it went further than that for you. I'm sure we could find many better interfaces but for the price (it often come down to this), I think we're getting there.

Other out of price range 2 preamp units choices would be :
Audient id22 599$
SPL Creon USB Interface 599$
Universal Audio Apollo Twin Duo USB 899$
RME Fireface UCX 1599$

I think the PreSonus Studio 192 Mobile goes to 192khz.
But between you and me, running a budget interface at 192khz seems a bit overkill. Creating higher latency and bigger files of lower quality doesn't appeal to me.. ;)
I would use 192 only for mastering but then I woundn't do mastering with budget gear..

The audient was what I really had in mind, but the 192 thing. I didn't consider the UA, particualry becasue I felt it sounded cheap, bathe the twin, and rackmount. I installed the Apollo rack in my cousins studio, and my buddy had the twin. It's got a bit of that 'soundblaster' soundcard sound, maybe low-mid smearing?

As soon as a get into the 1k price point, it's almost not worth it to me until I just settle at the top side of things. I have a very peculiar sense of diminishing returns I think. Ok, I'm a fidelity addict. I'll pay a lot more, for a little better, only on the top end products though. My feeling is that at that level, the price is worth the divided return, simply, because that level is otherwise unattainable. This assumes an integral chain through and through. Otherwise the "improvement" may go unnoticed.

The presonus mobile does do 192. its not out of the question, but at the top price point of something "project studio". I do like its multiple outs, but it would only allow 5.1 analog outs. Im not writing it off yet. I wasn't super impressed w the YouTube vids demos on the Tascam, but frankly I wasn't impressed with burl either, on YouTube. I might have to lay ears on these things.

Lol if I absolutely can't make up my mind there's always the mtrack. Indecisiveness is built into my basic function, but the choices are narrowing a bit.

I also agree that 192k from a budget interface makes no sense or is overkill. I'm not looking for finished quality live recorded tracks, from my interface, which is why I don't really care how "amazing" the built in pre amps are marketed as, and shopping cheap conversion. I always tout the importance of conversion, so to not be hypocritical I understand it's limited. The real drag is crappy DA, which is wher the Tascam comes in with burr-brown DA conversion. (TI chips are used on the AD side). But even then, we know by now that it's more than just the converter chip that contributes to the overall sound.

My thought is to have the sessions themselves all in 192k so my vsti's and everything is all clocked and sync at the top sample rate. If I need to re dub some guitars and vocals that were initially done at home, that's what I will do over at the studio, where the mic collection and outboard is well stocked, and the conversion is apogee and motu.

So I don't expect any sort of improved sonics over 44.1 or 96 in this budget interface range, it's more a matter of laying the foundation for the future. I couldn't notice a difference home on my mackies, when using the 44,1 96 or 192, on my FW 1814. I just used 44.1 or maybe 88/96.

I'm also confused about latency with regard to sample rate. Whenever I increased the sample rate in reason, the latency Decreased. Am I missing something? Does the opposite hold true for audio?

If I had the money to be in the 1,500$ range, I've found the spl Madison most alluring. The issue, is since I don't own a pcie madi card, that's an additional 8-1500$ for a nice RME card. That then brings the price range into the burl/antelope range, and it becomes a channel count vs quality thing again. Then there's the Ethernet vs madi situation, which frankly, I'm on the fence. Burl, and now rednet (by focusrite) offer multiple connectivity options within the same box. Burl is 800$ per card, choices being PT proprietary, madi, and Ethernet. You get one of your choice included in the chassis purchase of the mothership, and you can swap the others in and out, using only one at a time. Rednet I belive is PT, thunderbolt, and Ethernet, all built in, and I'm unsure if the Ethernet is able to be used simultaneously, I belive it is.

Becuause I'm starting from nothing, I'm not locked in to any one thing, but also, must bear the full cost of purchasing everything .

I sometimes feel like I talk like an elitist around here. I don't want to be one of those people who talks boutique, and walks motu. (Not that there's anything wrong with motu). I'm just very slow on the draw with a lot of things, and it takes me a very long time to observe, and absorb, each detail. Lol, sometimes I think people may question if I even did get the computer or NAS, lol I know I would. Truth is I am following through, and my software set is shaping up as planned, actually cheaper. But I've settled on less options with subjectively higher quality.

In the case of this interface, I wasn't sure if my old one was gonna get me by till the ship lands. Me not having the FireWire card was the deal breaker. Ironically, i threw away a siig FireWire card, in the box, never opened, about a year ago. I was like "I'll never need this stupid thing, it's been laying around for 5 years". No regrets, just gotta wait a little extra for a new toy.

DonnyThompson Wed, 06/01/2016 - 01:53

I would think that - like any other manufacturer - Burl would have varying degrees of quality components - that are based on price.
When Behringer acquired Midas, they made a big deal of touting that they were using Midas preamps in their new I/Os, but a little research showed that these preamps were not the same pre's that were used in their previously industry respected products - like their Venice desks... Behringer was using cheaper components. Yeah, they were still technically Midas pres, but they weren't "those" Midas pres that so many had come to like ... they were cheaper versions.
I guess I'm suggesting the possibility that Tascam might be doing something similar using Burl converters in their new models... That the converters used, while technically made by Burl, might not be the exact same quality of conversion as those that are used in pricier/ higher quality converters. I can't say that this is true, but it stands to reason based upon the price of the Tascam, that cuts in quality are being made somewhere. Obviously, you're not going to be able to pick up a Dangerous or Antelope for the $399 price tag that Tascam is selling their newer UH model for.
And ... even if the converters are the same as those being used in more expensive models, as you mentioned previously, there's more to a preamp/I-O than just the converters alone. I guess I'm saying that it doesn't really matter how good the converters are if the preamps that are feeding signal into them are of questionable quality. Personally - and I base my opinion on having actually used them - I've always found Tascam preamps to be lacking in gain, and not nearly as good sounding as those found in other similarly priced models by other manufacturers.
Although again, you get what you pay for. I wouldn't think that anything made by Tascam - Burl conversion included or not - would be the first choice of pre/I-Os to be used at those pro studios that are turning out commercial hits. ;)

Imho of course.
D.

kmetal Wed, 06/01/2016 - 10:18

DonnyThompson, post: 438738, member: 46114 wrote: I would think that - like any other manufacturer - Burl would have varying degrees of quality components - that are based on price.
When Behringer acquired Midas, they made a big deal of touting that they were using Midas preamps in their new I/Os, but a little research showed that these preamps were not the same pre's that were used in their previously industry respected products - like their Venice desks... Behringer was using cheaper components. Yeah, they were still technically Midas pres, but they weren't "those" Midas pres that so many had come to like ... they were cheaper versions.
I guess I'm suggesting the possibility that Tascam might be doing something similar using Burl converters in their new models... That the converters used, while technically made by Burl, might not be the exact same quality of conversion as those that are used in pricier/ higher quality converters. I can't say that this is true, but it stands to reason based upon the price of the Tascam, that cuts in quality are being made somewhere. Obviously, you're not going to be able to pick up a Dangerous or Antelope for the $399 price tag that Tascam is selling their newer UH model for.
And ... even if the converters are the same as those being used in more expensive models, as you mentioned previously, there's more to a preamp/I-O than just the converters alone. I guess I'm saying that it doesn't really matter how good the converters are if the preamps that are feeding signal into them are of questionable quality. Personally - and I base my opinion on having actually used them - I've always found Tascam preamps to be lacking in gain, and not nearly as good sounding as those found in other similarly priced models by other manufacturers.
Although again, you get what you pay for. I wouldn't think that anything made by Tascam - Burl conversion included or not - would be the first choice of pre/I-Os to be used at those pro studios that are turning out commercial hits. ;)

Imho of course.
D.

Yeah man, I don't expect a pro unit. I found myself wondering if I was getting sucked into the name allure of a recognizable name on the chip. I was like ut oh, am I getting into deliberation over sound quality of a low end set of choices? Lol I hypocritically have, stating in the first post or two ' I expect it not to sound very good... Features are what I'm shopping for in this range' , yet somehow words like 'quality' and 'conversion' leak into my mind.

From what I gather. It's th TI branded A-D chip, and the Burr Brown D-A. My only familiarity with BB, is that is the chips they use for conversion, in my (2nd from the bottom) Dennon 5.1 receiver. Cheap as it may be, I purchased 3 of them, including Yamaha, and maybe one other brand, or model. It sounds good. I a b them over a week, and became a master at plugging and unplugging the bare wire terminals quickly lol. Forcing my friends (non audio guys) to give me their opinion on both. Hands down the Dennon sounded fuller, or kinda, unobtrusive if not good. Yamaha didn't sound good in this price range (3-400$), or its next one up.

For the record, lol burl doesn't make anything cheap. Even there 2 bay converter chassis is 1200$, as opposed to 1700$ for the 8 bay.

To be honest, without laying ears yet, I think it's between m-audio mtrack for $150, or the Tascam. Since I can't hear the m-audio till it drops next month, it's realistically, does the Tascam sound a bit thin and weak in person, as the YouTube suggests. It's not 'not clear' rather a sensation of 'not there'.

The Tascam appealed with its brand name DA (BB chip) because, I monitor/listen 85% of the time, and tracking for me, tends to be spur of the moment, more of an idea pad, than, okay, this is for the record. Lol the solo record, I bought the Maudio to make, in 2006. The record, I've not completed one full song for, rather, 5 albums worth of fragments, and almost completely written, tracks.

Maybe I'm looking in the wrong area, but I'm not sure I could get anything of truly professional quality in the 500 and under range. I'd gladly grab a stereo DA for that price. The I'd snag the mtrack, for a recording interface, even if I was forced to use its own da section while tracking my um, masterpieces.

kmetal Wed, 06/01/2016 - 10:26

Boswell, post: 438739, member: 29034 wrote: Ahem...that's Burr-Brown converters. BB were taken over by Texas Instruments many years ago, but, to TI's credit and unlike the Behringer/Midas story, BB products have kept their own identity and quality.

Well I was going to actually enter the x-air into the conversation, but, won't bother anymore lol. 699 is their 18ch version, and the only one in the line that will output multichannel (as opposed to stereo only) via USB.

The thought has left quicker than it arrived.

It's funny, my tech savvy buddy, loves his Berringer xair, and x32, saying he finds it indistinguishable from the Midas version. I wonder if we are hearing a cheapening of Midas and a (slight)boost in Berringer. Be ringer has always reverse engineered good products and component cheapened them. I think they've been sued over patents a couple times, if my grapevine memory serves me. I'm wondering if maybe Berringer was the 'winner' in this area of the merger? Either way, I not considering the X- line anymore. Just conversation.

kmetal Wed, 06/01/2016 - 10:28

kmetal, post: 438750, member: 37533 wrote: The record, I've not completed one full song for, rather, 5 albums worth of fragments, and almost completely written, tracks.

I may be looking to hire some of you guys for some co-production / arranging work, if this trend continues, or even if I do 'complete' a song myself, I'd like to have some professional guidance.

kmetal Mon, 06/06/2016 - 11:34

I think I found a winner. The price is right, and is a proven company, albeit not for interfaces, but keyboards. It's $250 for the Roland quad capture. so $100 more than m audio, and $150 cheaper than Tascam.

http://www.rolandus.com/products/quad-capture/

The sales person made me aware of this product, and said it would be his second choice after the audient. He said his buddy had one it sounds better than the Maudio and tascam I was considering, he said due to a better analog section.

Anyone have any experience with Roland interfaces, or Roland in general? I've beat around on their v drums at the stores, and keyboards, which I always thought sounded good. And I use mostly Boss guitar pedals, even though they are noisey, they have good girth to them. (Boss and Roland are sister Corp)

@Boswell i was wondering if you in particular had any comments on Roland branded gear in general.

Boswell Mon, 06/06/2016 - 16:34

kmetal, post: 438882, member: 37533 wrote: @Boswell i was wondering if you in particular had any comments on Roland branded gear in general.

Some of their products are excellent value, while some appear to be built to a cost-conscious lower specification. I'd put the Quad-Capture in the first bracket, so it's a good compromise unit for what you have said about your needs and your budget.

I got to use a Quad-Capture not so long ago when tracking for a colleague. I can confirm that it seemed to be in the excellent value category, giving good results if you were aware of its shortcomings. Its overload margins were rather abrupt, so you had to be a little careful with signals that had a high crest factor such as piano and drums, and set the level trims lower than the output amplitudes would lead you to expect.

Another thing to beware of is that the data sheets say that the line outputs have a 2K Ohm output impedance, which is surprisingly high for this day and age. If you were to use the line outs to drive some standard line input loads you could lose 6dB or more of signal amplitude. On the other hand, it may be a data sheet error. I can't comment either way as I didn't get to try the outputs.

Perhaps the only other point to mention in the context of what you have said about your needs is that the unit becomes a duo-capture at 192KHz.

kmetal Mon, 06/06/2016 - 19:47

Thanks for the reply Boz. I'm glad someone trustworthy has laid ears on it. The one audio demo I found vs th audient d12, showed suble differences, the d12 being a bit more round. That said, I'm fine w the Roland, particularly w my 192k requirement.

Boswell, post: 438889, member: 29034 wrote: Another thing to beware of is that the data sheets say that the line outputs have a 2K Ohm output impedance, which is surprisingly high for this day and age. If you were to use the line outs to drive some standard line input loads you could lose 6dB or more of signal amplitude. On the other hand, it may be a data sheet error. I can't comment either way as I didn't get to try the ou

Ya know, I actually took note of this today while I've been researching. Lol I had no idea how to interpret it, or what it meant for my mackie hrs. I'm still so novice. As long as this doesn't somehow mess up my gain staging or effect the final product in any significant way, the mackies have plenty of power for me, I listen soft, all day long.

Boswell, post: 438889, member: 29034 wrote: Perhaps the only other point to mention in the context of what you have said about your needs is that the unit becomes a duo-capture at 192KHz.

Yup. I've decided on the octa capture instead. I found 2 inputs a bit hindering on my old interface, when switching instruments quickly for demos.

The octa gives me 4 ins @ 192k. And includes rack ears.

Then a full 8-10, w 4 individual cue mixes and Dsp, @96 and below. They must be aware of the headroom issue, becasue inputs 7-8 have "high headroom" or whatever they call it, specifically for kick snare and piano type, high dynamic range things, according to the manual.

It's 2x the price @500$, but doubles the capability at 192, triples it and then. Some at 96k.

Plus the octa is cascadable, the quad doesn't appear to be.

I've decided that this feature set, and quality level, will make a decent portable interface to my portable rig, once the flagship converters show up in a year or two.

I thank you all sincerely for your thoughts and time. I think we can consider this case closed, with the Octa capture taking the cake. I still worry a bit about a 5 year old design, but in the budget market there's not a whole lot of options, and nobody has had any issues w the Roland. Most of the hate revolves around connectivity, and there's isn't a lot of hate for this product. What more could I ask for in this range?

Awesomeness!!! Interface is projected for purchase in August. Obviously I'll have my ears open until then, but I've exhausted my mind on this all week, so, Roland it is, until further notice.

-Kyle

Sean G Tue, 06/07/2016 - 04:20

kmetal, post: 438882, member: 37533 wrote: I think I found a winner. The price is right, and is a proven company, albeit not for interfaces, but keyboards. It's $250 for the Roland quad capture. so $100 more than m audio, and $150 cheaper than Tascam.

Kyle I have the Roland Duo Capture EX for my little portable recording rig with a laptop.

I find it up to the task and great value for money... IMO it is really clean and transparent.

Roland use a pair of VS pre-amps in the Duo Capture EX which use the same components as used in their high-end digital mixer range.

It can interface with your Ipad as well using an Ipad camera connection cord.

IMO Roland make some good quality equipment which I think is often overlooked at times.

My mate has the Focusrite Scarlett and my Roland has lower latency...with the Roland you can monitor in mono as well as stereo.

Its battery powered also if you are on the go...mine came with NiMH LR6 AA rechargeables as standard although I went out and bought the Roland DC power supply
(it wasn't included with the Duo Capture EX unfortunately...this was the only downside as Roland insist you only use their branded DC power supply to prevent voiding your warranty...and charge like a wounded bull for the privilage of you doing so).

There is no discernible hiss whatsoever when you turn it up, unlike some other competitors' units in the same price range.

Would I recommend it?.....I would...for a budget little interface it does what I want it to do without any compromise.

Great little unit my one.(y)

kmetal Wed, 06/08/2016 - 23:08

Sean G, post: 438918, member: 49362 wrote: It can interface with your Ipad as well using an Ipad camera connection cord.

Ooooooooo. Man that's huge to me.

But.... Did I say case closed... Ugh.

Looks like focusrite has just released the 2nd gen Scarletts. These little guys go up to 192k, where the 1st gen was 96k.

Soooo.

For the price of the octa capture (499$) I could snag an 18 in 20 out, Scarlett, with 8 pres.

Or

For 350$ I could grab the 18 in 8 out version.

Or

4x2 version for 250$

In all honesty the 18x8 isn't really a contender, because it's a weird combo of line outs, and digital, so I couldn't do 7.1 easily/sensibly.

So really it's a question of the 4x, or the full 18x. I like the full 18 version because it has 10 physical line outs, two labeled main which must be default monitoring, and then another 8. I could then possibly run both 7.1, and 2/2.1 simultaneously.

Gosh darn it, I literally started shopping tonight looking for a deal on headphones, I mean, the octa capture. Maybe I'll get one super cheap with all these next gen product dropping this year. I have been a little weary of getting a 5 year old design, especially since I'd like 2 years of daily driving for my home demo junk, and then use it as the basis for a mobile rig for as long as it lasts. But the iPad connectivity... Man.

Now I'm totally unsure. I trust you and bozs opinions, and Roland is a company who I trust. I used to want one of there VS Portastudio deals, back when they were 'the shiz', lol I just ended up using my cassette Portastudio.

I only own 6 decent mics, so 8 pres is a bit overkill, 4 allowed barely enough, but sufficient.

My idea being the my stuff plugged in all the time, w the same gain settings, so I can jump between vocals, acoustic guitar (1 mic) electric guitar (1 mic, 1 di line), bass guitar (di). Singing and playing acoustic, would require using just one mic, summing on a mixer, or, a gain/mic position adjustment. I have no problems recording vocals and guitar with just one mic. This new rig is more about immediacy than raw power, or ultimate sonics.

So the Roland got me where I needed to be, albeit with nothing to spare (@192k), which is fine, and the slight inconvenience of the dual mic vocal/acoustic situation.

To be very honest, I had a funny feeling in my gut when I mentally decided on the Roland, but I couldnt develop the reason. I thought maybe I was just being a little worried about the price, which is relatively cheap, but 2-3x the duo, and m-audio. But the octa is the only one that makes sense. So currently it's octa vs one of the Scarletts. That is, until next week when presonus releases their next gen. Lmao. Strangely, I feel like the Roland may sound better. A hunch only, no real proof/reasoning. And it also has remote controllable pres. Which is huge to me.

Also, I realized I'm going to have 2 computer right off the bat. The kangaroo mini PC, and the lenovo. So, perhaps, I'm looking for two??? I must stop this. Fortunately the NAS drive has hdmi AV. Thanks Marco! Your reccomendation was priceless.

Interstingly, @Sean G focusrite claims :

"The second generation Scarlett range is packed full of upgrades. New super-low latency* will bring confidence to your performance, letting you record and monitor with software effects in real time."

"* Super-low roundtrip latency was measured at 2.74ms, working at 96kHz with a 32 samples buffer on Logic Pro X, running on a Mac Pro and OS 10.11"
--------

So I dunno, I was on my way to bed, but wide awake now, I'm gonna look more into these things. I'm waiting to realize things like 1/2 the channels work at 192, and that adat maxes out at 96k... But we will see.

Then for 699, I could step to the clarett 4 pre, interface, but this would have to actually be pro quality, otherwise, I'd rather save/spend that toward 2ch of burl or what have you.

@pcrecord arent you using the Scarlett, or were? Is that what broke on you? Or where you using Safire? Sorry man, I forgot.

I'll link each one from the focusrite site, and I'll quote the Sweetwater price.

$250 (consideration in the bare bones budget line of thought, a 'holdover', moving quickly to the kangaroo)

https://global.focusrite.com/usb-audio-interfaces/scarlett-6i6

$350 (4 preamps, adat in only, basically equivalent connectivity of the octa @192k, strong consideration)

https://global.focusrite.com/usb-audio-interfaces/scarlett-18i8

$499 (8 pres, adat in AND out, probably the one to get if i get one, rack mounted is cool)

https://global.focusrite.com/usb-audio-interfaces/scarlett-18i20

Sean G Thu, 06/09/2016 - 00:16

kmetal, post: 438984, member: 37533 wrote: Interstingly, @Sean G focusrite claims :

"The second generation Scarlett range is packed full of upgrades. New super-low latency* will bring confidence to your performance, letting you record and monitor with software effects in real time."

My friends is not the new version...he has had it for a while now.

pcrecord Thu, 06/09/2016 - 03:02

kmetal, post: 438984, member: 37533 wrote: @pcrecord arent you using the Scarlett, or were? Is that what broke on you? Or where you using Safire? Sorry man, I forgot.

It was a Liquid Saffire 56. Unknown to me, it was store demo that ran too long before I got it. So unless it was a dud, I believe it's wasn't Focusrite's fault. What was their fault is not replacing it when I sent it to repair under warranty.
I use it for the 2 headphones output these days. A 1k headphone amp is way ridiculus, but I get signal to it via otherwise unused adat...
The realtime mixer of Focusrite is good but as good as RME.

K, it seem you are changing your needs along the reflexion. Didn't you say 2 input was enough when the thread started ?

Now to me the question is which of those units offer the best quality? I think having more channels of crap is not very good way to go.. ;)

DonnyThompson Thu, 06/09/2016 - 04:04

Kyle, from my perspective, here's what I'm getting from you..

In no particular order:

You want an I/O-Pre that will record up to 192.
You want a model with built-in DSP.
You want the pre's to be of good quality ( are you looking for a model that will also have enough gain for low output dynamics and ribbons?)
You want as many channels available as possible, so that you don't need to constantly be switching out sources.
You want to be able to cascade future models with the first, (via optical or whatever), so that you can remain flexible and allow for the possibility of future additional input channel counts.
You want OS/ iPad connectivity.

I think it's safe to say that most - if not all - of the interfaces you've looked at in your price range will not allow any DSP when recording above 96.

At this point, I think you need to determine the features that mean the most to you... the "must haves".
Case in point... while it's nice to not have to be able to constantly swap out sources/change inputs, this isn't really a sonic issue; it's more of a convenience thing, so, is this a deal-breaker for you?

You already know - should you choose a higher channel count at a cheaper price - that quality will be cut somewhere; it's just the way it goes. Better components cost more, so the more channels you get at a higher quality, the more you will spend.

That being said, I don't see a problem with any of the models you've looked at thus far that will allow you to do the things you want to do, and have the features you seek.
(with the possible exception of the Tascam -I'm not a fan of Tascam pre amps, but that's a personal taste thing based on older models I've used, they may have greatly improved their products... I can't say).

They're all gonna be about the same in terms of sonic quality; and I'm not inferring that the quality will be bad, either... they will all probably give you the level of audio quality you would expect for the price bracket you are looking in.
It's not as if you are using something like a Grace, Millennia, Neve, ADK, SSL or UA, (or any other preamp model that averages out to be around $800 per channel) as your sonic comparison point; so you need to determine which features you want most; prioritize them, and then choose the model which will give you the most bang for the buck.

Make a list, and order the features in the hierarchy of what means the most to you.
Then, go shopping and do your final comparisons, and cut or add features as needed, or as you can afford.

IMHO of course. ;)

d.

kmetal Thu, 06/09/2016 - 04:35

pcrecord, post: 438994, member: 46460 wrote: K, it seem you are changing your needs along the reflexion. Didn't you say 2 input was enough when the thread started ?

Now to me the question is which of those units offer the best quality? I think having more channels of crap is not very good way to go.. ;)

Guilty, I've been flip flopping around, it's been literally 5 years since I picked up a Sweetwater catalog, a lot has changed. Lol I used to have the thing memorized. But you see how scatter brained an undecisive I am. I like to explore all options, even when I think I know, I have no idea.

DonnyThompson, post: 438997, member: 46114 wrote: You want an I/O-Pre that will record up to 192.
You want a model with built-in DSP.
You want the pre's to be of good quality ( are you looking for a model that will also have enough gain for low output dynamics and ribbons?)
You want as many channels available as possible, so that you don't need to constantly be switching out sources.
You want to be able to cascade future models with the first, (via optical or whatever), so that you can remain flexible and allow for the possibility of future additional input channel counts.
You want OS/ iPad connectivity.

Your right Donny. I'm gonna respond to your posts, then make a list in a new reply for organization sake.

DSP is something I do not want. Not in this level. Unless the same Dsp effects, can be used while mixing, I have no interest in Dsp as solely monitoring. My feeling is that any small latency incurred from native processing isn't a big deal because usually it's a slight delay and verb anyway, just for comfort.

And also when I move into the pthd or Dsp card based effects, I'll be doing headphone mixes off the daw auxes anyway, so I'd like to start with that workflow from the get go.

I have no interest in the quality of the interfaces pre amp as a selling point. Frankly even the top interfaces stock pres are of no interest. So expectations and requirements are low in this area. Especially, at this price point.

I said two channels in and out initially, but then I remembered it always aggravated me swapping plugs w my fw1814, which had two built in pres only.

4 inputs is minimum now, 5 is really what I want, so it seems it's 4 or 8. 4 built in pres and 8 total ins would suffice, the 8 built in pres, just make things even more easy for me. The goal is to have my main instruments in record ready at any given time.

Cascading is a bonus, since this is really just to have an audio note pad, I don't intend on buying another unit in this price range for more inputs. To me long term, that money is better spent on quality.

iPad connectivity is also nice bonus, but given I can scoop up an iPad interface for $75-$150, this really isn't important anymore. I'm just going to get a dedicated interface for the iPad. Either the presonus, or focusrite most likely.

kmetal Thu, 06/09/2016 - 06:04

Ok hear goes. In order (roughly).

Background. This came about since I haven't bought a recoridng system since 2006. I've also begun to focus on my own freelance / independent work. I'm still I member of the studio staff (last time I checked anyway, I went a month or so without a phone, so I gotta check in w the big man over there, lol.). Due to continuos gear reliability issues over there, and difficulty selling time at 50-75 and hour, I need to be able to offer better rates. I also would prefer more than the staff rates ($15/hr) which is fair, but not livable, especially sporadally. The studio just can't afford to pay more. Clients get ticked when paying 55$ an hour for simpl,e tasks like editing, and overdubs.

Basically the big studios is where I'll cut basics, and live stuff. Do first pass and last pass mixes. The inbetweens can be done at home, for about half that rate for my client, and full share take of the rate to me.

I'm also moving into video editing, the extent of which I'm not sure, but I selected magix movie edit pro as the first delve in. Main reason is multi cam, and hopefully easy compatibility w Sampltude. I have to thank DVDhawk for his thoughtful reply to my questions on the topic via PM a few months back.

Purpose: to record demos at home, and do rough mixes and editing, which can be re corded/mixed/built on at the studios. Monitoring in surround is what I really want to do, so if at all possible to incorporate enough outs cool. If it's a simple 2 or 4 out, not a deal breaker, since I only have one pair of studio monitors, and although I do have the Bose surround system, I need to choose a receiver, or slowly acquire the crown DCA amps, which are part of the big scheme system. Ie my "pro" home mix suite setup. (As an aside, I am approved financially for a home loan, and am going to build an additional room in the house, or modify the existing living room) I expect to move within 3 years. At this point I'll be ready to buy what we've I don't have to complete and install the full flagship setup, with the multiple pcs, boutique conversion, and dangers st, or equivalent.

Budget-$500 or less if possible. It's realistically no higher than $1500 if something is truly really pro. But i find above 500$, is a sorta no mans land until apogee/rme level, and at that point, I'm just holding out for boutique. So it's basically budget or boutique. I kinda roll with extremes. Money isn't an issue, it's just a matter of how long is reasonable to be interface less, while I save. I have a steady small, fixed income each week, from a loan a took for my hiatus. Basically anything extra I have after food and gas, goes towards gear/software. Typically It's about $50-75 a week 'extra'. So that's the time = $ formula I'm working w.

Also to produce you tube vids, and short little intros for other people's you tube channels. With this demo unit.

Requirements in rough order of importance.

-critical-

1. 192k a must. As rediculous as it may be. If it allows only have of the available inputs on the interface, no prob. I'll use 96 if I need to use all of them. Ideally, all I/o works at "full" sample rate. I am aware that some interfaces sound worse at 192 vs 96. It's so my sessions are at 192 for future use. I don't want to have to re edit, and import all sorts of midi, when I finally am tracking "for real" at home.

2. 4-8 input channels, at least 4 stock pres. 8 is just fine, and I'd pay proportionally more for the capability, just for convience, all other things being equal. (I.e. Same interface line, different model) This gets me going, and demoing. I will expand with 'keeper' outboard pres slowly with time. Not the least of which the remote controllable millennia hv3r I recently discovered from Chris's link to millennia s page. But you know, the neve style, the clean open tube, the vintage tube, and the transformers less super clean. The usuals.

3. Reliable drivers, after a nightmare PT m powered experience. I'll take reliability even over quality. The idea being to capture my thoughts and ideas.

4. Decent quality, i.e., I'd rather not scale down to say m-audio level simply for more channels or two meet a price. If I can get significant quality at the cost of channel count, I'm in. D-A is more important to me than AD, since my drums are sampled, and there's good tracking gear available at the studios, and my buddy's place. Frankly my Maudio interface was good enough for me, so anything should be a boost in quality over that, by now.

-optional-

Id really really like to have remote control over the input gains, since the gear may end up in a rack, in a ventted closet. but I can live without this, if I have to.

USB connectivity seems to be the most common at this price point. But I'm open to any connectivity, since I have 2 open pcie 3.0 1x slots available in the lenovo.

hi-z instrument ins. 2 would be nice, more is welcome. I own 3 electrics, and ill need a bass. Im selling off my yyaamaha bass and cheter 7 string to help towards a new car. if not, ill just get a nice radial active DI rack unit or floor box, or maybe passive. gonna need advice on that.

Adat/spdif is a nice bonus, but usually doesn't operate past 96k in most cases. I would however use it to watch movies and connect my Apple TV and/or theater receiver, if I go that route, which is more economical than buying 7.2 channels of DCA amplification right off the bat.

Rackmount would be sweet. im longing to design and build an oak or maple rack with ventilation to house, my gear, and computers.

It'd be nice, but not likely, to send cue mixes sperately from the main 2-bus, to the headphone outputs via the DAW. Confused?

I'll likely scoop another Art pre amp if I need immediate extra inputs. And swap the tubes immediately. I gave my first one to my boss.

-could care less either way-

Headphone monitoring matrix w effects

Dsp of any kind

cascading- nice option to have in case I interface isn enough live, but I rarely havve used more than 8 w my personal setup, becuas I lack mics and pres.

50db of gain is plenty. I work w LDC (at3035, rode nt1a if it still works after I 'mod' it, akg 414 xls, 3x sm57)
the beyer 160 ribbon, will come along w a pre, as will the shure sm7, likely a dual channel high gain choice. the mojave tube condesner will show up sometime, but gain is not an issue as. far as I know w this mic.

dont care about the quality of the onboard stock pre amps of a cheap interface. they all are about the same. even the apogee ensemble left a lot to be desired imho, especially side by side with a Rosetta and calrec, and even eureka channel.

bundled software isnt important, im slowly finding what I need on sale. got waves H-comp and Hdelay for $40 total. I very much like those two in oarticular. the comp has aa tempo sync for the release, which sholld help w my electronic based musical tasks. I also scooped the rennesiance eq and compressor, which I've always liked, on sale for 60$ a couple months ago as part of the musicians 2 bundle. Those are pretty much all my faves from waves, I've used just about every pluggin from them. I still have the naive power pack, which has the l1, which I like for bass.

Other than that its stock plugs, one aftermarket verb, and fabfilter bundle on tap.

standalone operation- nice, but ill probaby not use it much. most likely only if the interface bcomes used soley as an adat extension, if it even has adat.

iPad connectivity is cool but like I said, im planning on the focusrite dock, or ppresonsus / focusrite iOS interface. those all currently max at 96k. I use cubase for iPad.

-----summary----

so based on this, its seeming these are the three choices, which I porbably missed a couple. No particular order.

Roland octa capture.

Focusrite 18i20, 18i8, or 6i6

Rme baby face (2ch)

Apogee 2 ch (not sure if it's PC compatible)

Tascam uh-7000 although, numerous people said its not very great sounding, and the you tubes echoed that fwiw

M audio mtrtack. At $150 it's brand new and a last resort.

Really it's seeming Roland vs focusrite. Focusrite certainly has the features/connectivity, but is it at a reasonable compromise in quality vs Roland? Is it a compromise in quality at all? Does a 5 year old Roland design make more ssn than a brand new focusrite? It's possible to my mind that the Roland may sound better, but it's also just as possible it sounds about the same or worse, and some of that money is going for its DSP, which is something I can't use at 192.

I think everything in the 3-500 range is probably about the same. Or pretty close, all very meh.

So I think that's about as organized as I can get my thoughts off 2 hours sleep. Lol my studio design client enthusiastically bombarded my txt messaging with numerous drawings and questions right around 3am. It's ok, I'm used to those hours, and it could be a nice, long term quasi steady paying gig.

Thank you all for your time and patience, my obsessive nit picking over insignificant things (i.e. Ram latency) is part of how I learn. I'm trying to be more wise,, and select things that I.need and really want, vs 'just go get it' type things of yesteryear.

I've never regretted buying the best of the line, even my cassette Portastudio was the best one art the time, and right at the 5-600 price point. Same w my mics. Even tho the at 3035 is a cheapo mic, it's bang for ya buck tough to beat, and better than it should be. Sometimes things just slip through the cracks. Ditto for y hammer Californian guitar, which sounds way better than it should for the price + emg pickup addition. Double ditto for the peavy 6505 tube combo, sounds better than it should at a rediculosly low 350$.

All thoughts welcomed, even if it's 'don't buy any of this crap' lol.

I'd like to have things. Purchased by August an have the new system up and running by sept. I'm 3 SSDs and 4 Ram sticks away from firing up the lenovo, and as it stands I've got plenty of software to keep me busy while I round out that arena.

pcrecord Thu, 06/09/2016 - 08:10

kmetal, post: 439000, member: 37533 wrote: Guilty, I've been flip flopping around, it's been literally 5 years since I picked up a Sweetwater catalog, a lot has changed. Lol I used to have the thing memorized. But you see how scatter brained an undecisive I am. I like to explore all options, even when I think I know, I have no idea.

No problemo my friend ! I've been there too ;)

kmetal Thu, 06/09/2016 - 21:06

Well, it's officially narrowing to the octa, vs the 18i20. The 18i20 has the most connectivity in the line, and is only $150 more than its next model down (18i8). I like the rackmount ability, and it uses an IEC power connector, vs the little pin style.

There may be an opportunity to score the octa cheap, if all these new gen things are coming out, gotta talk to a couple sales people.

Even at full price, I'd opt for the "better sound of the two". Scales are learning slightly towards Scarlett, right now, because it's brand new, and has a lot of connectivity.

Since I can't find the manual online, for the Scarlett, I need to call the sales person, and or focusrite customer service to find out about any limitations at 192k, the scarlet might have.

I'm not sure I could get something truly professional, even with 2-4channel count, even at the top of my budget ($1500). Something like the Lynx Hilo is probably the closest to that, but Lynx is not my first choice in upper end conversion. If I already had a proper pcie interface card (madi, ethernet) then it would really open my options up, into something from RME, or audient. This however isn't the case. Again open to suggestions till I hit the checkout line, but for now, I think I'll stick in the project studio realm, which is exactly what level my current computer and room is at. First thing I'm interested in upgrading is my monitors components (perhaps chips caps and crossovers?, I'll start a thread, I've already got pics of the amplifiers internals).

I also, finally found an answer to my question about sample rate vs latency.

Higher Sample Rate = Lower Latency.

From focusrite site. https://global.focusrite.com/precision-conversion (bottom of page)

"Lower latency
To begin with, higher sample rates mean lower latency – the time it takes a signal to pass through the interface. Any digital audio process introduces latency, but if the latency is low enough, you can, for example, monitor with your favourite plugins while you record. Low latency is a specific design goal in Focusrite interfaces, but you can make it even lower by working at a higher sample rate."

Interestingly the compare latency on the focusrite page, Scarlett vs. octa.

Funny how different programs effect latency! I had no idea.

Also, I found these two things interesting, while perusing the focusrite site.

A clear outline of the fundementals of digital audio.

https://global.focusrite.com/precision-conversion-learn-more#nyquist

And a cool little interview with a gear designer.

kmetal Thu, 06/09/2016 - 23:27

Well, I labeled bundled software as 'not important' which, technically it isn't, since I'm well stocked, or at least getting there.

As I flip flop again, the bundled software w the Scarlett looks pretty neat, and actually useful. Particularly thes softube time and tone bundle, and the novation bass station vsti, fill a hole in my current collection. The hole being an aftermarket verb that's decent, and cross platform/daw compatible. I'm again waiting to find out about all the hidden limitations lol, which I may discover upon first use, after purchase. I think the verb leaves a bit to be desired, but could be useful from time to time. I have used it a couple times at the studio.

Also of interest is the avid eleven lite amp sim plug, which probably doesn't include a vst version...

Here's some audio only demos from the softube site, which I think for presets, sound 'ok' and perhaps a bit cheesy.

http://www.softube.com/index.php?id=tsar1r

Vids of the entire bundle 'softube time and tone'

http://www.softube.com/index.php?id=tnt

Quick overveiw of bundle. From focusrite.


Softube tsar reverb plugin 2min demo

Tsar-1r features and overveiw

Drawer 'mastering processor'

Softube tube delay, which I think is weak, but eh, whatever,

kmetal Thu, 06/09/2016 - 23:38

IMHO, the drawer, delay, and saturator, make this smaller and phaseier. The verb is meh, a bit cheesy, but probably better than the waves irl, and def better than d verb. Fingers crossed that Sam has a decent verb.

Fwiw, the softube drawmer, sounds better on the audio only examples on the site. Check me out if your inclined, I think I've left enough links for the night. Lol.

Rough to tell from the YouTube demo, but the red eq may have some potential, as a casual player, or perhaps a snare or drum bus.

DonnyThompson Fri, 06/10/2016 - 04:38

kmetal, post: 439027, member: 37533 wrote: Fingers crossed that Sam has a decent verb.

Sam's verb is pretty decent, Kyle... not my all-time favorite, but pretty good.
The other stock DSP's included in the Samp Pro X Suite Series range from good to great. For example, their 116 EQ is, as far as I'm concerned, the best stock EQ out of any DAW I've ever used; the stereo delay is also very good.
The de-esser and compressor are good, not great. Am-Munition, which is their Limiter, is awesome.... complex, and will require some time for you to master, but it's awesome once you do. And on that note, don't forget... Kraznet's Youtube Videos on all things Samplitude will be priceless for you, once you get the program installed. The guy is a walking Samp manual, and is incredibly well-versed and easy to understand with his how-to videos for Samplitude.

I've got limited experience with the Scarlett plugs - I've used the Focusrite Scarlett Red Opto compressor plug several times in the past, which is an emulation of their classic Red 3 Compressor/Limiter hardware piece, and oddly enough, I didn't like it nearly as much as the IK/T-Racks version of the same ( which I really like, it's my go-to compressor for backing vox bus); so go figure...

But, in my opinion pal, I wouldn't let the included package of Scarlett plugs ( or other included plugs) sway me - either way - on my purchase of their I-O/Pre; that stuff is just gravy, and can so easily be substituted with a plethora of other plugs; so if the model itself fits your criteria for quality, available inputs and connectivity, then those things should be your determining factors.

IMHO of course. ;)

d.

kmetal Fri, 06/10/2016 - 06:53

DonnyThompson, post: 439033, member: 46114 wrote: IK/T-Racks version of the same ( which I really like, it's my go-to compressor for backing vox bus); so go figure...

Ya know D, I used t tracks a few times at my cousins place to finalize some mixes for the sake of using a different room, so I wasn't listening to the same anomalies over and over, particularly the nulls of the mix room. And I really found there red compressor to be quite good. I liked it better than any of the others. I had no idea it was modeled from focusrite. Good call on that one man!!

DonnyThompson, post: 439033, member: 46114 wrote: But, in my opinion pal, I wouldn't let the included package of Scarlett plugs ( or other included plugs) sway me - either way - on my purchase of their I-O/Pre; that stuff is just gravy, and can so easily be substituted with a plethora of other plugs; so if the model itself fits your criteria for quality, available inputs and connectivity, then those things should be your determining factors.

Fair enough Donny, I certainly know better. Lol I was getting excited last night, I'm like, man I know what I would say in response to those posts if it wasn't me posting them. Which is exactly what you said.

The reason I mentioned the verb in particular, was because I was considering purchasing it, even bofore this interface came out.

So, do you have a 'favorite' pluggin verb? Either one you own, or have gotten to use. It seems every one I've used, which is allt of them, all fell short. Even the lexicon plugs, which were I'd say better than a lot, but still not quite there.

Obviously the bricasti is the choice unit, and the price comes along with it. So I'll be using ITB verbs, at least until the next gen bricasti comes out.

To be completely honest, assuming theirs not an amazing amount of limitations, I think the Scarlett does the trick. It helped to lay out my requirements in order, after so much storming of brain. I'm still waiting for a reply from focusrite, but I might just call them. I've got to remain skeptical till confirmation.

I think with the Roland, I'm paying for Dsp, and with the focusrite I'm paying for the extra I/o, which in my case is more welcome, just due to the 96k Dsp limitation. But if sales person says $350 for the Roland, instead of 499, then that makes sense to me. I doubt I'd see such a huge gouge in the the price tag.

Otherwise, I think the octa, vs 18i20, are probably similar in sound quality, enough where the plethora of extra ins and outs tip the scale. This interface is merely a placeholder, and a test unit, for me to define my workflow, and have something while I'm adding amplifiers, SSDs, plugs, and all the other crap that adds up quickly, like an isolation X former.

I also want to be 1000% sure exactly what my min (daily) I/o requirements are because Ad/da is about $400 per channel for ad, and ditto for da, at the level that's coming next. This is huge, and not all units I'm. Considering are modular like the ship.

kmetal Fri, 06/10/2016 - 06:59

The worst part about this whole thing, is there's really no places around, that I know of, where I can go compare the octa to the focusrite. I normally buy both items, then return one, but the focusrite isn't even released yet, and I'm not really in the position to put out cash. Usually I do it w my credit card so the product is returned by the time the bill hits, and I only pay out for what I kept. I'll have to make some phone calls.

kmetal Fri, 06/10/2016 - 07:45

-update-

Just got off the phone with focusrite. Here's the deal w 192k sample rate operation of 18i20.

Adat I/o- not supported a 192k. 96k Max.

Spdif- supported at 192k - 2ch i/o

Analog- all 8 channels full operation.

So according to the representative I can have 10 inputs simultaneously at the full 192k sample rate.

This is cool with me. I'll have to look into a 2ch preamp w spdif connectivity @ 192, when I'm in the market for a new pre, which will probably be a while from now.

DonnyThompson Sat, 06/11/2016 - 06:16

kmetal, post: 439036, member: 37533 wrote: So, do you have a 'favorite' pluggin verb? Either one you own, or have gotten to use. It seems every one I've used, which is allt of them, all fell short. Even the lexicon plugs, which were I'd say better than a lot, but still not quite there.

I have several that I really like:

IK/T-Racks Studio Verb Package is a good one; these are four separate plug processors - Hall, Plate, Room and Inverse - that are emulations of Lexicon's classic PCM Series, and truthfully, I like these better than the actual Lexicon plugs I've used.
http://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/cat-view.php?C=family-t-racks

Valhalla Vintage Verb is another, and this one was a surprise to me, because it's not at all expensive. The GUI is cheesy looking, but the sound is quite impressive, especially considering that it's only $50. It provides various halls, plates, chambers, rooms and even a "random" mode that has a very deep response, with a slow attack and heavy diffusion.
https://valhalladsp.com/shop/reverb/valhalla-vintage-verb/

Waves Renaissance /True Verb are both good ones as well, but I've had these for a very long time now - my versions are still 32 bit, LOL - and came as part of a Waves Diamond Bundle that I bought years ago.
http://www.waves.com/plugins/renaissance-reverb
http://www.waves.com/plugins/trueverb#using-trueverb-for-creative-reverb-effects

The last one I like ( that I have) is Altiverb; this is a convolution reverb which uses various available reverb impulses/algorithms that you load into the processor. Many very good impulses are available for free, too...some are even Middle Side.
TC Electronics, Bricasti, Eventide and Lexicon convolution impulses are available for no charge; and while I'm certain that the Bricasti impulses don't sound nearly as good as having an actual Bricasti, they are still very good sounding impulses, as are the TC's and Lexicons.
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep05/articles/altiverb5.htm
http://www.resoundsound.com/4-impulse-response-reverb-packs/

The thing I found with using convolution reverbs, is that the less you mess ( adjust) the various parameters of the various loadable impulse files, the better they sound - the downside to this is that it takes some time to load and audition the impulses, because there are just so many to go through and listen to... and I'm not saying you can't adjust the files, because Altiverb does allow you to tweak the same facets that any decent reverb plug would; attack, time, decay, pre-delay, EQ, etc., - but it's been my experience that it's better to only adjust these various reverbs in very small increments... the less you adjust, the better they will sound, because the impulses are based on actual spaces, and if you adjust the parameters too much, you no longer have the original algorithm.

The good news is that these days, so many reverb plugs can be used free on a trial basis, so you can work with many different verbs for anywhere between 7 and 14 days, depending on the manufacturer's trial plan, and see which ones you like in context with what you do.

:)

d.

kmetal Sat, 06/11/2016 - 09:03

Thanks, D. I'm probably gonna poll everyone on what their fave verbs are. I have true verb, and the convolution verb from waves. My buddy was saying the H-verb from them is nice.

I didn't even know Valhalla verb existed. Ditto for the Tracks one. I think I might be mistaken thinking I'll find a one does it all type deal (barring the bricasti). It's seeming to me like I'm going to have to find a few that donspecific things well, i.e. Dark hall, or that l one does small rooms well, Ect Ect.

Altiverb has a long standing reputation, and I'd like to have one 'main' convolution reverb for the sake of organization and format things. I was always scared of the price tag, but my thinking has changed over the last few years.

I haven't bought anything new since I started at the studios, so I was/am very green to what's out there now, although it's been fun getting re aquanted w GAS.

Particularly w reverb, being at the studio, using the excellent sounding rooms, I've not reached for a verb in many years, besides just a hint of it for vocals. With 'modern' production having had fairly had fairly dry vocals, it was usually a barely audible amount of verb and delay.

I I tend to use delay more than verb in general.

But now, my new ideas involve a lot of electronic based vsti, and music that's not point and capture, so verb both as an effect, and a mild mix sweetener has become 'necessary'.

I'm gonna investigate those links today. I appreciated it.